Morton\'s theorem
 

Hi, this recent thread: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...=1#Post12980381 made me think about Morton's theorem. After experimenting this weekend a bit with Pokerstove, I decided to make a small note:

http://base.google.com/base/a/112163...11878682447032

(Warning: for the theoretically-minded only... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Keen to get your comments!

Re: Morton\'s theorem
 

I find myself considering weather or not guys like TJ, Hellmuth, Doyle and J.Chan think through things like this, for some reason I cant see them discssion issues and concepts like these, and yet, they're the most successfull tourny players around.

Re: Morton\'s theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
Was this an odd and artificially constructed example, or do such violations of the fundamental theorem of poker occur frequently in multi handed games?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a frequent situation in tournament poker, especially when the stacks are short. I have been thinking about one implication a lot lately, somewhat similar to the one in your post.

Re: Morton\'s theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
I find myself considering weather or not guys like TJ, Hellmuth, Doyle and J.Chan think through things like this, for some reason I cant see them discssion issues and concepts like these, and yet, they're the most successfull tourny players around.


[/ QUOTE ]
True, but they play live tournaments.
Unlike them i enjoy stars $12/180 man Turbo tournaments in which The Violation of The Fundamental Theorem of Poker occurs frequently.
But what I'm interested in are possible +EV situations that arise and gain in value through "equity transfer", and are actually more +EV than common prefered alternatives.

Re: Morton\'s theorem
 

I'll read it later.

I don't like this example:

[ QUOTE ]
Notice that in a few exceptional cases pre-flop hand rankings can be non-transitive as a result of which the 'best hand' can not be defined. A specific example is formed by the three hands: Qs4h 7s6s 2h2d.


[/ QUOTE ]

The standard example here is AKo, 22 and JTs.

Regards ...

Re: Morton\'s theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'll read it later.

I don't like this example:

[ QUOTE ]
Notice that in a few exceptional cases pre-flop hand rankings can be non-transitive as a result of which the 'best hand' can not be defined. A specific example is formed by the three hands: Qs4h 7s6s 2h2d.


[/ QUOTE ]

The standard example here is AKo, 22 and JTs.

Regards ...

[/ QUOTE ]
AKo, 44, and JTs is clearer, imo. (since AK vs 22 is so close)

Re: Morton\'s theorem
 

I'd take AKo or maybe JTs?

Pocket 44s are no fun because you have to burn out so many outs for the other guys. If someone has 44 than the only advantage of AK over JT is if the AK pair, which is almost a decider. I think it depends on the suits of the 44 and AK if I have JTs. If neither of them have my outs, then id probably choose JT because half or a third of their outs will improve me.

Just talking outloud over an old topic

Re: Morton\'s theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
I find myself considering weather or not guys like TJ, Hellmuth, Doyle and J.Chan think through things like this, for some reason I cant see them discssion issues and concepts like these, and yet, they're the most successfull tourny players around.

[/ QUOTE ]
These guys play based on experience and do not really consider the math or the theories a whole lot. They have played every hand so many times that it is a lot of instinct with them. Plus they play with the same people day in day out so it is a lot about playing the player with them as well.