Re: Razz resources?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sklansky wants his students to think about the game and do some independent work. If one is merely given a complete odds chart, they have learned nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]I larned me I caint calculate odds fast enough in a live game to be useful.

Re: Razz resources?
 

Well I've got plenty of experience in holdem and the pot odds needed to survive there, but always sort of memorized odds instead, ie 4:1 once for a FD, ~7:1 for a gutshot etc etc.

I get the feeling that in razz, you'd have to a) remember the important mucked cards and b) calculate your odds based on seen an unseen cards. That could prove to be a little tough for me so I was hoping there was a simpler formula or something. I'll pick up SoP asap.

Re: Razz resources?
 

Maybe you should pick up The Theory of Poker, or possibly, The Mathematics of Poker also. These books detail, in general, how to make such calculations.

For your holdem example, there is little reason to remember percentages for flush draws (although little harm also). I feel it's an inexact method to arrive at decisions, though, and you probably lose some value for it, or make calls you shouldn't.

In holdem, for example, say we're on the turn and we have a flush draw. We've seen exactly 6 cards, our 2 plus 4 on the board, so there are 46 unknown cards. There are, say, 2 flush cards in our hand and 2 on the board, so there are 4 known flush cards and 9 unknown. So your raw chances of making a flush are 9/46.

But say you're afraid of the board pairing. Or that your opponent is drawing to a straight. In the first case you'd want to subtract from your outs and of our suited cards that pair the board. In the second case you'd want to subtract any suited cards that potentially make a flush. Or realistically, in either case, you'd want to subtract a *fraction* of an out, say 1/2, because you don't KNOW if those are good or bad hands for you.

Or, if you have a pair and a flush draw, and the pair is small and you feel it's no good on it's own, you can now add your trip and 2-pair outs (provided they are not also of your suit).

In Theory of Poker and probably SSHE I think Sklansky also points out that you can add partial outs or runner-runner draws if a call is very close otherwise.

Anyway, the point is, if you can do it, you're better off figuring out custom odds for your situation. Even if you don't, you might be better off remembering that THIS time your odds are not 4:1, they're a bit shy of 4:1 and if we're getting right around 4:1 to call, maybe better to fold.

My method for remembering mucked cards is to only worry about cards under 8 to start, and divide them into 2 groups: cards I need and cards I have. As the hand progresses, I make special note of any outs I've seen that pair my opponent. The more of these I see, the less likely he's paired (I rarely try to figure out the actual odds that my opponent is paired. It probably would behoove me to memorize a chart, there)

It is SUPER important to remember how many cards you're drawing to, if nothing else, because the difference between having 0 of your outs visible and 5 is enormous. If you're drawing to, say, a 7, the difference is between 12/35=2:1 against and 7/35=4:1 against.

Re: Razz resources?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sklansky wants his students to think about the game and do some independent work. If one is merely given a complete odds chart, they have learned nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]I larned me I caint calculate odds fast enough in a live game to be useful.

[/ QUOTE ]

Iffn y'all kin uze a eksell spredshiet ya kin lern ta kakylate dem odz. Den ya kin mebbe memyrize when sichiashins is no good.

Or you can fiddle with twodimes or propokertools, but I don't think that's as beneficial.

Re: Razz resources?
 

I own and have read SSH and the 'counting outs' section really helped. Hidden outs, backdoor draws etc etc. I generally refer to an odds chart with anything that's not a clear cut 4:1 draw or whatever. Like in you example, if we put our opponent on a possible set then our FD outs aren't always clean, so we need a better price to continue.

[ QUOTE ]
It is SUPER important to remember how many cards you're drawing to, if nothing else, because the difference between having 0 of your outs visible and 5 is enormous. If you're drawing to, say, a 7, the difference is between 12/35=2:1 against and 7/35=4:1 against.

[/ QUOTE ]

I basically do this, but don't calculate odds. Silly, I know. I basically see how many of my low cards are out there and get a general idea as to what to do based on that, my actual cards, and my opponents' boards. My biggest problem is when I come to the close decisions and actually need to calculate my percent. I'll try playing a single table next time to have ample time to note down mucked cards and actually figure out my odds.

Thanks a bunch for the replies, folks.

Re: Razz resources?
 

You don't really have hidden outs or back-door draws in razz like you do in high-only games. There's only one type of target hand.

Re: Razz resources?
 

But you do have to discount some of your outs, for example when you are drawing to a range of hands, all of which beat your opponent's current hand, but some of which he is drawing to beat also. For example when you are drawing to a 75 and your opponent is showing something like 854 - you can make your 7 and still lose, so you can't count all of your outs and go based on that. Doing so isn't *awful* but it isn't accurate.

Anyway I was just trying to point out that rules of thumb, memorized stats, etc, can only take you so far.

Re: Razz resources?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, they are few, but key.

[/ QUOTE ]
Too bad they're not all correct. As mentioned previously, there are 3 instances in the 3rd st chapter of SOP where the pot odds are calculated incorrectly.

Re: Razz resources?
 

Actually I'm referring to the last 2 pages of "The Cards That Are Out" in the first half of the book.

Re: Razz resources?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Actually I'm referring to the last 2 pages of "The Cards That Are Out" in the first half of the book.

[/ QUOTE ] Ah, ok, thought we were only talking about the razz section. There are several essays in the first part of the book that give a rigorous mathematical treatment to different situations and are for the most part quite good.