[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
Clearly this answer is different to my answer and a 9% difference is pretty large. Can anyone tell me where my method or the pokerstove method is going wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]
The PokerStove method Bryce mentioned on StoxPoker is very good for some situations, but not this one. The problem is that it is sort of like using a regular thermometer to measure the temperature of a drop of water. The initial temperature of the thermometer biases the reading. It's not as much of a problem if you are measuring the temperature of a larger quantity.

When you give yourself a testing hand in PokerStove, you block many combinations from among your opponent's holdings. When you give yourself JJ, you block 5/6 of the JJ combinations, as well as many AJ, KJs, and QJs hands. When you give yourself KK, you block KK, AK, KQ, KJs, etc. These don't have to balance out, and they don't here, primarily because having JJ blocks many more hands lower than one queen than hands with top pair or better.

The PokerStove method is more reliable when you are not using it on a small range like the top 10%. You will generally find smaller errors when you analyze a larger range like the top 50% of hands.

There ought to be a simple tool which tells you the answer without having to add dead cards, and some poker programs give that information.