[Matt Flynn]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I've missed the PSA, but the odds table in appendix B is incorrect. I don't understand how such a thing can happen, checking e.g. wikipedia is the _least_ one can do, right? </rant>

Some minor note which I find useful because I'm a nit: the 'multiply by four' rule can be improved a bit to
p = outs * 4 - (number of outs above 8), e.g. for 15 outs
p = 15*4 - 7 = 53% instead of 60% (real number 54%).

[/ QUOTE ]


You are of course right. Divisors should be 47 and 46, not 49 and 48. This was an Excel eff up and was right when we first did it and checked it. It was my fault, not Sunny or Ed's.

Nice modification of the Four Times Rule!


[ QUOTE ]
Then a real question:

On page 12 you discuss the K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] hand on a T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] board, and discount the 9 possible flush outs to 5 outs, which seems quite drastic to me. Now I'm reading it for the second time, you don't mention the number of opponents (or pre-flop action); what did you intended? If it was heads-up and raised preflop I'd be quite happy with my number of outs; if it was limped 7-way multiway I wouldn't. What are your thoughts on this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. We didn't want anything complicated to confuse the discussion, because discounting outs is plenty if you don't already know to do it. Here we were indeed thinking of a multiway pot, so we also didn't count the kings and jacks.


Deeper discounting should be used when the penalty for hitting a bad "out" is worse than the gain from hitting a good out. For example, if you opponent holds a full house and you hit the flush here, you will lose more money, and maybe a lot more. But if you hit the flush, you won't necessarily make anything more from him. By discounting your outs more, you help adjust for the nastiness of hitting yet still being behind.