New Thread For Yes Or No Questions

[Mickey Brausch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you believe there are advantage plays in blackjack that are currently undiscovered?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand the question.

[/ QUOTE ]Transl.: Do you believe there are things you know you don't know?

[Magic_Man]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you believe there are advantage plays in blackjack that are currently undiscovered?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand the question.

[/ QUOTE ]

For example, shuffle-tracking & ace-sequencing are more recent discoveries than simple card counting. Do you think there are other methods of beating casino blackjack that we will discover in the future? Or has every avenue been explored already?

[Magic_Man]

And a related question - are there other casino games currently being played for which +EV plays exist or may exist, but are currently not being exploited? In other words, are there games that can be, but aren't currently, being beaten?

[Magic_Man]

Do you believe that +EV dice control in craps is possible? Without drawing suspicion as to the method of throwing? (I don't mean suspicion from continuously winning. I mean suspicion from not hitting the back diamonds, or otherwise not giving a legitimate-looking throw).

[gotmarc]

Would "The System" have +EV in a large number low-limit NL Sit-and-goes?

[David Sklansky]

[ QUOTE ]
Would "The System" have +EV in a large number low-limit NL Sit-and-goes?

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt it.

[David Sklansky]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you believe that +EV dice control in craps is possible? Without drawing suspicion as to the method of throwing? (I don't mean suspicion from continuously winning. I mean suspicion from not hitting the back diamonds, or otherwise not giving a legitimate-looking throw).

[/ QUOTE ]

It's illegal. And difficult. But the way to win without drawing suspicion is to hit the wall 85% of the time. Most dice cheats get caught because they won't work on small edges and are unwilling to leave while losing. But with the house edge at .2% you don't need to do much to overcome it in the long run.

[Divad Yksnal]

[ QUOTE ]
Sklansky top smartest in history.

None were women. None were black. None were oriental.

None were alot of things. Why?




Because he's impartial, that's why we love him. I'm surprised you didn't have a lot more none's in your list like, Eskimos or Norwegians or Mexicans or Italians....hmmm no we all know Italians are smart, even Sklansky knows that, or Chinese or Iraqi's etc....

leaponthis


[/ QUOTE ]


Absolutely correct. Davis is an incredibly impartial person of extraordinary intelligence. I respect him beyond words.

But his lack of knowledge has led him to unfairly dismiss the Chinese in particular and possibly others.

DY.

[jogger08152]

Rotting wrote:
[ QUOTE ]
Without any cards having been exposed (live cards or mucked cards), and assuming you don't have ESP, would you ever fold a 9 high flush draw (four to the flush) on the flop in limit hold em'?

[/ QUOTE ]
Brocktoon wrote:
[ QUOTE ]
The 1 word answer is clearly "yes". You didn't specify that your hole cards were suited but I'll assume that you meant that since its obvious that there are times to fold a 9-high flushdraw on monotone flops.

Its easy enough to create a hypothetical situation where folding would be correct. Say the most insanely tight/passive player you've ever played against (1% PFR over thousands of hands) raises several limpers from the BB and the flop comes AKK with 2 of your suit and the SB leads and the BB raises.

[/ QUOTE ]
Rotting wrote:
[ QUOTE ]
I still call in your hypothetical situation, 10000% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]
Brocktoon wrote:
[ QUOTE ]
I guess you like drawing dead then.

[/ QUOTE ]
Rotting wrote:
[ QUOTE ]
This is ridiculous. You're basically BS-ing the "you don't have ESP" part of my post. There couldn't POSSIBLY be someone that you peg with such certainty as flopping a full house with such accuracy that you'd fold a flush draw.

[/ QUOTE ]
1. I surmise you have never played live. There are indeed players you can peg with this level of certainty.

2. Even if you believe the BB is not so easy to peg, you don't need very much certainty that he flopped a boat in order for a fold to be correct. I suspect you have no conception of a weak-tight player, but assuming you do, what hand range do you put him on, given his play? How about the small blind? What % of the time are you drawing dead vs at least one of these two? What % are you drawing live, but vs. a hand like KQ that has redraws against you if you turn your flush (and, you hope, turn it with something other than the Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], J [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], T [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], etc)? What % are you drawing truly "clean" (EG vs. AQ, QQ, JJ, etc?)

(A bit of rough math:

1. Estimate the chance that you're drawing dead on the flop is only 5% (which is certainly more optimistic than I'd be, given the read suggested by Brock)
2. Estimate the chance that one of your opponents flopped trips (but nobody flopped a boat) is 25%. Again, more than generous I think.
3. Assume you lose if you catch a heart on fourth street but another heart comes on fifth street.
4. Assume you lose if the board shows trips by the river.
5. Assume you win if any one heart hits by the river if neither #3 nor #4 also occurs, even if there are two pair on board at the river. (IE, you never lose to a higher flush unless there are four hearts on board, and you never make your flush but lose to a pocket pair that hits its 2-outer or somebody catching running trips.

Even with this optimistic set of assumptions, your equity interest in the pot is only about 25.9%: pretty thin, especially if there's action. Suppose there's 10 small bets in preflop (5 players for 2 bets each), then you, the SB and the BB play for 2 bets each on the flop and on the turn: you're getting 22-to-6 on your money, not counting whatever you may win or lose on the river.

Do you still like your call?

Incidentally, I think a more realistic estimate of your true equity might be 15-20% here, since in practice you're going to get shown the big blind's (flopped) boat a hell of a lot more than 5% of the time, not to mention occasionally being shown that a 9-high flush wouldn't be the nuts even if the board wasn't paired, but whatever.)

But hey, why worry about all this crap! After all, we're just talking about a bunch of sucker limit players anyway, right?

[cwar]

[ QUOTE ]
1. What is your favorite poker game? (Yes/no is for lawyers)

2. You meet a room full of strangers named after poker games. Through magic you know each is the world's best at his or her namesake. Who do you respect the most?

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you answer Matt's questions?