The Mathematics of Poker

[wpr101]

I haven't got all the way through the book yet but it is probably the best book written for a player who is already a winning player and understands math well.

[KurtSF]

Howdy all,

I've read this thread in dribs and drabs through the months, but I can't recall if this is addressed anywhere. Apologies if it is.

Some background. In the general population I am a math wiz; I've always been good at it and its always come naturally. Big whoop, right. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] In reality, I took a few advanced classes but largely got off the boat at calculus. I do have have a deep understanding of math through this level, often being able to "estimate" a answer in my head without doing any of the calculations, just visualizing the problem. But higher maths are a complete mystery to me. I loved the fact that when I started playing LHE, instead of being the guy who was good at math, I was the guy playing catch-up. It seemed the "good" players were always 1 calculation ahead of me. I worked my butt off to understand the math behind a poker hand, and feel it made a decent but not great player. I have since switched to NLH and now I find that the "good" players do NOT have the kind of math background the good LHE players have. I feel that the solid mathematical basis I have for my game gives me a leg up on the competition.

I don't think I have ever been as excited about reading a poker book as I am about this. Now, the questions:

How much can I get out of the book by trying to understand the concepts without fully grasping the math? Put another way, can I take lessons away from this book that can be directly applied to my poker game without being able to solve the equations presented? And mostly, what tactics and tips would you give for how to approach/read this book? I want to get the most out of it, as someone who is overmatched by the math involved but not intimidated.

Many thanks for reading this, and many more for taking the time to respond!

[sputum]

[ QUOTE ]
In the general population I am a math wiz

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
someone who is overmatched by the math involved but not intimidated

[/ QUOTE ]
The math is mostly pretty simple (and I'm NOT a math wiz [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img])
I'm just reading it again and again. But that's what I usually do with poker books. Then I'll mess about calculating different toy stuff for a bit (simulation or formally, get any integrals solved in the math forum [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img])
The problem is that in the micros and small stakes this approach to play is dominated by playing 'suboptimally' because you're playing donks. Who wants to make a donk indifferent to calling or folding if he calls incorrectly anyway?
Not a criticism of the book in any way shape or form of course. I love it.

EDIT: btw, they solve the equations for you.

[mosquito]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I looked today and saw it for 1000 FPPs, surprisingly less than most of the books available.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the heads-up. Just ordered it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't know why, I can't find it. Have to be Silver Star?

[sobefuddled]

No. Go to the main menu. Click cashier. Click FPP Store and you will find it on the drop-down menu.

[mosquito]

[ QUOTE ]
No. Go to the main menu. Click cashier. Click FPP Store and you will find it on the drop-down menu.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not there for me. Blechh. Can someone else confirm that it's still there?

[sobefuddled]

You're right. It's gone now. I bet it's out of stock. I'd keep checking back there tho. I'm sure it will be back in stock soon.

[mosquito]

Hope you are right. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I would hate to have missed it. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[Martin Pescador]

I'm reading this book, and I'm having difficulty understanding the formula below the table on p. 154. The left-hand side seems to be the ex-showdown equity of Y betting, but I don't understand where the constant k on the right-hand side comes from. Isn't the ex-showdown equity of Y checking 0? Can somebody please explain this to me?

Best regards,
Martin

[Goldmund]

What do the authors think of he Sklansky-Chubukov Rankings in NLHTAP as compared to their own push/fold tables in the jam or fold game?

Sklansky-Chubukov's raising standards are a lot tighter than those advocated in the table on page 135 of MoP, but the MoP strategy is in jam-fold-only scenarios.

What's the value of the Sklansky-Chubukov numbers in late, huge blinds (efective stacks say 6-12 Big Blinds) Tournament play. It seems MoP advocates pushing a lot more often than S-C. I know that the S-C charts are based on an oppt. 'knowing' our holecards and still playing an unexploitable game, but does the pushing strategy in MoP not lead to oppts calling with a very wide range after we pushed into them a few times consecutively, decreasing our fold equity to a point that a heads-up ecounter becomes a coinflip+? Goldmund