The Mathematics of poker by Bill Chen & some dude...

[baztalkspoker]

I've only had the book a few days and haven't had a chance to go through it properly yet. I know about ROR formula already but the very useful looking RoRU(risk of ruin with uncertain win rate) formula I can't figure out yet. Anyone have some practical example(s) using pt based data?

[WiltOnTilt]

I just started reading this book. I consider myself above average at "poker math" -- specifically EV calc type stuff. I graduated with a comp sci degree so i'm not too foreign to formal math...

I think it's hilarious how many greek symbols and equations they have in first section marked "Basics". I'm understanding the book so far, although I had to re-read a few pages when i got momentarily lost, but I can't imagine how joe-average poker player could possibly understand the concepts starting off in the "Basics" section.

They should have done a better job dumbing it down and/or removing many of the equations/greek symbols/math lingo until at least later in the book. I know being math guys they feel the need to build the "foundation" of ideas so they can build on it later, but if you want to reach a wide audience it's simply not a good strategy to keep people interested. I have one friend who tried to read this book and threw it out 2 chapters in because of all the graphs/equations/and "foreign letters" that people w/o a math background don't understand.

That said I'm looking forward to reading the rest of the book for myself so I can translate it to others.

WoT

[MicroBob]

"if you want to reach a wide audience"


I never got the impression they wanted to reach a wide audience.

[Adman]

It is probably a great book but unless you have a strong math background you will find it frustrating. I know I was not able to get much out of it at all. I think the guys who are saying that it's "fairly basic" are much stronger in math than they realize. Also, I would add that I don't think understanding the complex material in that book is necessary to be a winning poker player, I'm sure it wouldn't hurt and could only help but certainly is not necessary.

[Barfunkel]

[ QUOTE ]
"if you want to reach a wide audience"


I never got the impression they wanted to reach a wide audience.

[/ QUOTE ]

They definitely should write more books for the narrow audience. I could easily read a whole book about valuebetting the river or somesuch topic.

[WiltOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
"if you want to reach a wide audience"


I never got the impression they wanted to reach a wide audience.

[/ QUOTE ]

poor assumption on my part. i thought they wanted to sell books.

[johnnyrocket]

[ QUOTE ]
I just started reading this book. I consider myself above average at "poker math" -- specifically EV calc type stuff. I graduated with a comp sci degree so i'm not too foreign to formal math...

I think it's hilarious how many greek symbols and equations they have in first section marked "Basics". I'm understanding the book so far, although I had to re-read a few pages when i got momentarily lost, but I can't imagine how joe-average poker player could possibly understand the concepts starting off in the "Basics" section.

They should have done a better job dumbing it down and/or removing many of the equations/greek symbols/math lingo until at least later in the book. I know being math guys they feel the need to build the "foundation" of ideas so they can build on it later, but if you want to reach a wide audience it's simply not a good strategy to keep people interested. I have one friend who tried to read this book and threw it out 2 chapters in because of all the graphs/equations/and "foreign letters" that people w/o a math background don't understand.

That said I'm looking forward to reading the rest of the book for myself so I can translate it to others.

WoT

[/ QUOTE ]

i am in engineering and u said the book is mostly statistics, i cant really think how u expect to not have any of this notation, this is used in almost any statistical calculation