#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: CP2-7 decisions
[ QUOTE ]
(With 2h9hQhKhAh 2s3s4s6c8c 6sKcAc--- no diamonds--- the flush is about +0.55 and AA/KK is +0.40. With 2h9hQhKhAh 2s3d4s6c8d 6dKcAd, a more even distribution of suits, the flush is +0.54 and the AA/KK split is closer, about +0.44. If we make the 3 and the 8 hearts, the AA/KK is about +0.33.) So Mark, do you mean if no diamonds there is more chance they will play a lower flush on the back and our flush becomes stronger? [/ QUOTE ] Well... I wondered if that had a noticeable effect. It looks like it doesn't change the value of the flush much, it is always about +0.55 points and always the best option (in the variations I tried.) Perhaps if it were a weaker flush there might be some impact. But the value of splitting AA in front and KK in back does vary, probably because your opponent is more likely to make a flush if one suit is especially live. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re: CP2-7 decisions
Well, Badugi (as usual) guessed what I was up to. (Next time I'll have to post a bunch of utterly straightforward hands to third-level him.)
The examples I gave all have at least two options within 1/10th of a point. (Each was evaluated against a bit more than 4000 relevant hands, so the numbers probably aren't accurate to 3 places but most likely are to two.) I have generally left out options which merely switched kickers around in inferior ways. #1: 2233555668JQA (vs 4380 sample hands): -1.86986 2d3c5d5h6c 2s3s5s6h8c JdQcAd -1.88813 5d5h5s6c6h 2d3c8cJdQc 2s3sAd 55533 28JQA 662 comes in a bit worse, at -1.97, but still close. I found the choice of A23 in front interesting, but it does strengthen the Q-high middle slightly. The similar alternatives are actually very close, well within the margin of error: -1.89566 2d2s5d5h5s 3c6c8cJdQc 3s6hAd -1.89361 3c3s5d5h5s 2d6c8cJdQc 2s6hAd This hand had a surprisingly large number of undominated alternatives. #2: 4568JK[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 23899JA (4434 samples) karpov got the best option correct, but playing the flush is quite close, with either 99A or 9JA in front. -1.14118 6h9c9sJdJh 2d3d4h5h8h 8sKhAc -1.17163 5h6h8hJhKh 2d3d4h8s9c 9sJdAc -1.18606 5h6h8hJhKh 2d3d4h8sJd 9c9sAc #3: 344579TTJJQKA (4331 samples) The best option here is actually the surprising JJ/TT split. Playing the straight doesn't look quite as good but is still within 1/10th of a point. -1.5366 4hJcJdQcKc 3s4s5c7h9d TdThAs -1.55553 4hTdThJcJd 3s4s5c7h9d QcKcAs -1.60125 TdJcQcKcAs 3s5c7h9dTh 4h4sJd The straight + 9-low seems significantly worse. -1.81413 TdJcQcKcAs 3s4h5c7h9d 4sThJd #4: 22445678TTJQK (4444 samples) Another surprise, playing an 8 in the middle may be the best play, though both 2461Badugi and karpov identified the best alternative: -1.85329 2dTdTsJsKh 2h5c6c7s8c 4h4sQc -1.88726 2d4h8cTdTs 2h4s5c6c7s JsQcKh Playing the straight is awful: -2.52048 4h5c6c7s8c 2d4sJsQcKh 2hTdTs #5: 3569J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 35789TJQ (4522 hands) Another nonobvious split two pair is a strong play here, though the flush/9 low is competitive: -1.86577 3d5dTcJdJh 3h5s6d7h8s 9d9sQh -1.90801 3d5d6d9dJd 3h5s7h8s9s TcJhQh Playing the straight in back is a bit worse as the best play involves abandoning the front with J-high: -2.02875 8s9dTcJdQh 3d5d6d7h9s 3h5sJh Going for the 9-high straight instead is pretty bad: -2.22247 5d6d7h8s9d 3d5s9sTcQh 3hJdJh |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: CP2-7 decisions
I'm obviously overvaluing pairs in the front, though jacks up being better than splitting the two pairs in #2 is still surprising.
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Re: CP2-7 decisions
[ QUOTE ]
I'm obviously overvaluing pairs in the front, though jacks up being better than splitting the two pairs in #2 is still surprising. [/ QUOTE ] I should have included that as an alternative, it's actually pretty close to the other options. Here's the complete list of non-dominated options for that one: -2.60442 6h8h8s9c9s 2d3d4h5hJd JhKhAc -2.47903 8h8s9c9sAc 2d3d4h5hKh 6hJdJh -2.424 6h8h8s9c9s 2d3d4h5hKh JdJhAc -1.80469 4h5h6h8hKh 2d3d8s9c9s JdJhAc -1.80356 9cJdJhKhAc 2d3d4h5h9s 6h8h8s -1.70862 6h8h8sJdJh 2d3d4h5h9c 9sKhAc -1.64885 4h5h6h8hKh 2d3d8s9cAc 9sJdJh -1.45377 9c9sJdJhKh 2d3d4h5h8h 6h8sAc -1.23207 8hJdJhKhAc 2d3d4h5h8s 6h9c9s -1.22801 6hJdJhKhAc 2d3d4h5h8h 8s9c9s -1.21065 6h8hJdJhAc 2d3d4h5h8s 9c9sKh -1.19689 6h8hJdJhKh 2d3d4h5h8s 9c9sAc -1.18606 5h6h8hJhKh 2d3d4h8sJd 9c9sAc -1.17163 5h6h8hJhKh 2d3d4h8s9c 9sJdAc -1.15562 8h9c9sJdJh 2d3d4h5h8s 6hKhAc -1.14118 6h9c9sJdJh 2d3d4h5h8h 8sKhAc |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: CP2-7 decisions
Hi Mark, what a fantastic job you are doing. I play chinese like 5 days a week, $100 the point or higher. So your posts have great value for me.
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Please More Hands Mark
[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
|
|
|