The Mathematics of Poker

[thylacine]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this specifically holdem math oriented or does it cover other games too?

[/ QUOTE ]

e.g. how do you play 0.8746284765928 facing a reraise....

[George Rice]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is this specifically holdem math oriented or does it cover other games too?

[/ QUOTE ]

e.g. how do you play 0.8746284765928 facing a reraise....

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[Shandrax]

The funny thing about Hold'em is that once you see the flop and don't hit the nuts, you don't know what number your hand has.

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
It depends.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing it doesnt. But you need to read the book [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[samsdmf]

Wow, just wow- if this book is anything less than amazing and elightening (even to the highest stakes players) I will be surprised- cannot wait to read this. I will soon be dropping words into conversations at my home game people didnt even know existed.

[kitaristi0]

[ QUOTE ]
I will soon be dropping words into conversations at my home game people didnt even know existed.

[/ QUOTE ]

And that's all that matters.

[jackaaron]

Will this book help you adjust the math for games and opponents where you have much less fold equity? Seems like a lot of 2+2 books are written for games where people can actually lay down a hand (sometimes) and have an actual stake in the game.

[davebwell]

Is this a hold em book or a more general poker theory book?

[Shandrax]

[ QUOTE ]
The funny thing about Hold'em is that once you see the flop and don't hit the nuts, you don't know what number your hand has.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have to correct myself here. In fact, you do know what number your hand has. The problem is that there are way too many cases to keep track of.

Second pair on a board with 2 cards of the same suit, a possible gutshot and three possible overcards is...whatever..

[Jerrod Ankenman]

You should almost always fold if you can - in our [0,1] games 0 is the nuts.

:P

-jerrod