Sklansky Hand Rankings Destroyed! >=)

[jjshabado]

[ QUOTE ]

If you or anyone has any doubts that I'm broke as a joke, I can provide screenshots of my Poker Stars cashier as proof.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, I'm pretty sure this is the one thing everybody believes.

"Synchronicity" is a great word though. I no longer have suited connectors, I have suited and synchronized cards.

[cogger]

Did your mother have any kids that lived? You outta pay me a $1 for reading. This thread is a deliberate joke and is meant to be fake. Last night I watched Daivid on the WPT while you where playing your $1 big bet games with your bro.....

[Tony Guoga]

Sklansky's rankings are actually wrong (mathematically), but not by much. Here are the correct rankings:

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/People/mummert/poker/

This was a study done by a professor of computer science at Carnegie Mellon University.

[fraac]

The legendary Todd Mummert! Bless him. irc poker was the shihit.

[MrBlah]

vnh

[Y0UNGDR0]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You are brainwashed by Sklansky and the sheep that treat his books like the Bible and his rankings like the ten commanments!

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank-you. I will now seek help to end this affliction.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

You're welcome.
$1 to my Poker Stars account and I'll refer you to my father's girlfriend, who is an accomplished shrink with a PhD. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Well at least you got a reply from Mason himself. Not sure if it's worth more or less than $1 tho. I'll transfer you $1 if you tell me exactly what you were smoking...

[/ QUOTE ]

Take a guess [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
Hy-DRO-ponic marijuana. =)

You are correct in your assumption that I was high when this thread was written. *clap*

[Y0UNGDR0]

[ QUOTE ]
OP is correct.

Extrapolating from his post, a hand like 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (YD number 81) should be quite an underdog to a hand like 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (YD number 117). What is interesting is that when I test this hypothesis by running "hot and cold" simulations on PokerStove or cardplayer.com, the simulator incorrectly assigns 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] the greater win probability (by a healthy margin, too: PS thinks pocket 9's are about a 7-to-3 favorite over A9).

In addition to its implications for what Sklansky might term "reverse domination" situations (o! the irony!), OP's system correctly implies that suited hands offer no advantages over offsuit hands, which should be intuitively obvious to all of you. (Clearly, it is just as good to have two chancese to make a four card flush as it is to have only one chance at a three-carder. (3-1=2; but 4-2=2 as well. Q.E.D.))

These examples support OP's assertion that much current poker thinking is incorrect: Sklansky has not only inadvertantly tricked many of the readers of these forums; indeed, his corrupting influence appears to have spread even to those computer programmers who design poker software.

To Y0ungdr0:

Thank you very much for your help! If you do manage to collect some donations, please let me know. I certainly believe your work deserves compensation.

Personally, I would most like to present my money to you "over the table", ideally by going all-in preflop in one or two heads-up NL situations your system has identified.

My thought is, we can reveal our hands preflop, and in order to assure that you receive your due, I will take the worst of it in any of the mismatch situations that you've discovered, EG by playing A6 against your K7. I really like this, because my donations will be in direct proportion to the value of your thoughts (especially over the course of the many hands I hope we can get in, so as to further my learning). Given the strength of your ideas and your great generosity in sharing them, I feel like no matter how much I end up eventually donating, I'll be getting one heck of a bargain!

I'll look you up next time I'm on PS. Thanks again for your terrific thoughts!

Warm regards,
Jogger

[/ QUOTE ]

Your sarcasm is so clever and subtle.
Thank you for the entertaining post and the backhanded compliments. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Y0UNGDR0]

[ QUOTE ]
I see why your broke and need donations!

[/ QUOTE ]

I no longer need donations, thank you. =)

I took my freeroll winnings and made a decent bankroll for the micro-stakes. =)

I'm doing quite well. The reason I was "broke" was because I was not able to deposit in the first place, doofus. Try reading thoroughly before posting ignorantly. Thank you!

[BlueDingo]

Let's some of the math your basing your theory on