|
|
#311
11-17-2005, 01:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Player Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
For the poster who said JJ had position please reread the original post by Mason and you will see that he said What happen was that a player raised to $40 and then got reraised to $150. The original raiser then folded and showed AQ. His opponent then showed JJ. JJ could have limped reraised or been in the blinds it is unclear. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Here's a hint. In almost all cases the ace-queen will check the flop and the player holding the jacks will bet probably somewhere between half the pot to the whole pot. [/ QUOTE ] Try reading the whole thread, kid. 
|
|
#312
11-17-2005, 01:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Player Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
In the JJ example you said the $150 reraise was allready in the pot so it was not part of his negative EV. [/ QUOTE ] Wrong, I definitely account for that in the EV calc using Mason's assumptions, starting from the decision point Mason requested we start at (for your convenience, that is in this post). 26% of the time, JJ loses 150+225 = 375 When JJ loses, he loses the 150 he put in preflop plus the 225 he puts in postflop. I did not read any further in your post. As I said before, if you would like to provide some math to disprove what I showed, please feel free to make another attempt.
|
|
#313
11-17-2005, 01:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Player Discussion
Just for fun, here are two Mason quotes in response to my previous posts that I think people have forgotten about:
[ QUOTE ] Now it is possible in many poker situations for more than one hand to have positive expectation due to other monies in the pot. But there isn't much of that here. However, that's not my point and I won't make any effort to defend it. [/ QUOTE ] Interesting.... [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] making that preflop call with AQ against a good player is not +EV and your analysis was not sufficiently rigorous to demonstrate to us that it is. [/ QUOTE ] I agree completely. [/ QUOTE ] Really?
|
|
#314
11-17-2005, 02:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Player Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] In the JJ example you said the $150 reraise was allready in the pot so it was not part of his negative EV. [/ QUOTE ] 26% of the time, JJ loses 150+225 = 375 When JJ loses, he loses the 150 he put in preflop plus the 225 he puts in postflop. I did not read any further in your post. As I said before, if you would like to provide some math to disprove what I showed, please feel free to make another attempt. [/ QUOTE ] The probabilities are wrong. 67% chance of missing flop (44/50*43/49*42*47) = .67 so 33% chance of hit, but P(J flop and A or Q) = 4% So, 29% of flops are good for AQ AQ EV = 38 JJ EV = 17 3% differance on $430 gain = additional $13 for AQ. Have a nice day.
|
|
#315
11-17-2005, 02:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Player Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] In the JJ example you said the $150 reraise was allready in the pot so it was not part of his negative EV. [/ QUOTE ] 26% of the time, JJ loses 150+225 = 375 When JJ loses, he loses the 150 he put in preflop plus the 225 he puts in postflop. I did not read any further in your post. As I said before, if you would like to provide some math to disprove what I showed, please feel free to make another attempt. [/ QUOTE ] The probabilities are wrong. 67% chance of missing flop (44/50*43/49*42*47) = .67 so 33% chance of hit, but P(J flop and A or Q) = 4% So, 29% of flops are good for AQ AQ EV = 38 JJ EV = 17 3% differance on $430 gain = additional $13 for AQ. Have a nice day. [/ QUOTE ] you are missing the times that J hits the turn or river.
|
|
#316
11-17-2005, 02:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Player Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] In the JJ example you said the $150 reraise was allready in the pot so it was not part of his negative EV. [/ QUOTE ] 26% of the time, JJ loses 150+225 = 375 When JJ loses, he loses the 150 he put in preflop plus the 225 he puts in postflop. I did not read any further in your post. As I said before, if you would like to provide some math to disprove what I showed, please feel free to make another attempt. [/ QUOTE ] The probabilities are wrong. 67% chance of missing flop (44/50*43/49*42*47) = .67 so 33% chance of hit, but P(J flop and A or Q) = 4% So, 29% of flops are good for AQ AQ EV = 38 JJ EV = 17 3% differance on $430 gain = additional $13 for AQ. Have a nice day. [/ QUOTE ] Mason explains above what probabilities to use given the assumptions he provided us. See Mason's "Analysis" post for an explanation. I did not read the rest of your post. Note that Mason himself has shown that the EV for AQ given his assumptions is 15 and he also agreed w/ me elsewhere in the thread that the EV of JJ is 40. Again, thanks for trying.
|
|
#317
11-17-2005, 03:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Player Discussion
Azk, lock this up please.
|
|
#318
11-17-2005, 03:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Player Discussion
I'm going to take a stab at this...
In order to make my arguement as convincing as possible im going to try to use several Mason quotes and show why I think they lead to the wrong conclusion. quote 1: [ QUOTE ] According to my analysis, if Player A chooses to call the $110 raise (to $150) there are strategies available to him where he shows a profit relative to folding after he has already put his initial $40 in the pot. That means since he just happens to be against precisely a pair of jacks he wants to keep playing as opposed to folding where he forfeits his original $40 investment. If you buy my analysis as being reasonably good, this statement has to mean that you would prefer the ace-queen suited at precisely this point in time in precisely this situation. That's as clear as I can make it. [/ QUOTE ] Here Mason says that since it is +EV for the AQs to call the $110 raise, you would prefer to have the AQs. While I agree that Mason has shown it is profitable to call the raise, I disagree that you would rather have the AQs. In this example when AQs calls the raise he will make $15 accoring to Mason's analysis. So, where does this $15 come from? quote 2: [ QUOTE ] If he chooses to play, and perhaps follows the strategy I outlined and it gives him a positive expectation from that point on, then that positive expectation must come from somewhere. In this case it can only come from Player B who holds the jacks. [/ QUOTE ] I beleive this is incorrect. The +EV experience by the AQ in this case comes from the $55 already in the pot from the blinds and AQs's initial raise. When AQs makes the call of the $110, there is $55 in the pot in addition to the $150 raise the the player with JJ. AQs take 15 from that 55, leave JJ with a profit of $40 after the flop. So, while AQs makes a profit of $15 this does not mean you prefer it to JJ because JJ makes a profit of $40. To make this clear, examine a much simpler situation. Play is heads up with no blinds and $100 stack sizes. Player A opens with 22 for $90. Player B moves all in for $100. Obviously in this case it is +EV for 22 to call. But, just because it is +EV for 22 to call does not mean you prefer 22 to AA in this situation.
|
|
#319
11-17-2005, 03:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Analysis
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, but I have had enough. I'll let others elaborate. MM [/ QUOTE ] Now I don't study at MIT, but if I would use this phrase in a paper for my university I would probably be asked to pack my bags and leave the college grounds. Borknagar PS: I'll let others elaborate
|
|
#320
11-17-2005, 03:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Analysis
Pretty dissapointing that you can't
1) admit you were incorrect or 2) elaborate yourself Some very respected players/members put quite a bit of time into this problem. Have some respect for the people that have helped these forums thrive since the beginning. As it is, you have come off like a completely ungrateful and condescending jerk.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
