|
|
#32
06-30-2007, 11:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Are you hitting your sets?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] AA has the lowest set:flop ratio (by quite a bit, too - 14:1 against) [/ QUOTE ]You might expect this - you're more likely to see a flop when the remaining Aces have been dealt to other players, so you're less likely to flop a set with Aces. Not sure how big this effect is. [/ QUOTE ] This logic is incorrect. Even if any other A always calls and any other 5 always folds, then there will be the exact same number of dead aces and dead fives when AA or 55 respectively see a flop (in a perfectly normal distribution). [/ QUOTE ] Now it is normal to flop more sets with AA-JJ than 55-22 bc you usually see more flops with AA-JJ than you do with 55-22 [/ QUOTE ] I would think you get LESS sets with AA-JJ because you take more pots down pre flop with them. where as 55-22 you see more flops trying to hit sets instead of raising and re-raising. 
|
|
#33
06-30-2007, 11:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Are you hitting your sets?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] AA has the lowest set:flop ratio (by quite a bit, too - 14:1 against) [/ QUOTE ]You might expect this - you're more likely to see a flop when the remaining Aces have been dealt to other players, so you're less likely to flop a set with Aces. Not sure how big this effect is. [/ QUOTE ] This logic is incorrect. Even if any other A always calls and any other 5 always folds, then there will be the exact same number of dead aces and dead fives when AA or 55 respectively see a flop (in a perfectly normal distribution). [/ QUOTE ] This may be similar to what Jhill was getting at, but not sure. Anyway, I don't think this is true. Everyone is as likely to be dealt an A when you have AA as they are likely to have a 5 when you are dealt 55. However, they are not as likely to see a flop with a 5 as with an A, and seeing a flop is a prerequisite for flopping a set. It's easier if you think of it as heads-up. Presumably, you are charging more to see a flop (or calling more, if you prefer a smooth call) with AA than if you hold 55. Therefore, your opponent, if he sees a flop with you, is more likely to be holding an A than a 5, and the times we see a flop are the only times we see whether we are flopping a set or not. This effect will be less pronounces in FR, and I, as the other poster was, am not how much it should effect the results, but it is nevertheless true that Aces should flop a set in a raised pot less than fives.
|
|
#35
06-30-2007, 11:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Are you hitting your sets?
[ QUOTE ]
If you want to see how well you are running with regards to pairs (sets, AA vs KK, sets vs overpairs etc) you should download setometer. I was trying to embed a screenshot of it, but i'm rubbish. There are some screenshots in the monthly thread by some people (The_main and others i can't remember) The program itself can be downloaded from http://www.pokerluckometer.com/ (not a rickroll) [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#37
07-01-2007, 01:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Are you hitting your sets?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] AA has the lowest set:flop ratio (by quite a bit, too - 14:1 against) [/ QUOTE ]You might expect this - you're more likely to see a flop when the remaining Aces have been dealt to other players, so you're less likely to flop a set with Aces. Not sure how big this effect is. [/ QUOTE ] This logic is incorrect. Even if any other A always calls and any other 5 always folds, then there will be the exact same number of dead aces and dead fives when AA or 55 respectively see a flop (in a perfectly normal distribution). [/ QUOTE ] oops. Could you clarify this please? The ratio is how often you hit a set when you see a flop, so I see what you're saying, but... It seems to me that when someone is dealt aces, the likelihood of a flop decreases. In other words, people are more likely to see a flop if they have an ace. If that is true, when you are dealt aces and there is a flop, it's still more likely that someone else has an ace if they are willing to see the flop.
|
|
#38
07-01-2007, 01:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Are you hitting your sets?
I think alot is player style dependant. See the tables below:
 This is over my last 58k hands. As you can see, the dealing distribution looks pretty normal. I was dealt AA less than any other PP, but otherwise it looks pretty normal. My style is more to see flops with 22-TT, and I am much more likely to 3-bet or raise a bunch of limpers with JJ-AA, so you see that number of flops seen greatly decreases as we reach JJ+
|
|
#39
07-04-2007, 06:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Are you hitting your sets?
I wish this displayed a probability distribution wherein we could see how many standard deviations we are to the left or right of center.
Personally, I've hit 17 sets in 216 pairs (that saw the flop) over the last 6400 hands. I just wonder what the probability of that happening is. Also my last session, 52 pairs saw flop, 0 sets! weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
