The Mathematics of Poker

[Guy McSucker]

While this is fresh in my mind I thought I'd post it.

p222, at the bottom, in the fourth line of equations to calculate the value of g, you lose a factor of (x_1)^2 somewhere.

When I solve

g = y_2(x_1 - y_2) - g(y_2)^2

I get g = r/6 not g = r/2. Having said that, I made so many mistakes in doing this calculation that it could well be off.

Guy.

[bozzer]

[ QUOTE ]
the question in the post above me hints at the answer, but may i ask the simplest question: is this book predominantly limit or no-limit? i realize mathematically they are the same except for constraint on betting size, but which does the book use more for examples?

thanks in advance!!

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have the book, but the impression I get is that most of the examples of real poker games are of NL HE. There is a huge difference mathematically between FL and NL because of the difference in maximum bet size.

It sounds like this book will help me think about problems I already like to muse on (like what is an unexploitable starting hand range UTG?), but it won't tell me the answer - is that correct? I will probably get this and love thinking about it in the abstract, but will have to wait until 'Applied Mathematics of Poker' comes out before it changes my game?

[gdsdiscgolfer]

Is the errata PDF on the conjelco site being updated consistently?

[Guy McSucker]

[ QUOTE ]
Is the errata PDF on the conjelco site being updated consistently?

[/ QUOTE ]

It says "Last updated on 12/6/06."

Why did I have to look that up rather than you? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Guy.

[sobefuddled]

Well, you didn't. I guess your name says it all? [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[captainwan]

How do we make sure that our actions frequencies (bluffing frequency, betting or checking strong hands frequency) are more or less in line with what we want them to be. Do we use some tricks to randomize the process or just do it by feel?

[Ryanb9]

I found this review on amazon.com

7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

If this is poker, I quit!, January 2, 2007
Reviewer: S. Williams (Phoenix, AZ) - See all my reviews

Here is a quote from the book, "This is the general recursion that describes the relationship between successive values of Rp. To find specific values, we can use the fact that we know that Rp converges on r as P goes to infinity (since this is an approximation of the no-fold game as shown in Example 16.4). Hence, we can choose an arbitrarily large value of n, seet it equal to square root of 2 - 1, and work backwards to the desired P. As it happens, this recursive relation converges quite rapidly. Of course, we can see that for the no-fold case, Rp simply is r for all thresholds, and this game simplifies to its no-fold analogue."

Of course! Duh, who didn't know that! If you enjoyed reading that, there are 375 more pages of this stuff. Oh, and in case you get bored with such elementary level stuff, there are sections throughout the book, where the authors have "marked off the start and end of some portions of the text so that our less mathematical readers can skip more complex derivitions." I can't even give you a quote from one of these sections because I don't have those keys on my keyboard...

I have been buying poker books for a while now and I finally found my limit. While I did slug my way through this book, I doubt it will make any difference in my game. I don't see how knowing that, quote, "skew instead sums the cubes of the distances, which cause the values to have sign," will improve my game. Whatever the heck that even means!

My advice, save your money and time, unless you want to put this book on your shelf and use it to intimidate your opponents. If one of them asks for advice you could give them this book, tell that it is a "must read" if they ever want to be a good poker player, and say that you LOVED IT! If they read it, they'll never look at you the same way again, I guarantee it. And they might just quit poker all-together. Like I said above, if THIS is poker, I might quit myself!

[sobefuddled]

Guess I need to go to Amazon and write a review. I was an English major umpteen years ago. I have very little formal math background but was quite strong in Algebra and that, so far, seems to be enough for me. Perhaps this reviewer didn't take enough English courses? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] The book, is after all, very well written.

[utility]

[ QUOTE ]
I found this review on amazon.com

7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

If this is poker, I quit!, January 2, 2007
Reviewer: S. Williams (Phoenix, AZ) - See all my reviews


...blahstupidblah...


Like I said above, if THIS is poker, I might quit myself!

[/ QUOTE ]

Better yet the first comment to the review:
"This was a very helpful review - it convinced me to buy the book!"

on the other hand: if this book really makes those fish QUIT they probably shouldn't have published it! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[jaVinci]

I find this book very interesting.

I have no problems understanding most of the math (Msc Finance), and in poker I am a half decent 10/20 fixed limit Holdem grinder.

But, I have problems applying the stuff in this book to my game.

A challenge for those of you having read the book:
What part of this book did affect your game the most, and how did you apply it to your game?

Thanks.