Group: 1
"Big Slick" "Anna Kournikova ('Looks good, but hardly wins.')" "Machine Gun (AK-47)"
EV ratio: 0.78 .....ranking: 5 of 169...... based on "348,364" Hands
In the upper right corner ( blue ) opponent hand is suited, in the lower right (white) it is unsuited
Values in Table are Expected Values (win% + 1/2 tie%) in percent terms.
In the blue, hands are suited diamonds (ex: vs 
)
In the white, hands are offsuit one diamond one heart (ex: vs 
)
After the Flop, Turn, And River you will have, this hand, this often:
  |
Flop |
Turn |
River |
| NoPair |
10332 |
52.71% |
78003 |
33.87% |
386130 |
18.22% |
| OnePair |
7920 |
40.41% |
107748 |
46.79% |
916776 |
43.27% |
| TwoPair |
792 |
4.04% |
26334 |
11.43% |
469092 |
22.14% |
| Trips |
308 |
1.57% |
7040 |
3.06% |
92004 |
4.34% |
| Straight |
63 |
0.32% |
2844 |
1.23% |
65508 |
3.09% |
| Flush |
164 |
0.84% |
6717 |
2.92% |
138296 |
6.53% |
| FlHouse |
18 |
0.09% |
1461 |
0.63% |
47124 |
2.22% |
| Quads |
2 |
0.01% |
105 |
0.05% |
2668 |
0.13% |
| StFlush |
1 |
0.01% |
48 |
0.02% |
1162 |
0.05% |
| Total |
19600 |
100.00% |
230300 |
100.00% |
2118760 |
100.00% |
*white columns show the possible flops/turns/rivers (respectively) that make that hand
According to Apu's Too-Good-To-Be-True Nofoldem Holdem simulation wins, ties and ranks:
| Players |
Winning % |
Tie % |
Target % |
Rank (Wins) |
Rank (W+T) |
| 10 |
19.27 |
2.74 |
10.00 |
4 |
4 |
| 9 |
21.28 |
2.70 |
11.11 |
4 |
4 |
| 8 |
23.62 |
2.66 |
12.50 |
5 |
4 |
| 7 |
26.39 |
2.62 |
14.29 |
5 |
5 |
| 6 |
29.77 |
2.60 |
16.67 |
5 |
5 |
| 5 |
34.08 |
2.61 |
20.00 |
6 |
6 |
| 4 |
40.03 |
2.65 |
25.00 |
7 |
6 |
| 3 |
49.18 |
2.70 |
33.33 |
8 |
7 |
| 2 |
65.28 |
2.66 |
50.00 |
9 |
8 |
*This table is based on NO-FOLDEM simulation data
**
Target % is just 100% / Players, it is there for convienience only, and not meant to be implicative of strategy
© Copyright 2008
9 comments
Doyle is correct. Here is why... AK will likely not see the river because of these bets. The showdown percentage, and the Apu data GARAUNTEES that AK will see the river, but if the 22 bets the flop, AK has only seen 3/5ths of the board, and may not continue. (may have hit on the turn or river though, if it had not folded due to a bet).
AK suited often bets the flop against 22 which WILL fold unless its hit a set or the flop is very very ragged. AK is better than 22 unless you're extremely passive.
ok metsrule17p, I just re-read your comment and I have an answer that SHOULD clear this up.
First, betting matters, but you even eliminate that so...
Doyle's simulation that you mention, is a simulation...and if you tall the results,they will "approach" the Expected Value, assuming the trials were independant. In Fact, we can model how close we will get to this EV, based on a normal distribution... but it will likely NEVER be exact.
The EV's I have listed, are based on ALL possible boards... it is exhaustive, and it will provide EXACTLY the correct value. It is NOT based on simulation.
Consider flipping a coin...
Doyle might flip a coin 100 times, report that he got say 52 heads, and 48 tails (a likely outcome), and by simulation declare that heads has an EV of .52 and tails .48.
My algorthym more or less, splits all the likelyhoods of the events, H and T, and then divides by the count, and declares the answer: 1/2 = .50 Heads: .50, Tails .50... It is exact
Finally, the computer is correct in this case, however, you MUST consider that you must be in the hand to win, and if you fold on the flop, turn, or river, your probability of winning is ZERO, so betting matters,... but the computer is correct and Doyle is not wrong so much as a victum of "experimental error" and a lack of knowledge od statistics (otherwise he would have ensured that his number of trialswas great enough that his experimental mean was within acceptable closeness to the truth).
But that's just how I see it