I'm still baffled

It’s just mathematical probability. If a player played either the hand 76s or 88 only, assuming they are equally likely occurrences preflop, and the flop came 852, he’s much more likely to have 76s than 88. Do the math. -ISF blog

I can't wrap my feeble mind around this one. Could someone explain it and/or "do the math" ?

Ok there are 4 combinations of 67s and 6 combinations of 88.

The fact there is one 8 out leaves one suit dead so there are now 3 possible combinations left of 88 and we only flop a set 1:12

There are still 4 combinations of 67s, but I don't know how often we flop an OESD.

I think the point is due to cthe combinations of hands 88 and 67s left we are 33% more likely to have 67s.

Also, see this good thread by spoon:
http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...ng-t67000.html

It would behoove you to figure this out, because it will all become clearer. I can give you some direction.


Do you have pokerstove? I want you to find out how many combo's there are of any two hands. AA, AKo or any other pocket cards.


edit: nevermind, pokermuzz would rather just give you the answer.

Originally Posted by PokerMuzz

The fact there is one 8 out leaves one suit dead so there are now 3 possible combinations left of 88

I don't understand this type of thinking.

Villain has a (4/52) * (3/51) = 1/221 chance of being dealt 88 preflop.

He is dealt 88 preflop.

Flop comes xx8.

Villain now *had* a (3/52) * (2/52) = 1/442 chance of being dealt 88 preflop.

Villain's hitting a set in fact reduced his odds (from the Hero's perspective) of having one.

Gentlemen, commence stacking.

Originally Posted by bigslikk

Originally Posted by PokerMuzz

The fact there is one 8 out leaves one suit dead so there are now 3 possible combinations left of 88

I don't understand this type of thinking.

WE ARE SAYING EXACTLY THE SAME POINT, BUT I SAY IT WITH LESS MATH - BECAUSE WE DON'T NEED IT IN THIS SITUATION

What is your point? It's clearly stated in the article we don't need to think about preflop probabilities. There are 6 combinations of 88, because of the 8 on the flop there are now only 3. We agree it makes it less likely because of the 8 on the flop, but what's with all the convoluted math?

1/221 = 2x 1/442 which is exactly the same as saying he could have had 6 combinations but now he can only have 3. Half the probability....


The fact that there are still 4 possible combinations of 67s make it more likely he has that hand.

This is quite the hilarious misunderstanding. I'm arguing with you in the hopes that I learn something.

How can I argue with you and say the same thing? Well, I don't agree with what I / you said. I was presenting your information from my point of view, which was supposed to sound retarded, and thusly, challenge your idea.

You're telling me that the villain's odds of being dealt 88 preflop CHANGES after the flop comes out? Christ does that sound goofy to anyone else?

Just because a third 8 comes out of the deck later doesn't mean that the villain didn't have the chance to be dealt it before the flop. Sure, he doesn't have it NOW (duh, it's out on the flop), but I don't see how that makes the odds of his being dealt 88 any less. It is, was, and always will be, 1/221.

FUCKING HELL

Lets say we have A8, the flop is 885. What is the chance of him being dealt 88? 1/221 still, yeah. But now we know there are 3 8's oout he can't have that hand, so we can't be worried about 88, when we are ASSIGNING A RANGE

I'm not saying that the probability changes preflop. Your getting mixed up between probability of a hand preflop and assigning a range, calculating equity.

EDIT: Nice delete eugmac. I'm saying that the probability of him being deal 88 pre in the example is still the same but when we see two 8's on the flop and one in our hand, it then makes villains 88 impossible! AS you correctly stated there aren't 5 8's in the deck.

lol sorry but i got your point as soon as i posted it.

maybe you should chill down a bit?

Originally Posted by eugmac

lol sorry but i got your point as soon as i posted it.

maybe you should chill down a bit?

Yeah sorry this shit is putting me on life tilt.

basically if there are 3 3s out on the board a 3 is a very small part of someones range. Just like if there is an 8 on the board 88 is a smaller part of his range than if it wasn't on the board. Hope this makes sense.

I am beginning to understand. Beginning. Thanks for the help.

Here is a way to understand it, if a horse has a 1% to win a race, but wins, its odds of winning the race then are 100%, because it won the race.


As you get more information the probabilities can change.

Preflop you dont know any other cards. So there are 4 8s that he could have. If all 4 8s come out on the flop, you KNOW he doesn't have any 8s. If one 8 comes out on the flop, there are only 3 left that he could have.

Something like that.

8d 8s 8c 8h

7d 7s 7c 7h 6d 6s 6c 6h

simpl

Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer

8d 8s 8c 8h

7d 7s 7c 7h 6d 6s 6c 6h

simpl

Of course, it was so obvious! I'm off to WSOP.

with 4 8's

you can have less combinations than you can make with 4 7s and 4 6's, only excluding 6's only and 7's only

obvious yet?

edit: LOL, i thought it was 76o

neway, you can have 6 combos of 88

and 4 combos of 76s

assuming one 8 hit flop. you can only have 3 combos (DUCY?) of 88 left


4>3, thus it is slightly more probably villain will have 76s than 88 in that situation

Originally Posted by bigslikk

You're telling me that the villain's odds of being dealt 88 preflop CHANGES after the flop comes out?

I will tell you that villain's odds of HAVING BEEN DEALT an 88 changes after the flop comes out.

Originally Posted by bigslikk

Christ does that sound goofy to anyone else?

Nope.

Originally Posted by bigslikk

Just because a third 8 comes out of the deck later doesn't mean that the villain didn't have the chance to be dealt it before the flop. Sure, he doesn't have it NOW (duh, it's out on the flop), but I don't see how that makes the odds of his being dealt 88 any less. It is, was, and always will be, 1/221.

OK. You hold 88, flop comes 882. What are villain's chances of having been dealt an 8?

After the cards are dealt, we are left ESTIMATING villain's likely preflop holding based on betting, the board and reads. Each piece of information makes certain preflop holdings more or less likely to have occurred. We don't know what occurred, and we won't know until a showdown (if ever). But we can use every scrap of information to reason backwards to guess his range.

I'll pose a question to try to move this thread forward. You hold 99, raise 3.5xBB from the button, and BB calls. Villain checks this rainbow flop:

Example 1: TT2
Example2: QJ2

On which flop are you more likely to (still) be ahead? Why?

I understand finally. Will be incorporating it into the ranges I give. Thanks it took long enough lol.

Edit:

Absent any read,s you're ikely to be ahead on TT2. 2 tens out versus 6 jacks/queens out.

Originally Posted by bigslikk

I understand finally. Will be incorporating it into the ranges I give. Thanks it took long enough lol.

Edit:

Absent any read,s you're ikely to be ahead on TT2. 2 tens out versus 6 jacks/queens out.

That's a good start, just thinking about the board texture.

But also try to put villain on a range. What hands (absent reads) might be calling here? An unknown villain's range should include more hands like AQ, AJs, KQ rather than hands like AT, KT.

Also thinking about his range, I'm not fussed about AA, KK, or AK 'cuz they fit villain's betting so far. JJ is really the only likely hand that concerns me on the TT2 flop. I think of QQ as possible but not likely.

Also remember that a good bit of villain's range is pp's 88 and worse, of which 22 is an extremely small part of.

Every scrap of information we can gather makes the assessment that we're still ahead MUCH more likely with TT2 than QJ2. BTW, I think we're still likely to be ahead against the QJ2 flop, and I'm betting it on the flop. But several cards will make me pause before I bet it on the turn.

There are 3 guys and 3 girls left on earth. All of the guys figure they're probably getting layed, until they find out 2 of the girls are lesbian lovers. The guys now desperately realize they only have one prospective mate for the 3 of them, and commence beating the living shit out of each other over use of the remote control for the television.

While this is going on, the lesbians start making out, mesmerizing two of the males. The other guy (we'll call him Bruce Nasty) secretly gay but wanting to procreate slips into the woods and reluctantly procrastinates the fornaliscious female, never revealing his sexual orientation, but continuously complimenting her on her hair and skirt as he does her. She thanks him for the compliments, and answers her cell phone in the middle of sex.

9 months later she gives birth to a boy who enjoys humping rabbits. Everyone dies, because even if he didn't hump rabbits, he wasn't gonna hump his mother, the only available female. That's because she's old and crusty. Besides, that would mean she's giving birth to her own grandchild, which is kinda fucked up. Wait, Adam and Eve, how do we exist again? Oh Milf, gotcha.

Originally Posted by Rondavu

There are 3 guys and 3 girls left on earth. All of the guys figure they're probably getting layed, until they find out 2 of the girls are lesbian lovers. The guys now desperately realize they only have one prospective mate for the 3 of them, and commence beating the living shit out of each other over use of the remote control for the television.

While this is going on, the lesbians start making out, mesmerizing two of the males. The other guy (we'll call him Bruce Nasty) secretly gay but wanting to procreate slips into the woods and reluctantly procrastinates the fornaliscious female, never revealing his sexual orientation, but continuously complimenting her on her hair and skirt as he does her. She thanks him for the compliments, and answers her cell phone in the middle of sex.

9 months later she gives birth to a boy who enjoys humping rabbits. Everyone dies, because even if he didn't hump rabbits, he wasn't gonna hump his mother, the only available female. That's because she's old and crusty. Besides, that would mean she's giving birth to her own grandchild, which is kinda fucked up. Wait, Adam and Eve, how do we exist again? Oh Milf, gotcha.

Shoulda folded pre

Originally Posted by Trainer_jyms

Originally Posted by Rondavu

There are 3 guys and 3 girls left on earth. All of the guys figure they're probably getting layed, until they find out 2 of the girls are lesbian lovers. The guys now desperately realize they only have one prospective mate for the 3 of them, and commence beating the living shit out of each other over use of the remote control for the television.

While this is going on, the lesbians start making out, mesmerizing two of the males. The other guy (we'll call him Bruce Nasty) secretly gay but wanting to procreate slips into the woods and reluctantly procrastinates the fornaliscious female, never revealing his sexual orientation, but continuously complimenting her on her hair and skirt as he does her. She thanks him for the compliments, and answers her cell phone in the middle of sex.

9 months later she gives birth to a boy who enjoys humping rabbits. Everyone dies, because even if he didn't hump rabbits, he wasn't gonna hump his mother, the only available female. That's because she's old and crusty. Besides, that would mean she's giving birth to her own grandchild, which is kinda fucked up. Wait, Adam and Eve, how do we exist again? Oh Milf, gotcha.

Shoulda folded pre

I thought I was ahead, so I pulled a random squeeze play