Poker Forum - Register
Play Online Poker Games at US Poker Sites - Get the maximum Full Tilt Poker Referral Code and PokerStars Marketing Code exclusively at Cardschat. Try online poker at Everest Poker, Ultimate Bet.
Party Poker Titan Poker PokerStars Bodog Pacific Poker
Go Back   Poker Forum > Poker Message Boards > Poker Strategies
Search

Online Poker Forum
Receive the maximum sign up bonus when using our exclusive Full Tilt Poker Referral Code CARDSCHAT.
Reply
  Poker - Question for AG: The Mathematics of Poker by Chen/Ankeman
 
  #1  
08-01-2008, 9:56 PM
jeffred1111
Kathy Liebert's Boytoy
 
Location: Valuetown
Plays at: PokerStars
Likes: Your sister
Posts: 780
Question for AG: The Mathematics of Poker by Chen/Ankeman

I always sucked @ math, always. Only thing I was ever good at was Literature but I still have a sense for fractions/math thinking: thing is, it doesn't come that fast. I know that I won't be able to develop to my full potential if I can't comprehend or easily understand the underlying math of poker, namely at other forms than NL (LHE, Omaha, etc.).

Would this be a good way to better my poker math or would it be too much ? If it's not suitable, any other book you can recommend ? As is already clear, I've read TOP (probably on a weekly basis I go check out something in it...), so I'm really looking for math problems.

THX !
 

PokerStarsPokerStars is one of the best poker sites on the internet. They accept US players and using PokerStars marketing code CARDSCHAT you get a $75 bonus.

Full Tilt PokerFull Tilt Poker is the poker site the pro's play at. US players are welcome - use Full Tilt Poker referral code CARDSCHAT for a $600 bonus.

  #2  
08-01-2008, 11:11 PM
aliengenius
Putting 'AG' back in LAG
 
Location: Buffalo NY
Plays at: CC LB games
Likes: pin-up girls
Posts: 3,886
Texas Hold’em Odds and Probabilities by Matt Hilger

and/or

Killer Poker by the Numbers by Tony Guerrera

From the library thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by aliengenius View Post
No! The book is super math heavy, almost to the point of being too technical to be useful/practical.

Here is a page scan to give you an idea (sorry about the sizing):

Attachment 7430



And while it's not all like that, there are certainly more practical math books out there for those of us who are not Dr. Cheetah.

Last edited by aliengenius : 08-01-2008 at 11:22 PM.
  #3  
08-01-2008, 11:46 PM
jeffred1111
Kathy Liebert's Boytoy
 
Location: Valuetown
Plays at: PokerStars
Likes: Your sister
Posts: 780
Thanks, will probably pick the Hilger one since it is available in PokerStars FPP store. But does Guerrera/vorhaus touch on Omaha at all or is it (again) geared towards NL only ?
  #4  
08-01-2008, 11:58 PM
aliengenius
Putting 'AG' back in LAG
 
Location: Buffalo NY
Plays at: CC LB games
Likes: pin-up girls
Posts: 3,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffred1111 View Post
Thanks, will probably pick the Hilger one since it is available in PokerStars FPP store. But does Guerrera/vorhaus touch on Omaha at all or is it (again) geared towards NL only ?
hold'em
  #5  
09-01-2008, 12:11 AM
jeffred1111
Kathy Liebert's Boytoy
 
Location: Valuetown
Plays at: PokerStars
Likes: Your sister
Posts: 780
Meh.
  #6  
09-01-2008, 12:36 AM
ChuckTs
kiss the sky
 
Location: not playing enough
Posts: 10,996
Would you say Chen's book requires prerequisite knowledge of complicated maths or could we actually figure it out through the denseness (new word?) of it?

ie would it make sense to me or does it require like college/uni-level probability knowledge?
  #7  
09-01-2008, 12:40 AM
aliengenius
Putting 'AG' back in LAG
 
Location: Buffalo NY
Plays at: CC LB games
Likes: pin-up girls
Posts: 3,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckTs View Post
Would you say Chen's book requires prerequisite knowledge of complicated maths or could we actually figure it out through the denseness (new word?) of it?

ie would it make sense to me or does it require like college/uni-level probability knowledge?
Could you make sense of the page i posted? I can't read it, but then, I was an English Lit major.
I just think your money is better spent elsewhere.
  #8  
09-01-2008, 2:00 AM
jaketrevvor
brb
 
Location: Rainy Olde England
Plays at: pokerher.com
Likes: cavegirls
Posts: 1,405
I disagree, I received TMOP for christmas from my mum and I think it's great. Super interesting probability stuff that you should know anyway imo even though, I concede, it's more of a maths book than a poker book in parts. As far as having to be a maths expert to understand it, concepts are explained systematically and in an order so that knowledge and understanding is built up chronologically throughout the chapters starting with the basics. So only a bit of basic mathematical understanding and common sense is needed really. Oh, and patience - it's sure as hell not a quick read and if you skim over parts you're likely to not be able to understand following sections.

But then again as a maths geek my opinion is a little bias
  #9  
09-01-2008, 2:07 AM
ChuckTs
kiss the sky
 
Location: not playing enough
Posts: 10,996
Well I am too which is why I asked. I'll probably take a quick peek at it next time I'm at a bookstore. Thanks for the help ag and jake
  #10  
09-01-2008, 2:11 AM
jaketrevvor
brb
 
Location: Rainy Olde England
Plays at: pokerher.com
Likes: cavegirls
Posts: 1,405
Ooo and I meant to specify that Chapter 1 is particularly awesome, even if you know most of it already - very well explained imo.
  #11  
09-01-2008, 2:18 AM
vanquish
au revoir les enfants
 
Posts: 4,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckTs View Post
denseness (new word?)
kathy liebert recommends 'density'
  #12  
09-01-2008, 2:19 AM
AlexeiVronsky
Expert Member
 
Plays at: Full Tilt
Likes: HORSE
Posts: 237
It's more about understanding how to play with a game theoretical approach in mind rather than the typical focus of math in poker which is geared strictly towards pot odds and the like which is an easy enough concept to get without a book. It definitely gave me a deeper understanding of poker strategy and optimizing play. It's a great book for what it is, but it's practical application is something you have to work to incorporate into your game and at a deeper level. I think it's more useful against very good poker players, against weaker opponents you're generally still better off using exploitative strategies though you may still modify your game a bit to make it more optimal strategy even against players who only minimally adjust to exploitative strategies.
  #13  
09-01-2008, 2:39 AM
skoldpadda
Caveman Eye Surgeon
 
Location: Cyberspace
Plays at: PokerStars, Tilt
Likes: CC Razz Guru
Posts: 2,668
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaketrevvor View Post
Ooo and I meant to specify that Chapter 1 is particularly awesome, even if you know most of it already - very well explained imo.

Keep reading -- it gets much more complicated in terms of the math.

I have an engineering degree and I'd say it's pretty dense stuff.

Not recommended by me.
  #14  
09-01-2008, 2:41 AM
jaketrevvor
brb
 
Location: Rainy Olde England
Plays at: pokerher.com
Likes: cavegirls
Posts: 1,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by skoldpadda View Post
Keep reading -- it gets much more complicated in terms of the math.
I have indeed read it all. Chapter 1 stands out to me as particularly well-explained as well as containing most of the fun parts of probability
  #15  
09-01-2008, 2:53 AM
MrSticker
Ultra Good!
 
Location: NoCal USA
Plays at: F.T.P,Stars
Likes: Winning
Posts: 3,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffred1111 View Post
I always sucked @ math, always. Only thing I was ever good at was Literature but I still have a sense for fractions/math thinking: thing is, it doesn't come that fast. I know that I won't be able to develop to my full potential if I can't comprehend or easily understand the underlying math of poker, namely at other forms than NL (LHE, Omaha, etc.).

Would this be a good way to better my poker math or would it be too much ? If it's not suitable, any other book you can recommend ? As is already clear, I've read TOP (probably on a weekly basis I go check out something in it...), so I'm really looking for math problems.

THX !
Here's a review I did on Hilger's book:

Stick's Poker Blog: Book Review: "Texas Hold'Em Odds and Probabilities" by Matthew Hilger

In it I said it was a little bit tough for me, but by the looks of AG's attachment from TMOP, Hilger's book is probably a good bit easier. I think all the charts in the back of the book make it worth it.
  #16  
09-01-2008, 4:50 PM
robwhufc
Footie's back! :)
 
Location: Sittingbourne, UK
Posts: 5,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckTs View Post
Would you say Chen's book requires prerequisite knowledge of complicated maths or could we actually figure it out through the denseness (new word?) of it?

ie would it make sense to me or does it require like college/uni-level probability knowledge?

I like it, but it's a maths book really and not a poker book. Definately have a look at it in the store if you're unsure.
Reply
  Poker Forum > Poker Message Boards > Poker Strategies

« Previous advice    Betting correctly Next »

Display Modes
Similar Threads for: Question for AG: The Mathematics of Poker by Chen/Ankeman
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
My Poker Library (updated) aliengenius Poker General 79 07-05-2008 7:31 PM


PokerStars
WORLD'S LARGEST POKER SITE - US PLAYERS ACCEPTED AT POKER STARS

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:42 AM.


Sitemap: 1 2 3

Copyscape   Poker En Ligne Online Poker Poker Online
All original site contents ©Cardschat.com 2004-2008. Reproduction is prohibited.