D
dumpy620_84
Rock Star
Silver Level
Not trying to nitpick here, just seeking to make sure that I really do understand.
Three comments/questions:
1. Steve Brecher asked about the starting hand KQ$ in clubs, How many of the other 1225 hands were 'better' than this starter . . . .
My recollection is that the 169 possible card combinations, with precise suits accounted for, created exactly 1326 possible hands. So if Steve had said, "How many of the other 1325 hands are better", I would not have been surprised but there's a hundred hand difference, if this was just a 'minor slipup' on his part, no problem. But if there really IS a hundred hand difference how does one account for it?
If the three equal hands are dropped out (KQ$ in spades, diamonds, and hearts) that leaves 1322.
If all pairs in which a club is NOT included 1/2 (13 X 6) = 39 are dropped out of his calculations, that would leave us with 1283. I do not see the justification for dropping these hands out, by the way, so if this is what's been done . . . why exactly is it justified?
And since I don't see any reason to drop out any other hands, I'm totally confused by the number 1225 which he used. Simple mistake, or am I missing something?
2. Loved the concept of 'showdown equity'!!!! Only thing I'd say, IF the correct number of possible opposing hands is 1325 rather than 1225, then the percentages would have to be refigured and slightly adjusted (e.g. 238/1225 compared to 238/1325 is a difference of about 2% numerically and 8% comparatively) to make them correct.
3. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears that the most startling thing about the chart Steve included at the bottom of the article is how much stronger the conventionally acknowledged strong starting hands are when played from real late positions and conversely, how very little it matters if you play semi-junk (e.g. 65$) from any position IF one is allowed to limp in rather than pay to draw. Is this a proper interpretation of Steve's lesson and what strategic implications, if any, spring from it? Thanks for reading and commenting.
Three comments/questions:
1. Steve Brecher asked about the starting hand KQ$ in clubs, How many of the other 1225 hands were 'better' than this starter . . . .
My recollection is that the 169 possible card combinations, with precise suits accounted for, created exactly 1326 possible hands. So if Steve had said, "How many of the other 1325 hands are better", I would not have been surprised but there's a hundred hand difference, if this was just a 'minor slipup' on his part, no problem. But if there really IS a hundred hand difference how does one account for it?
If the three equal hands are dropped out (KQ$ in spades, diamonds, and hearts) that leaves 1322.
If all pairs in which a club is NOT included 1/2 (13 X 6) = 39 are dropped out of his calculations, that would leave us with 1283. I do not see the justification for dropping these hands out, by the way, so if this is what's been done . . . why exactly is it justified?
And since I don't see any reason to drop out any other hands, I'm totally confused by the number 1225 which he used. Simple mistake, or am I missing something?
2. Loved the concept of 'showdown equity'!!!! Only thing I'd say, IF the correct number of possible opposing hands is 1325 rather than 1225, then the percentages would have to be refigured and slightly adjusted (e.g. 238/1225 compared to 238/1325 is a difference of about 2% numerically and 8% comparatively) to make them correct.
3. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears that the most startling thing about the chart Steve included at the bottom of the article is how much stronger the conventionally acknowledged strong starting hands are when played from real late positions and conversely, how very little it matters if you play semi-junk (e.g. 65$) from any position IF one is allowed to limp in rather than pay to draw. Is this a proper interpretation of Steve's lesson and what strategic implications, if any, spring from it? Thanks for reading and commenting.