The guy got lucky.. simply as that

Not really. With pocket 9s, there is a less than 10% chance that an overcard DOESN'T come by the river. With the opponent holding 2 overcards, he has a 2 in 5 chance that the overcard that comes more than 90% of the time one that he needs. It's pretty much like shooting fish in a barrel at that point.

It's like this man, big bets and big pots are for big hands.
99 is not a big hand.

If you know the guy is going to pay you off when you get a big hand, why wouldn't you wait for one?

I also didn't say that he should have "been a nellie" laid down 99 before the flop, but he sure as hell didn't have to go all-in right there. All-in preflop is for "over aggressive 12 year olds" as you put it. (Unless you have AA or KK)
Real poker players make their money post-flop.

QFMFT:2 cents:

People who play cash games like they're tournaments are what we real poker players eat for dinner.

Fish...it does a body good.

You keep playing your donkaments, pushing all-in with pocket 9's, because you have to due to the ever increasing blind structure. But make it a habit of playing that way in a cash game, you won't last long.

Dude relax. We all bow down to you mighty Poker wisdom ok?

Like I said I was representing a big hand in the chance the guy would fold but I picked the wrong guy who was willing to race with a shitty hand like q-10. Com'om most poker players I know would fold in his spot. Q10 for $200? Come on now. He should have folded.

Im mean I show strength preflop when I enter the pot, how many players you know that will come back at you with q-10??

Almost as many as will go all in preflop with a 9-9.

I was just making a play to try and take the pot there. The hand prior I saw him raise with alot of crap and knew he was just trying to steal every hand... I made a bad play I admit that but still do you agree with his call? Am I wrong that a better player would have folded there with his hand?

Even though I hate your push, I like your push better than his call.

You do know the gap theory right?

It takes a better hand to call with than to raise with.

I play 6-max online for the most part, and sometimes I'm pretty much aggressive retarded. People have asked me on many occasions, "how can you raise with that hand?"

My answer. "I can raise with any two cards, I just can't call with them."

He got lucky for sure, but at the same time you played into his game. If he hadn't been playing loose all night you maybe wouldn't have gone back over the top with 99:2 cents:

His hand was as good as yours, and every player's measurement of a good hand is different. His case is particular because he had been playings (and apparently showing) crap hole cards and teasing you with them. If I am in his place, calling may not be so hard because after a series of junk winners, a reasonable hand isn't a bad thing.

After all, the reality is that there would only be a few things he could face that would be so terrible pre-flop: A-A, A-K, A-Q, K-K, K-Q, or Q-Q. Below that, it starts getting much closer to a crap shoot, especially if you hand isn't paired.

Is he lucky you didn't have one of those 6 hands? Sure. But the reality is you went all in with a hand not knowing if he had A-A, K-K, Q-Q, J-J, or T-T on top of you. You took the risk in a place where a call would have gotten you a flop and allowed you to maybe learn a little more about his hand.

allin preflop its a bad move no matter what you're holding.

rawalex, QT is less than 50% to win. The underpair is the favorite by several percentage points. You need to go back to poker school if you think the overcards are 65% to win.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAA!!!

thanks, that's a good one.

What is the easiest place to learn all of those odds?

Mitch

5 * 13% is not the correct calculation to figure out the % chance of him winning given that scenario.

.87 * .87 * .87 * .87 * .87 = the correct % chance of him winning w\ pocket 9's under the assumption that the 13% remains fixed.

By your logic if he drew 10 cards he'd have over 100% chance of winning which obviously isn't the case.


Like I said, methinks you need a stats review ;)

These threads always get more entertaining when the guys who live in Vegas show up and start calling each other names :1orglaugh

Oh and also I didn't check the 13% I'm just using your numbers for lazieness sake.

If by several you mean 4 then you're right.

Two black nines versus QT of hearts

The 9's wins 51.69% of the time
The QT wins 47.95% of the time

They tie 0.37% of the time.

If you pushed all in, flipped over your nines and showed them, your opponent would be getting the best of it to call with his hand, when you consider the money already in the pot.

The problem with a hand like 99 preflop is that if your push does get called, you're a coinflip at best, and you're totally dominated by an overpair at worst.

Against your typical bad player you're going to have several opportunities to get your money in as a 2 to 1 favorite or better, yet you seem convinced that risking your whole stack on a coinflip and giving your opponent the right price to call is "punishing him"

You're way off on the math.
You're combining two different statistics in a way that they weren't meant to be combined.

If you hold any two random cards your odds of pairing one by the river is roughly 50 percent. The reason the overcards win less than 50% of the time is because making that one pair doesn't always mean you finish with the best hand.

Also, if you have a 25% chance twice, that doesn't mean you have a 50% chance of making the hand. (i.e. flopping a flush draw)
You can't just add up percentages like that. That's not the way math works.

Eggggggggggggggggggzactly

Actually, because of the law of odds, every time you add more cards to turn over, the more chance it has to come. There is a point where it becomes MORE likely that he will get one of his cards than not.

Here, while it isn't complete, this is one of those wikipedia things that actually isn't terrible:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poker_probability_(Texas_hold_'em)

Real key is the after the flop numbers, chance of getting a pair:

Either pair 6 0.1277 6.83 : 1 0.1304 6.67 : 1 0.2414 3.14 : 1

6 outs, 12.77 chance on the turn, 13.04% chance on the river, and 24.14% chance overall that it comes on either. As I said before, my math is "rounding" to prove a point, but the effect is the same.

Dig420, going all in pre-flop turns almost every hand into a statistical nightmare. Everyone thinks "Damn, I got pocket aces, let's fuck these guys over" and the guy next to them goes all in with them, turns over a Q-J suited and ends up with a flush, flushing you off the table.

Considering the cards you claim to carry, you don't seem to be very observant. The very best players in the world don't go all in very often preflop, but rather usually right after the flop or after the turn. Those that do go all in pre-flop tend to be short stackers with few options.

I am sure there are more than a couple of people like you who all in pre-flop, but you don't see them on the million dollar tables very often.

As for the odds, a spread of less than 5 or 6 percent is pretty much coin toss range, certainly not all in territory, especially not pre-flop. Consider you own experience. You have pocket 9s and you call your way to a flop. The flop comes T-Q-A. Would you care to explain any circumstance under which you would go all in at that point?

Remember, with 9's the chance of at least one overcard coming in the deal is pretty high... 20 out of 48 cards, essentially a near certainty that one of the overcards comes. Now, pre-flop all in might push a more timid player out of a pot, but betting against a mega-loose player, you are almost certain to get called, and almost certain to be sitting with a hand that is at best a few percentage points over the odds.

Re-read the original post. limp, limp, our guy raises, the over guy raises over him. At that point, he could have called and got a flop and had a better idea where he stood. The price of information was lower than the price of the all in.

It's all in the numbers, leave your balls at home.

Again, you can't add the flop, turn, and river percentages together and think that those are the odds.
That's not the way math works.

Umm all I said is you don't multiply 13% by 5 to get the % of winning the hand that's not how you combine %'s mathematically. Yes I'm aware the % changes a small amount every hand and that you were rounding, it has nothing to do with what I said.

Did you read the part where I said:

AND


My point had nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that you used 13% for your base point, my point was that you don't use 5 * 13% to figure out the correct odds using that 13%.

Having 2 50% chances doesn't mean 50% + 50% = 100% chance, just like having 5 13% chances doesn't mean 13% + 13% + 13% + 13% + 13% = 65%.

Once again, you need a statistics review. Like snake said you're combining numbers in a way that you can't do mathematically.

Dude, man, you really need to go back to school.

You don't add it directly (and I made that clear) but it is pretty close and good enough for mathing out problems on a poker table. What you are mistaking I think is the odds from a static point and the odds of any single card. Consider: In our test case, there is a 13% (round number) chance that the card that comes up next is a Q or T. Now, with 5 shots at 13%, do you think that the odds that any one of those cards being a Q or T is higher than if only a single card was turned?

You don't beleive me?

Set up this experiement, and do it a bunch of times.

Take a deck, extract 2 9s. Extract a Q-T. Shuffle up the rest of the cards, and do a regulation deal to 5 cards. Record the number of times that (a) the Q-T gets paired up, and (b) the number of times an overcard (past the 9s) comes.

Do it 20 times. Record your answers.

Then, do the same thing, but deal it out to 8 cards. Do it 20 times, record your answers.

Actually, incorrect. If you have a 50% chance now, and you turn 1 card and it doesn't come, the next one would be 100%, because a 50% chance would imply 1 out or 2. If there is a lottery with only 2 tickets and you hold both, you have a 50% chance that either ticket wins... or a 100% chance overall.

Think!

No it's not dude.

If you flop a flush draw, you have a 25% (roughly) chance of making your flush on the next card.
Using your "good enough for the table" math, that would mean I have a 50% chance of making a flush by the time the hand is over.

In reality you only have a 35% chance of making the flush by the river. If I used your math I would think I'm even money to make my hand and would go all in every time I flopped a flush draw, when in reality I'm a 2 to 1 underdog.

*sigh* that's only in exhastive circumstances, which these aren't. You said yourself the 13% is only a rounded figure and we're only using it.

Use coins for the 50% example what are the odds of me not flipping tails on consecutive throws.

If I get 1 throw it's 50%
2 throws? 25%
3 throws? 12.5%

You calculate this by -multiplying- the %'s not by adding them.

(50%)^(number of throws)=the odd of consectively not throwing tails. Same thing with not drawing the wrong card.


(1-13%) * (1-13.5%) * (1-14%) *(1-14.5%) * (1-15%) = the correct odds

(assuming for simplicity sake the odd change .5% per card drawn)

We just simplified it to

(1-.13)^5 = the odds winning pocket 9's

You never -add- %'s. I really don't know how much more clear I can be.


Are you really this dense or just arguing for the sake of arguement?

Thank you.

Quoted for troof

Again, it is a curve, but you need to back up further to understand why for the purposes of calculating it out is is just as easy to straight line it as it is to go all over the road.

Flush draw. 19.15% chance that a needed card comes up. Combined on turn and river is about 35%. Not straight line % + %, but certainly not 19.15% either. GigoloMason is trying to suggest that you have a 19.15% chance and that is it, because that is the chance that any single card is a card you need. That just isn't the case.

GigoloMason, coin tosses are not a good example because there are no "eliminating" odd. The odds reset every time and remain the same on every toss no matter what happened in the previous toss. Cards are both eliminating and compounding because you get multiple shots to acheive your goal. Take your coin flip. There is a 50-50 chance that either side comes up, true enough. But if you flip it twice, the chance that you get heads both times is only about 25% (possible outcomes are HH HT TH TT). Flip it a third time, and the chance that you get heads 3 times in a row is even lower (HHH HHT HTH HTT THT TTH TTT). 14% chance? By the 5th flip, the chance that you didn't flip a tail somewhere in the 5 is very low indeed.

Yes, the chance of any single flip being a head or a tail is 50-50. But cards isn't a single flip but a series of flips (5 to be precise), which means that the likelihood from the start that something may happen is high, and gets smaller as more and more of those opportunies are used up (although there is a small increase as each non-useful card it revealed).

I don't pretend for an instant that my numbers are exact or precise, but they do allow you to pretty quicky figure out where you stand.

wow after everything I've posted how is this still going so far over your head? the fact that you don't understand basic math/stats doesn't make me wrong...

PS:
1-((1-.195)*(1-.195)) = 36%

seriously special ed. say it with me now .... we dont add percents

by the way are you even READING my posts? I just read what you seem to think I'm saying and its so far off the mark... just wow.

Just lost a hand on Full Tilt with AK vs A6 buddy had 4 6's by the river lol..

I hate big slick. Costs me more money than any other hand probably, because it's very very difficult to lay it down preflop or on the first post flop bet. You end up calling, calling, folding. Sucks.

Dumbass. For the purposes of being able to calculate it in your head at a poker table, adding a slightly discounting the number is a pretty good way to get very close to the true odds.

19.5 x 2 = 39%, small discount, and SURPRISE, you are looking at about 36%, or about the error rate of a single card in the deck. For the puposes of figuring out the chance that, post flop, you will get a card it is pretty darn functional.

No, you can't straight add it and get a perfect answer, that was never the point. But your odds don't stay at 19.5% if you have more than one chance to draw, and that is my point.

We're supposed to believe you're some kind of awesome poker player/expert but you don't know how to play AK profitably?

Things that make you go hmmmmmmmm

No More Talk
 

Money/mouth anyone?

So who's hosting the cash games in LA next week so we can see who can back up all his talk?

Not sure why you would move all in when he raised you if he hasn't been playing bad cards all night. Seems to me like he was giving you a pretty clear indication that he had at least something. Sure he got lucky, but to move all in on a pair of 9's probably wasn't the smartest move you have ever made.

I think you are wrong to criticize this guy the way you did because when it comes down to it, poker is only a thinking mans game when you are playing with people who think about it. When you play against people who are random I find that more often than not you are going to get over confident and get screwed like you did.

That's my two cents anyways.

One more thing...just wondering why all the math that is happening right now is based on this being a heads up game. Were there not more people at the table?

I'm not going to pretend that I am a poker wiz or anything, but poker is much more than a numbers game. There is a human element involved here too, so you can crunch all the numbers you want but when it comes down to it I think that when your raise is doubled and you only have a pair of 9s pre flop, you should either call, fold, or raise but not go all in. I just don't see that as being a very smart decision, nor do I think it is a good stradegy. (Unless of course we are talking tournament style and this is heads up)

A) Yes your 'method' is fairly close in this example but in the one this thread started on you're over 15% off. I'd consider that a fairly big opsie in an odds game.

b) I understand the odds change for every card flipped. YOU are the one who started this thread by making the example simpler with a flat % for every card. I simply used the model you started with. I disclaimed in my first post that I know this wasn't really how it worked (assuming the odds were fixed), and in my math post I actually showed an example of the odd changing w\ every card played. The fact that you didn't actually read what I wronte is not my fault.

c) Irregardless of what's 'practical' I was trying to point out how the actual odds are correctly calculated. No matter how you spin it you're wrong in this sense. You CANNOT add %'s. Yes it may work out close to the actual answer occasionally, but it can also be fairly far off the mark as well using a method like that (as in the original example where it was 15% off).

AK can be tough for anyone, it's only A high but it's a very good ace. Leads you into some very dangerous situations. As far as whether you believe me or not, it's not really like I give a fuck, right? Why should I care what you think, my friend? Are you important?

RawAlex, you can keep fighting this off, but the fact is your method to a staggeringly incorrect conclusion re pp v overpair. That alone should tell you that you need to reconsider your method.

With only 200 bucks in front of him, I would imagine to re-raise is the same as going all in. Why would you re-raise with 99 anyway? Either you're pretty damn sure you're ahead RIGHT THAT MOMENT and you don't really want to see a flop, or you think you're behind and you fold. Push all in, odds are somewhat better than 50-50 he folds, especially if he's been pushing with rags, and if he doesn't you're probably still ahead. No sense whatsoever in pushing a good amount of money into the pot with a medium pair so you can be forced to lay it down when an overcard comes on the flop. A straight call is better than a re-raise in this position, you can lay it down easily if you don't have too much invested in the hand.

Against a proven maniac pushing all in with 99 is perfectly legit and maybe necessary. He *might* think twice before raising your bb with 5-9 os

If you think the way to win at poker is to only play hands where you're damn sure you're ahead, you're going to get taken by any aggressive player who sits across from you. Your goal is to get as many chips in the pot as you can when you have the odds in your favor, not wait for a sure thing that very very very rarely comes along. You look for your spots and you take them.

Most people are not able to do long calculations in their head, which is the reason why most poker players memorize odds charts and positional odds so they don't have to calculate it out.

in the original example as discussed, I think we all agreed that it was a coin flip, and further, it was VERY likely (super high percentage) at that least one overcard would come in the five cards, because he pushed all in pre-flop. In fact, it is less than 10% chance that an overcard doesn't come, which is a low enough number to say "very likely". With the other player holding two overcards, the chance that one of those overcards come is significant, especially when you consider 5 cards have to be turned. NOTHING IS CERTAIN, but the odds are pretty high. The hand was 55 - 45 for the 9's, but with a less than 10% chance of improving the hand and a fair number of hands that would be better starting hands. So the player with 9-9 is sitting hoping for nothing to happen, while the player with Q-T has 6 direct outs plus potential for straights and even flushes when you are sitting pre-flop.

The all in might have been a better call after the flop if you saw 3 under cards. There was no reason to go all in pre-flop, the odds don't support it (especially when you don't know the other player's hand... he could have easily been outmanned before the first card even turned, playing a hand that is unlikely to get much better).

Not at all. a 55-45 hand, less than 10% chance that the bigger hand pre-flop gets better, and a big chance that the overcard hard will pull a pair or do something else. Again, it would be a differnt story after the flop, but before the flop, he didn't know what the guy's hand was, and that makes the 9-9 hand a very poor hand to raise over the top.

you're making it way too complicated. The only thing you have to know is that a pp is odds favorite over two overcards. Who gives a shit what the odds are that AN overcard will come? Only two out of five will help him. Against a maniac, 99 is a monster and you take his chips more often than not, and that's all you need to know to play that hand correctly. What you DON'T want to be doing is calling big bets after the flop with undercards.

That maniac player that he's talking about playing against? He'll take YOUR money 9 times out of 10, because you'll be too scared to play against him. All you can do is wait and hope someone else at the table takes him out. Myself, I'd rather have his chips in my stack.

lol... that sucks... these baller's always lose their money in the end... you have to grind it from them. Sometimes thinking it's a sure thing is when you should fold.

oh my yes, you should always fold with a nut flush or a boat.

Why do people feel like they just HAVE to post in a thread when it's totally obvious they have no fucking clue what they're talking about?

oh yeah.. post count.

dig, again, go back and read the opening of the dicussion... limp limp 9-9 raises, Q-T raises over him, and then 9-9 goes all in.

The mistake for me is that last part. 9-9 should have called and got a flop. While we haven't seen the cards, I suspect that one of the flop cards was an overcard, which would have made the 9-9s weak.

Technically, you are also correct, don't get into it with a wildman. If it is a money table, let it go around a couple of times and walk away with your money and your sanity.