|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 8/28/2008 8:14:02 PM PACIFIC |
 objective rankings, Mike K, 22. Jan 2003 22:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'm wondering if one can fairly objectively rank starting hands in hold'em. I'm fairly sure that its accepted that AA is the best starting hand and that KK is better than QQ. I wonder how would one decide if a certain pair was better than say AKs. Is showdown testing a good measure of starting hand rank. or are there other things to consider such as 'a hand that wins less in showdown testing but has deceptive value can make more money than another hand'. sorry about that mess of thoughts... any comments would be appreciated. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: objective rankings, whiskeytown, 22. Jan 2003 23:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| one can't be objective per se...every hand has an inherant value, and sometimes certain hands are usually guaranteed to win a certain percentage over other (AA vs QQ, for example) - but you must always put into account the circumstances of the table, the game, betting structure, opponents, etc... Tonight I busted out in a NL tourney with JJ (all money in preflop) - If I'm on the button early in the game (blinds 10/20) and someone makes it 10 times the BB to go, I muck...no value.. on the other hand, short handed, 7 players, and a UTG raise from a group of players who have been trying to steal pots with Q4 suited, and I'm much more likely to push all in..... another example...66 isn't a bad hand heads up, (50/50) - but it blows in 2-4 way pots...more then that, though, and you start getting the odds to limp in in limit poker....so certain hands cannot be rated objectivly (like suited connectors or middle pairs) without knowing how many people are still in the pot... so statistically, certain things can be proven, but you can never come up with a time where there is an objective AK rules over 66 or whatever...(and heads up, it actually doesn't, but it will still win a lot more over time then 66...esp. in multiway pots with 2-4 players) it's a mess...and I'm too tired to really comment clearly, and I busted out of two tourneys tonight near the bubble....maybe Mountain Mike Caro of the Ozarks can do a better job then I can... ---------------- I'm like a wino with a twenty dollar bill, forever and eternally yours. - Bill Mallonee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: objective rankings, Mike Caro, 22. Jan 2003 23:27 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Jan 2003 22:41 Mike K wrote: > I'm wondering if one can fairly objectively rank starting hands in hold'em. I'm > fairly sure that its accepted that AA is the best starting hand and that KK is > better than QQ. I wonder how would one decide if a certain pair was better than > say AKs. > > Is showdown testing a good measure of starting hand rank. or are there other > things to consider such as 'a hand that wins less in showdown testing but has > deceptive value can make more money than another hand'. > > sorry about that mess of thoughts... any comments would be appreciated. Hi, Mike -- I published a complete ranking of all 169 starting hold 'em hands about six years ago. These weren't just based on simulation through the showdown, but on a formula that considered how well the hands would probably fare. I plan to republish the charts -- with have separate ratings for many opponents, few opponents, and unknown number of opponents -- on the new poker1.com web site (coming very soon). Check the library there in the future. I have also promised to publish the results of millions of hands actually played online, based on a fairly old, but relevant, database. The latter will show that I was slightly off on some of the projections, but very close. Straight Flushes, Mike Caro | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: objective rankings, Snorbolus, 23. Jan 2003 08:23 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Brian Alspach has written a very good article about preflop hold’em hand rankings that is now posted on his website. Alsapach’s Mathematics and Poker Page: http://www.math.sfu.ca/mast/people/faculty/alspach/ The preflop hold’em hand article: http://www.math.sfu.ca/mast/people/faculty/alspach/mag51/ There are also lots of other great articles posted on his site. Snorbolus on 22. Jan 2003 23:27 Mike Caro wrote: > on 22. Jan 2003 22:41 Mike K wrote: > > I'm wondering if one can fairly objectively rank starting hands in hold'em. I'm > > fairly sure that its accepted that AA is the best starting hand and that KK is > > better than QQ. I wonder how would one decide if a certain pair was better than > > say AKs. > > > > Is showdown testing a good measure of starting hand rank. or are there other > > things to consider such as 'a hand that wins less in showdown testing but has > > deceptive value can make more money than another hand'. > > > > sorry about that mess of thoughts... any comments would be appreciated. > > Hi, Mike -- > > I published a complete ranking of all 169 starting hold 'em hands about six years > ago. These weren't just based on simulation through the showdown, but on a formula > that considered how well the hands would probably fare. I plan to republish the > charts -- with have separate ratings for many opponents, few opponents, and unknown > number of opponents -- on the new poker1.com web site (coming very soon). Check the > library there in the future. > > I have also promised to publish the results of millions of hands actually played > online, based on a fairly old, but relevant, database. > > The latter will show that I was slightly off on some of the projections, but very > close. > > Straight Flushes, > Mike Caro | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: objective rankings, Mike Caro, 23. Jan 2003 20:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks, Snorbolus -- Brian Alspach has had many significant contributions to poker. I will take a look as soon as possible, and I recommend that others do, also. Straight Flushes, Mike Caro | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: objective rankings, Jeffrey Biship, 28. Jan 2003 14:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Jan 2003 23:27 Mike Caro wrote: > I have also promised to publish the results of millions of hands actually played > online, based on a fairly old, but relevant, database. Man, I remember the firestorm that little project created a year or two ago on RGP. I'm glad to see you're going through with it. Jeff | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: objective rankings, noiseboy, 24. Jan 2003 12:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think the hand ranking issue should be approached a bit differently than most authors have. I would say that a different list should be made for each type of table since the value of hands drastically changes at different types of tables. And the hands should be ranked based on profitability, rather than just likelihood of winning. A hand like Axs for instance, drastically changes in value based on looseness or tightness of the table. Tight table, you'll be outkicked every time and you won't get odds on flushes. Loose table, you're out cheap when you miss the flop, you win big when you hit a flush draw or two pair. So really you could possibly make objective rankings, but it would be kind've a bear to memorize a different hand ranking for each type of table. A better way is probably just to learn what types of hands play well in different kinds of conditions, and what kinds of flop you want for those hands. You could learn any list of the "good hands" and adjust your play according to table conditions. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|