Lay down AK pre. Hand Advice*

spoonitnow that is NOT the situation we are talking about. you have changed the parameters of the argument to suit your point.

Originally Posted by MehFU

spoonitnow that is NOT the situation we are talking about. you have changed the parameters of the argument to suit your point.

Then give me "parameters" and I will refute you.

P.S. Make it complicated so I can shut you up for the last time in this thread.

how are you able to predict that a person ahead of you is less likely to hold one of your hold cards?
what is the probabilty if you hold X that a person dealt into the hand before you also holds X?

Originally Posted by minSim

Actually MehFU is correct in one and only one way; If villains range is KK+ only (or KK or AA only).

Card removal isn't a subject then, because it doesn't change villains range. It's still KK+, with all cards as likely as they were.

Card removal comes into play if villains range is wider then KK+. Let's say villains range is QQ+. Because hero has AK, the likelyhood villain has QQ goes way up.

You are right, but there is something to add. Assuming villain´s range is KK+, when we hold AK his range is SMALLER, as i said before. So in the case you are shoving against him, you have more fold equity.

Originally Posted by MehFU

how are you able to predict that a person ahead of you is less likely to hold one of your hold cards?

If in Omaha I am dealt AAAA then it's less likely someone else has an A, even if they took their cards before I did.

This is the REAL WORLD spoon. In the REAL WORLD you DON'T have parameters or dead cards. You have a CHOICE! That's meta game.

OMAHA IS NOT THE GAME.

ill repeat because i edited to better define the question

how are you able to predict that a person ahead of you is less likely to hold one of your hold cards?
what is the probabilty if you hold X that a person dealt into the hand before you also holds X?

Originally Posted by MehFU

how are you able to predict that a person ahead of you is less likely to hold one of your hold cards?
what is the probabilty if you hold X that a person dealt into the hand before you also holds X?

You edited your post, but I answered that exact same question above using KK and you told me that I was avoiding the question.

Originally Posted by MehFU

OMAHA IS NOT THE GAME.

It doesn't matter what the game is.

it does because you do not hold complete information on the state of the deck before you are dealt your first hole card.

you never hold all the cards available of the same rank preflop.

Originally Posted by MehFU

it does because you do not hold complete information on the state of the deck before you are dealt your first hole card.

you never hold all the cards available of the same rank preflop.

It doesn't matter. If you hold AAAA, you do not hold complete information on the state of the deck. It's the same as if you were dealt AA in Hold'em or AAA in Pineapple.

You're just wrong, so let it go, ok?

I think I understand mehFU. The opponent can only have KK or AA here, it doesn't matter what hands we're dealt. But since we have both an A and a K we've got blockers to their outs and we should shove. Even if opponent tables AA, you have to call for meta.

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

I think I understand mehFU. The opponent can only have KK or AA here, it doesn't matter what hands we're dealt. But since we have both an A and a K we've got blockers to their outs and we should shove. Even if opponent tables AA, you have to call for meta.

You should fake a stroke for meta imo.

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Originally Posted by MehFU

it does because you do not hold complete information on the state of the deck before you are dealt your first hole card.

you never hold all the cards available of the same rank preflop.

It doesn't matter. If you hold AAAA, you do not hold complete information on the state of the deck. It's the same as if you were dealt AA in Hold'em or AAA in Pineapple.

You're just wrong, so let it go, ok?

[/b]

what the frick stop changing the point, deal with hold em.

what is the probabilty if you hold X that a person dealt into the hand before you also holds X?

if u can answer this question and show that is less likely for a person to be holding XX if you are susequently holding X if you are dealt after that person then i will concede.

Villain is dealt two cards, then Hero is dealt two cards.

There are two cases: Hero is dealt a pocket pair, Hero is not dealt a pocket pair.

Case 1: Hero is dealt a pocket pair, here we'll use KK as an example.

What is the chance that Villain was dealt KK?

According to MehFU, the chance would be 6/1326, since there are 6 possible ways to be dealt two Kings and there are 1326 total ways to be dealt a Hold'em hand.

Since Hero holds KK, there are 50 cards left that could be in Villain's hand since it is impossible that Villain was dealt either of those Kings. Of those 50 remaining cards, two are Kings.

There are 50 ways Villain could have been dealt his first card, and 49 ways he could have been dealt his second card, which means there are (50*49)/2=1225 ways he could be dealt a Hold'em hand (we divide by 2 since we would consider AsAc to be the same as AcAs, and so on).

Of those 1225 remaining Hold'em hands, only one is KK. Therefore, the chance that Villain was dealt KK is 1/1225, which does not equal 6/1326.

Case 2: Hero is not dealt a pocket pair, here we'll use AK as an example.

What is the chance that Villain was dealt AK?

According to MehFU, the chance would be 16/1326, since there are 16 possible ways to be dealt Ace-King and there are 1326 total ways to be dealt a Hold'em hand.

Since Hero holds AK, there are 50 cards left that could be in Villain's hand since it is impossible that Villain was dealt the Ace or King that Hero holds. Of those 50 remaining cards, 3 are Aces and 3 are Kings.

There are 50 ways Villain could have been dealt his first card, and 49 ways he could have been dealt his second card, which means there are (50*49)/2=1225 ways he could be dealt a Hold'em hand (we divide by 2 since we would consider AsAc to be the same as AcAs, and so on).

Of those 1225 remaining Hold'em hands, only nine is AK. Therefore, the chance that Villain was dealt AK is 9/1225, which does not equal 6/1326.

In both cases, you are incorrect. This is the part where you concede.

LOLMATHAMENTS

IM MORE OF A FEEL GUY

Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer

LOL MATHAMENTS

IM MORE OF A FEEL GUY

I'd make a joke about this but you're already in my signature as a polite gesture so I can't go back on that.

in this sentance right here you have proved my point:

Of those 1225 remaining Hold'em hands, only nine is AK. Therefore, the chance that Villain was dealt KK is 9/1225, which does not equal 6/1326.

THIS IS GREATER.

a person ahead of you is more likely to have KK given that you have AK.

MehFu, unistall pokerstove now! It calculates equity exactly like everyone here tells it's done... appartently the wrong way... and I told you before.

But one last try to explain it to you, you obnoxious fucktard. Have your attention now?

It doesn't matter who gets dealt what first. If he gets dealt KK, then it's less likely for you to draw AK... does that make sense? no? That's because you're an idiot and you should shut the fuck up.

And stop hijacking this thread.

Originally Posted by MehFU

in this sentance right here you have proved my point:

Of those 1225 remaining Hold'em hands, only nine is AK. Therefore, the chance that Villain was dealt KK is 9/1225, which does not equal 6/1326.

THIS IS GREATER.

a person ahead of you is more likely to have KK given that you have AK.

You found a typo. If you read the entire post, you'll see that it should read "Of those 1225 remaining Hold'em hands, only nine is AK. Therefore, the chance that Villain was dealt AK is 9/1225, which does not equal 16/1326."

9/1225 < 16/1326

I win.

ok i read it much more carefully and that sentance actually doesnt make sense regardless of the typo in regards to the question.

you still havent answered my question.
dont show that the probability of getting KK is lower than AK because we know that.

please show that the probability of player 1 having KK is less because you hold AK if the player is dealt before you.

Originally Posted by MehFU

ok i read it much more carefully and that sentance actually doesnt make sense regardless of the typo in regards to the question.

you still havent answered my question.
dont show that the probability of getting KK is lower than AK because we know that.

please show that the probability of player 1 having KK is less because you hold AK if the player is dealt before you.

Villain is dealt two cards, then Hero is dealt AK.

What is the chance that Villain was dealt KK if Hero is dealt AK.

According to MehFU, the chance would be 6/1326, since there are 6 possible ways to be dealt two Kings and there are 1326 total ways to be dealt a Hold'em hand.

Since Hero holds AK, there are 50 cards left that could be in Villain's hand since it is impossible that Villain was dealt the Ace or King that Hero holds. Of those 50 remaining cards, three are Kings.

There are 50 ways Villain could have been dealt his first card, and 49 ways he could have been dealt his second card, which means there are (50*49)/2=1225 ways he could be dealt a Hold'em hand (we divide by 2 since we would consider AsAc to be the same as AcAs, and so on).

Of those 1225 remaining Hold'em hands, only three are KK. Therefore, the chance that Villain was dealt KK is 3/1225 which is less than 6/1326.

would u please stop doing that.
the cards are dealt IN ORDER AT THE TABLE. you are behind the player.

deal 1 to OPP (1/52)
deal 1 to YOU (1/51)
deal 2 to OPP (1/50)
deal 2 to YOU (1/49) your last card is a king

please show the probability of the opponenet having a KK is reduced because your card is a king.

i cant emphasise that the assumptions you are making are pseudo probability and have no basis in reality.

Originally Posted by MehFU

ok i read it much more carefully and that sentance actually doesnt make sense regardless of the typo in regards to the question.

you still havent answered my question.
dont show that the probability of getting KK is lower than AK because we know that.

please show that the probability of player 1 having KK is less because you hold AK if the player is dealt before you.

you cant possibly be this dumb. we have explained it about every way that is possible, from simple thinking to outright explaining the math. please to be leaving now you fucking troll.

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

I think I understand mehFU. The opponent can only have KK or AA here, it doesn't matter what hands we're dealt. But since we have both an A and a K we've got blockers to their outs and we should shove. Even if opponent tables AA, you have to call for meta.

i would call a shove with AK even if villain showed me AA because i have 6 outs and he only has 2. By my math that makes us a 75% favorite.

ez game imo.

You keep missing the point that both of villains cards AREN'T dealt before you are dealt a card. Villain gets a card, you get a card, then he gets another card, and you get another card.

If for instance your first card is a King then the chances of villain's next card being a King is decreases. Obviously because there is one less King in the deck. The same holds if you look down and see KK in your hand. You now know there is only 2 Kings left in the deck, therefore he can only have 1 combo of KK. Likewise, because there is only 2 kings left in the deck (because you have the other two), then he can only make AK in 8 ways (4 aces * 2 kings). Reason being is because he obviously can't have your two Kings. Whereas, you had 22 he could have AK 16 ways and KK 6 ways because you know all of those cards remain in the deck.

Originally Posted by XxStacksxX

You keep missing the point that both of villains cards AREN'T dealt before you are dealt a card. Villain gets a card, you get a card, then he gets another card, and you get another card.

If for instance your first card is a King then the chances of villain's next card being a King is decreases. Obviously because there is one less King in the deck. The same holds if you look down and see KK in your hand. You now know there is only 2 Kings left in the deck, therefore he can only have 1 combo of KK. Likewise, because there is only 2 kings left in the deck (because you have the other two), then he can only make AK in 8 ways (4 aces * 2 kings). Reason being is because he obviously can't have your two Kings. Whereas, you had 22 he could have AK 16 ways and KK 6 ways because you know all of those cards remain in the deck.

Actually it doesn't matter what order they're dealt in, which is the point that MehFU doesn't understand, and which I might decide to refute also.

Originally Posted by MehFU

would u please stop doing that.
the cards are dealt IN ORDER AT THE TABLE. you are behind the player.

deal 1 to OPP (1/52)
deal 1 to YOU (1/51)
deal 2 to OPP (1/50)
deal 2 to YOU (1/49) your last card is a king

please show the probability of the opponenet having a KK is reduced because your card is a king.

i cant emphasise that the assumptions you are making are pseudo probability and have no basis in reality.

I have lost count of the number of times that I have proven you wrong in this thread, and you have yet to prove anything incorrect with any argument I have given. Alas, out of the sake of how much I enjoy proving people wrong in areas of mathematics, I will provide the proof you are asking for here.

There are five piece of information that we need, and here I show the calculations for each piece of information. (Note: People observing will be interested to know that this proves that it's just as likely to be dealt a King on the first card dealt as the second, third, fourth, or even last card dealt.)

1. The chance of Villain being dealt a K on the first card is 4/52 = 0.0769230769

2. The chance of Hero not being dealt a K on the second card is (4/52)*(48/51) + (48/52)*(47/51) = 0.9230769231

3. The chance of Villain being dealt a K on the third card is (4/52)*(3/51)*(2/50) + (4/52)*(48/51)*(3/50) + (48/52)*(4/51)*(3/50) + (48/52)*(47/51)*(4/50) = 0.0769230769

4. The chance of Hero being dealt a K on the fourth card is the sum of the following:

king king king king (4/52)*(3/51)*(2/50)*(1/49)
king king blank king (4/52)*(3/51)*(48/50)*(2/49)
king blank king king (4/52)*(48/51)*(3/50)*(2/49)
king blank blank king (4/52)*(48/51)*(47/50)*(3/49)
blank king king king (48/52)*(4/51)*(3/50)*(2/49)
blank king blank king (48/52)*(4/51)*(47/50)*(3/49)
blank blank king king (48/52)*(47/51)*(4/50)*(3/49)
blank blank blank king (48/52)*(47/51)*(46/50)*(4/49)

Which is 0.0769230769, thanks to our friend Excel.

5. The chance of Hero not being dealt a K on the fourth card is (1-0.0769230769) = 0.9230769231, as proven in (4).

Now we have two cases to examine. The first case is when the cards are dealt King-blank-King-King, and the second case is when the cards are dealt King-blank-King-blank. If the probability of the first is lower than the probability of the second, then we have proven that the probabilty of Villain holding KK is reduced because our last card is a King.

The chance of the cards coming King-blank-King-King is 0.0769230769 * 0.9230769231 * 0.0769230769 * 0.0769230769 = 0.0004201534.

The chance of the cards coming King-blank-King-blank is 0.0769230769 * 0.9230769231 * 0.0769230769 * 0.9230769231 = 0.0050418403.

this thread is going nowhere, the last 50 replies have all been the same

{locked}

oh by the way, bringing up Meta in a $5NL hand history post is beyond stupid!!

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

this thread is going nowhere, the last 50 replies have all been the same

{locked}

Dave told me you asked if I was around. The things you do behind my back when I'm sleeping!