Poker (was Re: NLP)

[Paul Makepeace]

On 9/7/07, Andy Wardley <abw at wardley.org> wrote:
> Paul Orrock wrote:
> > I did have to laugh at the inside straight comment. I've been there so
> > many times, and why is it that when you get the straight, someone else
> > always has you beat ?
>
> I guess that's why they say "never draw to an inside straight".  Well, not
> unless they're suited, high ranking cards and you're playing on the button
> against tired, drunk poker novices.
>
> The thing to remember is that you're not just playing against the odds of an
> out for your own hand (which for an inside straight are very small, typically
> < 10%).  Rather, you're playing your odds of an out against those of everyone
> else at the table.
>
> So you might have a 1 in 12 chance of making the straight, but the guy/girl
> holding out for a flush will have higher odds (roughly 1 in 4).  So even if
> you do make the straight, there's a good chance you'll still be beat.

Here's another that is a bit less than obvious. You've got 78 and the
board come 783 giving you two pair. I have JJ. At this point you think
you're looking pretty good. Except that 3 can pair or a running pair
on 4th & 5th, giving me JJ33 (aside from other typical outs like any
J, or a 9T). Summary is small or medium two pair is really vulnerable
to the board pairing.

P
>
> Apologies if I'm teaching my grandmother how to suck eggs, but I played for a
> long time before I had that "aha" moment when I figured out that it was
> relative odds that are important, not absolute ones.
>
> Well, I think so, anyway.  I'm no poker expert so I could be talking out of my
>   nuts flush.
>
> A
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>