When I tell my non-poker playing friends that I play poker they think I'm gambling - until I give them the following explaination.
Poker, played correctly, is not gambling in my opinion. And I think this is a good way to explain EV to non-poker players or new players. The idea in poker is to do two things - make correct decisions based on available ...
Probability: the chance of a particular outcome.
More precisely, the probability of any given outcome is the ratio of all the favorable outcomes and every outcome that is possible. (so favorable / everything)
The probability of throwing 6 with a dice is exactly 1/6 because all the sides are perfectly equal, there are 6 of them but only 1 is favorable in ...
Say we have a $1 million raffle that has only two tickets: a winner and a loser.
I give you a random ticket and tell you that you MUST sell it. How much money should you sell it for? (I.e. how much is it worth?)
A. $1 million?
No, because it could just as easily be worth $0.
No, because it could just as easily be worth $1 million.
C. $0.5 million?
Running it multiple times does not move EV an inch. It only reduces the variance.
I think the example from kiota is spot on (+1). On the river the number of down cards is 44. Even after you see 2 cards the bet was placed before.
If you hit on the first then you are less likely to hit on the second. If you miss the first you are more likely to hit on ...
EV does not depend on how many times you run it, only variance does. I will try to illustrate it with a simple example:
Assume heads-up play. You play all-in on the turn and you have x outs to win the hand.
Scenario 1 - Run it once
Cards_left = 52 - 4 (deck) - 4 (in your hands) = 44
P[win] = outs / cards_left = x/44 (you have x/44 equity to win the whole ...
Say that we decide to bet on coin flips.
In the first case, I will give you $1 every time that it is heads, and you will give me $1 every time that it is tails. Simple logic will tell you that since 1/2 of the time I owe you $1 (heads) and the other 1/2 of the time you owe me $1 (tails) that if we flip the coin enough times, it will even out. In this ...
Direct EV calculations are the first step in figuring out how to calculate "maximized EV" based on situational considerations. To become a better player, you will very much care about the size of your positive EV.
Sure, the basic EV calculations say to either bet, call or fold based on card odds vs pot odds. Usually, you're only really looking for a ...
First of all it's important to explain that EV is a concept rooted in the law of large numbers, and which poker players use to calculate risk and reward. I'll get back to this concept.
When calculating EV a poker player takes a few things into consideration:
1) The size of the pot
2) The probability of winning that pot
2) The size of the bet they're faced ...
If you have a simple 6 side dice you can arrange a simple demonstration.
Tell your friends you'll give them 1$ in every throw if the result is 3-6, and they have to pay 1$ if it is 1-2.
Tell them you're going to play 5 rounds and what they expect in terms of money won / lost. Then play the game and compare the results to their estimation.
Intuitively they ...
You aren't comparing AKs to any random hand, you're comparing it to a random pocket pair. As per http://www.tightpoker.com/poker_hands.html, the EV of AA-JJ is significantly higher than AKs and as such skews the group "random pocket" enough to be better than AKs.
AKs is still the 5th best starting hand in poker statistically.
Not sure if this is really a paradox, but...
In a heads-up game your opponent truthfully confides in you that he is playing a 100% range.
So you think to yourself, "Great, from now on I will play a 70% range and I will be profitable because I’m ahead of his range."
You are dealt a new hand and see that it is at the bottom of your range, but you no-longer ...
Your question is confusing, and it appears that you may have misunderstood the terminology.
"So I can calculate what the maximum bet size is with a positive EV. However, that would be too high, since we surely don't want a 0 EV."
Do you mean if a bet size is too high, it would not be called, therefore the final value would be zero? This is not the standard ...
KQ offsuit apparently has about 48 - 50 % equity against that range (I calculated this using an equity calculator). So, given that the all-in was preflop, you essentially have a coin-flip. So it's very hard to determine if a call here would be +EV or -EV, especially because figuring out that range is always very hard. So the calculation of equity can (and ...
The book is quite correct -- if your range contains more value than bluffs, then the correct bet sizing is to move all-in.
To see why, consider the classic polar versus bluffcatcher scenario. You have either nuts or air; your opponent's bluffcatchers only beat your air.
The equilibrium is reached in this game under the following conditions. If the pot is ...
The way I understand your question, it seems like b and a are the same thing.
in your example of (a) you mention that the total combinations come out to 42. this number is not arbitrary, it has to come from somewhere. If you were up against a random hand, then there would be a lot more than 42 total combinations. I am assuming that this 42 total ...
That is a relatively small sample size. I wouldn't worry about it too much if you're thinking that you may have a leak of some sort. I'd say you need tens of thousands of hands before that all-in number starts representing the real EV value. Hands rarely get all in, that's why the sample size needs to be so large.
EDIT: There is a correlation. Leak is ...
Well it seems like you are talking about value betting. The EV is basically if it is worth calling or betting that much. But when you are value betting you should be sure you have the best hand in play. Then the size of the bet is the maximum amount you think your opponent will call.
Say you have the nuts if you are putting your opponent on a strong hand ...
It may look easier to you but it's just a mental (mathematical) trick, in fact you're basically stating the same thing:
Consider it like this.
EV > 0
A = (percentage to hit * Pot size)
B = (percentage to not hit * Call size)
EV = (Percentage of hit * Pot size) + -(Percentage of not hit * Call size)
EV = A - B
And with EV > 0
A - B &...
EV = (F% * P$) + (1 - F%) * ((W% * (P$ + S$)) - ((1 - W%) * S$))
this formulae is correct only when P$+S$ = W$,
where W$ is the amount earned at showdown. So this formulae as it is only applies at situations where villain open raises and we shove. As this is not always the case(not always W$ = P$+S$), a more general form of this formulae would be by ...