Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[silverspawn]

I also tried the same against a random range (i.e., someone who plays all cards) and in that case AQT is about 1.5% better than AQ5 (88% vs. 86.5%). So even there it's a very small difference.

[faust]

So all the probabilities are against a randomly sampled hand from that set. So it depends on the position of your opponent, the number of players only matters indirectly. (Of course if your opponent actually raises every hand, then position no longer matters and these are just the wrong probabilities.)

So this is a bit of a nitpick, but I understand "random sampling" as a uniform distribution. But surely the probabilities change based on the information of what you have in your hand (and the flop), right?

[silverspawn]

Actually no, the assumption is virtually always that you can put your opponent on a range (i.e., a set of cards) but have a uniform distribution over that range. You could have strategies that mix it up for specific hands (i.e., I check 55 half the time and raise it half the time), and in fact computers who compute charts based on game theory do this all the time, but players tend not to do that.

In this case we don't have any actions from the opponent other than preflop, so there I think the deterministic assumption definitely makes sense. Not sure if even computers mix it up preflop.

[faust]

I'm not sure I got across what I was getting at. I'm not talking about probabilistic strategies. More like: If I have AT, and the flop is AQ, then the opponent is significantly less likely to have AA, and more likely to have JJ. The distribution over the hands that would raise is not uniform.

[silverspawn]

Ah, yes; that's true.

[silverspawn]

Unrelated to anything, whenever I read

"every word of that was true!"

I just have to roll my eyes. There's never been any sentence in which any word is true because words don't have truth values. It's so stupid.

[silverspawn]

"I meant every word' is a little less silly though still pretty silly.

[Awaclus]

This is a sentence in which the last word is true.

[silverspawn]

touche

[heron]

Thanks for the detailed explanation, makes sense that the odds of the opponent straight go way up given that they raised (even though they raised before the flop). I agree it's surprising how close it was even if you assume the opponent always raised.

[silverspawn]

Boo supreme court booo

[silverspawn]

booooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[silverspawn]

booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[silverspawn]

David Pakman keeps doing these segments about how Trump is in cognitive decline. I'm not sure if there's anything to it. The fact that I don't hear about it anywhere else suggests that there isn't.

But this one does sound pretty bad tbh

[silverspawn]

Man Dominion has too many card names.

[silverspawn]

ALRIGHT I'M UP AGAIN

[silverspawn]

Now that I'm a winner again mb I should join MasN hub

[silverspawn]

Then I can leave after the inevitable downswing tomorrow

[silverspawn]

Somewhere out there is an Everett Branch in which I'm thinking something like "well in my branch, coincidences happen about as often as they should, but somewhere out there is a branch in which they happen way more often, and that version of me will just be really confused what's going on".

Hi!

[silverspawn]

I don't really understand why this doesn't itself decide the election. If 30% support Hailey, we have a 0.3*(2*0.37+0.12) = 25.5% swing. I guess it's already baked into the polling?

[silverspawn]

Good on Haley for not endorsing Trump, anyway.

[silverspawn]

Listening to Candace Owens, I think for the first time in my life I understand anti-female sexism on an emotional level.

[silverspawn]

More evidence that the deep state is critically underfunded:

[Awaclus]

Listening to Candace Owens, I think for the first time in my life I understand anti-female sexism on an emotional level.

Why?

[silverspawn]

Like the description of women as emotional, and aggressive but in a dishonest, backwards sort of way, and subtly manipulative -- that's my model of the sexist stereotype, and Cadence Owens was the first person where I felt like it's completely accurate.