Roughing the Punter

Go Back   Roughing the Punter > Main Forums > The Chip Count

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-21-2013, 03:36 AM
GroovinMahoovinPartDeux's Avatar
GroovinMahoovinPartDeux GroovinMahoovinPartDeux is offline
Bet Like a Real Fucking Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 7,002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerKat View Post
Can we put this to bed? Another round is only going to show even more convincingly that hecky doesn't understand this stuff.
A random AA hand is pretty close too:

5-Card Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation ?
600,000 trials (Randomized)

Hand Equity Scoops Wins Hi Ties Hi Wins Lo Ties Lo
AsAhAd** 49.57% 237,373 333,105 5,336 0 42,500
Ac2d3h4h5c 50.43% 235,567 261,559 5,336 237,369 42,500

I'm not wasting any further time arguing with someone who can't figure out we're talking about limit, after being told numerous times we're talking about TBC's limit game, and responds with a bunch of ad hominem attacks and insults.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-21-2013, 08:02 AM
hecky's Avatar
hecky hecky is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GroovinMahoovinPartDeux View Post
Uh, project much?



Fantastic. The context was a low limit game, not PLO.



The LOL is that statement was made by CrapsMaster, who's a winning player at nosebleed stakes, and you're arguing with him.



The additional pair of KK is largely irrelevant in that context because you already have AA.



Fantastic. Again, the context was low limit, not PLO.



The discussion was not PLO all-in situations. The discussion was a low limit ring game.



No, being aware of a rather simple poker concept is not an indicator of being "the smartest guy." I tend to get annoyed when I see other posters receive unwarranted criticism, and you called another poster "clueless" for a statement he never made, and now you're ranting and raving about a completely different topic.



For fucks sake, you were told this about ten times already. TBC was playing 3-6 or 4-8 limit 5 card o8 at some So Cal casino, I think Barona, and said that AAKK2ds was the best possible hand. Toledo Tom disagreed that it was the best. You said Toledo Tom was clueless for saying "AAKK2 ds sucks," which he never said; he merely said it was not the best hand. You then went on lengthy tirades about PLO and all sorts of other stuff



That's great. PL is irrelevant to limit. I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself. This is probably the thirtieth time you've been told "the context was low limit."



You don't give a shit, but you're replying a week later. Right.



Nope. I certainly say wrong things about poker, but not in that thread.



Replying to a topic about the actual topic is called "being able to communicate with other people." Sticking to the topic of low limit when the context of low limit and ignoring zillions of references to PLO is called "staying on topic."

You've been told numerous times the topic was TBC's low limit game and you're ignoring that, so you're either impaired when you're posting or otherwise unable to follow a simple flow of logic.

TBC "I'm playing low limit 5card O8. AAKK2 ds best hand."
Toledo Tom "Not best."
Hecky "You think AAKK2 ds sucks? You're clueless."
Groovin "He didn't say it it sucks, he said it isn't the best hand."

That discussion is very simple to follow, and you were told that was the topic numerous times. Being unable to figure out we were talking about limit after I told you for the thirtieth time is some sort of defect. Whatever is preventing you from being able to follow a simple train of logic, I suggest you avoid posting on the internet when you're in that state because it's impossible to communicate with someone who reads numerous posts saying "the context was a low limit game" and keeps ranting about PLO.
Clown, this thread is a different thread than TBC's thread. There is no context. CrapsMasters starts out talking about high only, then talks about PLO, because frankly limit omaha is a rare beast outside of 4 card O8. Then you correct him by telling us "what the context is". Just like in my post previously, I've said where my thoughts came from on the subject, yet you will continue to ignore this. Ad hominem attacks? I found it crazy you are bringing me up in this shit with "goofball". Now you want to play victim. So typical of these forums. It took me a week to respond because I didn't notice it. So ? I don't come here for poker stuff even though sometimes I have responded in this forum. That pretty much means i don't bother browsing this dead forum.

I'm here for TBC, but tell us how you know a guy a lot more interesting than TBC... seemingly missing the part your buddy Stan ain't posting on a blog and is therefore 100% irrelevant.

That is an interesting point about the AAA**. I wasn't aware it was so easy to do that in propokertools. I don't really mess with poker much anymore as it is pointless to play in my state due to legalities/grifters/cheaters/rake/leo. I have been asking for hard data from the beginning, finally glad you were able to get it through your head. A million bullshit what-if/depends scenarios are one thing I do find 100% useless and really just tune people out when they go down that rabbithole. I was never able to convey this to you, though. That is a solid argument about how KK is irrelevant when it only changes things 1-3%.

and your post was mostly tldr; I read the top part of it and your last post in this thread. I'm sure I covered enough points. I don't know what to say.. I told you more than once what my argument was based on, but because ALL YOU WANT TO DO is prove you are right, you ignore it and keep telling me my logic is wrong when applied to limit. ooook buddy, heres a cookie.

I liked you at the time when all those people claimed you had dupes and took you at your word. Now I realize no one except you is going to care enough to try and outplay you at the he said/she said game. I believe this was a horrible judgment on my part and I wouldn't trust you at all for trying to get things correct. You just pick'n'choose constantly, even when corrected. That is because you have no desire to reach consensus and/or learn anything. You just want to show everyone how right you are. It is just LOL. I could go back and point out how you are "correcting" me on things I've corrected myself, but what would be the point ? You'd go off on some other tangent.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-21-2013, 08:48 AM
hecky's Avatar
hecky hecky is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerKat View Post
I demonstrated nothing of the sort. Everything is being driven by the AA.

5-Card Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation ?
600,000 trials (Randomized)
Hand Equity Scoops Wins Hi Ties Hi Wins Lo Ties Lo
AAATT 49.88% 241,157 357,402 0 0 0
A2345 50.12% 242,598 242,598 0 306,433 0


Hand Equity Scoops Wins Hi Ties Hi Wins Lo Ties Lo
AAAKK 49.99% 241,762 358,085 0 0 0
A2345 50.01% 241,915 241,915 0 306,133 0

Can we put this to bed? Another round is only going to show even more convincingly that hecky doesn't understand this stuff.
Everything is driven by AA and the double-suitedness. Now that you bring more data, it supports a different conclusion to me. Honestly, you were the one who told me 'hotncolds are irrelevant' or some such. Make up your mind on that before you take a vote on what I do or don't understand. Seems fair, no ?

Really, if you want to make it interesting, remove 1 suited ace, then the other etc so we can at least make comparisons. I don't think that AAKKK was the same one you used previously, but I don't want to bring this back up.

I have no real beef with you. You're not going to keep screaming "BUT IT IS LIMIT" and not allow us to discuss any other variants of the game.

One thing I think I'd say that I've learned is that 5 card plo8 has more variance in it than I would have ever guessed given how little these equities change. It is kinda nuts.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-21-2013, 09:39 AM
hecky's Avatar
hecky hecky is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,006
Default

Actually even though I tried to give Groovin a pat on the back, I would like to point out that his use of AAA** does remove 1/2 the suitedness from the sim making it a completely different hand. So he has not isolated KK to enough of a degree in his comparisons because we were previously discussing AAKK2 double suited and thus one should not draw any sort of conclusion. No wonder he is of the 'what if/but' style of poker arguing. I just threw my hands up earlier, but can't in good conscious keep my mouth shut with his nonsensical reasoning.

If propokertools lets you do something like AsAhAd*s*h then we will have something. Again, just more poor analysis on his part that I don't want to get caught up in.

<stick tongue out, puts fingers in ears, looks at groovin, and ducks behind the tree>

Last edited by hecky; 08-21-2013 at 09:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-21-2013, 03:11 PM
GroovinMahoovinPartDeux's Avatar
GroovinMahoovinPartDeux GroovinMahoovinPartDeux is offline
Bet Like a Real Fucking Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 7,002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hecky View Post
Clown, this thread is a different thread than TBC's thread. There is no context. CrapsMasters starts out talking about high only, then talks about PLO, because frankly limit omaha is a rare beast outside of 4 card O8. Then you correct him by telling us "what the context is".
Chaperone started this thread to keep your crap out of the TBC thread, unless you think someone who almost never posts about poker coincidentally started a 5 card Omaha thread on the same day.

Quote:
Just like in my post previously, I've said where my thoughts came from on the subject, yet you will continue to ignore this.
Yeah, I ignore people who justify raving about a completely different topic and calling people clueless or mentally ill for not realizing they were talking about someone else.

Quote:
I'm here for TBC, but tell us how you know a guy a lot more interesting than TBC... seemingly missing the part your buddy Stan ain't posting on a blog and is therefore 100% irrelevant.
The only Stan I know from gambling is the former floorman at Borgata, and none of the IRL Stans I know have anything remotely to do with TBC, so I have no idea WTF you are talking about.

Quote:
I have been asking for hard data from the beginning, finally glad you were able to get it through your head.
Hard data doesn't exist for limit unless one has tons of actual play data, which probably doesn't exist for that game, or is able to model betting. I said that in one of my very first posts when I said "I don't have a sim" and clarified that I meant something similar to Turbo Texas Hold'em, Turbo O8, etc, not a hold and cold sim.

Quote:
A million bullshit what-if/depends scenarios are one thing I do find 100% useless and really just tune people out when they go down that rabbithole.
Fantastic, but there are no such what-if/depends scenarios In limit 5 card o8, short of an opponent exposing his hand, AA234 ds is the best preflop hand, period.

Quote:
I was never able to convey this to you, though.
Probably because, for whatever reason, you were completely unable to follow the discussion. My biggest time sink on forums is arguing with people who, for whatever reason, aren't able to follow discussions, and start arguing about basketball when I'm talking about baseball and I find out later that they were arguing about something someone else said because they thought that person was my ghost.

Quote:
I don't know what to say.. I told you more than once what my argument was based on, but because ALL YOU WANT TO DO is prove you are right, you ignore it and keep telling me my logic is wrong when applied to limit.
That's because the topic was limit. We were discussing TBC's limit game. Lots of concepts from limit don't apply to big bet, topics from cash don't apply to tourneys, etc. If I barged into an NFL topic to argue about CFB, I'd be rightly called an idiot if I continued to argue after I was told "we're talking about the NFL."

Quote:
I liked you at the time when all those people claimed you had dupes and took you at your word. Now I realize no one except you is going to care enough to try and outplay you at the he said/she said game.
I have no idea what "dupes" means. There is no he said/she said game. The topic was limit. There's a reason why I never argue with any of the winning gamblers on RTP; because I'm smart enough to realize that if one of them tells me I'm wrong, I'm probably wrong. I'm told I'm wrong about baseball topics all the time, sometimes by people who know much less about baseball than I do, but they know as much or more about gambling than I do, so at a minimum, if one of them tells me I'm wrong, I at least reinvestigate my position.

Quote:
I believe this was a horrible judgment on my part and I wouldn't trust you at all for trying to get things correct. You just pick'n'choose constantly, even when corrected. That is because you have no desire to reach consensus and/or learn anything. You just want to show everyone how right you are. It is just LOL.
No, the LOL is that you started a shitshow because you lack basic reading comprehension and rather than admit you made a mistake and were talking about a different topic and criticized Toledo Tom for something he never said, you're instead psychoanalyzing me. I showed you TBC's original post, I showed you Toledo Tom's post, and you're still saying that I was wrong about pot limit.

People who can't practice simple reading comprehension for whatever reason should stay the hell away from internet discussions.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-21-2013, 03:26 PM
GroovinMahoovinPartDeux's Avatar
GroovinMahoovinPartDeux GroovinMahoovinPartDeux is offline
Bet Like a Real Fucking Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 7,002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hecky View Post
Actually even though I tried to give Groovin a pat on the back, I would like to point out that his use of AAA** does remove 1/2 the suitedness from the sim making it a completely different hand.
Um, removing half the suitedness hurts the AAA** hand compared to the AAAKK ds hand.

AAAKK single suited vs A2345 ds, different suits:

AsAhAdKcKd 45.94% 319,494 462,164 0 0 0
Ac2d3h4h5c 54.06% 388,504 388,504 0 434,214 0

AAAKK ds vs A2345 ds, different suits

AsAhAdKsKd 47.43% 317,244 489,687 0 0 0
Ac2d3h4h5c 52.57% 360,981 360,981 0 434,214 0

AAAKK ds vs A2345 ds where one of the AAA ds is the same suit:

AsAhAdKsKd 50.34% 340,937 515,591 0 0 0
Ac2d3d4h5c 49.66% 335,077 335,077 0 434,214 0

Random AAA* hand vs A2345 ds

AsAhAd* 49.59% 237,404 333,427 5,267 0 42,378
Ac2d3h4h5c 50.41% 235,398 261,306 5,267 237,153 42,378

Quote:
So he has not isolated KK to enough of a degree in his comparisons because we were previously discussing AAKK2 double suited and thus one should not draw any sort of conclusion.
If you can't extrapolate from those above hot and cold equities that you would rather have two random cards than KK given that you have AAA*, I'm not sure what to tell you. No wonder this argument goes on and on.

Quote:
No wonder he is of the 'what if/but' style of poker arguing. I just threw my hands up earlier, but can't in good conscious keep my mouth shut with his nonsensical reasoning.
LOL. You're arguing that because I used a random AAA** hand, which might be single or double suited, to show it's better than an AAAKK ds hand, that I need to specifically use a double suited hand because the double suited hand might be worse, and you're telling me that I'm nonsensical.

Quote:
If propokertools lets you do something like AsAhAd*s*h then we will have something. Again, just more poor analysis on his part that I don't want to get caught up in.
a random choice of ds or single suited is better than double suited. Got it.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-21-2013, 03:28 PM
GroovinMahoovinPartDeux's Avatar
GroovinMahoovinPartDeux GroovinMahoovinPartDeux is offline
Bet Like a Real Fucking Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 7,002
Default

Also, it's actually removing a bit more than "half the suitedness" because there are times that the random AAA** hand will include two random hands of the same suit, hands like AhAcAs5s9s, where the 9s is a 3 legged cowboy.

EDIT: And truth be told, I'm not even sure what relevance AAAKK has to this argument because the reason that the random AAA** hand is better than AAAKK is because the random card(s) will sometimes be a low card and the AAA** will get half the low. AAKK2 ds already has a low card. But the counterfeit protection and straight outs are more important than a pair of kings when you already have a pair of aces for high, i.e. when you're splitting with another A2 on a board like 3676Q, the aces up are good for high and you don't need the kings too.

Last edited by GroovinMahoovinPartDeux; 08-21-2013 at 03:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-22-2013, 10:40 AM
Craps Master's Avatar
Craps Master Craps Master is offline
Moderator-The Chip Count
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 801
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hecky View Post
Everything is driven by AA and the double-suitedness. Now that you bring more data, it supports a different conclusion to me. Honestly, you were the one who told me 'hotncolds are irrelevant' or some such. Make up your mind on that before you take a vote on what I do or don't understand. Seems fair, no ?

Really, if you want to make it interesting, remove 1 suited ace, then the other etc so we can at least make comparisons. I don't think that AAKKK was the same one you used previously, but I don't want to bring this back up.

I have no real beef with you. You're not going to keep screaming "BUT IT IS LIMIT" and not allow us to discuss any other variants of the game.
What point are you trying to make?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-22-2013, 01:07 PM
hecky's Avatar
hecky hecky is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,006
Default

There are lots of them. I suspect KK is probably pretty strong in multiway pots. I haven't read Groovins posts yet, but I'm sure he has worked hard to prove otherwise. I was never stuck on the KK fact, but Groovin said things like "there is no argument that AAKK2 ds is better". Well if Groovin is going to make statements like that, he should expect me to ride his ass like he does to others. The fact is, AAKK2 ds *IS* better in headsup. No one has found a better hand to my knowledge. Now if you want to argue that whatever hand "plays better" then be my guest.

I'll try to explain my main point and leave it at that.

We have this discussion about "multiway pots in 5 card omaha8", right?

That is so vague. Yes, I and *everyone* understands the original context of the discussion. Yes it was limit and low limit at that.

Now if you ignore this and just talk about 'multiway pots in 5 card omaha8' you are talking so many different scenarios. Not just the # of players, but whether big bet or limit, preflop action, etc, that will effect the distributions. Another scenario is multiway after everyone has pretty much called off with their 100-300 bigblind stacks preflop. That is a totally different situation. Groovin likes to nit it up and try to out literalize everyone to prove something. If he would make a precise statement then I wouldn't disagree with it. Instead it all becomes these silly types of discussions where no one is listening to the others.

I agree that AA234 ds is better in a multiway limit pot of 5 people than AAKK2 ds. Does that mean I necessarily know it is better in a hand where 3 people get it all-in preflop? No, I am not sure. The distributions are quite different. Groovin though glosses over this sort of thing when it is not to the benefit of his argument. So this shit just goes on and on. Furthermore, the way he responds to things does not encourage the type of discussion that is conducive to learning things. You read poker strategy discussions, even by smart guys, it is 99% "but/whats/ifs". At this point I just want hard data that says specifically the scenario and compares it to something else. More like what you'd see from a scientific study. Otherwise it is just arguing in circles.

THat is about it. Groovin will claim I am trolling, but I don't consider what I am doing anymore trolling than the way he takes every post and picks at every sentence even when it really does nothing to forward the discussion. I still like the guy, but I'm not going to go down his rabbitholes with him if I can stop myself.

The other thing is, Groovin will never say "I was wrong about that". It is just some big ego pissing war with him. He just ignores it and finds something else to attack.

Thats about it. I actually like the guy though, but I will give him shit back like he gives me. I thought this was done with when I let him get in the last word in the other thread. Then in here, you answer and he had to drag me into it and all this other shit, ignoring things he has plainly been told and repeating them as being true. According to him, I still don't understand the context of the original conversation. He'll probably still insist on that even though this is probably the third or so time I've explained otherwise.

I didn't want to pollute your forum and didn't mean to insult it.

I know AAKK ds is a primo hand in plo. Any 2 pair hand is at least decent but can easily be misplayed causing you to lose your stack by being oversetted. I do not think KK is irrelevant in multiway pots. Maybe ATJQ2 ds would be better in multiway pots. No one really knows this because we lack tools to reasonably approximate this stuff.

I think that pretty much covers all my points. If Groovin wants to rip it apart line by line, feel free but don't expect me to necessarily read it anytime soon.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-22-2013, 01:14 PM
hecky's Avatar
hecky hecky is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GroovinMahoovinPartDeux View Post


a random choice of ds or single suited is better than double suited. Got it.
Here is an example. I see part of Groovin's post at the bottom and see this as the first thing.

My suggestion allows you to isolate the KK portion of the hand. When you don't specifically make 2 of the ace's double-suited then it introduces other variables which we are not able to separate the effects of in the results and I don't care enough to do the whatif/she says/blah blah song and dance. Get it ?

Like I said, I might read your stuff one day but not anytime soon. Like you didn't comprehend the above, so you turn it into an insult. Ok. I got it. wtfever. It will never stop with you and I don't want to write a scholarly article over this stupid shit.

It is just bullshit like this and frankly although I think you're a smart dude I don't think you're as smart as you think.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.