zrlcsx
zrlcsx
Joined: May 8, 2015
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 21
April 17th, 2018 at 6:52:43 AM permalink
The advanced strategy for decision point 2 does not agree with the UTH calculator.

Specifically holding 2K with QQ on board you should raise with any A,J,T kicker.

QQA - Raise average value of raising= -0.254980 average value of checking = -0.294960

QQJ - Check average value of raising= -0.475243 average value of checking = -0.450256

QQT - Check average value of raising= -0.494414 average value of checking = -0.464107

Should the rule be changed to only raise with A kicker or is the calculator in error?
Chuck
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 99
  • Posts: 14234
April 17th, 2018 at 7:33:59 AM permalink
Quote: zrlcsx

The advanced strategy for decision point 2 does not agree with the UTH calculator.

Specifically holding 2K with QQ on board you should raise with any A,J,T kicker.

QQA - Raise average value of raising= -0.254980 average value of checking = -0.294960

QQJ - Check average value of raising= -0.475243 average value of checking = -0.450256

QQT - Check average value of raising= -0.494414 average value of checking = -0.464107

Should the rule be changed to only raise with A kicker or is the calculator in error?



I'm not sure I'm following the full calculation you're making.

Assuming you're talking about kickers in hand, not on the board, Ax (any ace) in your hand should have been bet 4x pre-flop, so there's no decision to be made by the time you know QQ is on the board.

By Mike's kicker rule, except for some 4toa flush or straight hands, QQ and anything else on the board is 11 cards or less the dealer can have against you, plus a maximum of 8 kings and aces for 19, so the jack plays. In that specific instance, since QQ eliminates most outside or inside straight possibilities that wouldn't favor the jack, I can't think of an instance you wouldn't bet it except 4toa flush.

The 10 could play, depending on other overcards.

As they say, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing on my part. So perhaps you could explain more fully, at least for me, what your question is?

Edit. Been thinking about this some more. Perhaps decision point 2 is the 2x bet, even though you're talking about kicker strategy? (I need to look at the calculator you're referencing, I guess). If QQx is the flop,.the vast majority of the time the jack would play no matter the river, and it's an aggressive strategy, so it's probably correct to bet 2x there.

I would think.the 10 would be a close decision as well, and the math might say bet 2x. The number of times you could pair, trips, etc, and high cards on the board are good for you, since they're not then in the dealer hand, 2x might be the right aggressive bet.

The difference might lie in the 2x, even if it's not +ev in the way you're dissecting it, is worth more than a straight + or -. In part, that's because you make 2x instead of 1x, so that allows for it to be less ev to play than check, in part because you know the dealer always qualifies, and in part because you're trying to offset and minimize the cost of the Blind bet by betting 4x and 2x whenever possible. Since the Blind bet pushes below a straight, but you lose it when you lose, betting 2x on even a slightly negative hand would have the effect of adding a little value to the overall cost of losing the Blind on other hands.
Last edited by: beachbumbabs on Apr 17, 2018
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
zrlcsx
zrlcsx
Joined: May 8, 2015
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 21
Thanks for this post from:
beachbumbabs
April 17th, 2018 at 10:26:41 AM permalink
Thank you for the quick response.

I am only concerned about the 2x bet (Mike calls it decision point 2 in his Advanced Strategy) after the flop. If my hole cards are K2 offsuit (would not have bet 4x) and the flop is QQT, QQJ or QQA. Mike's advanced strategy for shared pairs in all three cases cases you should raise. Mike's calculator says to check QQT and QQJ and raise QQA. All cases have negative outcome. Only the QQA has Raise greater that Check (values in original post are from Mikes Calculator).
Chuck
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 99
  • Posts: 14234
April 17th, 2018 at 11:56:06 AM permalink
I would think it's an exception case that factors in what I said in my last paragraph (those 3 factors). What little I know about the algorithms behind the calculator, it could be a programming oversight, and they should always match, but in general using those calculators, there are very specific (and a long list of) exceptions for most (all?) of the strategy generators for VP variations and other games, and that could be one. There's usually a simple, complex, and optimal strategy for every game, depending on how far into the thousandths you want to dig.

I'll step out because I can't give you a better answer, but hopefully one of the better math guys on here will.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
gordonm888
Administrator
gordonm888
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
  • Threads: 55
  • Posts: 3700
April 17th, 2018 at 12:17:21 PM permalink
My experience with the UTH calculator on WOO is that it provides mathematically correct values of EV for any case that you define. It is a wonderful calculator and very useful.

The advanced strategy for UTH on the WOO site can be improved upon (particularly, in my experience, for decision 2 -after the flop). Some of us have used the UTH calculator to develop a list of exceptions to the UTH advanced strategy that we use when we play the game. It is simply a question of how many rules you want to memorize to capture a tiny bit of extra EV.

You have started out in the right way - you are using the calculator to explore where the exceptions might be and appear to have discovered some! Just remember that no one claimed that the advanced strategy was mathematically optimal for every case.
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
zrlcsx
zrlcsx
Joined: May 8, 2015
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 21
April 17th, 2018 at 1:36:26 PM permalink
I understand that that the advanced strategy is less than optimal in order to simpify. But in this specific case it is more comlex by adding J and T kicker. I am afaid I am missing something.

I would expect any exception would act to make the strategy more complex. Here it simplifies.
Last edited by: zrlcsx on Apr 17, 2018
Chuck
Hunterhill
Hunterhill
Joined: Aug 1, 2011
  • Threads: 50
  • Posts: 2012
April 17th, 2018 at 2:32:43 PM permalink
Maybe in your case but how about if you have K3
Or K4 does it change then?
The mountain is tall but grass grows on top of the mountain.
zrlcsx
zrlcsx
Joined: May 8, 2015
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 21
April 17th, 2018 at 2:46:43 PM permalink
The values change slightly for K4 and K3, but still indicate checking is best for the T or J. Ace kicker remains a raise.
Chuck
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7237
April 17th, 2018 at 5:46:01 PM permalink
These cards matter because of straight possibilities. There are also flush possibilities in some cases. Are those accounted for elsewhere? k2/qq10 rainbow will look much worse than the same hand with 3 suited cards.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
zrlcsx
zrlcsx
Joined: May 8, 2015
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 21
April 18th, 2018 at 5:19:24 AM permalink
I should have indicated in the beginning that there was no chance of a flush draw. If k2 was suited i would have already been in at 4x.
Chuck

  • Jump to: