Quit Counting Outs UTH!!

Quit counting the outs if you want to ... the outs have been counted for you

In the thread, https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/tables/37925-award-for-worst-river-1x-advice-uth/#post880498 , I came across those bad-to-dubious strategies searching for alternatives to the necessarily shortened Grosjean card, the quickly mastered Wizard, and the not-right-for-me Steven How strategies. I find the flop/2x strategies hard to master beyond a simple strategy, but nothing on the internet that I have found is any help. This is not too much of a problem, as one reason the flop/2x strategy is hard to get down beyond the basics is the difficult decisions don’t come often enough to get practice, plus much of it requires a computer to be perfectly correct. The advanced Grosjean or How may be right for you, and the How you can check out free … https://discountgambling.net/ultimate-texas-holdem/

Now I will say I’m pretty happy with my turn-river/1x play. I seldom count the outs, and I believe any player can get to this advanced ability pretty easily.

For Turn-River/1x decision only, I have gotten to the point I seldom count outs. I’ve also come to realize betting 1x on a board that is likely to be the best hand for the dealer and player both, is much simpler than I had realized. Except for not getting enough practice, due to infrequency, this can now be memorized pretty easily. At the bottom are new charts, check those out, I really use them.

note: While betting with just a kicker is ruled out if the board has 4 to a flush, or 4 to outside straight, some “scare” boards are borderline, and using the computer evaluation you may get an indication to fold when below says to play. These still are simple strategies, more than one kicker never considered. They are based on counting the outs. I want to see if there are exceptions, where if you actually count the outs, you get a different answer. Normal out counting method, only considering outs with one dealer card. So please help find any errors if you will.

First establishing whether the player kicker is potentially usable as a first step makes a better 1x decision strategy for me than that given by a Grosjean card strategy or the How strategy. YMMV.

I won’t get into how you can tell if you should consider your kicker or not. When you don’t is when you “play the board” as Grosjean puts it. That means considering that the board may be the best hand for dealer and player both, your hole cards clearly irrelevant. Your game play ability has either reached this stage or not. The number of outs you count is 18+, BTW, not 21+, when you ‘play the board. ‘

First, in bold the situations with more explanation, then below the charts.

Player Kicker in Play

-The board is unpaired

........... only one card that outranks your kicker can be missing from the board [if two+ are missing, fold, otherwise bet 1x]-The board has one pair.

........... 2 cards that outrank your kicker can be missing from the board [if 3+ are missing, fold, otherwise bet 1x]-The board has two pair AND fifth board card represents possible dealer outs

............ 2 cards that outrank your kicker can be missing from the board [if 3+ are missing, fold, otherwise bet 1x]

-The board has two pair, AND fifth board card lower in rank than either pair

............ 4 cards that outrank your kicker can be missing from the board [if 5 are missing, fold, otherwise bet 1x]

-The board has trips.

............ 3 cards that outrank your kicker can be missing from the board [if 4 are missing, fold, otherwise bet 1x]

-Board has 4 OAK

............ 5 cards that outrank your kicker can be missing from the board. A 6-card or less as kicker is an instant fold [if six are missing, fold, otherwise bet 1x]

>>>

Player Kicker Can’t Win

I have found the ‘instant fold’ cards very valuable to learn in this group, as you fold often. In most cases the cards need to be high in rank, which means you need to look out for open ended 4 cards to a straight too

-No pair [or better] on the board. No pair means No Play, instant fold -Board has One Pair

…………..A 9-card or less in the board cards anywhere means instant fold, and a 10-card there is a fold unless all other cards are higher including paired cards. Bet 1x on all others. -Board has two pair with the 5th card representing a dealer out.

……….. A 10-card or less as the fifth card means instant fold.

Play All Others

-The board has two pair, AND fifth board card lower in rank than either pair.

……………..An 8-card anywhere on the board is an instant fold. Play a 9-card or higher as the fifth card, when all other cards are higher in rank

-Board has Trips.

……….A 9-card or less within the 2 other cards is an instant fold, and a 10-card there is a fold unless all other cards are higher [otherwise bet 1x]

-Board has 4 OAK

………… 4 cards can be missing from the board that outrank the fifth card on the board. An 8-card as the 5th card is an instant fold [otherwise bet 1x]

/row]
 

Player Kicker in Play	Cards Outranking Kicker That Can Be Missing From the Board and You Bet Your Kicker
Unpaired Board	One Card Can Be Missing
Board has One Pair	2 Cards Can Be Missing
4. Board has Trips	3 Cards Can Be Missing
5. Board = Two Pair, Fifth Card Makes Dealer Outs	3 Cards Can Be Missing
6. Board has Two Pair, Fifth Card Lower in Rank	4 Cards Can Be Missing
7. Board has 4 OAK	5 Cards Can Be Missing

Player Kicker Can’t Win	Action Indicated
The board doesn't have a pair or better	No pair means No Play, instant fold
Board Has One Pair	A 9-card or less in any board cards means instant fold a 10-card also UNLESS ALL other cards are higher Play All Others
Board has 2 pair with the Fifth card making dealer outs.	A 10-card or less as the fifth card means instant fold. Play All Others
Board has two pair, AND fifth board card lowest in rank	An 8-card anywhere on the board is an instant fold. Play all cards that are higher fifth cards
Board has Trips	A 9-card or less within the 2 other cards is an instant fold A 10-card there is a fold unless ALL other cards are higher Play All Others
Board has 4 OAK	4 cards can be missing from the board that outrank the fifth card on the board. if so bet An 8-card as the 5th card is an instant fold

Last edited by: odiousgambit on Feb 5, 2023

the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!”   She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder

Now, where have I seen an "alternative to counting the outs" strategy before?

Quote: ThatDonGuy

Here is my strategy for calculating the "21 Outs" (that I used once, before pretty much staying away from UTH as I kept confusing the board with the dealer's cards):

Count the number of ranks not on the board that (a) do not make a straight and (b) are higher than both your highest hole card and the lowest unpaired rank on the board. If it is lower than the number next to the hand on the board, bet; otherwise, fold.
No Pair – 2
Pair – 3
Two Pair, fifth card higher than low pair (e.g. K K 9 6 6, or K 9 9 6 6) – 4
Two Pair, fifth card lower than low pair (e.g. K K 9 9 6) – 5
Three Of A Kind – 4
4/Open Straight – 1 if there is a pair; otherwise fold
4/Inside Straight (including AKQJ and 432A) – 2 if there is a pair; 1 if there is not
4/Flush - always fold
Straight, Flush, Full House, Straight Flush – always bet
Four Of A Kind – fold if the higher of the fifth board card and your higher hole card is 7 or lower, or an 8 with four 7s or higher

Link to original post

Quote: ThatDonGuy

Now, where have I seen an "alternative to counting the outs" strategy before?

Quote: ThatDonGuy

Here is my strategy for calculating the "21 Outs" (that I used once, before pretty much staying away from UTH as I kept confusing the board with the dealer's cards):

Count the number of ranks not on the board that (a) do not make a straight and (b) are higher than both your highest hole card and the lowest unpaired rank on the board. If it is lower than the number next to the hand on the board, bet; otherwise, fold.
No Pair – 2
Pair – 3
Two Pair, fifth card higher than low pair (e.g. K K 9 6 6, or K 9 9 6 6) – 4
Two Pair, fifth card lower than low pair (e.g. K K 9 9 6) – 5
Three Of A Kind – 4
4/Open Straight – 1 if there is a pair; otherwise fold
4/Inside Straight (including AKQJ and 432A) – 2 if there is a pair; 1 if there is not
4/Flush - always fold
Straight, Flush, Full House, Straight Flush – always bet
Four Of A Kind – fold if the higher of the fifth board card and your higher hole card is 7 or lower, or an 8 with four 7s or higher

Link to original post

link to original post

Can't say I remember it ... I'll check it out, maybe compare it

Is this one size fits all, or do you have a different one for 18+ outs, when your hole cards are irrelevant?

PS: a chart would be nice

Quote: odiousgambit

Can't say I remember it ... I'll check it out, maybe compare it
link to original post

Is this one size fits all, or do you have a different one for 18+ outs, when your hole cards are irrelevant?

This only applies with 20 outs.

Quote: odiousgambit

PS: a chart would be nice

Like this?

Board	# of cards or more needed to fold
No Pair	2
Pair	3
Two Pair	4, if the fifth card is higher than the low pair (e.g. K K 9 6 6, or K 9 9 6 6); 5, if the fifth card is lower than the low pair (e.g. K K 9 9 6)
Three Of A Kind	4
4/Open Straight	1, if one of the cards is paired; otherwise, Fold
4/Inside Straight (including AKQJ and 432A)	2, if one of the cards is paired; otherwise, 1
4/Flush	Fold
Straight, Flush, Full House, Straight Flush	Bet
Four Of A Kind	fold if the higher of the fifth board card and your higher hole card is 7 or lower, or an 8 with four 7s or higher; otherwise, Bet

your chart is good!

Comparing mine and ThatDonGuy’s strategies that don’t count the outs

Quote: ThatDonGuy

… here is my strategy for calculating the "21 Outs" …

that you do not include the situation where you determine that the board may have the best hand as is for player and dealer both … you ‘play the board’ then, as Grosjean puts it. I suggest you see my charts, hope you approve.

Quote:

Count the number of ranks not on the board that (a) do not make a straight

including inside straights? one card evaluation only of course

Quote:

and (b) are higher than both your highest hole card and the lowest unpaired rank on the board.

this took some study but is correct and a good explanation

Quote:

If it is lower than the number next to the hand on the board, bet; otherwise, fold.

No Pair – 2

you don’t say what to do. If it means you fold, it agrees with my strategy I see you say what to do in your chart

Quote:

Pair – 3

Two Pair, fifth card higher than low pair (e.g. K K 9 6 6, or K 9 9 6 6) – 4

Two Pair, fifth card lower than low pair (e.g. K K 9 9 6) – 5

Three Of A Kind – 4

all these agree

Quote:

4/Open Straight – 1 if there is a pair; otherwise fold

4/Inside Straight (including AKQJ and 432A) – 2 if there is a pair; 1 if there is not

I don’t include these

Quote:

4/Flush - always fold

I mention but not in charts

Quote:

Straight, Flush, Full House, Straight Flush – always bet

OK of course but seems to be your only ‘play the board’ inclusions?

Quote:

Four Of A Kind – fold if the higher of the fifth board card and your higher hole card is 7 or lower, or an 8 with four 7s or higher

might take time to check out

Quote:

link to original post

I need to add "play all others" to my second chart in some places

PS after criticizing you, now i see I also don't say what to do in the first chart [it is, you bet]

PPS fixed it but may have introduced error , will have to be checked out

Quote: ThatDonGuy

This only applies with 20 outs.

I don't understand this Table, but I've been using this 1x-bet strategy "less than 21 dealer-outs" to play all board situations, including a pair and a trips. Now, it looks like you are saying that in certain situations we should use 20-outs or 19-outs.

In this Table, what does this mean "# of cards or more needed to fold"?

Quote: aceside

Quote: ThatDonGuy

This only applies with 20 outs.

I don't understand this Table, but I've been using this 1x-bet strategy "less than 21 dealer-outs" to play all board situations, including a pair and a trips. Now, it looks like you are saying that in certain situations we should use 20-outs or 19-outs.

In this Table, what does this mean "# of cards or more needed to fold"?
link to original post

Count the number of ranks that are:
(a) not on the board,
(b) do not make a straight with 4 cards on the board
(c) are higher than your highest hole card, and
(d) are also higher than the lowest unpaired card on the board.
If that number is equal to or greater than the "# of cards or more needed to fold," then fold; otherwise, bet.
For example, suppose the board is A, 9, 8, 6, 5 of mixed suits, and your hole cards are 6-4 unsuited.
Of the 13 ranks, don't count:
(a) A, 9, 8, 6, 5 (they are on the board)
(b) 7 (it makes a 9-high straight with the board)
(c) 2-6 (they are not higher than your highest hole card, which is a 6)
(d) 2-5 (they are not higher than the highest unpaired card on the board, which is a 5)
This leaves K, Q, J, and 10, which is 4; the board is 4/inside straight without a pair, and the table says to fold if you counted 1 or more ranks, which you did, so you fold.

Quote: ThatDonGuy

Quote: aceside

Quote: ThatDonGuy

This only applies with 20 outs.

I don't understand this Table, but I've been using this 1x-bet strategy "less than 21 dealer-outs" to play all board situations, including a pair and a trips. Now, it looks like you are saying that in certain situations we should use 20-outs or 19-outs.

In this Table, what does this mean "# of cards or more needed to fold"?
link to original post

Count the number of ranks that are:
(a) not on the board,
(b) do not make a straight with 4 cards on the board
(c) are higher than your highest hole card, and
(d) are also higher than the lowest unpaired card on the board.
If that number is equal to or greater than the "# of cards or more needed to fold," then fold; otherwise, bet.
For example, suppose the board is A, 9, 8, 6, 5 of mixed suits, and your hole cards are 6-4 unsuited.
Of the 13 ranks, don't count:
(a) A, 9, 8, 6, 5 (they are on the board)
(b) 7 (it makes a 9-high straight with the board)
(c) 2-6 (they are not higher than your highest hole card, which is a 6)
(d) 2-5 (they are not higher than the highest unpaired card on the board, which is a 5)
This leaves K, Q, J, and 10, which is 4; the board is 4/inside straight without a pair, and the table says to fold if you counted 1 or more ranks, which you did, so you fold.
link to original post

I have to understand this, but the example you give above shows a hidden pair 6-6 for the player, so the Wizard's basic strategy dictates a 1x raise; however, you say a fold. Is this correct?

For this particular example, the online UTH calculator does say that the player should raise. So, you need to give me a better example, if you can.

Quote: aceside

Quote: ThatDonGuy

This only applies with 20 outs.

I don't understand this Table, but I've been using this 1x-bet strategy "less than 21 dealer-outs" to play all board situations, including a pair and a trips. Now, it looks like you are saying that in certain situations we should use 20-outs or 19-outs.

In this Table, what does this mean "# of cards or more needed to fold"?
link to original post

Bear in mind everybody who tries to write about UTH has trouble with clarity. S. How is the worst, and may know the most. Showing it rather than talking about it might be the way, but here we have to write

"Now, it looks like you are saying that in certain situations we should use 20-outs or 19-outs" Another problem is a writer might refer to 20 outs and be referring to the 21+ outs, because at 20 you bet, at 21 you fold. It's referencing the same thing

Grosjean seems to be the one who came up with 18+ outs, at least it's on his strategy card. No one should say 19 , I'm sorry if I did. It is for a different situation.

Take an easy one, the board has 4 aces. Your cards may stink, but you have to know there's a good chance you are going to push here, right? This is the other situation, you can see that your kicker is not as good as the 5th card on the board so you dismiss your own cards, and in fact in that case it's impossible for you to win! But that push may still be good, yet the dealer still has the chance to have a better card than the 5th card on the board, unless it is a King [you bet for sure if it is a K]. Those dealer chances are still called 'outs' by Grosjean. You count the possible outs till you get to 18 or more, at a lesser count you bet 1x.

Not all of them are as easy as AAAAx on the board, but they all originate with the realization that you only have a kicker to win with, but it's clear that you can't win with it. Still, you don't want to fold if the board has a good chance to end in a push. You should play with the notion to double check yourself if you've decided to fold, you don't fold all that much, really, in UTH.

Yes, I think Wizard should include this with his strategy. He just does not include this push situation at all.

The dealer-21-outs-beating-you rule should be applicable to all situations except these two: a hidden pair/+ or a quads board. If there is a pair board or a trips board, this rule is applicable too. Eliot has demonstrated the math in a post here. If there is a quads board, we just use the 7/8 kicker rule.

Quote: aceside

The dealer-21-outs-beating-you rule should be applicable to all situations except these two: a hidden pair/+ or a quads board. If there is a pair board or a trips board, this rule is applicable too. Eliot has demonstrated the math in a post here. If there is a quads board, we just use the 7/8 kicker rule.
link to original post

Maybe you are right, but here is the thing: the chart I have made for the board-causing-a-push situation have all been tested for that situation by the Wizard calculator, assuming no errors [possible of course]. So that is a chart that will keep you from counting outs, however many outs is right. I think the Wizard can rightfully publish that chart, since it is derived from his calculator

In the meantime, I am testing the latest charts, both, myself, hoping others are too. Once it is tested thoroughly, I'll blogpost it.

Where is Mission when you need him?

Player Kicker in Play	Permissible Missing Cards Outranking Kicker
Unpaired Board	One Card Can Be Missing, Bet 1x
Board has One Pair	2 Cards Can Be Missing, ditto
Board has Trips	3 Cards Can Be Missing, ditto
Board = Two Pair, Fifth Card Makes Dealer Outs	3 Cards Can Be Missing, ditto
Board has Two Pair, Fifth Card Lower in Rank	4 Cards Can Be Missing, ditto
Board has 4 OAK	5 Cards Can Be Missing, ditto

Player Kicker Can’t Win	Action Indicated
The board doesn't have a pair or better	No pair means No Play, instant fold
Board Has One Pair	A 9-card or less in the board cards means instant fold a 10-card also UNLESS ALL other cards are higher Play All Others
Board has 2 pair with the Fifth card making dealer outs.	A 10-card or less as the fifth card means instant fold. Play a Jack Fifth Card if it is Middle Value Play all Queen or better 5th Cards
Board has two pair, AND fifth board card lowest in rank	An 8-card or less anywhere on the board is an instant fold. Play all that have higher fifth cards
Board has Trips	A 9-card or less within the 2 other cards is an instant fold A 10-card there is a fold unless ALL other cards are higher Play All Others
Board has 4 OAK	An 8-card as the 5th card is an instant fold A 9-card as the fifth card is a fold UNLESS all other cards are higher Play All Others

My own initiative based in part upon the Wiz's Analyzer...

Turn Raises (1x or Call)
Any hand that beats the board One Pair or better by rank of hand
Any hand Two Pair or better OR Board Flush, Full House, Straight-Flush
Any One Pair NO 4-Flush, or 4-to-a-Straight on board
Pair 33 or better IF 3-to-a-Straight-Flush AND/OR inside Straight on board
Pair 44 or better IF open-ended Straight on the board- NO 4-Flush
Pair 55 or better IF 4-Flush on the board
Third highest Rank of Pair or better IF 4-to-a-Straight-Flush OR both a
4-straight AND a 4-Flush on the board.

7-CARD NO PAIR OR BETTER TURN RAISES (1x or Call)
Fold if 4-to-a-Straight, 4-Flush, or 4-to-a-Str.-Fl on board
OTHERWISE RAISE with 2nd-high or best kicker.

WITH PAT HANDS ON THE BOARD, AND NO IMPROVEMENT BY RANK OF HAND
3rd-high kicker or better for One Pair or your pocket makes the board 9-low
Include 4th-high kicker for Triples and Two Pairs
Include 5th-high kicker for Quads
IF THE BOARD has these Pat-Hand Properties, RAISE

Suited89

The "21 Outs" rule is hard to explain, but I have found that once somebody gets it, the math is not that hard.

Most of the time there are five singletons or a pair on the board.

Five singletons -- 15 outs less any in your own hand plus 4 more for every rank above the highest rank you can see. If there are four or a straight or flush on the board, then adjust for that too.

Pair -- Same thing, except change the 15 to 11.

If you practice with my UTH game, you get to the small raise a lot and the game will correct you if you're wrong. A small downside is the 21 outs rule is not perfect, but the game is, so you may get advised contrary to the 21 outs rule once in long while (apx. once an hour with fast play).

When I first learned the game, I sometimes forgot what to do with exactly 21 outs. Think of baseball -- three strikes and you're out. In UTH -- exactly 21 strikes and you're out (fold).

Quote: Suited89

My own initiative based in part upon the Wiz's Analyzer...

Turn Raises (1x or Call)
Any hand that beats the board One Pair or better by rank of hand
Any hand Two Pair or better OR Board Flush, Full House, Straight-Flush
Any One Pair NO 4-Flush, or 4-to-a-Straight on board

good

Quote:

Pair 33 or better IF 3-to-a-Straight-Flush AND/OR inside Straight on board
Pair 44 or better IF open-ended Straight on the board- NO 4-Flush
Pair 55 or better IF 4-Flush on the board
Third highest Rank of Pair or better IF 4-to-a-Straight-Flush OR both a
4-straight AND a 4-Flush on the board.

Now you say this is at the 1x point, so has to be hidden pair; I bet all such pairs except look for a reason not to bet 22. I don't seem to get many protests from the Wizard trainer. So, seems too tight, but can't swear to it

Quote:

7-CARD NO PAIR OR BETTER TURN RAISES (1x or Call)
Fold if 4-to-a-Straight, 4-Flush, or 4-to-a-Str.-Fl on board
OTHERWISE RAISE with 2nd-high or best kicker.

not following the above too good

Quote:

WITH PAT HANDS ON THE BOARD, AND NO IMPROVEMENT BY RANK OF HAND
3rd-high kicker or better for One Pair or your pocket makes the board 9-low
Include 4th-high kicker for Triples and Two Pairs
Include 5th-high kicker for Quads
IF THE BOARD has these Pat-Hand Properties, RAISE

I've gone away from ranked kickers type strategy and will let others comment on these

Quote:

Suited89
link to original post

Quote: Wizard

The "21 Outs" rule is hard to explain, but I have found that once somebody gets it, the math is not that hard.

Most of the time there are five singletons or a pair on the board.

Five singletons -- 15 outs less any in your own hand plus 4 more for every rank above the highest rank you can see. If there are four or a straight or flush on the board, then adjust for that too.

Pair -- Same thing, except change the 15 to 11.

If you practice with my UTH game, you get to the small raise a lot and the game will correct you if you're wrong. A small downside is the 21 outs rule is not perfect, but the game is, so you may get advised contrary to the 21 outs rule once in long while (apx. once an hour with fast play).

When I first learned the game, I sometimes forgot what to do with exactly 21 outs. Think of baseball -- three strikes and you're out. In UTH -- exactly 21 strikes and you're out (fold).
link to original post

I wasn't going to post any more charts, but I kept working at it and got a little excited maybe to find I was able to make them without most any situation calling for counting outs. I just now got to the point where all of the charts are like that. I hope you noticed my comment that all of the second chart comes from using your calculator to derive it. I need others to check it out too, but, hey, this is really your stuff and could go on your strategy page.

While betting with just a kicker is prohibited if the board has a flush or straight with four or more cards, some "scare" boards are dicey, and utilising the computer evaluation, you might get a signal to fold when the instructions below indicate to play. More than one kicker was never considered, but these are still straightforward strategies.They are based on the outs system. If there are any instances where you get a different result if you truly count the outs, I want to look into them. Typical out calculation simply takes into account outs with one dealer card. To that end, if you could, help us uncover any mistakes.

Quote: Anthonycolucci

While betting with just a kicker is prohibited if the board has a flush or straight with four or more cards, some "scare" boards are dicey, and utilising the computer evaluation, you might get a signal to fold when the instructions below indicate to play. More than one kicker was never considered, but these are still straightforward strategies.They are based on the outs system. If there are any instances where you get a different result if you truly count the outs, I want to look into them. Typical out calculation simply takes into account outs with one dealer card. To that end, if you could, help us uncover any mistakes.
link to original post

are you saying the calculator only does the out thing?

I did find one mistake, "play all others" is not a tested thing in all cases for the second chart

latest mod,

Player Kicker Can’t Win	Action Indicated
The board doesn't have a pair or better	No pair means No Play, instant fold
Board Has One Pair	A 9-card or less in the board cards means instant fold a 10-card also UNLESS ALL other cards are higher Play All Others
Board has 2 pair with the Fifth card making dealer outs.	A 10-card or less as the fifth card means instant fold. Play a Jack Fifth Card if it is Middle Value Play all Queen or better 5th Cards
Board has two pair, AND fifth board card lowest in rank	An 8-card anywhere on the board is an instant fold. Play all that have higher fifth cards
Board has Trips	A 9-card or less within the 2 other cards is an instant fold A 10-card there is a fold unless ALL other cards are higher Play All Others
Board has 4 OAK	An 8-card as the 5th card is an instant fold A 9-card as the fifth card is a fold UNLESS all other cards are higher Play All Others

I noticed that some people seem to think that there are different numbers of outs needed to choose between folding and making the 1x raise. To make it easier on everybody, I'll show how many "base" outs there are for pretty much each hand:

Board	# of "base" outs
No pair	15
One pair	11
Two pair, fifth card higher than low pair (9 9 6 3 3 or 9 6 6 3 3)	7
Two pair, fifth card lower than low pair (9 9 6 6 3)	4
Three of a kind	correction: 7
4/Flush, no pair, no 4/straight	23
4/Flush, no pair, 4/inside straight	26
4/Flush, no pair, 4/open-ended straight	29
4/Flush, with a pair, no 4/straight	20
4/inside Straight Flush, with a pair	23
4/Open-Ended Straight Flush, with a pair	23
4 of a Kind	0

Count how many ranks that are not on the board and do not make a straight are higher than both your highest hole card and the lowest unpaired card on the board, multiply that by 4, and add it to the "base" value to get the total number of outs.
I left out Full House, Flush, and Straight as you don't need to count missing ranks for those; a Full House can have up to 3 outs, a Flush up to 8, and a Straight up to 4.

The three-of-a-kind board in the above Table shows a [# of "base" outs] of 4. Why? I don't understand this. Isn't it 7?

Also, I used Eliot’s theory to calculate the dealer's numbers of outs needed for the player to fold 1x, but I find two different criteria:

For a five-singleton board, the strategy is dealer-21-outs-fold-you;
For a pair board, the strategy is dealer-23-outs-fold-you.

Quote: aceside

The three-of-a-kind board in the above Table shows a [# of "base" outs] of 4. Why? I don't understand this. Isn't it 7?

Also, I used Eliot’s theory to calculate the dealer's numbers of outs needed for the player to fold 1x, but I find two different criteria:

For a five-singleton board, the strategy is dealer-21-outs-fold-you;
For a pair board, the strategy is dealer-23-outs-fold-you.
link to original post

It should be 7. I will edit it.

Great thread! I only use UTH for loss rebate play at one online casino. I max bet, so I only end up playing a few dozen hands a month. If I ever need to play long sessions of UTH, I will definitely want to revisit this thread.

Quote: aceside

The three-of-a-kind board in the above Table shows a [# of "base" outs] of 4. Why? I don't understand this. Isn't it 7?

Also, I used Eliot’s theory to calculate the dealer's numbers of outs needed for the player to fold 1x, but I find two different criteria:

For a five-singleton board, the strategy is dealer-21-outs-fold-you;
For a pair board, the strategy is dealer-23-outs-fold-you.
link to original post

I've not seen 22 outs pass muster that I remember

If Eliot's theory says one thing, and the wizard online calculator another, which one is right?

First of all, we must rely on the online calculator. Second, different people have different strategies and the 21-outs rule is just a general guide. I might misunderstand Eliot theory too. Third, a five-singlet board and a pair board are very different. The kicker required for raising 1x for a pair board is one rank lower, mostly.

Maybe I’m crazy but I hate thinking of the issue as 21 outs. I prefer to think of it as the rank of my kicker.

Unpaired board (no four straight or flush):

Play K high kicker in my hand if no A or K on board. Play Q high kicker in hand if A or K on board. Play J if both A and K on board.

In other words, a K in my hand is always playable. A Q or J is playable if there are As and Ka on the board.

Pairs board (no four straight or flush):

Play a Q high kicker if no A or K on board. Play J kicker if A or K or Q on board. Play T kicker if two of A, K, Q on board (pair of something doesn’t count as two of them).

Quote: unJon

Maybe I’m crazy but I hate thinking of the issue as 21 outs. I prefer to think of it as the rank of my kicker.

Unpaired board (no four straight or flush):

Play K high kicker in my hand if no A or K on board. Play Q high kicker in hand if A or K on board. Play J if both A and K on board.

In other words, a K in my hand is always playable. A Q or J is playable if there are As and Ka on the board.

Pairs board (no four straight or flush):

Play a Q high kicker if no A or K on board. Play J kicker if A or K or Q on board. Play T kicker if two of A, K, Q on board (pair of something doesn’t count as two of them).
link to original post

Thank You!

I think it is a very natural progression to go from counting the outs to realizing you can at least seldom count the outs. Or, if I can flatter myself to think anyone likes my charts, use charts instead for those seldom times you do ...

any player must realize right away you always bet your King kicker on an unpaired board. Next, you realize the Queen is often valid, and when. You are simply going to stop counting in those situations. Do you like it? Surely you must. Do you want to expand on it? Well, of course, I'm saying in this thread you never need to count outs, if you don't want to.

the Wizard is digging in his heels, I can tell, with his comments. Maybe Unjon can work on him LOL

Playing the Wiz's game now and I was down $700 playing $15 per spot with $0 on the trips. I won back to $500 ahead. Then I got to thinking about max bets. If the Blind pays 500 to 1 on a Royal, for a $25K limit payout, that'd be $50 on the Blind; $50K limit would be $100 on the Blind; and $75K limit would be $150 on the Blind. Of course if the board comes up a Royal, then what? This Blind bet requires a straight to win.

I'm changing up my betting strategy because I hit $5850, and raised my bets to $80/spot, no trips bet. I've been losing since so the bets have been lowering.
Well, a full house came up on the board and I called, and the Blind was pushed, so I didn't get a 3:1 payout on the Blind with a tie with the dealer.


Damn, even a pocket straight tie pushes! Oh, it wasn't a pocket straight, but might as well have been one. It was another board straight.


I tried to raise my bets to $120 per spot, but the table limit is $100 per spot. So a Royal would pay $50K. I'll have to find someplace else to play that has at least a $500 limit.
\Well, my good luck did not hold up and I lost over 40 full bets and wound up at $0 from over $9,000. I can't tell if it's that Blind bet not paying off or just the sheer getting beat by the dealer that's causing it, I'm gonna say it was the dealer.
\Played another $5K buy-in session and got to over $10K, even up to $11K. I should truncate my upside to winning the $5K session back and cash out and start another buy-in. Playing to see how far I can go at the top seems to have a very fast downside in this game.

Quote: ChumpChange

Playing the Wiz's game now and I was down $700 playing $15 per spot with $0 on the trips. I won back to $500 ahead. Then I got to thinking about max bets. If the Blind pays 500 to 1 on a Royal, for a $25K limit payout, that'd be $50 on the Blind; $50K limit would be $100 on the Blind; and $75K limit would be $150 on the Blind. Of course if the board comes up a Royal, then what? This Blind bet requires a straight to win.
link to original post

If you want me to answer, you're going to have to tell me if you used the charts and how much you liked them ... j.k.

yes, I think the blind bet can run into the max they will pay out. Please write a letter to your congressman, I think congressional hearings are long overdue

generally the advice is to not play the Trips. It sucks you in, since you want to get paid on trips, but for the royal and the straight flush, it doesn't pay as much. If you can get a good paytable, though, I'll give you a pass on it. Good luck.

The board Royal did not pay! I missed out on $30.3K!


My biggest win at max bet.

Quote: ChumpChange

The board Royal did not pay! I missed out on $30.3K!

link to original post

The blind bet only pays when you win, i.e., when dealer is beaten. Dealer is also playing this board, so of course you have tied the dealer and there is no payout.

But I imagine you knew this?

I've never gotten a Royal on anything before, and now I'm disappointed. Add to that, I never ever thought I'd get a Royal, much less in the first 12 hours or so.
I think I've got this game just about beat if I ever get a big enough bankroll to attempt to play it at the casino. But I'm really relying on the auto-correct on the game a bit too much. I can't expect dealers at the tables to correct me, but then games are played much slower and I can carry a cheat sheet index card with me.

I'll go watch Victor play and him complaining about his beyond belief bad luck at this game, where runs of bad hands he has are harder to get than a Royal Flush, but he gets the bad hands. He might even mention "outs" and he may or may not play accordingly.
"If it was possible to lose the Royal Flush, believe me, I would lose the Royal Flush." - Victor on 2/6/23 (rant starting around 6:30 in).

Quote:

7-CARD NO PAIR OR BETTER RAISES (1x or Call)
Fold if 4-to-a-Straight, 4-Flush, or 4-to-a-Str.-Fl on board
OTHERWISE RAISE with 2nd-high or best kicker.

Corrected TURN this way to illustrate that no pair can be made at all.

Otherwise OK.

Beyond counting outs... kickers (rank) prevail.

BTW: my $2 ROYAL :oP



Suited89

Quote: Suited89

Quote:

7-CARD NO PAIR OR BETTER RAISES (1x or Call)
Fold if 4-to-a-Straight, 4-Flush, or 4-to-a-Str.-Fl on board
OTHERWISE RAISE with 2nd-high or best kicker.

Corrected TURN this way to illustrate that no pair can be made at all.

Otherwise OK.

Beyond counting outs... kickers (rank) prevail.

BTW: my $2 ROYAL :oP



Suited89
link to original post

what I see here is a 4x that wasn't bet? And a 2x that wasn't bet, if, say, you were still dozing? ... If you get to the "1x or call", as you put it, decision point and still haven't bet, you would bet because you have a flush ... a royal one, yes

so maybe you just wanted to show us your Royal?

I was asked to check out this thread and have happily done so.

Personally, I have never had a problem with the 21 outs count, so I wouldn't really have any great need for any type of chart where any variations to counting 21 outs would result in a negligible save to EV, though I could see where someone who plays a lot might need an alternative or someone who has trouble grasping 21 outs. 21 outs can also get tricky with the prospect of the dealer needing two cards for a straight or flush.

These charts actually seem more complicated to me than counting the outs; while I am a very average poker player, I have probably played more than some people, so just counting the outs comes pretty naturally to me. Take a board like:

Ah Qd 9c 5s 3h

If I have:

Jd 6c

Okay, so any card on the board being matched beats me, that's 15. Kings beat me, so that's another four cards. That's nineteen outs and the dealer can also have a jack with a better kicker. I would just count that as one out, so that gets me to twenty; I should call.

If we have a board with a high pair:

Ac Qd Qs 8h 5d

I have:

10s 7d

Three Aces, Four Kings, Two Queens, Four Jacks, Three Eights, Three Fives. No straights or flushes possible, 19 outs, easy call. I wouldn't add an out for a ten with a better kicker because that would only be 10x9x without the dealer already beating me some other way.

If you use the calculator:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/ultimate-texas-hold-em/calculator/

You can compare the EV of -1.716 for the bottom hand to -1.91 for the top hand. Superficially, both hands would have nineteen outs for the dealer, but that's why I went ahead and added an out due to the top hand possibly having a Jack that outkicks me with the second kicker as opposed to beating me some other way. Jx10x, Jx8x and Jx7x all beat me for the top hand. In the bottom hand, any 10 other than 10x9x (except cards that individually beat you anyway) is also using the eight as the final card.

I also count dealer two cards against an open-ended straight (think of a hand like Kc Qs 4d 5c 3h) or dealer needing two cards to make a flush as one out. If both are applicable, then I count that as two outs. A hand with the above and player has:

Jd6d

Becomes a call with the board above, but a fold if you change any of the non-club cards to a club.

Aces-Four
Kings-Three
Queens-Three
Fours-Three
Fives-Three
Threes-Three
Jack (Better Kicker) +1
Two for a Straight +1 (Makes 21, but is actually a very close call---that's likely because the better jack shouldn't be a full +1 and we're blocking some straights...also, dealer Ax2x beats us by the ace anyway)***
Two for a Straight + Two for a Flush (changing a non-club to a club) +2 (Definite fold)

I've played on Wizard's game and this method seems fairly accurate and works with the fact that I prefer just counting the outs anyway.

***When I say close, the Raise has an EV of -1.99495. I don't mind folding something like this and being wrong. If our hand were instead Jd2d, then it's definitely a fold as there are more ways to outkick our jack by having Jx, dealer having Jx6x now beats us, for example.

Anyway, with all apologies, I do have difficulty with charts as opposed to counting outs is the short story. I simply decided to incorporate different dealer two card (or match + better kicker) situations and add them to the number of outs.

Thanks, Mission, really appreciate it

However I can't resist an opening heartfelt response

Quote: Mission146

These charts actually seem more complicated to me than counting the outs

I absolutely can't fathom that, especially in the case of the second chart. It's OK though... At least there's Unjon who thinks alike, and the others who responded too, though I can't tell in some cases if they like my stuff

Quote: odiousgambit

Thanks, Mission, really appreciate it

However I can't resist an opening heartfelt response

Quote: Mission146

These charts actually seem more complicated to me than counting the outs

I absolutely can't fathom that, especially in the case of the second chart. It's OK though... At least there's Unjon who thinks alike
link to original post

Unjon would wipe the floor with me in heads up THE, so it makes sense to me why he looks at it the same way.

You're welcome; my apologies for the delay. It's been an extremely hectic week.

Both of your examples above show a 19-outs hand. To justify the dealer 21-outs theorem, it is better to use example hands of 20-outs. I actually apply the 21-outs theorem only to unpaired boards only.

Quote: aceside

Both of your examples above show a 19-outs hand. To justify the dealer 21-outs theorem, it is better to use example hands of 20-outs. I actually apply the 21-outs theorem only to unpaired boards only.
link to original post

My bottom example uses a nineteen outs hand and explains my process for getting it to 21, or more, outs.

The top two hands were simply for the purpose of illustrating why I count same card + better kicker as an out sometimes. Usually if same card + better kicker could be three or more other kicker cards that wouldn't beat me by themselves some other way, then +1.

For this hand
Board: Ah Qd 9c 5s 3h
Player: Jd 2c

The online calculator dictates a Raise.

Quote: aceside

For this hand
Board: Ah Qd 9c 5s 3h
Player: Jd 2c

The online calculator dictates a Raise.
link to original post

It would; I was referring to changing the J6 to a J2 in my bottom example where the other asterisks were.

Also, that addendum was referring to a totally different board. (Kc Qs 4d 5c 3h)

Quote: Mission146

Quote: aceside

For this hand
Board: Ah Qd 9c 5s 3h
Player: Jd 2c

The online calculator dictates a Raise.
link to original post

It would; I was referring to changing the J6 to a J2 in my bottom example where the other asterisks were.
link to original post

(Bold Added to Quote Below)

Quote: Me

Jd6d

Becomes a call with the board above, but a fold if you change any of the non-club cards to a club.

Aces-Four
Kings-Three
Queens-Three
Fours-Three
Fives-Three
Threes-Three
Jack (Better Kicker) +1
Two for a Straight +1 (Makes 21, but is actually a very close call---that's likely because the better jack shouldn't be a full +1 and we're blocking some straights...also, dealer Ax2x beats us by the ace anyway)***
Two for a Straight + Two for a Flush (changing a non-club to a club) +2 (Definite fold)

I've played on Wizard's game and this method seems fairly accurate and works with the fact that I prefer just counting the outs anyway.

***When I say close, the Raise has an EV of -1.99495. I don't mind folding something like this and being wrong. If our hand were instead Jd2d, then it's definitely a fold as there are more ways to outkick our jack by having Jx, dealer having Jx6x now beats us, for example.

Quote: Mission146

I was asked to check out this thread and have happily done so.

I'm feeling quilty for pouncing ,perhaps with a bit of seeming rudeness, so let me say again, Thank You!

Quote:

Personally, I have never had a problem with the 21 outs count, so I wouldn't really have any great need for any type of chart where any variations to counting 21 outs would result in a negligible save to EV,

I agree that there is probably just a small gain you get in EV at the 1x decision point "period" but all analysts think it is worth playing right.

Quote:

though I could see where someone who plays a lot might need an alternative or someone who has trouble grasping 21 outs. 21 outs can also get tricky with the prospect of the dealer needing two cards for a straight or flush.

These charts actually seem more complicated to me than counting the outs; while I am a very average poker player, I have probably played more than some people, so just counting the outs comes pretty naturally to me. Take a board like:

Ah Qd 9c 5s 3h

If I have:

Jd 6c

Okay, so any card on the board being matched beats me, that's 15. Kings beat me, so that's another four cards. That's nineteen outs and the dealer can also have a jack with a better kicker. I would just count that as one out,

now, please do note that the chart says 'one card' also

Quote:

so that gets me to twenty; I should call.

If we have a board with a high pair:

Ac Qd Qs 8h 5d

I have:

10s 7d

Three Aces, Four Kings, Two Queens, Four Jacks, Three Eights, Three Fives. No straights or flushes possible, 19 outs, easy call. I wouldn't add an out for a ten with a better kicker

this thinking is deviating from Wizard strategy and probably Grosjean's by considering sub-kicker... considering the *2* cards the dealer might have, in other words. You are right the calculator considers them, so to speak.

Quote:

because that would only be 10x9x without the dealer already beating me some other way.

If you use the calculator:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/ultimate-texas-hold-em/calculator/

You can compare the EV of -1.716 for the bottom hand to -1.91 for the top hand. Superficially, both hands would have nineteen outs for the dealer, but that's why I went ahead and added an out due to the top hand possibly having a Jack that outkicks me with the second kicker as opposed to beating me some other way. Jx10x, Jx8x and Jx7x all beat me for the top hand. In the bottom hand, any 10 other than 10x9x (except cards that individually beat you anyway) is also using the eight as the final card.

I also count dealer two cards against an open-ended straight (think of a hand like Kc Qs 4d 5c 3h) or dealer needing two cards to make a flush as one out. If both are applicable, then I count that as two outs. A hand with the above and player has:

Jd6d

Becomes a call with the board above, but a fold if you change any of the non-club cards to a club.

see below comments

Quote:

Aces-Four

Kings-Three

Queens-Three

Fours-Three

Fives-Three

Threes-Three

Jack (Better Kicker) +1

Two for a Straight +1 (Makes 21, but is actually a very close call---that's likely because the better jack shouldn't be a full +1 and we're blocking some straights...also, dealer Ax2x beats us by the ace anyway)***

Two for a Straight + Two for a Flush (changing a non-club to a club) +2 (Definite fold)

I've played on Wizard's game and this method seems fairly accurate and works with the fact that I prefer just counting the outs anyway.

***When I say close, the Raise has an EV of -1.99495. I don't mind folding something like this and being wrong. If our hand were instead Jd2d, then it's definitely a fold as there are more ways to outkick our jack by having Jx, dealer having Jx6x now beats us, for example.

So, since the matter seems important to you and I guess others, let's make it clear again that the charts are a simple strategy that will sometimes give the wrong answer, giving you a warning when you play the wizard game with advice ‘on’, say. But as far as I've been able to tell, with a proviso, never a wrong answer to the question "are there less than 18+ or 21+ outs determining I should bet 1x, or greater than 18+ or 21+ outs determining I should fold?" I'll quote the exact proviso the Wizard gives on his webpage

Quote: Wizard

I get asked a lot about combinations of cards that will beat the player. For example, any two dealer spades that would give the dealer a flush in [a 3 to a flush example]. The answer is no. It would really make things complicated if the strategy accounted for double-card combinations that would beat the player.

Hopefully all know why I use 18+ and 21+ both at this point.

Mission, I think you are a Steven How level player and this is why you feel the reluctance to go with charts that aren’t going to get you to the same level. That’s a compliment. And thanks for the input again!

Has anyone found fault with the charts using the proviso?

link to original post

I have made changes in the charts, finding mistakes or better clarity, it is important to go to my latest blogpost to get to the latest charts [I can edit there and not upthread]. Upthread you might find mistakes

Well, if there's 6 other players at the table, counting outs might seem necessary. If it's one or two players at a table, I wouldn't bother counting outs, but I have never counted outs yet, seems confusing.

Quote: ChumpChange

Well, if there's 6 other players at the table, counting outs might seem necessary. If it's one or two players at a table, I wouldn't bother counting outs, but I have never counted outs yet, seems confusing.
link to original post

You're only playing against the dealer.

If you mean you are sharing information with the others, I don't know how to comment on that

If you mean you love my charts so you don't have to count outs, thank you!

Quote: OdiousGambit

I'm feeling quilty for pouncing ,perhaps with a bit of seeming rudeness, so let me say again, Thank You!

You're welcome and not at all! The least I can do is check out this thread given how often you have interacted with my articles. I apologize if my statement read sarcastic as it wasn't meant to come off that way; I literally meant that I was happy to look it over.

Quote:

I agree that there is probably just a small gain you get in EV at the 1x decision point "period" but all analysts think it is worth playing right.

I agree with that if it is something that someone is going to be playing with great regularity. Otherwise, if +EV, I just look at it the way I would vulturing Ultimate X; I don't need to know every single decision point perfectly. I suppose there are variants in VP, which isn't really true of UTH, but I think the EV costs are only extremely significant with these sorts of decision points if you're playing it a good deal.

Quote:

this thinking is deviating from Wizard strategy and probably Grosjean's by considering sub-kicker... considering the *2* cards the dealer might have, in other words. You are right the calculator considers them, so to speak.

Probably. I based my, "Adding outs," method on playing the game on WoO in conjunction with using the calculator and find it agrees with me a substantial percentage of the time when the 21 Out method would say to Raise 1x, but my method of adding outs gets it to 21 and says to fold.

Quote:

So, since the matter seems important to you and I guess others, let's make it clear again that the charts are a simple strategy that will sometimes give the wrong answer, giving you a warning when you play the wizard game with advice ‘on’, say. But as far as I've been able to tell, with a proviso, never a wrong answer to the question "are there less than 18+ or 21+ outs determining I should bet 1x, or greater than 18+ or 21+ outs determining I should fold?" I'll quote the exact proviso the Wizard gives on his webpage.

That's definitely good if the charts are equal to, or superior than, the simple strategy. I was just explaining why counting outs isn't a problem for me and my own techniques to add to the count outs simple strategy to, "Count more outs," which I see as an improvement to the simple strategy.

Quote:

Mission, I think you are a Steven How level player and this is why you feel the reluctance to go with charts that aren’t going to get you to the same level. That’s a compliment. And thanks for the input again!

Thank you very much for saying so! I want to make clear that I find no fault with the charts themselves. I just think for people who have played THE counting outs would come more naturally. You're always figuring the ways an opponent could have you beat in Texas Hold 'Em, mentally getting close to the probability, eliminating hands based on their previous actions, etc...counting the superficial raw number of ways they could beat you is the super easy part, so I think it just comes naturally to people who have played a fair amount of poker.

Reminder that the latest version of the charts, with the most clarity I can give them, are in the still editable blogpost https://wizardofvegas.com/member/odiousgambit/blog/#post2561

The latest edit is for the first chart. I had forgotten that 21+ outs is not the rule for a board 4OAK. The correct play comes from Grosjean, and the Wizard calculator agrees.

I am double-checking the second chart’s 4OAK rule at this moment. Pretty sure it’s been checked and double checked already, while, having forgotten, I just checked for the 21+ rule for all places in the first chart and didn’t check with the calculator.

I don't know why the chips didn't show... at lower right it DOES indicate I won $1010. That would be $2 Ante + $8 Raise + $2 Blind. FWIW.

Suited89

Quote: Mission146

Quote: odiousgambit

Thanks, Mission, really appreciate it

However I can't resist an opening heartfelt response

Quote: Mission146

These charts actually seem more complicated to me than counting the outs

I absolutely can't fathom that, especially in the case of the second chart. It's OK though... At least there's Unjon who thinks alike
link to original post

Unjon would wipe the floor with me in heads up THE, so it makes sense to me why he looks at it the same way.

You're welcome; my apologies for the delay. It's been an extremely hectic week.
link to original post

Lol. I don’t mind 21 outs but once you know on a no pair board that means play all A and K kicker, play Q kicker if there’s an A or K on board, Etc. Then remembering that is a lot easier than 21 outs and recounting.