Poker Clan

Hello new to this site and about 6 months playing hold'em so like anything I do I like to read up as much info as possible, good to see a site to ask questions with. Play online tournaments etc just do the cheapy ones for now to get a feel for it. I have learned one thing I put next to my computer written in big magic marker PATIENCE. That I have learned is very important in hold'em. I was in first "live tournament" ion AC couple of weeks ago for $20 buy in and must admit a lot more fun live, so going again this Thursday. Anyway just wanted to say good site and introduce myself.

I've got to wonder about simulations and percentage computations around a given hand playing 10 other "random hands."  I don't think the numbers are of any particular value, because THE CARDS ARE NOT PLAYED IN A STATISTICAL VOID.

Here's what I mean.

A-A (red) can raise to 4 times the BB and get called by two players (neither of them the blinds).

Flop comes Q-10-7 with 2 spades and a club.

A-A bets out 3/4 of the pot (trying to make the pot odds wrong for a flush draw).  One opponent folds, the other calls.

Turn comes 8 of clubs.

A-A bets out 3/4 of the pot again.

River comes 9 of clubs.

In this scenario, a certain set of hands that were statistical losers against A-A would win if they were willing to make calls that were bad pot odds, but not if they weren't.  What if the aces were to slow-play at the flop or turn or both?  This would change everything.  Then, hands that shouldn't have called the opening raise would have the opportunity to beat the hand that had them statistically beaten.  Hell, 2-3 of clubs would win if it was willing to stay for river, as well as K-J and J-6 and 6-5.

I don't believe the odds of a given hand improving against RANDOM hands takes into account the types of hands that will call the big blind or a raised or re-raised pot and how those hands would stack up against a given hand.  It also doesn't take into account which types of hands can be played differently after the flop.  Isn't A-K is an easier hand to play against 9-5-2 rainbow than 4-4?

It's why I think it's going to take a lot longer for a supercomputer to beat a 10 person sit-and-go of strong pros  than it took for it to beat a grand master at chess.

The particular stats are rather simple. I agree that they are not the real world of poker. They do have some value however, as a benchmark of relative strength. A beginning poker player more or less see's the game of poker in black and white terms of whom has the best hand is going to win the pot. So for someone who is just beginning these kind of stats are good for the start of the journey. As a person gets more into the human side of the game , and begins to understand secondary concepts like A-k plays better with more players and KK plays better with fewer, the relevance of the stats diminishes. Or in other words, THE CARDS ARE NOT PLAYED IN A STATISTICAL VOID.