http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kn97y...om=PL&index=56


Yea phil gordon thinks so too. he must be an idiot also huh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

some of you feel like your to good or above the rest.
just a warning - this makes the site look like a piece. as a noob to the site and having some moron tell me that im an idiot because i explained the rule of 4 and 2 and to him it seems as thought it is all wrong and that you dont count the burn cards in your favor then why dont you tell that to phill gordon.

morons!!!!!!!!!

burn cards obviously count. how else can you make a 10 card straight?

Phil Gordon is describing how to use the rule of 4 and the rule of 2. Yes, this rule basically works, although it's an approximation, and doesn't give an exact result.

But it isn't derived from the fact that there are 4 more cards dealt from the flop on, and 2 more from the turn on. It just isn't. Read my original post on the subject up in this thread to see where it comes from. Phil Gordon says nothing about burn cards in the video you posted, so yes, I agree with the way he explained how to use the rules.

in before sick level.

Also, sick level op.

OP please never stop playing poker!

i agree that burnt cards don't affect your chances, it's simple combining analysis, the cards you don't know, such as burnt cards or cards in your oponents hands make no diference

the rule of 4 and 2 has to do with the fact that the chance of you hitting with 1 card to come is roughly 2x your number of outs. you'll notice that there's about 50 cards in a deck. 1 out of 50 = 2%

get it? lol

I don't know what's worse, the fact that you're arguing this, or the completely unreadable, incoherent manner in which you went ahead and argued it.

Burn cards have nothing to do with anything. They are unknown to you. They might as well still be in the stub. This is not hard to understand.

^
this

I never said that the burns count(only a moron would twist what i said into that!!). look at the math, when phill explains it you multiply by four, second burn then the turn card = 2 cards. then the third burn then the river card = 2 more cards( your chance's are greater early on and diminish as you move through those two cards and on through the next two(multiply by 4 then by two) by the flop you have four possible outs or cards then you have only 2).
understand what is being done here?
you take in to account that the burns could have been your outs or your possibility of making your hand in that string or in that series of cards that were dealt for the board. so in THEORY YES , if you look at like some kind of code or sequence that may or may not occur it is just that. The possibility was there or it wasnt but you factor in all the variables for the situation.

only a moron would take that in the way that they did!!!!!!!!!
you count those cards in the process of figuring your chances or probability!!
so yes they do count if you are using them to figure your chances or probability
he does say to multiply by 4 then by 2!!!!!!!!!

think about it!!!!!!

same thing i tried to explain in another thread maaaaaaaan!

and your wrong on that. 52 cards at 2% is not 100% or 1 ?!?!?!
so lol cause your math isnt as great as you think

wow once again you guys are making this site look like some kind of place for people who pose as poker players and not actualy poker players.

Really? What's the title of this thread? (Hint: burn cards do not effect your outs)


No, you don't.

Phil Gordon doesn't say anything about burn cards in that video affecting your outs. This is because they don't.

I think you might want to consider taking a step back - you're completely wrong here, you could burn 0 cards, 1, or 5, it makes no difference. You could burn all the cards in the deck except the last 2, doesn't matter. Odds stay the same.

After the flop has been dealt, there are 47 unknown cards. Each out gives you a 1/47 chance. 1/47 is close enough to 1/50 to make it an easy approximation. 1/50 = 2% and thus, the rule of 2.

At this point I guess I figure this is a huge level. The alternative is too grim.

the fact that you guys are even trying to explain this, to this character is amazing and shows the tact and dedication of the people on this site. no1 has even attacked him for what he is. i applaud you gentlemen, and suggest that orig poster sits and reads carefully, and absorbs. if not, please let me know what your FT name is, id love to come "pose as a poker player" at your table.

I haven't read this thread ...... but:



Statement 1: On the flop there will be four more cards dealt (2 burns and the turn and the river. TRUE

Statement 2: On the turn there will be two more cards dealt (a burn and the river). TRUE.

Statement 3: If you multiply the number of your outs on the flop by 4 you get an approximate though not too too precise chance to make your hand. TRUE.

Statement 4: If you multiply the number of your outs on the turn by 2 you get an approximate though not too too precise chance to make your hand. TRUE.

Statement 5: Statement 3 is true because of statement 1. FALSE.

Statement 6: Statment 4 is true because of statement 2. FALSE.



Phil Gordon did say statement 3 and 4 but he did not say statement 1 and 2 and 5 and 6 so I don't know where you are pulling it from (though statements 1 and 2 are obviously correct).





On the turn there are 46 cards left and if you have 12 outs than 12/46 so you have like 26% to win. Using the rule of 2 you get pretty close at 24%.

On the flop there are 47 cards left so if you have 12 outs then 12/47 = 25.5% chance to win on the turn and if you miss on the turn then you have the 26% chance to win on the river. So you can already see that just multiplying this by double the 2 you multiply by to solve for one street will not quite be accurate (especially since for the one street it wasn't quite accurate) since the chances of hitting on each street is not quite the same (25.5% vs. 26%). So with he 12 outs you actually have about like 46.5% whereas using the rule of 4 would get you 48%.


(Also we are assuming best case scenario where the opponent does not have any redraws at all.)

This is wrong.



This is right.



This is right. And this is why the rule of 2 and 4 are APPROXIMATIONS and not perfect.

I heart Lego05. Merry christmas everyone.

Merry Xmas, OP. Congrats if this is a level

So wait you mean if I have 15-outter (oesfd) on the river and we burn 6 cards my odds of hitting with one card to come are 105%? Cool.

But yeah seriously nothing different from burning top card and burning bottom cards. Do you realize that if you burn the bottom of the deck it doesn't change the odds? What about if you don't burn any cards but just go into the deck and take out the 2nd/3rd/4th cards for flop 6th for turn and 8th for river? Same cards but not "burning" any of them. What if we burn every card in the deck except for the ones we're going to put on the board? Will that make a difference?

I don't care what you guys say I'm still going to use the rule of 3 and 1.

Obviously a level.
nh OP.

Merry Christmas buddy and to all and I should be asleep right now.

sick level

Student like the OP were the reason I got an A in statistics on the curve.