Hey QTip, I'm rereading your book and come across the definition of g bucks...
When your book came out I pointed out here:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...7&postcount=76

That you are wrong with the definition of g-bucks and I wondered if you have corrected it... in that case I'm interested in having the updated book

Hi ServerB. While you were correct about Galfond's use of the term, I'm happy with my use of it (and am rather confident Galfond would be as well) for the concept of a hand vs. a range instead of a hand vs. a hand. I've no plans to change the term in the book. It's simply switching the perspective.

ok ty

sorry for posting again but I got a question regarding a definition....

at pg 100 you said the EV of folding is always 0. Even In sng strategy Moshman defines it the same way.
However... if we are hu and we keep folding to the sb raise... we are losing... so the ev is less than zero...
can you elaborate a little bit on this?

No need to apologize. I'm happy to help.

There an Appendix A at the back of the book on this topic. Want to check that out first, and then if you have any further questions, we'll tackle them.

ok I will look into that and the post again if I need help

You're being a little nit-picky. Obviously folding the SB in HUNLHE is -EV. I don't think he would need to cover that in a basic poker math book.

ok, NL100, UTG raises to 3, Hero (BTN) 3bets to 99, blinds folds and UTG shoves... Hero folds... Exact same situation
That definition isn't counting for the actual money invested in the pot...
but I will check the book again looking for additional info

Well, I had the same question when I was learning the math "Why are we saying the EV is 0?" So, I wanted to make sure I answered it in the book. Perfect appendix topic, I thought.

It's been a few months since I have read the book but I doubt he was talking about folding after putting in a bet.

Bought this yesterday and have only have had quick read through, but the implied odds cheat sheet alone has made this worth the price IMO. Will post a proper review in a few days.

found an error:
pg 101
at the bottom of the page there is a formula...
That example came out from a hand when we got AQdd and the board is 79dd3hKc, we assume Villain is gonna call our shove on the turn with AK and TT...
with pokerstove against that range we got exactly 25% equity
so at the bottom of the page instead 0,24 and 0,76, there should be written 0.25 and 0,75.
It isn't life changing obv, but I thought it was a good idea to pointed it out

Sorry for the double post, but I found another error :P
Page 117, just before the table...
When you hold a suited hand instead of an offsuit hand. your preflop equity generally increases by about 4%

It should be 2%...


Also in the table there is a notable error imho...

2 overcards vs 2 undercards... you picked a wrong example and you said it's a flip.... 2 overcards vs 2 undercards should be AKo vs 87o for example which is close to 60/40... this is one of the best cases, since for example AKo vs 82o is 32/68 ... which is notally different than 55/45

I got a question about Appendix A...
In the example we got a 2 calling ranges: KJ,22,88 and 22,88
The first range represent 18 combos and the latter only 6.
After it you are making a calculation about EV...
I can't understand why you wrote 0,67(20)
0,67 isn't correct from my point of view... since KJ,22,88 represent his entire (100%) range
while 22,88 represent 1/3 of this range...
so IMHO
the equations should be
1 (20) = 20
0.33 (80) = 26.40

Hey ServerB. I'm glad to see you're putting a lot of effort into the material. You'll certainly benefit from it, and I appreciate you making the effort to let me know about things you find. I do, however, want to point out a paragraph at the end of the About this Book section.

"Finally, you'll notice I’m rounding numbers and using estimates in most of the math I present in this book. This book is designed for practical use at the poker table. My goal is not precision three places to the right of the decimal."

The .24 and .76, I probably didn't bother to look up in PokerStove.

The offsuit equity to suited equity varies depending on what you run.

If you run a hand like AdKh vs. 7s6d and compare it to AdKh vs. 7s6s, you'll find the difference very close to 4%. Other examples will be 3, and, as you mentioned, other examples will be 2. I've honestly never taken the time to run the entire range of possibilities to find what the average is.

2 undercards vs. 2 overcards certainly is a typo. I meant to write Pair vs. 2 overcards as the example and equity indicate. I'll get that fixed. Thanks.