Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishing
I ran a simulated play using the PIO 25 representative flop boards. I did prove that they are a good representation of all flop boards, as with over 1,000,000 hands played with both random flops and the 25, none of my results varied by more than a few percent.
I calculated the value of each flop bases on win rate but there was very little difference between the 25 flops.
Bottom line, I could not find differences between the 25 flops and thus could not find a way to use them to categorize flop boards.
I am now experimenting with flop boards characterized A-T high, 9-6 Medium, 5-2 low.
Also things like static, dynamic, pair, 2 suited, 2 straight and so on. I am calculating the value value of each flop board and that looks promising. More results to follow.
Thanks Pedro and ohly for suggestions.
You're welcome, I have to thank you for doing the tests, I think I was not very clear on the method I suggested, I already tested classifing them as T-A high, 6-9, mid and 2-5 low and it didn't worked, the method I was suggesting is to specify the cards T-A as their value, and 6-9 as mid and 2-5 as low, example JackMidLow, AceMidlow, QuenMidlow, grouping cards T-A and simply classifing them as high didn't give me good results in my tests, I think these high cards have so great impact on how the players hit the board that the strategy is very different, on A99 than J99, I believe that this why it didn't worked, so I suggested to group only cards to 6-9 as mid and 2-5 as low and not group the high cards, but what you said is good to add in the category, like JackLowLowpair or QuenMidMidtwotostraighttwotone
Enviado de meu XT1033 usando o Tapatalk