I guess he could also mean the time when TT and AA both flop sets, which would be:

(To simplify, let's assume that the T is the first card of the 3 flop cards.)

1 - [ (46/48) * (45/47) ] = 8.2%

So... fine, there's independently an 8.2% chance you are outflopped when you hit your set, and then an 8.6% chance that you get sucked out upon (and then a ≈2% chance AA makes a backdoor straight or flush or something).

I guess this is what he's getting at.

Yes. I think that is what he is getting at.

But you're not accounting for the times your TT has a set preflop. The EV is different.

I'm so confused at this point.

So, if we hold TT, there's about an 18% chance that we lose versus a premium pair (such as AA) when we flop a set on a Txx board. Is that where we are at?

No, absolutely not. That might be valid when we know V has exactly AA or KK or w/e, but against a range of AK and JJ+, the probability of being set over setted goes way down. I SWAG it at 10% losses by the river a few posts up.

Just reread your post, and the answer is, no absolutely not, and that the 18% figure is meaningless when you say "Txx flop."

Suppose the dealer paused 3 seconds between dealing each card on the flop.

If the first card dealt is a T, then, for the next 3 seconds, there is a 4% chance the next card off will be an A. Likewise for the third card of the flop, likewise for the turn and then for the river.

Of course, that's not how flops are dealt. The better way to ask the flop question is: if you have TT and he has AA, what percentage of flops will contain a T and an A? And that is .125 × .125 = .015, 1.5%, I think. I can't think of any reason it's not our (p) of flopping a set x his (p) flopping a set, anyway.

There's four cards to come, and TT can also lose to straights and flushes. So 4 * 4 isn't the correct number. It isn't 16% it's 18.5%.

Do you not know how an equity calculator works?

We're not trying to calculate the odds of two people flopping a set. Who cares about that? A flopped set can also lose on the turn and river. Do you need to be told that?

We're trying to calculate the odds of losing when we flop a set. When you flop a set you know one of the cards on the flop will be a ten. You don't need to think about pausing when cards are dealt. Your argument is complete nonsense.

How often you flop a set against two over pairs .12754
How often tens lose after they flop a set against aces .18508
How often tens lose after they flop a set against aces with one non-ace over card .17133
How often an overpair flops a set when you flop a set .087879
How often you lose when there's two overpairs .25921
How often you win where there's two overpairs .74079
The difference .48158
Solving for X in 28 = .12754 * (.74079 * 135 + .48158 * X)
X = 248.21

If there's not 51 dollars of dead money pre-flop then
28 = .12754 * (.74079 * 84 + .48158 * X)
X = 326.66

I need to go get some popcorn for this nonsense.

That's what PokerStove is calculating. We know one of the five upcards is going to be a ten. How often do we lose?

I wish I could know which flops I'd hit a set on... gawd it would make poker so much easier.

4 people don't flop a set as often as your calculation would indicate they do.

4 pocket pairs equals 1/8 to the 4th power or 1/4096 of the time.

I'm still confused on what arguments we are each trying to make, but according to PPT, TT has just over 77% equity versus (AA, KK, QQ, JJ) on a board of ten plus any two random cards (TXX).

So, the set loses about 22% of the time versus overpair. Obviously, this includes set over set as well as four card flushes, four liners, quads on board, etc.

Edit: in practice, I'm going to say that number is too high. There are going to be spots where an overpair folds its equity (imagine QQ versus our TT on a TAA flop, for instance.

Well, this went to crap.

Sorry bruh, I'm still lost.

I think you're showing how often we get set over setted on the flop, while I'm wondering how often our set loses to any better hand at showdown. That's where we're at?

In either case, the return on set mining obviously needs to be better than 8.6:1

You have to add in the set attracting characteristics of big pairs. I don´t want to bore you with the math because it is very complicated, but TRUST me when I say that it has been PROVEN many times that for each pip value difference between pairs the chances of the smaller pair making a set increase by roughly 1.2%. Anyone who has played this game for a reasonable amount of time instinctively knows this UNDENIABLE TRUTH.

Great thing about math is that it's either you are right or wrong.

Due to the cold caller, I think you only need the flashy player to have $250 at the start of the hand. The 15x rule assumes conditions when it's much harder to get the money in.

Obviously, $105 already in the pot before your call. You'll get paid off more than enough by overpairs or TPTK, and I'd expect to get all-in against many draws. More importantly, there are two opponents who will have the opportunity to get all-in. In fact, there's a pretty good chance you'll get all-in against both opponents due to good relative position.

Of course, you'll only win the one c-bet sometimes, but that's going to be a pretty significant amount. Rarely, it'll check through on the flop and you'll get to see an extra card. More rarely, you'll get to showdown for free and win vs. AQ/AK. So that's all extra money even if you were never going to put in another dime without a set. But mostly, you can just expect to get all-in a high percentage of the time if you want. It's basically the perfect scenario to ignore the 15x rule.

Maybe so.....however, those of us in the "know" appreciate your first detailed post.

Have you heard of the rule of two and four? You have 8 outs over 4 cards.

Over two cards you know the number is at least 8 * 4 or 32%. Over 4 cards you're losing much more often.

I'm not trying to make any argument at all. I typed up a, relatively simple, EV calculation.

I showed you how to use an EV calculator which is really useful.



Found this link: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/32...2-4-a-1168512/

If you understood it you wouldn't have appreciated it because it was totally implausible.

For one more example look at his point 6.

Can you not see that you don't need to multiply by .125 in this equation? The "when we flop a set" already includes that .125. His formula is off by a factor of 8. He already multiplied by .125 in #1. He doesn't need to do it again.

The correct formula is really simple:
1 -41/45 * 40/44 which is 17.2%

smmcoy, I'll be nice (because I would appreciate being told when I am in the wrong) and let you know that mpethy is the residential expert in these matters.

If you want to question his calculations, drop the attitude.

I think this is *pretty* thin, imo. Maybe it's because I'm absolutely buried set farming this year, but I would typically want a decent amount larger (15x?, although I'm probably grabbing the number out of my bum) to make up for the times (a) the overcard / horrible runout comes to his overpair and he doesn't stack off, (b) he only has overs, whiffs, and doesn't stack off, (c) the small amount we sometimes spew a street or two on a 9 high flop, and (d) the stack we lose when we flop a set and lose the hand.

ETA: Are we going 4way? I originally thought this was 3way. Obviously the more ways it goes the more this number comes down.

GverygoodchanceI'mbeingresultsorientedbasedonthisy earsresults,but:setfarmingishardsometimesG

Just a reminder to all, that trolling strat threads is not allowed, even if you think someone else did it first, even if you are the OP and you think your sarcasm is so obvious that no one can miss it.

There are a lot of beginners ITF, and believe me, some of them will believe that sarcastic posts are serious.

Point 6 was an estimate of the combined probability that one of the V's would have an overpair AND flop a set AND we will flop a set of tens.

Your formula appear to solve: GIVEN both V's have an overpair and GIVEN hero flops a set of Tens, what is the probability that at least one of the V's will flop at least one set.

You could not be more wrong, and my post explained exactly why. Notice this in his post: of the time we flop a set

Look at how he uses the number to come up with 10% of the time he loses against two Villains.

4 outs, 4 cards. 4 * 4 * 2 = 32. This is not rocket science.

We know the real number is more than 33%:


He even knows that each card is 4% to improve a higher pair. And he still thinks that it's not roughly 4*2 because that's not how flops are dealt, when of course it's exactly how flops are dealt.