Well my girlfriend calls her mother by her name, along with a couple other things that are not too nice. :P

http://forum.zwame.pt/

Hey guys, thoughts on gin rummy?

I don't have the first clue about the game (yet), but a few regs play it at my local casino during the afternoons and apparently they are terrible, and dump ****loads of money every day. I want in!

What's the skill/luck ratio like? The edge v.s a competent player, and v.s a bad player? The learning curve? Are there any good resources online? etc.

Thanks!

Thanks but I don't speek too much portuguese yet.

I love the game, but am bad at it and haven't found any resources online. Depending on the format - it's a bit to a lot less luck based than, say, HUSNGs.

Alternatively just be born with an eidetic memory and be the best gin rummy player ever. EZ game.

(ps would also be interested in learning resources)

Hi guys,

I'm a french hypers player (30-50€), and live in Cardiff since september to june.

I just want to know if there are hypers players who live in Cardiff ?

Ok thanks, I'll keep you posted about what I find...

sup

google translate

21:18 Coffee hud http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1_vyRK7woc

Question that bothers me.

Imagine a weighted range.
The first player plays that range and he arrives at that range trough a static approach (meaning he just rolls a dice and what the dice tells him is the way he splits up his hands over different lines).
A second player just uses game flow and uses a tighter range in some situations and a loser range in other situations but the end result is that average seen he arrives at the same weighted range.

If our max EV strategy against that weighed range is strategy X; does it really matters that EV is potentially not symetricaly distribuated against the game flow player and such technically we are due to make a mistake vs the tighter or looser range (depending on where the assymetry is residing) or does this really not matters?
Meaning is it really so that our max EV strategy is actually a static approach vs both players? Or do we require to construct 2 different strategies versus the dynamic player and uses hands/HUD/gameflow to gestimate where he is residing the most likely?

Well if we play GTO if that is possible, then we would get same EV vs both.

For the 2nd player, changing your ranges based on frequency can increase your EV but you may also lose EV if you are worse than him at game flow.

Also it's very very rare that using game flow the 2nd player can arrive at the same frequencies as the first player, unless he is only playing you alone over a large sample, and neither of you adjust.

A more pragmatic example is players that flat TP+ at dry boards one time and then suddenly start to xR TP+ at dry boards. Depending on air part, being capable to bet calling midpair or not changes our cbet ranges potentially. At least according to simulations.

So I was starting to think in the direction of 'the potential assymetry of EV' has somehow to be a driver to decide how certain you have to be before you switch to the more extreme exploiting strat instead of strategy X.

But before I start to construct some equations in that direction I wanted to check if this assymmetry is really something we often have to care about.

Not sure if I still make sense.

Nope you don't have to care about that stuff... But always have a plan with your hand.

If you cb mid pair you should never "not know" what to do immediately if you get check raised.

??

just getting round to watching wsop main, and see this hand lols, has to be one of my favourite all time hands. Guy deserved it so badly lol, his face is gold

LOL

if i ever be this much of a douchebag, someone please kill me

lol reaction is priceless

:50 to 1:10 poker in a nutshell

Definitive proof that the poker Gods are not to be trifled with

That's great. Love the needling from the winner after, so subdued, but beautiful.

Jay also looks like he's holding back a reaction too.

Good stuff.

But the plan of our hand depends upon the range we assign to our opponent; we either assign the more extreme looser strat, we either assign the more extreme tighter strat, we either assign a weighted range.

If we assigned looser strat; we risk of loosing EV in the case our opponent is drooling around and is actually not using gameflow but some dice to randomnise how he splits TP+ over xc and xR in which case the weighted range works better. It is always possible he keeps flatlining in his head and keeps switching his game upside down just because he starts to loose chips and cannot handle it.
Also, if our opponent is somehow capable to analyze frequencies and showdown hands and ingame EV estimations way better then us; it is extremely likely that he will be residing less lenghtened into a situation where he is actually trying to max exploit our incorrect assigned range (meaning loosing EV) compared to we trying to max exploit our incorrect assigned opponent range (meaning loosing EV) and such assignment of weigthed range works better.
In this paragraph we essentially always update our opponent ranges after each played hand and go for max EV against that. After we are convinced the potential mistakes are reality, we go for max EV against weighted range.

If we assigned tighter strat; we risk of loosing EV in the case our opponent is drooling around and is actually not using gameflow but some dice to randomnize how he splits TP+ over xc and xR in which case the weighted range works better. It is always possible he keeps flatlining in his head and keeps switching his game upside down just because he starts to loose chips and cannot handle it.
Also, if our opponent is somehow capable to analyze frequencies and showdown hands and ingame EV estimations way better then us; it is extremely likely that he will be residing less lenghtened into a situation where he is actually trying to max exploit our incorrect assigned range (meaning loosing EV) compared to we trying to max exploit our incorrect assigned opponent range (meaning loosing EV) and such assignment of weigthed range works better.
In this paragraph we essentially always update our opponent ranges after each played hand and go for max EV against that. After we are convinced the potential mistakes are reality, we go for max EV against weighted range.

If we assigned weighted range; halve of the time we loose vs tighter strat and halve of the time we gain vs looser strat. If our simulation programs works correctly they will include correctly inequallity of EV symmetry and will advice us correctly whether or not ie MP has to be included in our betting range.
However in this case we are due to make a mistake if our opponent keeps residing in one extreme strategy while we keep using the weighted strategy while our opponent only switches again when he sees certain lines/showdown too frequent in which case going after our opponent by ingame max EV estimation of the more extreme strategy is correct.
In this paragraph we essentially always go for max EV against weighted range. After we are convinced the potential mistakes are reality, we go for max EV against the more extreme range.

Is our EV of the max EV strategy versus the weighted range indeed equal to the EV we get by averaging the EV of the max EV strategies vs the tighter strategy and of the max EV strategy vs the looser strategy?
Essentially, does it matter that in the first case we first average the range and in the latter case we average the EV but the frequency of occurance of the latter are the same as the frequencies used in the weithed range?
I always start to get the idea the asymmetry of EV ensures that these both methods result not in the same end result.

I am actually getting more confused now.

I think you should stop thinking about this and just play lol.

Seems that I have no other choice as I only advanced a tiny bit since I posted about this.

Would still appreciate it if you/someone else could walk me through my last post and point out some mistakes.

Well you must play based on what you think villain's ranges and tendencies are.

If on top of this you also assign a probability of your judgement being correct then you are just going round in circles.