i had started a thread on this subject earlier but it seems to have gone into the archive. only 2 pages of threads now.

i have been looking at them recently. and i think some of charts showing them on the internet are wrong.

charts seem to think A9o is good for a 40.9x BB shove..... but i'm thinking that is based on a $2 big blind. so it would be more like a 20.5x shove. and the pages do say 40.9x shove.

i did the math and it look more like the 20.5x shove. here is the math. i assumed no small blind, but it shouldn't matter much, at least when you are shoving 20x 40x big blind.

here is the math,

7% of hands call (basically you need close to 50% equity to call)....... those hands are collectively about 83% winners...... so assuming 20x shove, 93% win 1. and then net 66% (83%-17%) i lose 20 in the 7% of hands which are called..... so +.93 minus .94 = close to zero.......

hey, it turned out i also own the kindle version of the sklansky/miller nlhe book.

a bit of work to find this as kindle version isn't searchable.

anyway, SC ranking number is your stack (in dollars, not counting SB), and it assumes $2 BB.

SO, all the charts i've seen of it on the internet are WRONG..... they assume it's depth of stack in BB........

to get that metric = (SC +1)/2......... and really, you could just SC/2 and be close enough.......

an acquaintance of mine writes articles for highly respected economic think-tank.

i was talking economic data being so widely available these days. he said for his work that economic data must come from original source. i think i now understand why

FYI,

i'm attempting to model some sort of formula for SC ratings......

no sure if it'll be 1) points for high card, low card, pair, gaps, suitedness, OR 2) some sort of curve fitting with logs or exponents and then have to memorize some key log/exponent values.

bill chen had a scoring system for hold-em hands.......... but it didn't seem to differentiate much between the rank of the lower card. it did it indirectly with gaps. but there was no difference in ranking between A8o and A3o. ok assumption full ring, but heads-up = much greater focus on card ranks. of course A3o does have some straight potential. but i think i'd rather have the 8 than the 3.

is there a "free" calculator where i can compare A8o (and A3o) vs. top 10%, 20%, 40% etc. etc. of hands?

thx advance ......... maybe david sklansky can read this......... also, rankings would be interesting for what size shove ATo can profitably call vs. 10%, 25%, 50%, 70% top hands. a SC calling score (but as noted, it depends on what % villain pushes with)

The SC rankings are all computer generated. My contribution was only the thinking up of the interesting question that the computer answered. In other words you need to find a computer programmer.

David, thank you............ i am interested in taking the SC rankings as given and coming up with formula to understand their value (more like a regression.. high card, low card, pair, suited, effective gap size) and a way to remember them without rote memory..

i was having some success but got off the work for awhile....... need to learn a bit more about curve fitting but mostly it's polynomials, exponents, logs, maybe sine/cosine (set up properly) at the most basic level

i like chen's hold-em rankings (full table).... but he doesn't differentiate A9o and A6o. he differentiates effective gap but not value of low card. there is a correlation between them but it doesnt capture the rank of the low card itself

SC rankings is an interesting theoretical concept, but with little value for a poker game without complete information and multiple betting streets. I wouldn´t bother too much about it.