PDA

View Full Version : crazy hand - quad aces with K kicker


Triweasel
07-14-2004, 11:57 PM
Ok, stats geeks, what are the odds of this happening. I'm too lazy to figure it out.

PokerStars Game #545251689: Tournament #2072502, Hold'em No Limit - Level IV (50/100) - 2004/07/14 - 23:46:43 (ET)
Table '2072502 2' Seat #8 is the button
Seat 4: dslugs (1055 in chips)
Seat 5: Dr. Streak (4650 in chips)
Seat 6: Cohete009 (3310 in chips)
Seat 8: triweasel (3080 in chips)
Seat 9: wmocha (3265 in chips)
wmocha: posts small blind 50
dslugs: posts big blind 100
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to triweasel [Jh Qd]
Dr. Streak: folds
Cohete009: folds
triweasel: calls 100
wmocha: calls 50
dslugs: checks
*** FLOP *** [Ac Ah As]
wmocha: checks
dslugs: checks
triweasel: checks
*** TURN *** [Ac Ah As] [Ad]
Cohete009 said, "oh my"
triweasel said, "lol"
wmocha: bets 100
dslugs: folds
triweasel said, "wow"
triweasel: calls 100
*** RIVER *** [Ac Ah As Ad] [Ks]
wmocha: checks
triweasel: checks
*** SHOW DOWN ***
wmocha: shows [8h 6s] (four of a kind, Aces)
triweasel: shows [Jh Qd] (four of a kind, Aces)
wmocha collected 250 from pot
triweasel collected 250 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 500 | Rake 0
Board [Ac Ah As Ad Ks]
Seat 4: dslugs (big blind) folded on the Turn
Seat 5: Dr. Streak folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: Cohete009 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: triweasel (button) showed [Jh Qd] and won (250) with four of a kind, Aces
Seat 9: wmocha (small blind) showed [8h 6s] and won (250) with four of a kind, Aces

E. Blackadder
07-15-2004, 12:01 AM
a classic demonstration of the value of skill in Hold 'em.

Matty
07-15-2004, 12:06 AM
Why didn't you go all-in on the river?

T-roy Boy
07-15-2004, 12:17 AM
R U SERIOUS

T-roy Boy
07-15-2004, 12:17 AM
Triweasel - go to chat

Sotally Tober
07-15-2004, 12:31 AM
Well, odds of a 3-of-a-kind on the flop is 424-to-1, 0.24%. Then there's 1 more in the remaining cards, in this case 39.

So, (1/424)*(1/39) = .006047%

USCanuck
07-15-2004, 06:31 AM
Well, odds of a 3-of-a-kind on the flop is 424-to-1, 0.24%. Then there's 1 more in the remaining cards, in this case 39.

So, (1/424)*(1/39) = .006047%

And then the highest kicker, well there's four of those.... do we have to account for the fact that order doesn't matter somewhere?
It's 5:30 in the morning to me, I'm not thinking this though clearly yet

lawfi5h
07-15-2004, 07:42 AM
Well, odds of a 3-of-a-kind on the flop is 424-to-1, 0.24%. Then there's 1 more in the remaining cards, in this case 39.

So, (1/424)*(1/39) = .006047%

but the odds are even lower that the 3 of a kind will be aces, ST. Odds of trip aces on the flop is 5,512-1. Odds of the 4th ace on the turn is 270,725-1. Odds that the K will be the river is 3,248,700-1

That assumes the cards come in that order....The odds of the board showing AAAAK in any order would be somewhere in the neighboorhood of 649,740-1.

Not sure about that last number-anyone else verify?

edited to add calculations: [(4/52)*(3/51)*(2/50)*(1/49)]^-1=270,725
270,725*(48/4)=3,248,700
3,248,700/5=649,740

Sotally Tober
07-15-2004, 09:09 AM
Well, odds of a 3-of-a-kind on the flop is 424-to-1, 0.24%. Then there's 1 more in the remaining cards, in this case 39.

So, (1/424)*(1/39) = .006047%

but the odds are even lower that the 3 of a kind will be aces, ST. Odds of trip aces on the flop is 5,512-1. Odds of the 4th ace on the turn is 270,725-1. Odds that the K will be the river is 3,248,700-1

That assumes the cards come in that order....The odds of the board showing AAAAK in any order would be somewhere in the neighboorhood of 649,740-1.

Not sure about that last number-anyone else verify?

edited to add calculations: [(4/52)*(3/51)*(2/50)*(1/49)]^-1=270,725
270,725*(48/4)=3,248,700
3,248,700/5=649,740

Why are the odds of trips aces any different than trip 2's? Am I missing something really obvious? I used this site's odds to get the 424-to-1, just to have a quick number to use.

http://www.homepokergames.com/odds.php

Then I know there's only 1 Ace left out of the remaining cards that can only happen in 1 way, so 1/39.

MountainHawk
07-15-2004, 09:12 AM
424-to-1 is the odds of getting trips. There are 52 ways to get trips (hdc, hds, hsc, scd for each of the 13 ranks) The odds of getting any particular set of trips is 22,048 to 1. The odds of getting trips of a particular rank is 5,512 to 1.

lawfi5h
07-15-2004, 09:13 AM
Why are the odds of trips aces any different than trip 2's? Am I missing something really obvious? I used this site's odds to get the 424-to-1, just to have a quick number to use.

http://www.homepokergames.com/odds.php

Then I know there's only 1 Ace left out of the remaining cards that can only happen in 1 way, so 1/39.

Becuase the 424 number is the odds of ANY trips on the flop...not Aces specifically. Those would be the same odds of trips 2s, specifically, also. Incidently (and not suprizingly) 5,512/13 = 424.

I think by you using 39, you are building in a bias, and saying that "given that none of the players in the hand, or any who mucked their hand, don't have an ace" which might not be true. My numbers do not make that assumption.

Sotally Tober
07-15-2004, 09:18 AM
Why are the odds of trips aces any different than trip 2's? Am I missing something really obvious? I used this site's odds to get the 424-to-1, just to have a quick number to use.

http://www.homepokergames.com/odds.php

Then I know there's only 1 Ace left out of the remaining cards that can only happen in 1 way, so 1/39.

Becuase the 424 number is the odds of ANY trips on the flop...not Aces specifically. Those would be the same odds of trips 2s, specifically, also. Incidently (and not suprizingly) 5,512/13 = 424.

I think by you using 39, you are building in a bias, and saying that "given that none of the players in the hand, or any who mucked their hand, don't have an ace" which might not be true. My numbers do not make that assumption.


Right, any trips. Got it. Tried to be lazy and just use that number b/c I knew it was there. My brain is completely turned off.

lawfi5h
07-15-2004, 09:22 AM
Why are the odds of trips aces any different than trip 2's? Am I missing something really obvious? I used this site's odds to get the 424-to-1, just to have a quick number to use.

http://www.homepokergames.com/odds.php

Then I know there's only 1 Ace left out of the remaining cards that can only happen in 1 way, so 1/39.

Becuase the 424 number is the odds of ANY trips on the flop...not Aces specifically. Those would be the same odds of trips 2s, specifically, also. Incidently (and not suprizingly) 5,512/13 = 424.

I think by you using 39, you are building in a bias, and saying that "given that none of the players in the hand, or any who mucked their hand, don't have an ace" which might not be true. My numbers do not make that assumption.


Right, any trips. Got it. Tried to be lazy and just use that number b/c I knew it was there. My brain is completely turned off.

Maybe more realistic (since aces really don't matter, I guess): 4 of a kind by the turn, top kicker at the river...odds:

424-1 by the flop
20,776-1 by the turn (424*49)
249,312-1

Still mindnumbing odds.

Expunge
07-15-2004, 09:23 AM
except that with all of us combined we have prolly seen that many showdowns

MountainHawk
07-15-2004, 09:24 AM
Considering PS has played over 500M hands, the board AAAAK should have shown up about 180 times or so by now just there. :)

lawfi5h
07-15-2004, 09:26 AM
Considering PS has played over 500M hands, the board AAAAK should have shown up about 180 times or so by now just there. :)

Would that be a Poisson distribution??

That might be the only time in my life as a pension actuary I can ask that and have some sort of a resemblance of relevance.

MountainHawk
07-15-2004, 09:28 AM
Uh no. 500M hands * P(hand coming up) (1/3M) ~ 180 :)

lawfi5h
07-15-2004, 09:32 AM
Uh no. 500M hands * P(hand coming up) (1/3M) ~ 180 :)

I agree with that is the expectation...but as far as the odds of, say, 17 out of 500M hands.

I really don't even care, I'm just bored at work.

MountainHawk
07-15-2004, 09:34 AM
Oh ... yeah, Poisson should fit that pretty well. It's technically binomial, but with numbers that big, Poisson's good enough.

lawfi5h
07-15-2004, 09:37 AM
Oh ... yeah, Poisson should fit that pretty well. It's technically binomial, but with numbers that big, Poisson's good enough.

AHHH...it's all coming back to me now....

I'll let you know if in 3M hands I see something that nuts. I wonder what the odds of a royal flush on the board are...

lawfi5h
07-15-2004, 09:38 AM
Why didn't you go all-in on the river?

Given cohete's post, I wonder if mocha woulda folded to an all in bet there....it might have been worth it just to see.

MountainHawk
07-15-2004, 09:40 AM
Oh ... yeah, Poisson should fit that pretty well. It's technically binomial, but with numbers that big, Poisson's good enough.

AHHH...it's all coming back to me now....

I'll let you know if in 3M hands I see something that nuts. I wonder what the odds of a royal flush on the board are...

20/52 * 4/51 * 3/50 * 2/49 * 1/48 = 1 in 649,740

Matty
07-15-2004, 09:41 AM
Why didn't you go all-in on the river?

Given cohete's post, I wonder if mocha woulda folded to an all in bet there....it might have been worth it just to see.

At least give it a shot...there's no downside, and you'd be surprised at how stupid some people are.

lawfi5h
07-15-2004, 09:42 AM
Why didn't you go all-in on the river?

Given cohete's post, I wonder if mocha woulda folded to an all in bet there....it might have been worth it just to see.

At least give it a shot...there's no downside, and you'd be surprised at how stupid some people are.

I can hear his thought process now...."maybe he has a king...all I have is 8 high"

MNBridge
07-15-2004, 11:30 AM
R U SERIOUS

I was actually in a limit game once where the board was an ace high straight no flush possiblity.

I bet, one player called, and the last player raised, I reaised and the player to my left sat thought a while and FOLDED!!

This was a 15/30 Game!!!

I also had a time once where the Board was:
AQJT on the turn. No flush draw.
I had the king and me and one other player were left in. (unlimited raising heads up).
We raised about 5 times then I decided that it was pretty obvious we both had a king and I called.

The turn was a rag and he showed down 3 aces!!! (At the end he said he wanted to gamble!!) I was getting 3 to 1 for every bet I put in and I stopped betting!! Talk about throwing away money :shake:

I will never stop betting again when I have the nuts. Even if it is 'obvious' we both have the same hand.


So yes the right move on this board is to BET.

MountainHawk
07-15-2004, 11:35 AM
In a ring game at a casino, unless you are capped out on the rake, continuing to bet when it's 'obvious' the hand is tied is a negative EV move.

douglan
07-15-2004, 11:36 AM
In a ring game at a casino, unless you are capped out on the rake, continuing to bet when it's 'obvious' the hand is tied is a negative EV move.

And, if the rake is still in effect for the hand, raising the pot on an obvious tie will almost always get a evil glare from your opponent...and maybe even a call-out... :)

lawfi5h
07-15-2004, 11:37 AM
R U SERIOUS

I was actually in a limit game once where the board was an ace high straight no flush possiblity.

I bet, one player called, and the last player raised, I reaised and the player to my left sat thought a while and FOLDED!!

This was a 15/30 Game!!!

I also had a time once where the Board was:
AQJT on the turn. No flush draw.
I had the king and me and one other player were left in. (unlimited raising heads up).
We raised about 5 times then I decided that it was pretty obvious we both had a king and I called.

The turn was a rag and he showed down 3 aces!!! (At the end he said he wanted to gamble!!) I was getting 3 to 1 for every bet I put in and I stopped betting!! Talk about throwing away money :shake:

I will never stop betting again when I have the nuts. Even if it is 'obvious' we both have the same hand.


So yes the right move on this board is to BET.

I will agree with that as long as you are not adding to the rake....if you are adding more money to the rake with every raise, it is probably more likely that you are tossing money away in the long run. But typically by that point, the max rake has already occurred.

MountainHawk
07-15-2004, 11:40 AM
I'll also point out you didn't have the stone cold nuts on the turn. Any Q, J, T on the river and your straight is toast, so that may explain his reraises.

Edit: or A, of course.

MNBridge
07-15-2004, 11:47 AM
I'll also point out you didn't have the stone cold nuts on the turn. Any Q, J, T on the river and your straight is toast, so that may explain his reraises.

If he also has the King then he can't beat me on the river and we will tie.

If he doesn't have the king he has at best a 10 outer.
I'll gladly shove every chip I have in the middle right along with him (Of course I like my 34 outs to his 10 :P ) might have been 35 outs to his 9 can't remember my other card

At 15/30 the rake is done @ $80 so the rake is almost always capped before you get to the turn.

MountainHawk
07-15-2004, 11:51 AM
If the rake's capped, go for it, I agree.

Triweasel
07-15-2004, 12:49 PM
Why didn't you go all-in on the river?

Given cohete's post, I wonder if mocha woulda folded to an all in bet there....it might have been worth it just to see.

At least give it a shot...there's no downside, and you'd be surprised at how stupid some people are.

I can hear his thought process now...."maybe he has a king...all I have is 8 high"

I definitely thought about raising after the turn, but the pot wasn't big enough to make it worth my while. If I had a K instead of a Q of course I'm betting after the 4th ace hits.

Spidurman
07-15-2004, 12:58 PM
some people just make strange folds...I've made quite a few bucks in hi/lo by switching from check-call to check-raise on 7th street. I've done it a few times with a weak low against his pair that is showing (I have ace high)...he folds!

Anytime you are freerolling the pot (can't lose, but can chop) - may as well bet. Sometimes it works :)