sklansky bucks v. galfond bucks
I saw Galfond's article a couple years ago, and it's a good concept. I assume all of you know about Sklansky bucks (probably from TOP, although I'm not positive now). But, Cash Plays this week got me thinking about Galfond bucks again.
Basically, if you have AA v. KK AIPF for $100 HU, then you win $100 80% of the time and lose $100 20% of the time. You win $60 Sklansky bucks every time. Flip it. You're the KK. You lose $60 Sklansky bucks every time. It's basically expectation and a way to think about making good decisions and winning money over the long haul when you get unlucky now.
Now, let's change the actual showing of AA to a range of hands that would get it in with us preflop. If the only hand they ever show up with there is AA, then obviously we lose $60 each time we do it no matter what. But, if they are a maniac willing to go in for their $100 stack with any pair and any two broadway cards, then KK v. that range is 78%, with an expectation of +$56. This is Galfond bucks, and clearly a better way to analyze whether or not we're making good decisions.
Now, being able to estimate someone's range accurately is obviously important, even though it's subjective. It's like fold equity. You need to hone your ability to accurately gauge it before you just start throwing into your calculations. But, once you can, it clearly helps. |
