Talk:Texas hold 'em pre-flop basic strategy

message: 09:41, 18 July 2005 User:Apoc2400:
Something must be wrong with the table. AT unsuited is listed as group 3, while AT suited is only group 7.
Correct.  That was a typo.  ATs should be in group 3.  Good catch.
--NickKovacs 18:47, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in table 

message: 66.167.136.48 14:23, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this would be more acceptable if an explanation of the origins of the system were presented. The author should be given some time (a month?) to provide at least the beginnings of that. I'll contact them. Mr. Jones 09:41, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinion?  Consensus? 

message: The strategy outlined in the article was derived from a couple of sources and the exact hand groupings is debatable. In David Sklanksky's book Hold'Em Poker for Advanced Players he introduces the idea of grouping hand rankings in groups 1-8 and the basic meaning of these groups (ISBN: 1880685221). This idea of hand groupings has been used in AI poker research by the University of Alberta (http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~games/poker/). From this poker research they have created several poker bots to attempt to play no limit hold'em programmatically. The table in the article is essentially the groupings and descriptions used by the default poker bot. The information I was hoping to share in the article is that thinking about pre-flop hand groupings and organizing the information in a 13x13 table can be a powerful tool. The hand groupings have been tested and found to perform fairly well programatically. However the exact groupings is debatable. What isn't debatable is the fact that hands like AA are much better than 72o or that suited hands are better than unsuited hands. This information can been clearly extracted from the table. The great thing about thinking about hands in different groupings is that you don't have to be exact, you can be off by 1 or 2 groups and still be okay. With that said, do you think the information portrayed on the article in okay/relevant? What would be the appropriate way to reference and disclaimer the article? I am new as a writer to wikipedia so I'd appreciate any help.
--NickKovacs 16:59, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: Is this correct?
"For the two starting cards there are 2704 combinations of rank and suit."
The combination of two starting cards possible is 52 choose 2 = 52*51/2=1326.
2704=52^2... which is > than the number of permutations of starting cards.
: Also, how can 9 10 Suited be amongst one of the weakest starting hands? 70.111.224.85 19:41, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Erm, the table doesn't claim it is. Rich   Farmbrough. 23:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this correct? combinations of 2 starting cards does not equal 2704 

message: :Raise the blinds in late position, limp in early position, fold mid-position. Call if short stacked, or if the amount is small.
The article seems full of jargon of this sort which is familiar to poker players but a mystery to everyone else.  A de-jargonizing pass would be appreciated.  Thanks - Tempshill 00:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not even sure it belongs on Wikipedia. It looks like more of a Wikibook to me. - Motor (talk) 00:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  de-jargonification 

message: First, this topic isn't encyclopedic.  I don't see how an "encyclopedic treatment" of this topic is even possible, as there are too many pre-flop strategies to address in an encyclopedia article.  It should be taken to Wikibooks.  
Second, authorship and copyright.  I'm sure that taking someone's system wholesale, then tweaking it with a few mods along the way, is not legitimate article content.  
Third, "recommended"????  WTF?  Encyclopedias have no opinions or recommendations!  This entire section is improper content.  Wikibooks can express opinions or recommendations, not Wikipedia.  It's not NPOV.
Finally, if this article is to stay, it must remain a general discussion of strategy, and not specific player instructions.  Discussion of various detailed ranking systems could be appropriate, however, the article (if it must exist) should be an overview of the fact that a strategy is needed, then a description of what a strategy is, then perhaps general examples of such.  Unfocused 20:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the article is totally inappropriate.  I have it my list to move it to a hand groups article, which would be accurate.  There definitely should be no pre flop strategy article. I'll move it in the next day or so. 2005 20:15, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems with this article