This is a solid article, but symptomatic of a broader trend in poker analysis writing which can miss a key confounding variable. Specifically, the breakdown neglects to control for RSP — Relative Suckoutiness Potential — as it varies across suits. A comprehensive meta-analysis of fourteen peer-reviewed studies (N=531,872 hands) indicates, with statistical significance (p = 0.022), that spade-based flush draws exhibit the lowest realization rate relative to expected equity. Although the data for other suits yields less conclusive results, the perceptual bias among players to generalize from the spade anomaly is predictable and arguably rational.
This is a solid article, but symptomatic of a broader trend in poker analysis writing which can miss a key confounding variable. Specifically, the breakdown neglects to control for RSP — Relative Suckoutiness Potential — as it varies across suits. A comprehensive meta-analysis of fourteen peer-reviewed studies (N=531,872 hands) indicates, with statistical significance (p = 0.022), that spade-based flush draws exhibit the lowest realization rate relative to expected equity. Although the data for other suits yields less conclusive results, the perceptual bias among players to generalize from the spade anomaly is predictable and arguably rational.
WOW, It's crazy that you mention that as my next post is going to be about a spades-related solver nuance!
Great! My first thought on seeing the subject was, "But what about Spades?"
I know I have a huge bias Towards Spades,( I'm even capitalizing them!). Interesting stuff.
April Fools!
This is a masterpiece of its genre. Congrats!
ahhh so meaningful from you, tyty!