No Limit, cont'd

OK: General consensus is for a pot raise, with one argument for a limp-reraise.


As it happens, the pot raise is right, but no-one spotted why (including me, when I was playing, which goes to show that you should always pay attention). My own line of thought that I was likely to get action for something slightly larger than a pot raise. I'm looking to double through here, and a "mere" pot raise is more likely to win me about 500.

So I raised it to 320. This was a mistake. As Sklansky might say, "can you see why?"

This went round to CO1, who promptly went all-in for 440. This got round to the small blind, who called. All others folded, and it came back to me.

Shit. I thought. If this was Prima, I know that I would be able to raise again. Are the rules the same on UB?

Unfortunately not. Because CO's raise was an underraise, I could only call.

Still, possibly no harm done. As long as an Ace doesn't come on the flop.

Pot size: 1410. I have 1120 in front of me.

The flop comes 986 two clubs.

Small blind bets 400.


What do I do?

They're at it again

From today's trial of the alleged murdered of Peter Falconio:

Carmen Eckhoff, a senior forensic biologist based in Berrimah, Darwin, said a DNA profile taken from Miss Lees' bloodstained T-shirt was compared with a profile obtained from a swab of Murdoch's mouth on New Year's Eve 2003 and was "found to be an exact match". Ms Eckhoff explained to the jury that the blood was 150 quadrillion - 150 million billion - times more likely to be his than any other caucasian male's in Australia's Northern Territory.

Now, without going too far into the statistics of forensic probability, I reckon that anyone who can write their own name will know that this number just has to be wrong. In fact, it's so gagaingly mind-bogglingly wrong that I'm still trying to work out how the biologist came up with the number. My best guess is that the entire seqience was taken. As we know, there are four basic "building blocks". So, if you take the entire genome sequence, and make each one a one-in-four chance, I suppose that you might come up with this kind of number.

Except, as we also know, building blocks don't work like that. DNA doesn't work like that.

Now, I'm not denying that the DNA sample is a powerful piece of evidence. But it isn't an irrefutable piece of evidence. In addition, for mixed populations and inbred populations the product rule is not as accurate. To the extent that the product rule is inaccurate, the error usually works against the suspect, unfairly exaggerating the strength of the evidence.

++++

And, on a different tack: this month's figures.

SITE		$3-$6	$1-$2	50C-$1	$25	$5	$2-$4	$5-$10	Grand Total
PTY								$559.00	$559.00
UB		$33.00	$168.50	$83.90			$9.00	$47.00	$341.40
Betfair			$14.50	$5.50		$35.25	$142.00		$157.25
SJ					$1.25				$1.25
EMP		$530.75					$95.50	$29.10	$655.35
PS		$10.50	$48.75				$123.50		$182.75
PP				$9.00			$25.00		$34.00
Total		$574.25	$231.75	$98.40	$1.25	$35.25	$111.00	$482.90	$498.50
Total Hours		23.25	30.50	10.00	3.50	11.50	23.25	4.50	106.50
Avg per Hour		$24.70	$7.60	$9.84	$0.36	$3.07	$4.77	$107.31	$4.68