[FlyingStart]

I'm small stakes but I figure I have earned the right to one post after reading this friggin' thing.

I certainly agree that Mason is wrong here, but I do think that the concept of implied odds in the AQs vs JJ situation can be discussed in more depth.

If the stacks were 10BBs both hands would be allin preflop and JJ would be favourite. I don't think however that the gap in the hands profitability will increase LINEARILY with increasing stack sizes. With this I mean that even tho JJ is even better versus AQs with 100BBs than with 10BBs it doesn't say what happens inbetween, and this is where I think Mason's thinking has some value...

Because of the often PSB on the flop AQs has the advantage of earning more on the flop (doulbe of what he put in) when ahead. If the stacks are big this also includes losing the entire stack sometimes the few times both players hit. But if the stacks instead are 35BBs the AQs will not risk much more the few times it is behind JJ after hitting itself.

The point I'm trying to make is that the SHORTTERM (Thinking of the streets as the timeline) implied odds is better with AQs and therefore maybe a better than JJ in this precise situation if the stacks were 35BBs instead of 100BBs.. If JJ has made a CB into a 18$ pot of 18$ when the flop is Q high, will he fold the rest of his 7$ when AQs bets a blank turn?

I think Masons thinking was that a CB in nolimit is much more expensive when failed than in nolimit, but neglected the massive implied odds JJ can have with big stacks.