[illegit]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]


I guess there are people who will play AJ this way, but I doubt they're still in the tournament at this point.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is probably the 1st 25 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly why I question anyone putting villain on a range of hands WE would be playing. If you overvalue their hand or undervalue, you're in trouble either way. They don't all play like we do, and they aren't all donkeys. At this point, we can't know which is which.


[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. I see too many people defaulting to assuming villain is reasonable. In tourneys with fields this large (over 2000 players right?) and many satellite winners what percentage are ACTUALLY reasonable players? Probably not even 50%, right? But we'll assume 50% just for an easy number.

So I'd say make the analysis of a reasonable player's possible holdings like many have done. In which case we're behind almost everything in a reasonable range. Then add a 20% possibility it's something unreasonable that we beat (20% and not 50% because even unreasonable players accidentally make reasonable plays, AND they could have unreasonable holdings that beat us like weak Ax 2-pair hands, or any2suited hands). So it's probably close.