Re: Comment on this statement...
 

[ QUOTE ]
"If play deteriorates to the point where everyone stays in with anything all the way to the end then everyone will break even."

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming no one adjusts (play really has deteriorated) and the game is played by infinite monkeys, everyone goes broke due to rake. As a short-term proposition, the luck box cleans up.

I love these games but only because I can adjust. I would never consider staking an infinite monkey.

Re: Comment on this statement...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nice responses. I thought maybe some intellegent discussion could come from this thread. I was wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should try posting in small stakes short handed. The type of discussion you're looking for is too basic for this forum.

Re: Comment on this statement...
 

the statement makes no sense, it's the complete oppositte of an equlibrium, and therefore, should never happen

I don't think any good discussion could come from it at all as it is false

Edit: so, the statement, "if play increased to expert level for all players (each player was playing with perfect information i guess) then everyone would break even" would be the true one.

But that is not possible as well

Re: Comment on this statement...
 

Your problem is that you don't like aggression. Do a long term experiment. Play 150,000 hands and get back to us on your findings. The rest of us have great, working play strategies, which are the same strategies used by pros around the world. Until our strategy is proven less effective, we won't consider risking our insanely high earn by changing to something that seems dumb on the surface.

Re: Comment on this statement...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Until our strategy is proven less effective, we won't consider risking our insanely high earn by changing to something that seems dumb on the surface.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or he could just appeal to mathematics and save him self half a year of frustration.

Re: Comment on this statement...
 

[ QUOTE ]
"If play deteriorates to the point where everyone stays in with anything all the way to the end then everyone will break even."

[/ QUOTE ]

It's nonsense, isn't it?

Imagine a game where all your opponents are calling all bets to the end every time. Are you going to break even in this game or are you going to crush it? Remember, you don't have to take every hand to the river, and even if you do, you're allowed to bet and raise your way there when you choose to do so.

Guy.

Re: Comment on this statement...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nice responses. I thought maybe some intellegent discussion could come from this thread. I was wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you want intelligent discussion maybe you could expand on it because I don't get the point of this at all. To me "If play deteriorates to the point where everyone stays in with anything all the way to the end then everyone will break even" is in the same camp as "I might as well not raise AK preflop because it is a drawing hand" - not exactly MHSH stuff.

Re: Comment on this statement...
 

the statement needs some assumptions, but i assume it is that:

you have to stay in till the end.

---

it is obvious that it will depend on how often each street is capped. if you have a few players who are always capping every street then every hand has the same pot size and so it will be breakeven (assuming no rake).

however if this is not the case, and pot size varies, if you are a good player you will be aggressive on your good hands and passive on your bad hands and this will have, albeit a very small, an effect.


hence you can win, but under the conditions above.

Re: Comment on this statement...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I thought maybe some intellegent discussion could come from this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets hear.

Re: Comment on this statement...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought maybe some intellegent discussion could come from this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rue#Post7099849