[bilbo-san]

[ QUOTE ]
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 40.617% 33.67% 06.95% 36316824 7499124.00 { AhQh }
Hand 1: 59.383% 52.43% 06.95% 56560080 7499124.00 { 77+, AQs+, AQo+ }

Against an unknown I think it is difficult to determine whether he could hold QQ+ here. I think we don't see this situation very often so that is why I lean towards folding. If we knew villain had a slight tendency to make odd plays with less than QQ+ then I would argue for shoving.

I wouldn't want to start my session with such a high variance play when I have no idea what the villain is capable of.

This reminds me of a situation I read about playing AK tptk vs an unknown. I'm not sure who the poster was or where I read it, but he said it is probably best to fold to resistence b/c we are unsure whether the villain is capable of making the move w/ a hand we beat. He said it would be best to fold now and learn more about that villain so we can make a better decision next time we're in a pot with them.

Isn't it best to lean towards conservatism when we are up against an unknown?

[/ QUOTE ]

Bear in my mind that I LOVE Variance.

You ever take a finance class and see this question?

"Which would you prefer?

a) Pay $10000 and receive $15000 today

b) Pay $10000 and wait until tomorrow. At that time, you receive either $50000 (50% chance) or must pay an additional $10000 (50% chance)."

I'm one of the ones who picks B. Same expectation, but sometimes B gets me $50000!

To put it another way, if you play this game over and over again, and you get real lucky and win a few more than expected, you're up big. But if you get real unlucky and lose a few, it doesn't hurt as much as the winning helps.

My roll is high enough that I never, ever, ever, EVER sacrifice EV to reduce variance, and if I think EV = 0 (i.e. SB is shoving every single hand when it's folded to him), I'll often embrace the variance (unless it has indirect negative consequences, like if I know the stupid SB will leave immediately if he wins a flip).