Re: Low Limit-Limit Holdem vs Blackjack, which is better?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With standard deviations you will never be able to figure it out. By the time you have enough data, your skill levels will have moved.
But if you are 16.01% better than the average no fold'em hold'em player in a 16% rake world, you are now EV+.
[/ QUOTE ]
Is this really attainable? If all the cards eventually "even out" - and in these small stakes "riverfests" you can't really outplay anybody and must always show down the best hand- how can anyone have much of an edge? A 10-16% house vig would make this the the absolute worst game in the house - worse than Keno? Am I missing something? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
[/ QUOTE ]
You are mistaken in that "you really can't outplay anybody." (See SSHE's section on playing in very loose games.) fishyak is spot-on, if you're 16.1% (or more) better than the other players, then you'll be +EV playing poker because it'll be THEIR money paying your rake. In BJ, over the long term, it's YOUR money going to the house since they have the .35% advantage.
|