[KipBond]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The optimal strategy against this opponent is optimal regardless of the number of games to be played.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so.

[/ QUOTE ]
Then you're wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. Your game theory understanding is confused. It's a different game if you only play 1 hand as opposed to an infinite # of hands.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In the case where you only get to play 1 game, I would narrow my calling range. In the case where you get to play many games, I would broaden the calling range.

[/ QUOTE ]
Then you don't understand fundamental poker theory. The number of games to be played is irrelevant, and the optimal calling range (at each blind level and stack size) is set and immobile mathematically. If you deviate from it then your expectation is less than it would be if you don't, and this is true of 1 game; it's true of 100 games; it's true of 1,000,000 games.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Theoretically, if you got to play an infinite # of games, and time wasn't a consideration, then you would call with the slightest of margins (~ Q7+).

[/ QUOTE ]
Um, false. Calling with say the top 48% of hands will yield a +EV result, but it won't yield optimal results.

[/ QUOTE ]

So calling with +EV hands over an infinite # of games (w/o consideration of rake/time/etc.) is -EV long-term? I don't think so. What exactly do you mean by "optimal" (in this case) if not +EV?