[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
yeah okay, but all I said was there's a significant chance the raise is worse for him than throwing some chips on the floor, which is not where you went with this [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

BTW, I get you, but I'm not totally sure it's theoretically right either since there are math-based spots where you have to put in more chips after the initial raise. it's close enough though.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the times that we are supposed to theoretically put chips in, are usually going to be times where it's going to increase our EV to more than -150, not the opposite.

Also in response to shaniac, I'm not twisting people's words around. In fact when I first posted my response, I got all kinds of critiques, telling me to go look at Ansky's posts and don't I understand reverse implied odds and etc etc. I at least make it clear that I understand what people are saying and pretty much agree with them, yet the critiques that I was getting were just telling me how flat out wrong I was and etc etc.

Below is what I said:

"If you play extremely well thats impossible. Theoretically there should be no situation in which a raise will cost you more chips than you are putting in. This will only occur if you have some weaknesses that you will exhibit later in the hand. I don't think that I have to assume this will be the case when I discuss the hand. "

Every single word of it is true, and yet instead of critically trying to understand what I was saying, they just assumed I was talking about something else and started telling me how wrong I was. When multiple people attack a statement without even bothering to understand it, it can be a bit frustrating.

The premise that it's theoretically impossible for the EV of a play to cost you more chips than you've put in, is completely true and irrefutable. This is all I was saying. Any time you are forced with a later decision in which you must put in more chips, it will always be correct to fold, unless putting in these chips increases your EV, thus still keeping your original play at no worse than the EV of the chips you put in.

I know that no one plays perfectly and etc etc, which is why I prefaced my entire statement with "theoretically".