[illegit]

[ 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 ]
False. The game is identical. The number of trials has no effect on the expectation of each individual trial. You flip a coin and it's it's coming up heads half the time. If you get laid 1:1 on the flip then it's a breakeven proposition, and would be if it were done once or done 1,000,000 times.

Also, i don't know what you mean by '1 hand'. It's 1 game/SNG consisting of multiple hands, not 1 hand.



[ QUOTE ]

You're wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]
Nope

[ QUOTE ]
So calling with +EV hands over an infinite # of games (w/o consideration of rake/time/etc.) is -EV long-term?

[/ QUOTE ]
Um.. WTF? Who suggested such a thing? No, it's not -EV, it's just not optimal. Calling with top 48% is +EV and a winning strategy; it's just not optimal. That is; calling with a certain tighter percentages at the earlier levels is also +EV but more +EV than calling with the top 48%.