|
|
#31
08-16-2007, 06:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: AA in a no blind game
[ QUOTE ]
jackflashdrive: pretty easy to see that if you 'raise' every hand, you are going to lose money if they call with even two different hands. [/ QUOTE ] sorry i don't follow. it seems to me that you are saying that if a person plays AA and another hand (say, 910s) that I will obviously lose money with my random hand. The reason for this is far from obvious to me (although I do see why the situation would become more complicated). 
|
|
#33
08-16-2007, 07:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA in a no blind game
[ QUOTE ]
wait, i didnt read all of your post, but did you just say position matters when 2 player play nothing but AA? [/ QUOTE ] It may seem strange, but it does. Maybe I should clarify: If two normal players play against each other, and they both know 100% they have AA etc... than I have a hard time imagining any situation in a nolimit structure where position would matter. However this is not the case in my highly hypothetical scenario. There are two players playing perfect postflop poker in a game theory sense. The strategies are balanced so that they cannot be exploited unilaterally by any changes in hand ranges or action frequencies. If both players have the same hand ranges (or same hands) and play perfect poker in a game theory sense, then position is the only thing that could make a difference in their EV.
|
|
#35
08-16-2007, 10:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA in a no blind game
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] jackflashdrive: pretty easy to see that if you 'raise' every hand, you are going to lose money if they call with even two different hands. [/ QUOTE ] sorry i don't follow. it seems to me that you are saying that if a person plays AA and another hand (say, 910s) that I will obviously lose money with my random hand. The reason for this is far from obvious to me (although I do see why the situation would become more complicated). [/ QUOTE ] sounds like it's time for someone to search the archives for 'shania'. they call pf with AA or one hand which you don't know. you bet the flop, they raise. how can you play optimally against that range?
|
|
#36
08-17-2007, 12:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA in a no blind game
One guy is OOP but with AA. He raises to 2% effstacks every time and preflop betting is capped to that. The other guy has random cards and has the option of calling or folding that raise.
The question you ask basically comes down to whether the position is more valuable than the equity disadvantage from the uneven card ranges? I think the answer is yes, but there is no way to prove as this game isn't solvable yet.
|
|
#37
08-17-2007, 12:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA in a no blind game
triumph,
I think you'd probably want to add the stipulation that if i see your 'other' hand at showdown you switch to a different 'other' hand. The main advantage of your playing the extra hand is that you steal my 2% PF blind more often. When I am representing a hand that beats AA I am generally representing a hand that beats the other hand in your range. If not, it's a cooler. One way to think about this is if we had $1000 stacks and preflop action was capped at $0.10. Can you see that we are just playing poker here, and that you are by no means destined to make money simply because you are playing AA and one other hand? For your original statement to be corret, you'd need to show that the shania you get from mixing in a random hand with your AA is sufficient to ensure your profit *given particular blind and stack sizes.* I'm sure there is a line somewhere but I think it is probably a little higher than the 2% PF cap.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
