An Ethical Question

<3 Devin

[sebsn]

[ QUOTE ]
These are our options:

small blinds/large blinds

don't play / play
play / play

Assuming ur better than your opponents how can "don't play + play" > "play + play"? For that to happen the EV of playing in the small blinds would have to be negative. If this is the case, move down.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] ur argument! [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[BradleyT]

Put yourself in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th spot.

Would you rather be playing with
A) 20-50 BBs
B) 2-5 BBs

If you choose A as 2nd -4th, as big stack wouldn't you rather put your opponents in situation B?

Edit - obviously ICM says there's no difference in heros equity.

[DuderinoAB]

apparently sngs are still profitable...

[The Yugoslavian]

Hmmm, perhaps 1% of all "ethical questions" presented on this forum in its history have anything to do with ethics. I'm going to just skip reading the OP and assume this is one of the 99% that don't.

Yugoslav

[lucid75]

I lol @ the chatbox flaming when i do it. It kind of encourages me to do it more. Also 8-12 tabling makes it easier to play push/fold than 30 BB poker.

[jgarrett32]

if you really cant see the value in having the blinds be bigger if you are the chip leader on the bubble, please never ever play a sit n go

[DuderinoAB]

[ QUOTE ]
if you really cant see the value in having the blinds be bigger if you are the chip leader on the bubble, please never ever play a sit n go

[/ QUOTE ]

On the contrary please continue to play sit n go's

[kleath]

I dont think it's unethical, but its unnotbeingadouche and makes the sng last longer aka lowering your hourly rate, thats without even addressing the skill edge issue.

[DevinLake]

You guys are all idiots! STTF has fallen so far. I'm going to P5s for advice.