What would be better...?

[pricklypete]

1. Seeing all hole cards.

2. Knowing which cards are to come on the board.

[Alobar]

number 1 hands down. Not only would it be more profitable in general, it would also be a ton easier to keep it undetectable

[jesse8888]

For NL, I think (1) hands down. For Limit, it's possible that knowing the final board might be more profitable, but probably still go with (1) if pressed.

I completely disagree that (1) would be harder to detect. Didn't somebody just get caught with knowledge of (1) on Absolute when he called a Ten high bluff with Jack high? The reason for going with (2) IMO would be that the game would still be fun, as you wouldn't know if you'd won the hand til the end [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
Didn't somebody just get caught with knowledge of (1) on Absolute when he called a Ten high bluff with Jack high? The reason for going with (2) IMO would be that the game would still be fun, as you wouldn't know if you'd won the hand til the end [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

well they got caught cuz they were stupid. But it would be much easier to hide having that ability from detection (either from other players, or from software detection), cuz you can mask it as just playing really great poker. You could mask the other too, but it would be harder to do. I guess you could just completely change styles and play like a LAGtarded maniac, and just be considered sick lucky. But I'd rather everyone think I was the most skilled player ever, cuz im egotistical like that [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Gene Paulson]

Knowing which cards are to come on the board if you ask me the time you would draw out to a nut or very high hand would make for a big profit known what they have can almost be done by logic and tells etc.

[tshort]

[ QUOTE ]
1. Seeing all hole cards.

2. Knowing which cards are to come on the board.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't know if this post was serious when I read it this morning (and it's not a probability question).

#1, not close at all

[DarkMagus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Didn't somebody just get caught with knowledge of (1) on Absolute when he called a Ten high bluff with Jack high? The reason for going with (2) IMO would be that the game would still be fun, as you wouldn't know if you'd won the hand til the end [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

well they got caught cuz they were stupid. But it would be much easier to hide having that ability from detection (either from other players, or from software detection), cuz you can mask it as just playing really great poker. You could mask the other too, but it would be harder to do. I guess you could just completely change styles and play like a LAGtarded maniac, and just be considered sick lucky. But I'd rather everyone think I was the most skilled player ever, cuz im egotistical like that [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]imo the optimal way to cheat is to play as you normally would, without looking at anyone's cards, except during large allin decisions. This would still allow you to win quite a bit with a much smaller probability of detection. You could even throw in something like, you make the wrong decision on purpose 10% of the time or so to make it almost impossible to detect. It would just look like you're really good at hand reading...

[punter11235]

It depends what do you mean by "profitable".
If you forget about the risk of detection 1 is more profitable by far. If you take it into account both are probably the same as both would allow you to have huge winrate which you would need to lower artificially to avoid detection.