Well to be fair there weren't a lot of spots where two 100 vpip guys limp and it's on me in the hj.

I'd be absolutely shocked if I made 1000 really bad preflop plays a year.

I put some ranges into poker cruncher app and would put screen shots in but don't know how to copy paste from phone (anyone know how to do this?). When I give 4 extra players 50% we have about 17.5% and they all have about 20.5%.

When I give player 1 85% (assuming these guys aren't actually playing 100 cuz they probably don't even tho they might have been for a time). Player 2 85%. Player 3 (bb maybe) 60%. Player 4 (button or co) 50%. Then player 1 and 2 have 18.7 percent equity. Players 3 and 4 have 20.9% and 21.4% respectively. We have 20.4%.

When we manage to keep it three handed against the 85% guys we have 40%.

When we are dominated things would seem to get pretty bad. Looks like I was wrong to think that otr wasn't just making a mistake.


So that must be where the money goes then right? Not to, "everyone but you." I mean because after those trillions of hands we are gonna be losers, according to you and now otr and math it looks like. The limpers are gonna be losers so that leaves the rake and people left to act. This is where our money goes when we try to outplay the world. Right or wrong?

I've never played at commerce by the way.

No money went to rake in the hand posted here.

Beaver, UTG only became a a 100 VPIP guy yesterday. In the OP, OTR described UTG as a tilted loose passive which makes me think he would be playing more like 50% or so assuming he is slightly positionally aware. But anyway... A8o is so horrible that it actually does help the limpers when we play such a crappy hand since the pot will end up 4-6 handed most of the time. Say a limper limps 63s UTG. This limper will be in a much better spot if it ends up 5-handed than if it ends up heads up. When the pot rarely ends up 3-handed, we are in a great spot. Just off the top of my head, I think 4-handed with the BB is slightly favorable for us when the BB doesn't have us dominated. Anything else is awful for us. If CO or BTN 3bet anything remotely reasonable, we are in a world of hurt. Even if CO or BTN cold-calls and one of the blinds comes in, we are in a bad spot. But what I think you are way underestimating is just how absolutely ridiculously horrible it is for us when we get 3bet or even capped. The positive outcomes are marginal for us at best. The negative outcomes... the ones where we get 3-bet or capped in a multiway pot... are just such massive disasters that they negate anything positive that can ever happen.

You really answered your own question with your 3-handed example... when it is 3-handed, we have good equity, yes. But as the # of opponents increase, our equity goes down and the limpers' equity improves. Our money does, in fact, go to the limpers too. They will lose less money than they normally would thanks to A8o being so incredibly awful multiway. And you best believe it will be 4+ handed almost always... you aren't the only one who wants a piece of these terrible limpers. I would think 5+ handed would be most likely tbh.

But anyway... every beginner poker book, lesson, etc. goes into great detail as to why ace-rag is horrible in multiway pots. Your hand is going to perform much worse than any equity simulation shows due to reverse implied odds, and even the equity simulations show that A8o sucks really bad multiway.

results?
Did he make a flush?

So results-oriented.

Anything is possible I guess.