this is one of the things I disagree with most strongly. The idea that we have massive RIO and our villains suddenly become post flop geniuses when we have AA. As I said earlier it is quite possible that we make lots of mistakes but the guy calling with J6 makes even more. I also think it would account for some of the online data not reflecting the situation I experience live.

Ya, I think sabre nailed it regarding stack sizes.

Your game usually plays deep Vernon? I thought it was just a typical local 1/2 game? Out here if I'm sitting on 200 BBs there's usually just one other player at the table with the same stack, maybe two; the majority of the stacks are ~100 BBs with some terrible shortstacks mixed in.

Ya, I kinda agree with you on part of this, including how K6 is never folding a K high flop when playing for stacks with a small SPR. So while our mistake is probably, in general, < the mistakes of crappy hands who hit TP (worse than ours) or better (and win), there are other players at the table who are making less of a mistake than we are (the players setmining with 55). So in terms of preflop mistake + possibility of making a huge postflop mistake, players setmining with 55 > us with AA > retard with K6 playing for TP / two pair, IMO.

Yeah, ive been lurking and waiting to put my two cents in, but i think sabr has gotnthe most compelling concept, in that stack sizes dictate a lot of the preflop sizing strategies, and a lot of how important it may be to "thin the field", and how much we should charge callers. Also position, and how competant postflop the hero is compared to the table. So basically, all the things that normally matter when you talk about strategies. I especially agree with the difficulty of awkward 80-120 bb stacks. I try to buy in either shorter or deeper than that.

<sigh>

You are simply refusing to acknowledge the math, and you are refusing to recognize that reverse implied odds are not primarily a function of post flop skill (though, of course skill can somewhat limit your exposure).

Reverse implied odds deal with a situation where you can often be value towning yourself with a made hand, because the villain either has a weak hand that is easy to fold or a better hand than yours.

You say that the opponent who calls with unpaired trash will make more mistakes than us, but this is basically impossible, because those opponents will fail to flop a pair 73% of the time.

Your opponents don't have to become post flop geniuses to realize that when they called you with J6s, and the flop comes down QT7, that they missed the flop and should fold.

The probability of hitting a hand dictates that most of your opponents will usually have a very easy decision to fold to the first action. There is only a 27% chance that a villain will flop a pair. If he has a trash hand like K6s or J6s, he's only going to hit his high card half the times he hits the flop; the other half the time has J6s he'll flop a pair of 6s and almost never call a bet. Some fraction of the time he hits his high card, he won't flop top pair. Some fraction of the time he flops top pair the action ahead of him will force him to fold.

So what that means, when you understand the math, is that the vast majority of unpaired hands that called preflop have less of a chance of hitting a hand they can continue with than a pocket pair has of hitting a set. Most of the time, they'll have an easy fold.

But you don't have that luxury, because you have a made hand 100% of the time in a situation where at least 40% of the time someone flopped gin.

I have already said that there will be spots such as king high flops that are good for us, because they will put some villains in a position to make mistakes. But that doesn't take away from the fact that most of the villains missed the flop most of the time, and have a trivially easy fold.

Just looking at the basic math above shows that it is basically impossible for the villains to make more mistakes than we will.

You can't wish away the concept of reverse implied odds by claiming greater post flop skill than your opponents.

So it is +EV for me to call with J6o OTB if I know UTG has AA because he has RIO?

I refuse to accept the "maths" you have shown because it doesn't prove anything about the profitability of the situation. You have various raw EV figures and probabilities of hitting hands but still 100% subjective opinions about how the rest of the hand plays out and they will be subjective no matter how often you repeat them.

Here is the crux of what you seem to be missing as far as I can see.

THE FACT THAT I WILL SOMETIMES BE PUTTING IN A BET WITH LESS THAT 50% EQUITY DOES NOT MAKE THE FACT THAT THE OPPONENT CALLED PRE A LOSING PROPOSITION FOR ME.

You say yourself he flops air 73% of the time. Awesome. Thanks for the donation. The vast majority of the rest of the time he flops a pair and loses more money. Thanks for the donation. Rarely he outflops me. I will often bet fold and lose a small amount. This does not add up to me wanting to make this guy fold pre.

By your logic you think j6o has a higher EV once we reach the flop than AA because it will have easier decisions. That is not maths. That is speculation that I think is crap.

Nope, you're still missing the point. It's not a +EV call for the trash hands; they are just not offering reverse implied odds.

J6s or another trash hand is making a mistake preflop because his implied odds are so bad. He's only going to flop a great hand 4% of the time. That means at $10 a pop, he is paying $250 to flop two pair +. he'd need to win a stack close to 100% of the time and never lose for his preflop play to be profitable.

The fact is, you don't have an argument against the math, nor do you have an argument against the fact that J6 and other trash hands will only make rare big mistakes against you, and that usually they miss the flop and fold.

Those trash hands ARE donating. But the simple fact you refuse to acknowledge is they are not donating to you exclusively; that a good chunk of the time their donations will go to whichever one of the luck boxes flops gin on you.

Your " I refuse to accept the math" statement is juvenile; it's like a little kid sticking his fingers in his ears going "la la la la la la..."

That's not evidence or argument. It's not even rational. But if you're so opposed to stepping up your technical competence that you won't even discuss the math like a grown up, then you can't be helped.

We don't get paid to win pots.

just finished this thread. more tilting than losing to a one outer.

Mpethy, excellent work, you've put some time in here.