!

so for the record you are betting on his side right? i will book your 100% on his side as well, so im playing 100-200 effectively. i will also agree to lock into a certain number of hands with a buyout escrowed if it is desired.

ya i like this post, seems like you would get in sooooo many bad spots opening 100% on button. the raising 100% stuff seems like something you'd want to consider when you're thinking theoretically about the game, i'd be interested in getting some insight into what actually happens when if you actually put it into practice. bobbo? sounds like you actually do it, results?

yeah well I *would* be betting on his side but tbh I'm drunk and need to first re-evaluate in the morning, and secondly I've never made a substantial bet (other than playing poker) against anyone I like so I'm not sure if I can pull the trigger...

but I'll sleep on it and let you know.. hah

heh

obviously then you think that your edge is pretty small against someone who raises 100% of buttons. to the tune of what 0.125 ptbb is that the right math at $200 over 800 hands per hour? now ofcourse you are offering the bet in your perceived favor so you think your edge is bigger than 0.125 ptbb. all im saying is that the money youre laying is hardly substantial enough to matter

im well aware of this, but the fact that they think it is better means they should be paying ME, and yet im offering to pay THEM says something in and of itself no? i mean, they think their pf edge makes up for everything, why not just play straight up 10 tables vs whoever is sitting 300-600 that day?

so Kotkis vs Raptor, 4 tables 5/1 HU +100% button opens by Kotkis... should be Amazing

he has yet to agree

fwiw...

raptor is being quite deceptive in this thread IMO.
Jsnipes, why do you never want to play me but would play xorbie.
FWIW i'll book on raptor

If 27os is the bottom 20% of your range, it still has more equity than most other hands in the bottom 20% hu. I am not sure if this even pertains to the arguement, but what the bottom 20% of a certain person's range is, at least has to be agreed upon to be standard for everyone yes? In your hypothesis, do you make .5bb/100 with any of the bottom 20%? Some hands in the bottom 20% have more equity than others.

To prove a game theory type problem through math, there has to be some kind of standard on which to base your calculations etc...

It feels like you're trying to make a point against all the people who questioned your play based on your first post in this thread, but you're making it against the wrong person. I mean are you seriously suggesting that I should be the one paying you money for limiting my ability of play in a very significant way, and if I refuse your offer it's supposed to prove something? 0.125ptbb/100 doesn't come even close to the handicap I'm proposing, not to mention that you're most likely a better at handreading than I am anyways.

The offer I originally proposed is really simple: Some people in this thread clearly think that playing 100% pfr from BTN is a significant leak, I may not disagree with this, but I think I should be able to atleast breakeven against most people, so thus if one of the people thinks that it's a big enough leak he should be willing to pay me money to play him with the added rule stipulation. If I misunderstood Raptor's stance on this issue then maybe others like EC10 for example can take his place.

I don't understand why you think there is a handicap if you think that opening 100% of the button is the best way to play against a good player.

If raptor was the one being forced to open 100% of the button, then it would be fair to say that there is a handicap, as he's been advocating opening less than 100% on the button.

How do you readjust to someone who opens close to 100% OTB, but almost never folds to your 3bets and floats a lot?