Quote:
Originally Posted by kkotov100
Here's one of the caveats I run into with my logic here:
On a 10-person table, you're essentially paying $3 to see 10 hands a round. However, if you sit out the SB, then come back to play your button and post the SB on the button, you're seeing only 9 hands a round for the same cost of $3.
However, in those 9 hands, you have the opportunity to win a total of $28 total as opposed to $30 total in ten hands, hence the hidden cost of failing to post n play your small blind: in the long run, you play fewer hands and get a chance to win less money for the same cost, meaning that your button or late position posts would have to have a winrate value add high enough to at least offset the automatic $2 loss per round.
This would indicate that for a player who has a very little variance in his/her winrate based on position, this would be a long-run EV- move. However, if your winrate variance is skewed disproportionally towards late positions, then doing this SB sit-out move could very likely be EV+ in the long run.
There are several logic flaws in this such that I'm not sure it is worthwhile to go over them with you. The biggest is that winrate =/ % winning hands. Until you see that, there is little point in continuing to discuss this.
You can either decide that you win, which is great for everyone that plays against you. Or you might want to think about why people that can think it through more clearly because they aren't invested in proving they are right disagree with you. Up to you, whatever you want to do next.
