Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaKing
I can't believe you actually wrote this, this shows a complete fundamental lack of understanding of multiway equity. Did you only look at a small pocket pair vs two overcard hands with no overlap e.g. 22 vs QJss and 87dd? What do the equities look like 3 ways with JTs vs 22 and 88?
A massive massive +1
Did Sklansky just use napkin math to prove that AA prefers 4 callers to 1 caller? Without understanding concepts like position and implied odds?
This excerpt sounds like it was written in 1975, and it would probably not be bad for that time period. The problem is, it's 2023. We have Multiway solvers. AA NEVER wants 4 callers compared to 1 caller if given the option between the two, this has literally already been proven to high confidence levels.
Sklansky, you don't understand multiway pots. There are MULTIPLE equilibria in MW pots, that means one person can unilaterally increase or decrease your EV and you may have zero defense vs that strategy. You can't just say they add up to 50%. And you can't assume you automatically get to showdown.
Go read Noam Brown's research paper for when he programmed pluribus to understand how solvers work but napkin math is not how you prove AA is better 4 ways than 1. You don't just add up some numbers PREFLOP and then assume a flop/turn/river and all your opponent's actions.
Sigh