dude....just wikipedia for a few minutes instead of making stuff up.

Collusion (technically called a coalition) does NOT mean you can just regard all your opponents as one mega-player. That's far too strong a condition. To collude properly, opponents need to implement a set of strategies where all of them individually profit (without chopping up in the parking lot later.)

In multiplayer games, Nash equilibria always exist, meaning that in any situation where some players are colluding, one of them will be able to double-cross the others and make even more profit by deviating. In a Strong Nash Equilibrium, no collusion is possible between 2 or more players (but this is rare for most practical games including poker).

Perhaps Google can learn you about collusion in poker and asymmetric games. Wikipedia isn't doing it for you

ok if you say so.

There's two types of collusion. One where hands are known between colluders (essentially becoming a single player) and one where they're playing a cooperative strategy without knowing each others cards that you still can't beat. There's no requirement that in the latter type both individually have to have an edge over the weak equilibrium strategy. Since there's asymmetry in the case with collusion due to position its perfectly feasible that their optimal strategy involves one losing and the other winning. Certainly one will win more than the other.

In any case studying counter strategies to collusion in depth is likely an unproductive use of time. But it's worthwhile to understand that the strategy output by multiway solvers is exploitable, sometimes by unintentional bad play, and it is very relevant when it comes to seat selection, for example.

This sounds like what I was getting at with the exception that your math dick is a lot bigger than mine. It may be difficult to calculate, but it exists (or more accurately, my intuition tells me it should exist, given that my math dick is more compact than the space of LHE strategies).

The overall EV (across all positions) of such a strategy is negative, as with all Nash Equilibria in all raked games.

Says you

Some academic morons learn all the game theory terminology without understanding how it applies to poker and other people actually understand it and can apply it

And some people make 15k strongly opinioniated posts on a poker forum when they could have been doing so much more with their lives......

Studying game theory for years without understanding the basic concepts sounds like a sick life

Yeah correct. It is true that following the Nash equilibrium is likely to be unprofitable when opponents are colluding. But IMO, just like studying the NE in heads up is very useful, so we can understand what it is and react to opponent's deviations accordingly, I think studying m.w. nash equilibria should also be useful in teaching us best response strategies (which might involve getting up from the table if opponents are colluding).

I have PIO not monker, so I haven't really looked at mw solutions myself though. BK, have you? I think Don Juan said he had.

How are things Cally? We should all get lunch sometime.

this thread sucks

Don't worry, 2018 is almost over, and then we'll get a new one.

Maybe.

Bazinga!!!

I took a picture of a drama hand and sent it to a buddy. I had this thread in the backround. There were like 2 lines of text. He says who are you talking to since only readable part was "This sounds like what I was getting at.... dick is a lot bigger than mine. It may be difficult...."

you arent a winning player and have been running well for years. thats not all that uncommon.

but you also arent smart enough to understand and apply a solver so whatever but you might as well save your money.

lol never thought I'd see the day Victor of all people tells someone they're not smart enough to win at poker

For the sake of my often bruised ego, I'm glad this post was made like an hour before my first online dramaha hand. Turns out my 90/15 strategy wasn't a winner. I figured that if everyone else at the lofty stakes of 4/8 was doing it, it would work for me too

hey man I won a lot at poker. ofc, with some difficulty, I was able use solvers and stuff.

Solvers have not helped your live game results assuming you play live.

Hey remember that day at the end of March when BK1248 wore his Yankees hat in the poker room and was drinking Hennessey (or what passes for it at FW), shouting "**** the Red Sox!" Good times.

Totally missed this. #Fail

preposterous statement nominee

Is it?

Do you play live?