Fundamental Theory of Poker - what if? LC

[Master5hake]

what if it was possible for a hacker to be able to see all of his opponents hole cards at the start of each hand, but wasn't able to accurately determine the future community cards - (outside the narrowing of odds based on all the cards he could already see in people's hands)

what expected win rate in bb/100 would he be able to expect given he had at least an basic understanding of poker theory? - lets say he played a mid limit (10/20) full table game -

also - if he could see all of his oppenents hole cards, where would his ideal VPIP fall? I would imagine it would be high, possibly folding when he had a very poor hand and he saw two players at the table had hands they would raise with - making 3 bets before the flop even too expensive for him -
maybe I am off base thinking that an ideal VPIP in this situation would be so high

any thoughts?

[jman220]

I've often wondered about this same thing. I would guess that you would want a very very high VP$IP, since you could always outplay your opponents after the flop. I'm not sure however whether you'd want a higher or lower than normal PFR%. There might even be an argument for having a 100 percent VP$IP, because you would no longer really be playing your cards, you'd be playing your opponents cards versus the flop/turn/river, you would basically always know when your opponents hand was bad enough to push him off of it. I have no idea how you could calculate a possible bb/100 for this model though.

[jman220]

I also wonder if this would be as huge an advantage as it at first seems. In no limit clearly it would be huge, but in limit, I wonder how much it would reallly affect your bb/100. I'm sure it would probably double or triple it. But would it increase it tenfold?

[Master5hake]

yeah, in a NL game where your opponents had deep stacks, I would think you would try to play every hand as long as there were not huge PF raises, and your advantage would be HUGE -

to your point about the effect on limit, thats why I wanted to pose the question in terms of limit, realistically, anyone who had the ability to see all the hole cards would be an idiot to play limit, but for the sake of discussion (and because I mainly play limit) I think limit is a more interesting scenario to ponder

I think in limit, you'd play lot more hands against aggresive opponents, where you could make up you preflop disadvantage with weaker holdings with more bets in the late rounds as you hit flops with unlikely holdings to catch people off gaurd -

the looseness of the game would also be a huge factor in how loose the hacker would play -
the bottom line is, even if you know what everyone is holding, bad starting cards still only hit flops strongly enough to win hands rarely - so you would be getting 'taxed' preflop by playing those hands regularly up to the point where when you can outplay your opponents wiht perfection after the flop, i don't know that you would be able to show a profit of terrible starting cards

basically, avg. pot size (from the looseness/aggrsiveness) of the game would need to be pretty high to really lower you starting hands requirments to a rediculous level -

Maybe 35% VPIP on an avg. 10/20 game?

win rate of 7 BB/100?

[Master5hake]

here is some very rough (and most likely) flawed math -

lets say you will see the river 10% of the time under these conditions -

now on the last round of betting, you have the ultimate advantage - you know everything there is to know about the hand - you will ALWAYS know when to fold, even to one bet in a huge pot, and always know when to bet/raise for value.
So you would always save 1 bet when you have lost, and sometimes save yourself 2 bets in situations where you may have bet for value and been raised and had to make a crying call - I'll say in situations where you are beat, you would save 1.1 bets on avg.

now, for hands where you are ahead, you will always get a value bet in, sometimes for one bet, sometimes as a raise for 2, sometimes 2 or more from overcalls of your bet in multihanded pots - or on the other hand you may not get called at all, and gain zero bets from your information - this seems trickier to estimate, so I'll take the cop out and say its again 1.1 bet advatage on the river. (discounting for the times you would play the hand the same way without perfect info)

That right there, with perfect information, means you will be on avg getting an 1.1 extra bets on the river -

seeing the river 10% of the time, that alone would equate to 11 bb/100

so maybe we are talking 15bb/100

please flame me if this makes no sense

[jman220]

Problem is, I think this is really in the wrong forum, and thats why you're not going to get many responses. I really am curious as to what other people think about this though, its an interesting mathematical/strategic exercise.

[Master5hake]

yeah, I blew it, def. should have put this in Poker Theory - don't know if I should cross post or is there a way this can get moved to that forum - I'm hitting the sack now, but like you, I do want to here others opinions - I'll check it out in the morning and see if I should cross post it