Basic Theoretical Question

[beta1607]

Is it possible for two opponents to both play perfectly according to the Fundemental Theorum of Poker during the same hand? What about three or four playing perfectly? In what situations would this be possible/impossible? Assume 5/10 limit with $2 BI and 50 cent ante and 8 players if that matters.

I think the answer is fairly obvious but I got into an argument with a friend of mine who is a fairly good NLHE player so I wanted to turn to the illuminati on this forum for guidance.

[BeerMoney]

Quick answer.. For two people... Of course. Consider you have a draw with odds to chase in a limit game. Your opponent bets, and you call. You miss your draw on the end, he correctly puts you on a draw, checks to you , and you check behind..

You both played fine..

Three handed.. sure..

[beta1607]

[ QUOTE ]
You miss your draw on the end, he correctly puts you on a draw, checks to you , and you check behind..

[/ QUOTE ]

For this to be correct according the the FTP your opponent should have bet the river and you would then fold since he would "know" that you missed your draw.

[Hamlet]

Why should your opponent bet knowing that you can't call? The correct move is to check to induce a bluff from the draw. The draw plays correctly by not bluffing when he is going to get called 100% of the time.

[ QUOTE ]

For this to be correct according the the FTP your opponent should have bet the river and you would then fold since he would "know" that you missed your draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

[beta1607]

I would argue that the opponent should bet and have you fold so as to not have to show the hand to the rest of the table. If the opponent checks and you bluff, you may be playing 'optimally' but not 'perfectly' according to the FTP because we have to assume that your opponent will never fold to a bluff since he is playing perfectly in theory.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You miss your draw on the end, he correctly puts you on a draw, checks to you , and you check behind..

[/ QUOTE ]

For this to be correct according the the FTP your opponent should have bet the river and you would then fold since he would "know" that you missed your draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

you're stretching it.

[beta1607]

It is theory, not reality so it is meant to be streched. Unlike real stud there are not shades of grey regarding what is the right move, it is either perfect or it is not in this scenario.

As to my original question - I agree with you that it is possible to have 2-3 people play perfectly if they get some help with pot odds from other players.

[BeerMoney]

With your argument though, its impossible to play the river correctly.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
With your argument though, its impossible to play the river correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]

what i said is right.. Its possible for every street prior to the river.

[MRBAA]

No limit is quite different, because you can control the odds you lay draws, so you can often force your opponent to choose between two possibly incorrect actions -- folding to a bluff/worse hand, overpaying to draw against a hand he's behind.

In limit, there are constantly situations where two or more players can all play perfectly because of pot odds and the limited size of each new bet. However the more players that are in, the less likely that becomes. For example, the guy drawing to a straight against a flush draw and trips would probably fold if those hands showed him what they had. But since he doesn't know (has imperfect knowledge) he will very likely call.

[jon_1van]

a agree with beta, the better hand should bet because he knows he is winning.

The busted draw should fold because he knows he is losing.

[grb137]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible for two opponents to both play perfectly according to the Fundemental Theorum of Poker during the same hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to get philosophical, but it seems to me that is a nonsensical hypothetical. When I think "perfect play" according to the FTOP I think that you would in essense 1) know your opponents hole cards and 2) induce your opponent to make plays he wouldn't make if he knew what your hole cards were.

Two people can't do #1 and #2 perfectly at the same time. If both are doing #1 (both knowing each others hole cards), then neither can possibly do #2 (inducing the opponent to make a play they wouldn't make if they knew each others hole cards.

Basically, it'd be like playing with your hole cards exposed. Whoever was dealt the best starting hand would simply raise to an amount that would ruin the pot odds for the underdog hand, forcing him to fold.

[Andy B]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible for two opponents to both play perfectly according to the Fundemental[sic] Theorum[sic] of Poker during the same hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course.

[SA125]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible for two opponents to both play perfectly according to the Fundemental Theorum of Poker during the same hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're ever wondering if you're too anal about poker, ask yourself if you've ever asked yourself this question.

[peritonlogon]

To get philosophical, the FTOP is to ideal philosophy what analytic poker is to analytic philosophy. The more I've thought about FTOP the more I've come to the conclusion that it is really only useful as a means to derive hypotheticals that compose analytical solutions in poker. And many analytical solutions are, by the FTOP wrong but empirically correct. This all coming from a die hard Empiricist.

[beta1607]

good post.