Absolute Edge in SH play

[DavidC]

AdamL and I were discussing this:

He believes that your absolute edge over your opponents drops whenever you have to play more hands.

Here's what we've come up with:

There's three players who are the absolute worst at poker:

1) The guy that bets and raises, blindly and forever, without looking at his cards.

This guy is the worst of all poker players, especially in limit games where, once the betting becomes heads-up, there's no cap on the betting. All you would have to do is wait for the nuts and then stack him... Even in a game with a three-raise cap on the betting, he's still the worst.

2) The guy that blindly calls any bet, and any number of bets, without looking at his cards.

Yep, this guy is a solid asset at just about any poker table. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

3) The guy who folds at every opportunity, without looking at his cards.

Ditto.

-------------------------

Our opinion, is that the guy that raised all the time would lose less bets per 100 hands than he did at full ring play, that the same would be true of the caller. I believe (this hasn't been discussed with him), that the folder would lose more at short-handed play than full ring.

Does this seem true?

------

If this is true, then I ask, are you guys making more bb/100 at full ring or at short-handed play, over decent sample sizes (50k+)?

If you're making more at short-handed (bb/100), then how can we explain this?

--Dave.

[oreogod]

At most in shorthanded games, some of your preflop edge is lost. But if u know what you are doing shorthanded, where to push, they will consistently make mistakes while u will not.

And u do not need to wait for the nuts to beat a guy who blindly raises any two and continues to do so postflop.

Maybe its just because Im tired, but your question seems really vague to me. Either way an expert short handed player will always win against a moron...all the moron has on his side is variance and that is overcome easily w/ time.

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
At most in shorthanded games, some of your preflop edge is lost. But if u know what you are doing shorthanded, where to push, they will consistently make mistakes while u will not.

And u do not need to wait for the nuts to beat a guy who blindly raises any two and continues to do so postflop.

Maybe its just because Im tired, but your question seems really vague to me. Either way an expert short handed player will always win against a moron...all the moron has on his side is variance and that is overcome easily w/ time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically I'm asking if an expert player will win more bb/100 or less bb/100 at a 6-max game than at a 10-max game. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

In an extreme case: how about if he's playing HU?

I know he'll win vs a moron... I just want to know if he'll win more or less vs the moron, in terms of bb/100, at a short or a full game...

You don't HAVE to wait for the nuts, but depending on your bankroll, you might choose to... depending on his stack size, depending on who else is at the table, etc. etc. But if you were playing HU, that might be a good strategy... I mean, you could chase gutshots, because as soon as you hit one you could take whatever was in front of him at the time.

Also, what are your guys' SD/100?

--Dave.

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
Basically I'm asking if an expert player will win more bb/100 or less bb/100 at a 6-max game than at a 10-max game.

[/ QUOTE ]

The average opponent is worse both preflop and postflop in 6-max. That should answer your question.

[kahntrutahn]

most people's STDEV is ~16BB give or take 1BB per 100...

[AdamL]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Basically I'm asking if an expert player will win more bb/100 or less bb/100 at a 6-max game than at a 10-max game.

[/ QUOTE ]

The average opponent is worse both preflop and postflop in 6-max. That should answer your question.

[/ QUOTE ]

It answers the question from a practical standpoint, but it leaves the theoretical analysis of the structure of each game completely up in the air.

I don't know if Dave is still meaning the question this way, but the original point was to keep the expert perfect at both games and the fish horrible at both games, so that only structural factors came into play. We also don't count "BB per hour", but rather BB/100, because we're trying to calculate an *edge* and not an hourly rate.

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
most people's STDEV is ~16BB give or take 1BB per 100...

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, I'm amazed. Here's a snippet from the microlimits (ss lhe full ring) faq:

[ QUOTE ]
Standard Deviation / 100: This varies by your style, but 14-18 seems to be the typical range.

[/ QUOTE ]

[cartman]

I think player's 1) and 2) will do better the fewer players there are at the table because they have to beat fewer hands. I think 3) will do worse solely because he will have to post blinds more often.

Cartman

Yes, this is true. Your BB/100 should go down slightly in Short-handed play. This is easily offset by the number of hands you get per table, per hour. Full 10/20 games offer 75 hands/hour while 6 max games offer more than 100 hands/hour. Work out the multi-tabling math and you will see 6 max games at a higher BB/hour, even at a lower BB/100. (and that's what really matters, isn't it?)