M?

Okay, im familiar with the concept of pushing allin when shorthanded and theres dead money in the pot. for instance on button, with blinds of 150/300 and a chip stack of 500 id push allin with an ace. im a little confused on the concept. what constitutes dead money?

what if someone raises from early position up to 300 when the blinds are only 15/30. i still have the same chip stack. isnt the 300 the guy just put in the pot also dead money? obviously i dont push here. but why not? lets say i knew it was a race?

wouldnt it be the same thing if the blinds were at 150/300 and i was pushing with AK and i knew the bb had TT and would call? isnt there a difference between the blinds folding and it being a race between two players other than the blinds compared to a race between one player not in the blind and the bb? because the bb has already put money in the pot, he doesnt have to contribute as much as i do, so the dead money really isnt adding that much to my pot odds. only the dead money the sb folds is adding to my pot odds right? sorry for rambling hope this is understandable.

[tigerite]

I'm not sure if you mean Harrington's M, or what.

I still don't see what the big fuss is with that? I mean, it's just something he's come up with in his head, yeah? There's no mathematical or empirical proof for it, and there's no possible way he's played enough hands to know if it's even close to right. I'm just confused as to why people treat it as gospel, I guess.

[citanul]

because someone raising up front to X at blinds = small has a stong hand. if they raise to 300, they likely have a strong hand as well. their money isn't "dead" when you have no folding equity, their money is "dead money" in the pot.

the point is that when someone raises to 300, their money goes in the pot, but they likely have a strong hand. when the blind has 300 chips in blind, they have a random hand.

also, at small blinds levels, there's a lot of room left in your 500 chip stack to wait for opportunities. at 150/300, not so much.

c

[chekraze]

i thought dead money was moeny in the pot from a player who has already folded.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure if you mean Harrington's M, or what.

I still don't see what the big fuss is with that? I mean, it's just something he's come up with in his head, yeah? There's no mathematical or empirical proof for it, and there's no possible way he's played enough hands to know if it's even close to right. I'm just confused as to why people treat it as gospel, I guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Everytime someone mentions this you get all bent out of shape. Harrington didn't coin the term, Paul Magriel (sp?) came up with the concept and it's simply a measuring unit to aid in decisions. No science, no proof. Harrington uses it as a guide to strategy. Jeez.