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. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

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.