Re: Knowingly Taking the Worst of it
 

This is of course an interesting issue to discuss, and you and others make some nice points to consider on this thread (I haven't read it all though).

I have just one general thing to say, and it's definitely not an attempt to contradict you or others.

Well I think that on every MTT table, all the time, every hand, there are tons of +EV opportunities (some are big and clear, some small, some microscopic but still +EV) that most players, and I dare to say: most players here too (me included), are still very far from being able to exploit.

I mean: being able to recognize every small possible +EV spot is something that can take a lifetime to master. Only then it might make sense to move (knowingly!) into -EV territory.

But of course the ideas you present (and that were presented in a different manner by giga previously), can be very valueable to a great player.

2 Old Posts worth reviewing -
 

Zee Justin Post 12/10/04

Step 5 hand versus Gigabet 12/09/04

Re: Knowingly Taking the Worst of it
 

I think another way to frame this question is:

Is TEV( 2 X stack) > 2 X TEV(stack)
?
If it is then you can make a negative CEV play (knowingly taking the worst of it).

I think there is a wide range of situations where this is true and it can be affected by:

Ability (such as using a big stack)
Image
Opponents ability
Stack size
Structure
Online vs live (no gambler's ruin online)
steepness of payout and tournament position
Opportunity cost (each player's is different)
Inflection points
etc.

Like most things in poker it is highly situational and player dependent.

But I think its intuitively obvious that in many situations this inequality holds. In less clear situations I think it takes a great player to identify and objectify when the expression is true for them. The number of times many of us have won tournaments by knowingly or unknowingly taking the worst of it is a testament to how true the expression is in some situations.

In the case of Gigabet and Q3, I think his opportunity cost for continuing with an average stack is high enough to make some EV-/unclear plays on a regular basis. But pushing Q3 is probably just unclear because of the FE associated with any push.

I don't really like to label a hand as EV- because there are so many different things that make up the situation, play and outcome: image, reads, tells, position, stack size, etc. I think most hands are unclear. When you are willing to frequently play cards that are unlikely to be the favorites, then you must rely on these other aspects of the game to win chips. Although we realize the importance of these aspects through some obscure postings of taping paper over hole cards, most of our analysis is focused on the hands themselves; probably because its so difficult to capture the dynamics in an online thread.

I think an equally interesting question is: can I avoid putting the most chips into the pot when I knowingly have the best of it?

Re: Knowingly Taking the Worst of it
 

bump