[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
Of course there are a million different ways this hand could play out depending on the texture of the flop, the willingness of the AA to fold to aggression, Sammy's desire to bluff without a set, etc., etc. My point was not to come up with a complete EV calc for every scenario but just to point out that your calculations were based on a specific set of assumptions, namely:
(a) Sammy knows he has AA.
(b) Sammy will always fold in cases of set over set.
(c) Sammy will fold 100% of the time when he doesn't make a set.
(d) The other player will always go all-in.

These are your assumptions, not mine. My point was simply that your calculated EV does not "prove" that the move was +EV, it simply means that if all your assumptions are correct it was +EV. If I make one small change to assumption (a), and give him a range of AA or KK, it turns to -EV. Obviously there are a lot more variables that could come into play if we wanted to get really picky, but I was just using that one alteration as an example.

The issue I have with your assumptions though is that they assume the best case scenario for Sammy: he knows his opponent's cards and he knows what his opponent will do. It's literally impossible for him to make a mistake according to the FTOP. Even with that massive edge, it's only marginally +EV. If you add more hands to the other player's range and/or assume his post-flop actions will be less predictable, you make it more and more likely that Sammy will make a mistake that will cost himself EV.

If you alter assumptions (c) and (d) you could maybe come up with some additional EV from fold equity on a bluff, but even that's marginal at best and very player dependent. If he's a calling station it's flat-out -EV to bluff. Besides, I think it's really a stretch to argue for a calling a huge preflop raise with a dominated hand based on the assumption that he could bluff him off AA later.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good reply. I agree with most of that, with 2 comments
a) i think its actually pretty likely that all those assumption will be true
b) the EV could be significantly better than +63 in scenarios where AA does not push in but instead makes an incorrect fold. (FYI, someone else said AA had 14k stack not 10k, giving significantly more EV right there for eg.)

fwiw, i think SAmmy's call with his skills was marginal but probably eV+.
-g