[Aisthesis]

I agree fully. I think a lot of the skepticism expressed in this thread may be due to over-ambitious ideas concerning its applications.

There are way too many factors that go into general starting hand rankings for this model to have any potential at all for trying to revise the lists currently in existence.

It wouldn't be very hard at all at this point to make a spreadsheet with which hand is "median best" against a field of x number of opponents--IF one can settle on a ranking of the starting hands.

But I think before settling on such a ranking system (or systems--since the context of application is going to have a lot of bearing on which list one should choose).

I think it's mainly applicable in situations where you're basically playing the hand hot and cold--although it might also yield some surprizing results regarding things like what hands might be worth a limp on the button if it's folded to you.

But I think the way to go from here is first to specify the narrowly-defined situations where "median best hand" is clearly relevant for actual betting decisions. I'm thinking shortstacks in a tournament as well as some shorthanded situations (of which the "folded to you on the button" is really one, even if it's at a full table) are the best candidates for figuring out some specific applications. But only with a clear definition of context is it going to be possible to decide which hand-ranking scheme to use.