[Ed Miller]

OK, but Big Endian was just one example. My point is that big cards still miss 2/3 of the time which I think is frequent enough to qualify as a big leak.

I'll grant you medium leak. But people overestimate the size of that particular leak because of the nature of overcards.

They are a high variance proposition even when played correctly. Most of the time you play your overcards, you will end up losing an extra bet or two. Occasionally you pick up a pot by playing them correctly. So after people lose ten overcard hands in a row, they sometimes tend to say, "I'm just throwing my money away on these damn overcards." That thought gets people to, "Maybe I shouldn't raise preflop in the first place so I wouldn't feel so tied to them after the flop. Then I could just fold correctly like I want to."

To some extent, they are like 16 against a 10 in blackjack. People wrack their brains about how to play that situation... and the reality is that it doesn't much matter what they do. Hitting and standing are pretty close. The reason they think so hard is because no matter what they do IT'S GONNA TURN OUT BADLY. There's no way to turn 16 against a 10 into a rosy situation.

Same thing with overcards. Generally with ace-king, you will have raised preflop so the pot is usually big enough to take one off on the flop. But people think it's such a tough decision because no matter what you do, it's not gonna be pretty. You went from excellent starting hand to very marginal situation in two seconds.

You are usually gonna lose when you flop overcards. That causes people psychologically to draw the mistaken conclusion that their play of overcards is a much bigger money loser than it probably actually is on average.

EDIT: Oh, and by the way. NO ONE plays ace-king, suited or offsuit, poorly enough to turn it into a net long-term money loser. No one. The hand is too good.