[TrueBritt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But what if our poor player is so bad that there are no + or neutral EV 5-10 (let's say) games for him? What should he do? Drop down a level or two, of course! But he doesn't. If he did, he would no longer be a losing 5-10 player, but an even or winning player at some lower level. That's not who we are talking about.

Why doesn't he move down? Because the 3-6 game doesn't have high enough stakes to get him excited. So he stays in a -EV game despite the fact that he is destined to lose in it. He is choosing a -EV game because he wants excitement. In other words, he is, consciously or unconsciously, buying entertainment.

He had a choice to move to a + or neutral EV game, and he chose not to. He must now accept the consequences of that choice.


[/ QUOTE ]


My reaction, though, is that there is no reason why the higher stakes game has to be -EV. Were there no pros, the fish would simply inhabit every level, their choice depending on their bankroll.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that would be an ideal world for the fish, just as it would be ideal if we could buy other forms of entertainment for free. However, that is not the reality. The reality is that the fish attract the sharks, and the higher the stakes, the more sharks there are.

[ QUOTE ]

Sure, it's exciting to play higher stakes. But you don't need to sacrifice expectation to play higher stakes, or at least, not by definition. To continue the casino analogy, the EV of a roulette table is the same whether you're playing at the $5 or the $100 tables. The excitement comes from moving up to stakes that are meaningful for the bettor, but the casino doesn't start paying out 30-1 on the numbers just because the stakes are higher, as if that's the higher stakes "fee" gamblers have to pay.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is where your analogy breaks down. It's true that the expectation at the higher-stakes roulette table is the same as the expectation at the lower stakes table, but that isn't true in poker. The higher the stakes, the lower the expectation (in bb/100). For example, our fish's expectation at different levels might look like this:
.5-1: 2 bb/100
1-2: 1 "
2-4: .5 "
3-6: .25 "
5-10: -.5 bb/100
10-20: -2 bb/100
20-40: -3 bb/100
30-60: -4 bb/100
etc.

That is much more realistic than the idea that he would have the same expectation at all levels.


[ QUOTE ]

That the higher stakes games are -EV is not what makes the game exciting, it's an unfortunate trade-off for the excitement that the fish would rather do without.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. And as I said before, in their ideal world that -EV would not be there. But in the world as it actually is, the -EV is real.

[ QUOTE ]

It's not "exciting" to be playing against better players: some TAG who lurks to your left, folds for 20 hands, raises to isolate you, and then grinds you down with aggressive play doesn't make the game fun. The stakes can be fun, but they will be considerably more fun if everyone is there to gamble and enjoy themselves. Someone who is there to suck up their money diminishes the experience considerably.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup. And so the logical response to the presence of the TAG is to move down a level or two. If the fish chooses not to do that, then he is choosing the entertainment of higher stakes over the profitability of lower stakes. There will be financial consequences for that choice.