Hi PM
For anyone who hasn't seen that thread, it is
here
I was toying with those ideas when I first posted this and I think it is important to read Phil Van Sexton's criticism, which I think is valid.
Still, The idea of calling equal stack ALL-IN raises on the bubble with equal stacks still seems like a horrible move to me. As I said in that original post, I wouldn't even do it if I knew myself to be slightly ahead.
What troubles me about the reasoning though is the thought that in some way, we hurt our chances of making the money when we start to play too timidly and it is hard to know where to draw the line between what hurts us most, especially on an agressive bubble where your blinds are constantly being challenged.
The implications of my original argument, if correct, run both ways after all. We should be raising a lot on the bubble, and maybe even all-in against good players, because there is very little they can actually call with that makes the move correct for them, even if they are ahead. In a really strong game this might mean players going all-in almost any chance they can be the first in the pot until one player finally gets a big pair and can call down the raiser.
In that original thread I never did get any responses from math types about my reasoning and I too, would love to see some.
I'm gonna write more about this, I promise
Regards
Brad S
edit - In re-reading your post, I think you may be touching on at least
Part of where this reasoning might be flawed. Having 2x,x,x stacks may give you greater $EV than my assumption, but I am also not an expert on those approximations. That combined with the potential -$EV implications of playing too timidly on the bubble almost certainly lessens my original argument. To what degree remains to be seen.