Not An Ethics Question

[PuffsNutz]

On the rare occassions that all three of you are in the same hand, it seems likely that several other players will be in the hand and you'll have to deal with them as well.

Actually having to "deal" with other players in the
pot is exactly what you want, since you will
benefit by the extra information, and they will not.

You want to avoid at all costs just the 3 of you
being in a hand...

However, if your sure that others are in or will enter
the pot, you should play a ridiculous amount
of hands.....Im thinking at least 50%. This could
be a low number. Id like to hear from David on
this one.

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It tells you that an expert player is very likely looking to isolate a weaker player because the weaker player has a hand he can be run off of.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Maybe. Maybe he just has pocket aces.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you find that this happens more than every 220 hands?

I understand your point, but if you're saying that losing an extra small bet preflop not very often makes this a dealbreaker, I just think you're wrong, because you'll be picking up pots from him when he is making a move and does not improve in pots in which you might not otherwise have been involved.

[andyfox]

That was my thinking when I guessed $20.01. I figured it was an advantage, but that it would come up so rarely that it would be minimal.

[adios]

XXXX

[adios]

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

[turnipmonster]

I was explaining the rationale I had for saying $30. having the players on your left sucks, but on your right I think it's quite profitable.

--turnipmonster

[adios]

If the live one folds, I'm not sure you've gained a lot of information perhaps wrong though.

If the live one calls and the expert passes, again I'm not sure how much info is gained but it doesn't seem like too much.

If the live one calls and the expert calls, I think there is a significant informational gain.

If the live one calls and the expert raises, I think there is a significant informational gain.

If the live one raises and the expert passes, not sure how much of informational gain there is. I wouldn't think that much since the expert is folding most of his hands anyway.

If the live one raises and the expert calls, I think there is a significant informational gain.

If the live one raises and the expert re-raises, I think there is a significant informational gain.

The preceding was an analysis of the pre-flop situations. Not sure how to quantify them though.

Post flop I can see where there are significant informational advantages when all three players are involved but this probably doesn't happen that often as others have stated. When it does I can see where there is significant information gains in all the possible situations.

For those that think $30 is ridiculous, how would you quantify these situations?

[George Rice]

There are situations where you can take advantage of the circumstances, but can it equal as much as $10 more per hour. Perhaps, but I don't know. But David said that the player normally earned $20/hour in a 10/20 game. That's good, but not very good. So can such a player "only" make $20 an hour yet be sophisticated enough to make $10 more in this situation? If he was making $35-$40 I would think him more able. But at this win rate there may be some overlap between the hands he would have made extra money because of the circumstance and the hands he would have made extra money because of his skill.

Now where does this money come from? Clearly, some of the ev the expert is stealing from the player exposing his cards is being re-stollen by hero, but could the expert actually being losing ev in this situation (say the expert gains $4 from sucker and loses $6 to hero)? I wonder . . .

[AviD]

If you are both experts that play equally well, it would be feasible that your expert opponent can reverse your positional advantage, as well as recognize your counter to his eavesdrop hand reading and play back accordingly.

If he knows that you know that he is eavesdropping, and you know that he knows that you know that he is eavesdropping (of course an unethical expert would/should be aware)...then your positional and "insight" advantages may not be as significant as you "think".

[Piers]

There appears to be two main areas where you would gain. First in your pre flop hand selection.

If the flasher plays then you can make some adjustments to your opening hand selection based on what the peeper does.

If only the flasher plays then you should tighten up, as the chance he has a very big hand has increased.

If both play then you can play significantly more hands, both because of the extra information you expect, increases the EV of all hands across the board so more hands are plus EV; But also because the other two player's hand rate to be weaker then normal.

In fact there will be significantly more hands involving the three of you, as both you and peeper will be playing much more loosely when the flasher is in the pot.

Of course once all three of you are in the pot, then are numerous situations that could occur where you will be able to improve the quality of your decisions.

An extra $10 seems plausible to me (I guessed $5), the only problem, is the other strong player will quickly realise that you know what’s happening and adjust, reducing you edge significantly.