Aggression and Collusion

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
this thread is about loose aggressive tables exclusively.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which I realized after I made my original post; hence my two follow-up posts.

[Louie Landale]

Even your contrived example supports my view. You are better off being a 65% favorite against 4 opponents than an 85% favorite against 1. As a 65% favorite you are 2:1 to win. 2 times you win 4 bets and 1 time you lose 1, for a win of 7 bets in 3 attempts or a whopping 2.33 bets per attempt. Being an 85% favorite against one opponent means you win a solid .7 bets per attempt. The PF pot has to be huge to make those close to even.

An using your contrived example (two good straight draws out), let me contrive hands A2, K6s, Q7s, and 65. Now there are 4 more opponents drawing but are adding maybe 2 more losers for you (the back door flush draws). Then you are about a 60% favorite (3:2) getting 8:1 for your money; 3 times you win 8 and 2 times you lose 1 for 24-2= 22 bets in 5 attempts or dream-come-true 4.4 bets per attempt. And you get to bet 3 more times during the hand. There will be no Viagara commercials when they show that on ESPN.

Yes, a pair of Aces in Stud against 4 different flush draws on 4th street is about a 14:1 underdog and should be folded to any bet; but such a situation with the big-pair "best" hand doesn't come up in Holdem. Really, there are just not enough different hands they can draw to.

- Louie