interesting question..theory vs reality (long post)

[mudbuddha]

Baumer and I play at Casino Niagara, in a NL(100) game. Recently, we have been talking about small edges in poker and law of large numbers and the +ev and all that jazz.

* This is a slightly theoretical question, almost (and i stress almost) applicable for the game we play in. *

At this game, there are several regular players (usually old guys with the big gold jewelery, u know them) who play for bragging rights, aggressive players, either their filthy rich or they just dont care, who always get large stacks playing the most ridiculous cards and makin huge bluffs. These players think

they are gods among men and they basically prey on tourists. By the end of the night, the tables are loose and throwing 500-600 around like crazy, tourists are nuts sometimes.Anyways, my friend and I are very capable of outplaying these super aggressive players. However, recently, a few posts have been on my mind.

Assuming, you have 25 buy-ins when you bought in for the night, and now you have got your stack up to 700-800 (NL100). So your dominating the game and your are playing poker well in all aspects.

In one hand, your big blind and the super-agro is in SB. After it is folded around to you, the guy flips up his AKo. Your holding 77. At about 700$ each, the guy goes all in. Knowing you have 55%/45% to win, do you call? <font color="red"> </font>


The thing that has bothered me lately is that, I am a commerce student, and since poker is about money there is a certain aspect that I have never really seen any discussion on, being the opportunity cost. Does anyone have any insight in the fact that with your stack you are able to continue your strong play, taking advantage of your play in other spots rather than taking this spot just because it is +ev. If you loose your stack you will not be a few hundred behind everyone. (the other guy is willing to try to take you clean outta this game) Thus losing future profits, which you could have earned from choosing another spot. Do you throw away your 7 extra buy-in progress in building your bank roll?

According to the theory of poker discussed in these forums, you should take every small edge possible. Which is a good way of looking at all the scenarios overall. So the 5% or perhaps 10% if you wanna look at it that way. Either way, he puts you to the test. So given this, this is a clear cut call, to many posters.

Given that you are tactically superior to this player and doing well against the whole table.

whats your line here?

[mudbuddha]

any feedback appreciated [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Fold. You can outplay the table later, post-flop, when you have a clearer advantage. I would almost view this situation as a single-table-tournament style scenario, but with an even higher +EV for superior players. Save your money for hands when you are even more dominant.

My first post, been lurking for a while. I lke the site, thanks everyone.

Nick

[mudbuddha]

i agree, but my friend who is hardcore thinks its a waste of +ev.. he says every edge, andy ou must take the best of it.. anyone who would call here?

Short-term +EV vs long-term +EV. If there are a lot of other loose, aggressive players at the table that you have a good read on, you're better off not risking busting out here (especially if you lose the extra power of your big stack). Yeah, you've got a 10% edge here, but I would imagine you'll have at least a few cases where you're a much greater favorite post-flop. 10% expected win here is $70. I think you can make a lot more from this table by folding here and outplaying later (especially with a big stack).

[Kirkrrr]

There was actually a short section in Doyle Brunson's "Poker Wisdom of a Champion" book: There's no point in taking a small edge now when you know you will have a much bigger one later. Especially against a full table of insane tourists willing to give away their money. If you were talking about one $100 buy-in with a bankroll to back it, obviously yes; but in that scenario, I don't think that would be the optimal decision.

Kirk

[jomatty]

normaly it would make no difference wether you call or not. in this instance though you cant apply regular theory. if you could rebuy to cover and your banjkroll was no issue you could call but in a capped buy in game that big stack needs to be put to much better use than a coinflip.

conversely if you had just sat down you would have a clear call (with either hand) getting ahold of a big stack and putting it to good use is crucial in the game you describe.
matty

[Tilt]

Its a question of pricing risk. The price of risk is not easily determined. Just ask yourself whether the $35 in lost EV is worth the risk. I would guess that based on your situation as you describe it, it would be a no.

The being said, you either need to leave that table or stay out of pots with that guy. If you only take big edges in an aggressive game you will get steamrolled.

[OrangeKing]

Exactly - most people here would agree, I think, and even Sklansky mentions this somewhere - it's often right to turn down a good bet if it means you can take an even better one later (just like how it's sometimes right to take a bad bet if it means avoiding an even worse one later).

[mudbuddha]

alright, lets say it was the otherw ay around, and you were purely outclassed by the opponent and he was willing to put his stack vs yours.. would that paint a different picture?