The paradox of making money from opponents mistakes

[sweetjazz]

[ QUOTE ]
I still stand by my postion that the villian played "mistake free" poker when he bets the flop. He is acting in a manner that shows the most profit based on the information he has at the time. The same is also true when he calls the flop c/r.

[/ QUOTE ]

The relevant defintion of "mistake" for the analysis of this hand according to the FTOP is playing other than you would have if you could see your opponent's hand. In that sense, betting with AJ in the hand you described is a mistake.

As Sklansky CLEARLY POINTS OUT in TOP, this is an unusual sense of the word "mistake". The villain did not play badly here, because there is no way he could determine your hand. He played well, but he made a mistake from the point of view of the TOP. Just as calling with four of a kind on the river when your opponent has a royal flush is a mistake, though obviously not a bad play in general.

Nowhere in TOP does Sklansky ever suggest it is possible to play mistake-free poker. The goal is simply to make less mistakes than your opponents do.

In keeping with the way Sklansky discusses TOP, your "paradox" is resolved by noting that while the villain made a theoretical mistake from the point of view of people who know what the hole cards are, his play was obviously not a bad one given the information available to him.