Theoretical Modification to All-In Procedure

Hermlord · #1 03-25-2005, 02:13 PM

Imagine the following change in the rules of NL: when one or more players is all-in and there is no more betting, instead of dealing out the hand and giving the winner the pot, it is simply chopped up according to the win percentage.

Ex. Player A bets $50 all-in with AA; player B calls with KK. AA is 82% favorite over KK, so player A gets $82 and player B gets $18 (I'm rounding).

Yes this would be very boring. No I do not think this is a good idea. It's theoretical.

What changes in strategy would this entail, if any? Is it different for tournament vs. cash game? A few initial thoughts:

--If a tournament short-stack pushes all-in, and you have the big stack, you no longer call with like, J8s to knock 'em out, as they are likely favorite and you'll just give 'em a few more chips. Come to think of it, it becomes very hard to knock out opponents; maybe if you get below a certain number of BB the "old" rules apply again.

--Looking at the extremes, AA is always a favorite, so calling an all-in with it, you are risking $0. Conversely, with 27o or 23o you are always going to lose money. So it seems better hands get better and worse hands get worse. Did I mis-analyze this?

I haven't thought about this too deeply at all. I will contemplate it more as I fold the night away at B&M tonight.

Smasharoo · #2 03-25-2005, 02:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I haven't thought about this too deeply at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hermlord · #3 03-25-2005, 02:48 PM

? Does that mean:

1) you haven't thought about it either
2) my examples are wrong
3) I am wrong for posting a question whose solution I don't have fully worked out
4) other

My replies

1) OK, great.
2) Please correct, rather than calling me an idiot
3) I'm calling you an idiot
4) Please explain.

jtr · #4 03-25-2005, 02:51 PM

No comment on whether this odd procedure would make any difference to tournament play, but unless I'm missing something really important, it seems that it would make no difference whatsoever to strategy in ring games.

TheShootah · #5 03-25-2005, 03:08 PM

Yeah.....how does anyone get eliminated if the money is split according to percentages....the only way someone loses is if he is dead! Else you will see people with fractions of chips....unless I misread your post!
Edit: This makes no sense to me. Basically let's think up this scenario..I am in a tourney. I decide that basically I will only commit all my chips on nuts draws...I can never ever lose. I will always be drawing to the nuts...so I will always get some percentage back.

Big Country · #6 03-27-2005, 02:43 PM

Always push preflop.

You can never be eliminated if you are all-in preflop, unless that what the OP means in his first sentence is that if there is still potential betting, the hand is continued to be dealt out, in which case you could be all-in and lose.

pryor15 · #7 03-27-2005, 04:16 PM

that's a great idea, because dealers are really good at calculating percentages and dividing things up. hell, most dealers have trouble with dividing the pot 50/50 on a push

Civiliste · #8 03-28-2005, 10:29 AM

Wouldn't this actually discourage you from going all-in with monsters? IMO, it won't be the monsters moving all-in anymore, it'll be the marginal hands when there's the possibility of a coin flip situation. Furthermore, the previous posts are right. There would be no way to eliminate players; not a huge concern in cash games (even the loser would walk away with enough to call for a ride home), but this would destroy the tournament structure.

$0.02 donated (if only I could claim it on my taxes),
-Zak

Hermlord · #9 03-28-2005, 03:19 PM

As pointed out by me and others, this would make tournaments very different. I had one of two things in mind:

1) After you are short-stacked beneath a certain point, the regular rules apply. So if you move in with a 4BB stack and lose, you're out. Or,

2) An infinitely long tournament.

I am interested in how the math changes, not the practical ramifications -- obviously asking dealers to handle this is ridonkulous, though online maybe not such a problem. Infinite tournaments would probably not be too popular.

Classes just started so I've been ignoring this problem. However without doing any math, my intuition now tells me that cash games would be exactly the same, as some people stated above.