S
Syfted
Rock Star
Silver Level
I gave my friend the following ridiculous cash game hypothetical:
Folds to CO, who moves All-in for 10% of your bankroll. You have him covered. He also flips over his hand, AhKs. You look down at QhQs on the button.
I told him he was about 55% to 45% to win (actually 56.1% to 43.4%). He advocated folding because it wasn't worth the variance.
I argued that the edges in poker are so small that to fold in this spot would be absolutely insane.
The blinds are in the pot. They have really, really low odds of holding big pocket pairs since you hold the QQ and your opponent holds the AK.
Is my friend a risk-averse nit? Or does his variance argument actually have some merit?
Folds to CO, who moves All-in for 10% of your bankroll. You have him covered. He also flips over his hand, AhKs. You look down at QhQs on the button.
I told him he was about 55% to 45% to win (actually 56.1% to 43.4%). He advocated folding because it wasn't worth the variance.
I argued that the edges in poker are so small that to fold in this spot would be absolutely insane.
The blinds are in the pot. They have really, really low odds of holding big pocket pairs since you hold the QQ and your opponent holds the AK.
Is my friend a risk-averse nit? Or does his variance argument actually have some merit?