In article <334C9F3B.2...@ix.netcom.com>, andr...@ix.netcom.com (Andy

Last year Mason Malmuth started a thread, also called "Going too far". It
touched on this subject. In it and elsewhere I pointed out what I called a
"limitation" of the FTOP. No one has ever commented on those points.
Perhapss if I had expressed it as a theorem... :-).  Actually, in his
original discussion of the theorem, Sklansky points out that there are
situations where the FTOP does not apply. The reason I did not comment on
your first post is that I thought you were just re-stating what S had.

Just as we all play for different reasons, and play in different ways, we
are interested in different parts of the game (e.g., if more people talked
about gambling hormones, I would find something else to think about :-).
That's what I like about RGP. I find that the more advanced mathematical
concerns are pretty low EV for me, but I get a huge charge out of learning
about how other players evaluate play.

If I understand your main point I find myself in these situations about
once every 15 hands: perhaps once every three or four hours.

I think that if you include more in the pot than the equity represented by
the chips, if you include other factors such as the ability to outplay
opponents, potential bluffs and semi-bluffs, a lot of players have an
intuitive grasp of how to play in these situations (though they would never
recognize their algebraic representation).

These are the players we regard as "tough" as opposed to "tight". They know
intuitively when to raise with 2nd best, how to max the dead money in the
pot to justify potential moves on later rounds, and so on. They play like
they are using rapiers, building huge pots and occasionally winning them
with apparent miracles. You almost never can put them on a hand.

In short, given a pot of contestable size, if you believe you are second
best with outs and that third best has a draw to a bigger hand than yours
with some of your outs, you raise, because you want him to fold. If you
believe that the third best's draw is not in conflict with your own, you
want him to call and minimize your own investment. If there are sufficient
callers, especially if they are in conflict (all with flush draws perhaps)
you want them all to put in more money, You can even cap it -- even though
the leading player will gain more $EV than you, your action is still
profitable.

A game with more than two players who have a grasp of these points is a
thrilling experience!