I don't get it Toonces, referring to your 9/26/06 post, you wrote: Alternative 1a: Player 4 goes all in. Player 3 bets small. This is a very bad decision for Player 3Alternative 2b: Player 4 bets all but $500. Player 3 bets small. This scenario has potential for Player 3.I just don't see the difference or "potential for Player 3" by Player 4 holding back $500. As I see it, in either case, everything is up to Player 4: Player 4 wins - then LB1 is now Player 3 Player 4 surrenders - then LB1 is Player 4 Player 4 pushes - then LB1 is Player 4 Player 4 loses - then LB1 is Player 4Player 3's play doesn't make any difference, everything is up to Player 4 in either alternative. It just doesn't matter what Player 3 does under the scenario you laid out. The $500 doesn't seem to make any difference. I'm with Reachy on this, confused - please clarify
Now, here's that same chart for scenario 1a: Player 4 wins - then LB1 is now Player 3 Player 4 surrenders - then LB1 is Player 4 Player 4 pushes - then LB1 is Player 4 Player 4 loses - then LB1 is Player 3 (because player 4 busted). If you are player 3, you prefer the 1st set of alternatives.