5

According to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker, our expectation is increased every time the opponents make a wrong decision.

On the other hand, Morton's Theorem states that a player's expectation may be maximized by an opponent making a correct decision.

Personally, it appears to me that Morton's theorem is absurd. My reasoning would be that since poker is a zero sum game, the correct decision of an opponent by definition, would mean the one that minimizes the opponents expectations.

It appears that both theorems contradict each other. Which one of them is correct?

1

Never heard of Morton's Theorem, so i did some research.

There are 2 big differences; Sklansky's Theorem of Poker is applied mostly in HU pots, while Morton's Theorem is applied exclusively on multi-way pots.

Morton's Theory says basically that it may be correct (ie. EV+) if your opponents would instead fold a draw (ie. correctly, based on pot odds) rather calling incorrectly with a draw, based on the size of the pot (calculation on the above link), thus moving the equity of the folding player to you instead.

Personally, i never like to make my opponents folding a draw; you want to make money out of their draws, not trying to isolate players, holding hands you don't know about. There's also more calculations for Morton's Theorem.

0

According to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker, our expectation is increased every time the opponents make a wrong decision.

On the other hand, Morton's Theorem states that a player's expectation may be maximized by an opponent making a correct decision.

I think the informal language clouds the issue. Obviously Morton's Theorem doesn't apply heads-up, so we'll assume 3 players, Alice, Bob and Charlie. Charlie makes a mistake. The FPT tells us that Charlie's EV goes down, and the sum of Alice's and Bob's EV goes up. It doesn't tell us what happens to Alice and Bob individually. It could be - it normally isn't, but it could be - that Charlie's mistake also reduces Alice's EV and hands it to Bob instead. In that case, had Charlie made the correct decision for him, he would also be maximising Alice's EV - hence Morton's Theorem.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.