I want to point out that all of the ranges I used depend on the knowledge that there are that many callers. If I'm in middle position, I may limp with a hand that can take two callers as long as it's folded to me.

Quote Originally Posted by Xianti
I personally wouldn't include QJs even as a "maybe" against 2 all-in callers.
I agree 100%. I did some thinking on the situation, and found that when I used the hand { 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q3s+, J8s+, T9s, A2o+, K2o+, Q2o+, J8o+, T8o, 98o } that SHAKE used above, I'm beaten alot more often than not.

SHAKE. I see that you have used the math very well. However, I think that getting your money in in this situation with some of the hands you describe will cause more trouble than not. The math here won't take into consideration that this guy is AI on every hand. You will be abe to take advantage of the bigger hands in your range, and capitalize on them alot more often than you would normally get the chance to. In this situation, I am going to get enough opportunities with my bigger edges to make it fine just to wait for them. Even when he goes broke, he rebuys and I get the chance to take his stack again. You did differentiate between %EV, and $EV; however, when does any poker player use pure %EV to make decisions. This math just seems pointless to me.