First off, we are talking about hypotheses here at low stakes. In other words, if it doesn't work, I'll try something else!
But I have a strong hunch that this theory is correct. After all, you have the same number of players and the same betting structure as in short-handed limit. So I reckon that if you see the same percentage of flops, raise with the same percentage of hands, and achieve the same win ratio when you see the flop, then you are likely to win a similar amount of money.
The flaw in the argument would be if the other players played very differently from the way they play limit hold'em. For example, if everyone else was much more passive pre-flop and much more aggressive on rounds 2 and 3, then your strategy simply would not generate the same number of wins when flop seen. But I suspect that the betting strategy of other players will not be dissimilar to short-handed limit hold 'em. In this sense, TD has more in common with limit Hold 'em than does, for example, PLO.
And, as a starting principle, I like it. Where else would you start?
On the percentage strategy.
But I have a strong hunch that this theory is correct. After all, you have the same number of players and the same betting structure as in short-handed limit. So I reckon that if you see the same percentage of flops, raise with the same percentage of hands, and achieve the same win ratio when you see the flop, then you are likely to win a similar amount of money.
The flaw in the argument would be if the other players played very differently from the way they play limit hold'em. For example, if everyone else was much more passive pre-flop and much more aggressive on rounds 2 and 3, then your strategy simply would not generate the same number of wins when flop seen. But I suspect that the betting strategy of other players will not be dissimilar to short-handed limit hold 'em. In this sense, TD has more in common with limit Hold 'em than does, for example, PLO.
And, as a starting principle, I like it. Where else would you start?