Nope, it won't win anything more than if it were keeping his agreement with other miners, because it has only a fraction of the hash rate, and can hence only provide just as many blocks as it would when with his peers. In other words, that pool is betting on making a very short chain, with much less PoW than the rest of his peers, and breaking his agreement.
In other words, if this pool has 10% of all the hash rate, when his peers have mined 90 blocks on the new chain, he will have mined 10 blocks on the old chain. Most merchants and exchanges will not see their transactions on this small chain because the blocks are too full. So merchants and exchanges would still be locked out of bitcoin for 90% - while they would be running entirely NORMALLY if they simply upgrade their node to the majority hash rate of the miners' rules, and see all their transactions.
you have no clue..
now you are meandering into trying to argue about hash power.. yet you dont even understand hashpower either
you are presuming if it takes pool A 10minutes.. then it would take pool B 20 minutes, pool C 30 minutes.
that is not the case.
pools B and C could have found a block just SECONDS later.. but because there is only 1 winner. no one cares about the runners up timing.
if you take 1 pool away its not going to take 20 minutes to make a block. it can still take 10 minutes average block, just less competition so that the runners up now become winners more often, without affecting the average time much
i think its time you go to a shop and get some dice.. and some friends and family and play out some scenarios of randomness.. and see some real world scenarios play out.. it will surprise youtake your 10% of network hash scnario for instance
buy 100 dice..
get 10 people and give them 10 dice each. and ask them all to keep rolling until they get a total of lets say 600(adding each roll)
at very luckiest 1 person MIGHT get it in 10 rolls.. at unluckiest 1 person might get it in 60 rolls.
what you wont find is that if after playing the game for 2 weeks you found out the average took 20 rolls .. does not mean
if you took one person away it would average 40 rolls,
took one person away it would average 60 rolls,
took one person away it would average 80 rolls,
took one person away it would average 100 rolls
took one person away it would average 120 rolls
took one person away it would average 140 rolls
took one person away it would average 160 rolls
took one person away it would average 180 rolls
took one person away it would average 200 rolls
you would see the average would still be ~20 rolls. but now there are less people competing. so other people win more often.. and getting the result just miliseconds/couple roll variance before the other