# If alkyl-substituted alkenes are more stable, how does one explain their increased addition reactivity?

My understanding is that in alkyl-substituted alkenes there is hyperconjugation between $$𝜎(\ce{C−X})$$ and $$𝜋^∗(\ce{C=C})$$. I also have read that more alkyl-substituted alkenes are many folds more reactive in addition reactions. I understand how hyperconjugation stabilizes alkyl-substituted carbocations.

However, based on the fact that alkyl-substituted alkenes are more "stable", and the fact that the hyperconjugation between their $$𝜎(\ce{C−X})$$ and $$𝜋^∗(\ce{C=C})$$ causing a delocalization of electrons at the $$\ce{C=C}$$ double bond, wouldn't the alkyl-substituted alkene be less reactive? Obviously stability comes into play, and additionally the loss of electron density at the $$\ce{C=C}$$ double bond should mean that the $$𝜋$$ bond is less of a nucleophile so would prevent attraction of electrophilic addition.

One way I came up to justify this is maybe that the stability from the hyperconjugation of the carbocation outweighs stability from hyperconjugation of alkene. Or that somehow the hyperconjugation between $$σ(\ce{C-X})$$ and $$π^∗(\ce{C=C})$$ adds electron density to the $$𝜋^∗$$ making it more attractive to electrophiles that can break the $$\ce{C=C}$$ double bond. Of course, I am only using these as justifications to fill in misunderstandings.