PDA

View Full Version : Fold equity? Would someone please explain...


kevstreet
01-13-2005, 12:09 PM
I did a search and found 100 references to "fold" but couldn't find any that gives a definition. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

YourFoxyGrandma
01-13-2005, 12:22 PM
Search for "fold equity" in quotes. Also, I'll just tell you. Fold equity is the added chance you will take down a pot by your opponents folding. For example, you estimate you have a 50% chance of taking down a pot based on the cards alone. If you bet out, you estimate that you have a 65% chance of winning the pot. That added 15% is your fold equity.

Irieguy
01-13-2005, 12:41 PM
There is actually some confusion about this term, and I have seen it used several times to mean something that it doesn't really mean.

Equity: assets minus liabilities

Pot Equity: The chances you will win a pot multiplied by the amount of money in the pot MINUS the chances you will lose a pot mulitplied by the amount of money you put in.

Folding equity: The chances that everybody will fold if you bet, mulitplied by the amount of money in the pot.

Example: Blinds are 100/200 and it is folded to your button. You have 600 chips and estimate that there is a 50% chance both blinds will fold if you push. You have 150 chips worth of folding equity. (notice your pot equity is much different. To figure that, you have to consider how often you will win or lose if called, and how much money you would win or lose in each case. Folding equity is a component of pot equity.)

A lot of times people will use the term "folding equity" to describe the chances that they will win the blinds. But the amount of the blinds makes a big difference. We probably need a new term to describe only "the chances that the blinds will fold if you bet," without regard to the blind amounts. Sometimes it's helpful to discuss only that factor, but we don't have a simple term for it.

Irieguy

kevstreet
01-13-2005, 01:13 PM
Thank you very much fellas, this helps greatly. I kind of had a basic idea, but not nearly as accurate as your definitions.