Re: A couple of questions
[ QUOTE ]
The friends and the hat example is an excellent explanation of pot equity. Thanks, pov.
T
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, very good illustration.
The OP has made a pretty sophisticated observation: the decision to raise isn't as +EV in % terms as the decision to stay in. It's merely +EV, but that's enough to make it worth doing.
If I offer to toss you a black $100 chip at the table, your best move is to say, "OK, thanks!" If I then follow up by saying that since you took my black chip, I'd like to offer a red $5 chip as well, you shouldn't say, "Oh, but accepting this would be less +EV than accepting that black chip, so I decline." In fact it IS less positive-EV, but it's still positive EV. If I had asked you to choose between the two chips, that would be different, but I didn't. You're not choosing between calling or somehow raising without calling. You're choosing to call, which is really really +EV, and then given that you call you also raise, which is less +EV. But they're both +EV.
OK, I've muddied the waters. Go read pov's post again to undo my damage. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|