Re: A question about equity
 

[ QUOTE ]
That ended up being real long - I hope it made sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

that ended up being an awesome post, thank you.

Re: A question about equity
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you are deciding between checking behind the turn and calling the river, or betting the turn and checking behind the river UI, it is always better to bet the turn. without improving your hand, you are more likely to be ahead on the turn than the river. By betting the turn, and encouraging your opponent to check to you on the river, you put your 1 bet in with the highest equity, and have the opportunity to bet the river again if you improve.


[/ QUOTE ]

Grreat post! I havn't thought about that. A post of gold.

Re: A question about equity
 

Hey Cartman,

Regarding Nikla's post:

If I understand the general idea, it is that even if we have a hand such as K9-hi which isn't inspiring in of itself, it is actually a hand with a significant amount of showdown value heads-up. This assumes our opponent will peel loosely and often has a hand worse than ours. In a multiway pot gone headsup this does not apply. Additionally, many opponents who are loose preflop will only call the flop with some draw or pair or big Ace.

Giving a free card in position is bad when we are often ahead because:
-We don't give our opponent the chance to make a mistake by calling incorrectly
-We forfeit our hand's showdown value since only the best of our unpaired hands can call a river bet
-We make ourselves easier to play against - players are more likely to peel lightly on the flop if they can expect a free card with any regularity

However, other factors sway a bet to a check, as mentioned above:
-How likely our opponent is likely to bluff-raise a worse hand on the turn
-If our opponent would fold correctly on the turn but bluff incorrectly on the river
-How likely we are to have the best hand

Accurately judging how often our A-or K-hi hand is best is a difficult endeavor to say the least, but the most important. When we are often behind it is clearly wrong to bet, since we will not fold worse hands. Reading the board texture, knowing our opponent(whether by stats, category LAG/TAG etc or hopefully by reads) and recognizing the flow of the game (have we been consistently showing down winners?) all factor into this difficult analysis.

Surf

Re: A question about equity
 

i recall exactly which post Nikla made this comment and i too was under the impression that heads up Nikla would fire again on the turn with very very few exceptions. also in your post you said you are more inclined to fire again on the turn if a "big card" hits. can you define specifically what your "big cards" are. i realize A is in that catagory and i assume K as well, but what about Q?

Re: A question about equity
 

I think it is a decent assumption that the typical opponent will never ever fold a pair heads up. So the point of betting when a "big card" hits in my opinion is not because he will think "Uh oh, I had better fold my small pair because an Ace just hit and it is likely that the preflop raiser now has a pair of Aces". I think the reason it is good to bet the big card is because often he called the flop bet with one or more overcards which are no longer overcards because of the turn card.

So I guess it is not so much the sheer size of the turn card as it is the distance between the top card on the flop and the turn card.

Cartman

Re: A question about equity
 

Some passives won't bet the river with a pair (and it's likely they're ahead) when u didn't bet the turn. In this case u save a bet with ur A and K-high hands when u miss, don't u? Do u think this aspect outweights the fold equity u create by betting the turn? I think it does