[naphand]

The 25% equity figure is taken from seeing the next two cards, i.e. getting to the River. You are right in pointing out the actual figure for taking one more card is around 13%.

The point of the bet -vs- CR argument is that PFR commits his mistake by betting the flop when behind, but is correct to call the CR. Obviously if defender plans this then he is taking a chunk of both bets going in with the best of it. However, when we reach the Turn ther eis a greater amount of equity at stake, the pot is bigger and the bets just increased. CR the flop and betting the Turn gets less money in than check-calling the flop and CR the Turn. This is a more profitable line and also forces two mistakes from PFR when he plays bet-bet. But this seems irrelevant...

I am still having problems with the following (posted earlier):

[ QUOTE ]
Say PFR bets every street and Defender just calls down? PFR is making a TOP mistake on every street by betting. If Defender bets out the flop and PFR just calls down (calling correctly, assumng the pot is big enough), PFR makes no TOP mistakes as he calls correctly each time, yet the net result is the same. The pot is the same size at SD and each player put in the same money. Why are they different? You can argue that Defender made a TOP mistake by never raising (in the check-calling example), yet his pot equity was the same and the $$ in the bank were the same. How does "profiting from TOP mistakes" fit in with this, when in one case PFR makes 3 mistakes to Defenders one, and the in the other both played correctly? Profit identical.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does this illustrate the irrelevance of TOP mistakes where equity and profitability is concerned? How can a mistake-free hand be as profitable as one littered with mistakes? Clearly this can be the case, so where does it leave TOP? Is the notion of committing TOP mistakes even important? It seems to me that the kind of theory Gary Carson talks of in his book (all poker games start as a battle for the rights to the ante/blinds etc.) is more relevant from a strategical perspective, TOP is just damn confusing as in the example above there is no additional profit from "mistakes" compared to a "mistake-free" hand.

Can someone address this? I think if we are talking strategy and maximum EV plays, we need to clear up exactly what consitututes profitable and unprofitable play from a theoretical viewpoint. TOP does not appear to be helping in this respect.