[MrWookie47]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Almost. It's a value bet if he has a hand you beat 50% of the time GIVEN thant he calls. If he never calls your bet, there's no value in it. If he never calls w/o a hand better than yours, then there's negative value in it, since he'll fold often, but will cost you a bet when he beats you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that is what I was saying, only with the chances that he does or doesn't have the queen weighted in. Assuming that he has the queen less than 50% of the time, and he calls 100% of the time when he does, the times he needs to call WITHOUT the queen is LESS than 50% of the time.

(Chance he has Q (-1BB * chance he calls) + (Chance he doesn't have Q (1BB * chance he calls)) = 1

If he has a queen less than 50% of the time, we need him to call fewer times when he doesn't have it to make this a valuable bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't thought through your reasoning completely enough to say whether it's right or wrong. However, the fact that I have to think so hard tells me that going with the Sklanksy method which I described is much easier and much more useful at the table. I find it much easier to just estimate the hands he'll call me with than it is to take into account what hands he'll call me with AND the probability he has them.