[elindauer]

That's an interesting theory barron. You say intuitively you can get there. I feel intuitively you can't. I'm too lazy to do any rigorous math, so on some level we'll have to agree to disagree.

One thing to consider though is how bad the call would be if you did not know the raiser's hand. You are totally dominated, it would be awful. You agree, right?

Now, as more players enter the pot, it's going to be harder and harder for you to outplay everybody, even with the knowledge of 1 players hand. Where are the extra wins going to come from?

Presumably, you must be able to win unimproved or slightly improved more often because you know the Qs hand. I'm sure you pick up something, but I suspect it's not much. Qs have a way of sticking to a player's hand. If there is an overcard out, you have to raise and hope that a) the other guys don't have the overcard, and b) the Qs will fold. That's an expensive bluff when it fails.

If there is no overcard, you will rarely be succesful in bluffing out the Qs. And with the Qs on your right, you can't even take advantage of knowing he'll value bet through the field letting you check-raise those times you do get lucky and make a big hand.

These are just qualatative arguments of course. I'm not proving the case. Just trying to let you know why my intuition says the fold is bad. You start way down, and don't have that many ways to make up ground.

-Eric