[jtr]

I am most definitely not trying to insult you, D., and I apologize for anything in the post that gave that impression. If I've said something specifically offensive then let me know what it was.

I do feel you're being a little uncharitable here, however. Of course a knowledgeable player will not knowingly call a river bet when he believes himself not to have the pot odds to do so. But on the river it is often difficult to be precise about your chances of holding the best hand. (In contrast to earlier streets in which you can often be quite precise about your chances of drawing to the nuts or thereabouts.) So I do feel that for many players of reasonable experience, calling the turn raise is often done in the knowledge that, disastrous river cards excepted, a river bet will probably be called as well. The reason being that you won't know what your outs are. So it can make sense to look at the odds to call both as a package deal in the way I described. I completely agree with you that this analysis is incomplete and approximate, and that a better analysis would certainly include the option to call the raise and check-fold the river unimproved. If your thinking at the table always covers all of these options then more power to you; mine sometimes does not and I am looking for some speedy heuristics to help with the decision-making process.

In my defence, I'm pretty sure there's a page in SSHE in which the noted poker authority spells out some similar logic. I'll look it up if you think it would help.

And finally, yes, you're right, B of about 10% or more is going to be the threshold at which a strategy of calling down becomes clearly viable.