[Guruman]

It looks like I misunderstood your premise a little there Stellar. I'll take another whack.

[ QUOTE ]

Suppose Villain bets preflop. You can call this bet or you can raise in which case assume Villain will call.

Thus the preflop pot can be 2 SB or 4 SB at your option. The preflop raise carries zero EV.

Now consider the postflop play. A gutshot should be folded on the flop irrespective of whether the pot is 2 SB or 4 SB. Hero will play the hand exactly the same postflop regardless of what he did preflop. For his own reasons Villain will also play the hand exactly the same postflop.

Since the postflop action will be identical in every respect, it follows that the preflop action cannot change the winner of the pot nor the amount of postflop bets won by the winner. We also noted above that the preflop raise has zero EV.

So why do you think it is more profitable not to raise preflop? If the bigger Sklansky mistake means you make more money, then where is the extra money coming from? It's not preflop and it's not postflop either.

There is a way out of this apparent paradox. The Fundamental Theorem is not wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that there is no edge one way or the other when both players consider the odds. regardless of the size of the pot, the one who flops top kicker will automatically take down the pot uncontested.

With the gambler, the edge has to come from position, but only because this hand will be won on the turn every time.

I think a critical question is, what will top pair do on the turn those times that the gutshot connects?

will he recognize the straight board and opt to check/fold?
will he bet if he is checked to?
will a made gutshot lead every turn?
if a made gutshot checkraises, will the top pair pay him off?

I can’t figure this one without accounting for the turn here.