Chart - EV of Calling on the River... (is folding as bad as we think?)

[Wynton]

I'm going to use this thread as an opportunity to repeat a question I haven't yet been able to elicit an answer for: how do we know what the "correct" number is for folding at the river?

Is the concensus view simply based on the numbers respected players have generated, or is there any mathematical basis for the opinions about how often (or how rarely) one should fold at the river?

[imitation]

I guess the reason we say call because the pot is big is because very rarely can we be so sure of our "reads" online, a 4% difference is very difficult to really identify. Given the very random nature of many peoples play makes it difficult to accurately pick a number that really is our pot odds for calling on the river, and Ed and Sklansky's idea is that generally for this reason it's better to call than fold because it's more often correct (which I think we know it is). Also for metagame reasons that I think are difficult to quantify many people have built a game around not folding much on the river.

[ QUOTE ]
I guess the reason we say call because the pot is big is because very rarely can we be so sure of our "reads" online, a 4% difference is very difficult to really identify. Given the very random nature of many peoples play makes it difficult to accurately pick a number that really is our pot odds for calling on the river, and Ed and Sklansky's idea is that generally for this reason it's better to call than fold because it's more often correct (which I think we know it is). Also for metagame reasons that I think are difficult to quantify many people have built a game around not folding much on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this, and that Ed Miller's idea of calling "because the pot is big" is a pretty good reason. Obviously there are times where a fold is easy. But looking at the chart, its very very hard to calculate with certainty your exact chances of winning the pot to make the correct +EV decision. Since it will often be close, it is always better to err on the side of calling. This is because if opponents see you folding many rivers, it encourages them to bluff at you when for example they missed a draw they have been playing stronly. The increased chances of your opponents bluffing makes it even harder to calculate your exact winning %, which causes us to make even more mistakes.

[Surfbullet]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm going to use this thread as an opportunity to repeat a question I haven't yet been able to elicit an answer for: how do we know what the "correct" number is for folding at the river?

Is the concensus view simply based on the numbers respected players have generated, or is there any mathematical basis for the opinions about how often (or how rarely) one should fold at the river?

[/ QUOTE ]

from my understanding of it this stems from a "look at him, he's good, wins alot, and folds xx%. that's probably best"-type thing. certainly FRB should be lower at 6max than full ring b/c we are folding less in general, but your playstyle weighs heavily on this.

Players like Josh who check behind on the turn to call river bets in aggressive games will have a much lower FRB than someone like me who fires again often, so if i'm faced with river aggression it's usually a c/r or a donkbet after a free SD raise which I can usually confidently fold to. Reads change this pretty significantly, as do the games you play in...the party 20/40 i fold much less than I do at UB 10/20.

Surf

[Ed Miller]

[ QUOTE ]
Some people don't understand this. Most good players do. Folding the river for 1 bet is not a big mistake because it costs you the pot. Ed Miller, I believe, was simplifying a rule for the unwashed masses. Those of us that aspire to greater heights have to leave behind the comfortable (but -EV) river calls.

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to say that it sometimes amazes me how much "pokerthink" has changed since I started writing SSH two years ago. Ideas that seem like dogma now were fighting the uphill battle just two years ago.

Calling on the river with marginal hands was one of those ideas. Two years ago, the Small Stakes Forum (there was no Microlimit or MHSH or SSSH or whatever) was full of people who thought the key to winning limit hold 'em was finding the right spot to lay down top pair. And for them, the right spot was basically any time they got raised.

I'm really not kidding. Often they didn't even have to get raised to fold. If the flop got bet and called, their A7 on an A94 board was going straight in the mucker even if they had the button, even if the pot had ten bets in it, and even if the bettor was kinda crazy. Get raised on the turn? Top pair is auto-mucked. Flush comes on the river and a new person bets? Auto-muck.

In large part, some of my writings in SSH were designed specifically to counteract those ideas. I was writing to people who were folding way way too much.

Well, now "pokerthink" has swung the other way it seems. I think people on this forum generally play a whole lot better than they did two years ago, but I would be remiss if I claimed that no SSH-induced leaks existed.

Yes, learning to fold correctly on the river is an important skill. If you call routinely with hopeless hands, you have a big problem.

I'll give a quick river tip that will hopefully help some people. Bets mean something, but raises mean a whole lot more. They mean more still if you've called in between. For instance, just last night I folded K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]J [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] on a 9 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]5 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]T [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] board for a single bet, closing the action in a 23BB pot. Why?

Because the action on the river went bet, I called, and then someone behind me raised. Given the player, the previous action in the hand (they went nuts on the turn, and I got carried along for the ride... calling the last bet knowing full well there was a fair chance I was drawing dead), and the river raise after a bet and a call, this was 100% a full house. While the strong turn action could have been A4, this player absolutely does not raise after the flush card comes and there's a bet and a call without a boat. So I folded. He had 55.

This is an extreme example, but one that shows quite clearly that there is an exception to every rule. On the river you need to use your judgement. If you are 2% to win, and you are getting only 12-to-1, you have an easy fold. But don't start folding top pair again just because someone else breathes on you. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[baronzeus]

[ QUOTE ]
On the river you need to use your judgement.

[/ QUOTE ]

The best part of the post by far.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]

Calling on the river with marginal hands was one of those ideas. Two years ago, the Small Stakes Forum (there was no Microlimit or MHSH or SSSH or whatever) was full of people who thought the key to winning limit hold 'em was finding the right spot to lay down top pair. And for them, the right spot was basically any time they got raised.

I'm really not kidding. Often they didn't even have to get raised to fold. If the flop got bet and called, their A7 on an A94 board was going straight in the mucker even if they had the button, even if the pot had ten bets in it, and even if the bettor was kinda crazy. Get raised on the turn? Top pair is auto-mucked. Flush comes on the river and a new person bets? Auto-muck.

In large part, some of my writings in SSH were designed specifically to counteract those ideas. I was writing to people who were folding way way too much.

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally agree. I also think you did a brilliant job swinging the pendulum. And I also think great players understand what you meant by "folding the river for 1 more bet" given the metagame context the book was written in.

Krishan

So now it's time for a new book called the "Complete Theory of Limit Hold'em" [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[baronzeus]

.33 BB is a huge mistake. river decisions are the most important in a hand, by far, imo.

[MarkD]

[ QUOTE ]
.33 BB is a huge mistake. river decisions are the most important in a hand, by far, imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, of course. That is another thing that this chart illustrates - just how important good river decisions are. You don't have to be off by very much percentage in either direction before you are making a significant mistake.