turn

[Jake (The Snake)]

I'd bet against this opponent and probably check against a more aggressive opponent who might bluff the river even if he has less than king high. I'd be more willing to check with an ace here instead of a king though, since I could be more comfortable calling a river bet... but nut no-ace is underrrated anyway.

I think this depends on the opponent. For example a solid player is never folding anything to that turn bet because he already picked up something on the flop.

yeah, I think we have lots of fold equity here, and outs if we get raised. I would bet this like 90% of the time against this kind of opponent.

[admiralfluff]

Lots of people are referring to fold equity, but what exactly are you talking about? Folding equity generally refers to equity gained when a villain makes fold that has lower EV than calling or raising. The value of folding equity is the difference in EV between villain's optimal decision and his fold, which is simply the EV of villain's most EV positive play. (His mistake becomes our gain).

In this situation, with this loose opponent, he is almost always seeing a SD with A high. He is never folding a pair. If he folds any of his 6-outers, he is making a correct fold. I agree that a bet is best, but on the grounds of pure pot equity. Sorry for being a nit, but I think it's important to clarify the fundamental factors driving our decisions.

[ QUOTE ]
I think this depends on the opponent. For example a solid player is never folding anything to that turn bet because he already picked up something on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's what I was thinking...read dependant. I think it's okay to bet if in question and against a passive player.

[POKhER]

Fold equity in my brain is the % chance of your opponent(s) folding. It reduces SHARPLY with more opponents.

So if he folds 50%... thats our FE in my mind anyhow.

[Chairman Wood]

[ QUOTE ]
So you generally check here against this type of opponent? I would think that the things that Peter said as reasons to bet outweigh the fear of getting c/red.

If you do get c/red and you are fairly confident that it's not a c/r bluff, then you can easily get away from the hand on the river UI.

I dunno, it seems to be better to err on the side of aggression here. But then again, I think I'm too aggressive sometimes.

edit: I should note that it is a good point not to autobet so much as your post implied.

[/ QUOTE ] If you get c/r do you call a river bet if you spike say the Q [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]?

[DCWildcat]

We've got lots of outs. We're very often still ahead. Villain will often fold. I favor a bet.

[admiralfluff]

From a theoretical standpoint:

Equity is an actual measure of a portion of the pot. Pot equity is comprised of our hand equity + our fold equity. Our hand equity is the % that our hand will win at SD, times the value of the pot. Our fold equity is the equity gained by a fold of our opponent times the chance that he folds.

An example:

We are at SD with A8o HU OoP on a KQ526 rainbow board.

In order to make a bet profitable based on pot equity, we would want our opponent to have a worse hand more than 50% of the time when he called. If we knew our opponent would fold 70% of the time, we would require him to have a worse hand and call 15% of the time to make a bet profitable. Because there are 2 opponents on the river, 50% of the river bets is even equity. If we get 2 bets in on the river (1 from us, 1 from villain) and win more than 54% of the time. our equity edge is 4%*(bets in on river). Hence we get a positive return on our investment.

70% is not our folding equity. When villain folds a worse hand on the river, we gain no share of the pot. We only care when villain folds a better hand. Unlike our SD pot equity, our folding equity is a return percentage on the entire pot, not just the river round. If villain folds a better hand 1% of the time, our folding equity is 1%*(whole pot). So the complete requirements to make a profitable river bet, (are SD equity edge) * (bets in on river) + (fold equity) * (whole pot) > 0.

So betting and folding a better A sometimes can add signidicant value to a bet, which could make a bet correct even if he has a better hand far more than 50% of the time when he calls.

Considering soley how often our opponent folds is meaningless from an equity standpoint. We must consider how this fold changes our long term share of the pot (our EV)

So back to the OP, if our opponent will never make an incorrect fold on the turn we have no fold equity, and how often our opponent folds to our turn bet should not be a consideration. Howver, when our opponent calls our turn bet knowing how often he folds is important, but for different reasons. Once he calls, how often he folds will reshape the probability distribution of all of his possible holdings, effecting future decisions, but not the decision to bet the turn.

Of course, there are other ways to evaluate any problem, but the above method is probably most copasetic for the human mind.

[POKhER]

I'll return to this tommor when i can process information [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img].

Meanwhile, So you agree its the % chance the guy folds yeah?

In which case, I reckon he will fold INCORRECTLY (i.e. he holds a pp like 22 or something) gaining us $$$$.