equity question

I understand that a flush draw will hit 35% of the time by the river, so if I'm against 3 opponents and only contributing 25% of the pot, I have an equity edge at that point. But if I'm only against one or two generic opponents (all things being equal), how should my approach change? If I'm responsible for 33% of the pot, do I still bet my "even" pot equity? Plus, if I'm heads up, do I tend to lay back? This is assuming I have no read or desire to get tricky with my opponents. Thanks guys.

[LetYouDown]

[ QUOTE ]
If I'm responsible for 33% of the pot, do I still bet my "even" pot equity? Plus, if I'm heads up, do I tend to lay back?

[/ QUOTE ]
Whoa. 34.5% > 33%. This is not even. I'd push that edge all day, every day. I hear casinos are doing well pushing edges of that magnitude.

If you're heads up in an empty pot, you fold if the only way you will win is hitting the flush. Against two opponents, if you were certain you had a 34.5% chance of winning the hand (flush will win for you), you raise. Any more than that, raise until the cows come home. Granted, that's a big assumption to make. The size of the pot always comes into play here...but if you're assuming an "empty" pot: you fold heads up, you raise anything else. This is assuming you're playing Limit HE.

Don't count your chickens before they've hatched. If an astute player puts you on a flush draw, and you do your math that way, they can exploit it by getting you to call high, and then pushing you out of the pot on a bad turn.

So, you really only get that .35+ pot equity if you discount implied odds. (Theres a really nice thread about the EV of checking behind that you might want to look at.)

[Finite_Risk]

I assume you mean you are all in at this point - with 35% to hit by River and betting STILL TO HAPPEN on the turn, the 33% of the pot on the flop is a bit of apples and oranges.

Another point I find fascinating is "pushing edges all day long". While I understand that if you are ahead, EVENTUALLY you will be +EV be pushing that edge over time, the variance will likely crush you in the mean time.

Better question is, does the edge here compensate me for the variance I am assuming. Same concept in retirement planning - one portfolio may have a higher Exp Return, but the variance makes the outcome over anything less than a million years more uncertain.