"Value Bet"?

[LeftBack]

How about:

Any bet with +EV?

For example, if you have a OESD (8 outs = 31.5% success) draw w/ two cards to come, and three people call your bet:
For 100 bets, you win $125 (100*.315*4) and you lose $59.50. Your EV is $66.50/100, or .665.

Here's a hand from Two Dimes:

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=376815
pokenum -h th 8h - ad kh -- 9h jd kd
Holdem Hi: 990 enumerated boards containing Kd Jd 9h
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Th 8h 331 33.43 659 66.57 0 0.00 0.334
Ad Kh 659 66.57 331 33.43 0 0.00 0.666

Wouldn't raising AdKh on the river be +EV?

I don't see why the term needs to be restricted to certain situations?

[LeftBack]

This EV calc is wrong.

You only NET $94.50, and your EV is $35/100 or .35.

[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[Louie Landale]

A "bluff" has positive EV. Perhaps you mean "positive EV when called".

- Louie

[ddubois]

"Positive EV when called" is the best definition I've seen in this thread.

Betting for value is not exclusive to made hands, or "best" hands. If Jim has top two pair, and Bob has nut flush draw, and there are 5 more players at the table with crap like bottom pair and backdoor straight draws, then both Jim and Bob can bet "for value". They are making money with every customer they get to call, regardless of the eventual outcome. Both Jim and Bob want callers.

If you want callers, you are probably "betting for value". (I'm trying to think of a case where this statement is false, but I cannot.)

[Louie Landale]

This is not really a nit-pick even if it looks like one.

Lets not confuse "positive EV when called" with "wanting a call": if there are 8 bets in the pot and you figure to be a 2:1 favorite if you bet and get called then your value bet is positive. Never-the-less you prefer NOT to get called since winning 8 bets 100% is better than winning 9 bets 66% of the time.

That's real common: betting for value, even encouraging a call, yet hoping not to get called.

- Louie

[Louie Landale]

The "standard" definition is betting figuring to win most of the time when called. This is different than a "bluff" bet that has little or no chance of winning if called, or a "semi-bluff" bet that has a small but reasonable chance to end up winning.

Realistically this term is usually used in situations that may appear "marginal" to some or most folks: if you've got the nuts on the end you are technically "betting for value" but nobody would say that.

AQ flop Q-9-7--4-4. You've bet all the way and should "bet for value" on the river.

- Louie

[andyfox]

I've always felt people used the term to denote that the hand has some intrinsic value in the particular game. So, in the example you give, one has top pair, top kicker on the river so a bet "for value" indicates the generic hand (top pair, top kicker) has a value in and of itself, irrespective of the general action on prior rounds.

[Louie Landale]

Well, it only has intrinsic value for betting on the river if someone calls with a less hand or someone folds a better hand.

But I prefer your definition, where "value betting" is based on the showdown equity of the hand and NOT on other issues such as "free cards" or "semi-bluffing" or strategic reasons such as "setting up a bluff later". Basically "value betting" would be "betting a good hand". I proposed that notion a couple years ago here and got shot down pretty bad, being a "revisionist" etc.

That notion has the pretty big benefit that you can identify most kinds of bets. With the current definition you need a separate category called "protecting your hand" where its probably good but won't get called unless its beat (raise PF with KK flop an A heads up: the tight player isn't going to call unless he has and A, but you should often bet anyway. But that violates the current "value bet" rational).

- Louie

[BassMan712]

Here is the way i understand it using an example to explain:

Playing 5/10, at the river, the pot is $100 and you're heads up at the river.

Assume if you bet, you expect a call from your opponent. The pot is laying you 11-1 odds.

Next, assume that if this identical hand was played 11 times, you will have the best hand 1 time out of those 11. So,

The 10 times you lose the hand, it costs you $100.
The 1 time you win, you gain $110.
That give you a total EV of +$10.

Hence, a bet on the river in this situation is a "Value Bet"- a bet with
+EV if played an infinite # of times.

[Kaz The Original]

Quite simply a value bet is a bet when your hand is "likely" good that is it is going to be good more than 50% of the time (in your opinion).