-EV with the best hand??

Obliky · #1 08-30-2005, 06:45 AM

Hi,

This question relates to a situation that often comes up (usually) in limit poker.

The situation is:

You currently have the best hand, but are unable to protect your hand against a drawing hand due to the inability to bet enough to give your opponent the incorrect odds to call.

A good example of this is on TOP pg 20 Example 2.

The part i dont understand is that if your opponent has a +EV call due to the pot odds, then isnt the situation -EV for yourself (as the sum of all EVs = 0)..even though you have the best hand?

I think im missing something obvious in my reasoning of this situation...could someone point it out to me please [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Obliky

diebitter · #2 08-30-2005, 07:00 AM

Nope, just because it's +EV for your opponent does not mean it's -EV to you. Say you have the AK spade, and he has AKdiamonds. Everyone's still in, and at the turn there's 2 diamonds and two spades on the board. Someone calls. You're both +EV to a call or raise, aintcha?

Or, say you have AK, and there's a king on the board with rags, except 2 spades. There's 10BB in the pot. You know for a fact he's got 2 spades in his hand. It's +EV for you to bet, and it'll be +EV for him to call.

Obliky · #3 08-30-2005, 07:31 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Or, say you have AK, and there's a king on the board with rags, except 2 spades. There's 10BB in the pot. You know for a fact he's got 2 spades in his hand. It's +EV for you to bet, and it'll be +EV for him to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whats confusing me is this: (From SSH pg 20)

"Money does not appear from nowhere or disappear into nowhere: If one person has a positive expectation, another must have a negative one, and the sum of all expectations must be zero"

So therefore in the example you gave, musnt some player/s have a negative expectation equal to the sum of you and your opponent's positive expectations?

diebitter · #4 08-30-2005, 07:36 AM

I haven't really considered this, but these guys know more about it than I do, so I'd take it as correct.

However, if it is true, it's the truth about the entire hand, not each round of betting. So if you and MrX are at the river, and are both +EV like in the example I have with top pair/top kicker versus a flush draw, it's cos earlier rounds had play (yours, his and/or other players) that was -EV, I suppose.

Obliky · #5 08-30-2005, 07:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't really considered this, but these guys know more about it than I do, so I'd take it as correct.

However, if it is true, it's the truth about the entire hand, not each round of betting. So if you and MrX are at the river, and are both +EV like in the example I have with top pair/top kicker versus a flush draw, it's cos earlier rounds had play (yours, high and/or other players) that was -EV, I suppose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats what i was thinking, the -EV must be coming from somewhere...

Wheres Sklansky when you need him, eh? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Praxx · #6 08-30-2005, 09:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Thats what i was thinking, the -EV must be coming from somewhere...

Wheres Sklansky when you need him, eh? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's say you K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], and your opponent holds A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], and you are on the turn with two spades and two diamonds on the board, and you have paired your Q. The pot is 10 big blinds, and you bet.

You can bet profitably because you will win this pot 76% of the time (your EV is +8.30 dollars). Your opponent can call profitably because he expects to win 24% of the time for a total EV of $2.06. So both of you have positive EV!

The -EV, as diebitter said, comes from previous betting rounds - calls or bets were made that were NOT +EV, resulting in a pot bet that is +EV for the both of you on the turn. Your call on the flop against AK with KQ is -EV (without regard to postflop play).

#7 08-30-2005, 09:18 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Nope, just because it's +EV for your opponent does not mean it's -EV to you. Say you have the AK spade, and he has AKdiamonds. Everyone's still in, and at the turn there's 2 diamonds and two spades on the board. Someone calls. You're both +EV to a call or raise, aintcha?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope.

You are +EV to call, but you are neutral to raise.

Remember the Fundamental Theorem of Poker.

If you could see your opponent's cards, then you would know that you both have exactly the same chance of winning the hand. You would also know that your bet is not going to knock him out - if you felt it might, then it would be worth a bet, but if you saw his cards, you would conclude that he is +EV to call, and so would not likely fold.

Where is the +EV in making a bet in such a situation?

#8 08-30-2005, 09:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Or, say you have AK, and there's a king on the board with rags, except 2 spades. There's 10BB in the pot. You know for a fact he's got 2 spades in his hand. It's +EV for you to bet, and it'll be +EV for him to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

If there are 10 big bets in the pot then I am assuming that we have seen the turn.

That means that there were 20 small bets to get to this point.

What this means is that there is a very strong likelihood that at some point, the player on the flush draw called or made a bet that was -EV.

diebitter · #9 08-30-2005, 09:31 AM

[ QUOTE ]

What this means is that there is a very strong likelihood that at some point, the player on the flush draw called or made a bet that was -EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necessarily, but you're probably right. I'm sure there's a small set of circumstances where that wouldn't be the case, and thousands where it would be [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

What is definitely true is someone, somewhere played -EV.

#10 08-30-2005, 09:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What this means is that there is a very strong likelihood that at some point, the player on the flush draw called or made a bet that was -EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necessarily, but you're probably right. I'm sure there's a small set of circumstances where that wouldn't be the case, and thousands where it would be [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

What is definitely true is someone, somewhere played -EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly!

And it is their -EV play that now results in having two remaining players in a +EV situation.

So its not that the money is coming from nowhere - it came from other players who are no longer in the hand.

Try running the example with only the two players who are in the pot now - imagine they are SB and BB and everyone else folds.

How does that change the scenario?