Is equity all there is to it?

J. Stew · #1 09-07-2005, 08:25 PM

Party Poker 0.50/1 Hold'em (10 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is UTG+2 with Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]. CO posts a blind of $0.50.
2 folds, Hero raises, MP1 calls, 4 folds, SB calls, 1 fold.

Flop: (8 SB) 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (3 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, MP1 calls, SB raises, Hero 3-bets, MP1 folds, SB caps, Hero calls.

Ok I ran pokerstove against one opponent, since I figured Mp1 would fold with two back to him, giving SB a range of the top 17% of possible hands, which I estimated from how often he coldcalls. Am I right so far? Then I ran it and got an equity of 54.5% for me and 45.5% for him.

So am I justified in betting and raising the flop because my equity is larger than his and that's basically all there is to it? Putting an opponent on a range of hands then adjusting it to how he plays each street and re-estimating the equity along the way?

Turn: (8.50 BB) A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
SB bets, Hero raises, SB calls.

River: (12.50 BB) J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, SB calls.

Final Pot: 14.50 BB

Innocentius · #2 09-07-2005, 08:38 PM

If you really have more than 50% equity, you are right in betting, but I'm not sure about the way you came to this conclusion. You may very well be right, but I'm doubtful about the way you went about coming to your conclusion.

First of all, SB didn't really coldcall, since he already had half a bet in the pot.

Second, when you three-bet, you have much more information. He check-raised you. You cannot any longer just put him on the 17% best starting hands. You have to try to put him on a range that makes it reasonable for him to check-raise this particular flop.

J. Stew · #3 09-07-2005, 08:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You cannot any longer just put him on the 17% best starting hands. You have to try to put him on a range that makes it reasonable for him to check-raise this particular flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks, that's pretty clear, could you take a guess at what range of hands would three bet here or is that too player dependent?

Innocentius · #4 09-07-2005, 08:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You cannot any longer just put him on the 17% best starting hands. You have to try to put him on a range that makes it reasonable for him to check-raise this particular flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks, that's pretty clear, could you take a guess at what range of hands would three bet here or is that too player dependent?

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't really think I'm the best qualified to do this, but I can try to give you my thoughts about the hand.

The fact that MP1 called after you on the flop makes it less likely that SB is on a complete bluff, which would otherwise be possible for a very agressive player. Hands like AT or JJ come to mind. A set of tens is reasonable. It of course depends on reads, but there are certainly players which would play these hands like this. The nut flush draw with a lower pair also seems possible, if SB would call with such a hand pf.

Another way to look at the whole thin is that you will make top pair, a flush or a straight more than 50% of the time by the river (and you are going to the river no matter what). So you can try asking yourself how many hands he can have that would beat the hands you can make.

I'm not at all sure about this myself, but I think I would just call his flop raise. But on the other hand there might be a point in driving MP1 out in case he has you reverse dominated.

GTSamIAm · #5 09-07-2005, 08:59 PM

Damn straight. You are usually a favorite to beat him by showdown. If he has just a pair, you're almost a 2 to 1 favorite. At worst, he has a set, and your equity is a little over than 25%. Your 3-bet might even get you a free card.

GTSamIAm · #6 09-07-2005, 09:00 PM

I'd 3-bet all day long. Flop check/raise against the pf raiser is very often just a pair.

crownjules · #7 09-07-2005, 09:06 PM

If there were any "be all, end all" to poker, then we'd all be many many BB/100 winners. I don't see too many of those around, so I guess that means that equity isn't all there is to poker.

Equity is a measuring tool that helps you determine whether or not you can bet or raise for value. When your equity is greater than the fair share equity (100 / # of players remaining), then more of that pot is "yours" and thus every bet you get in there is more towards your potential winnings. In your example, on the flop fair share equity is ~33% for each player and you have well over that, so the majority of every bet going into the pot is yours. Equity shows that you are likely to win the pot over half the time. This needs to be tempered by the fact that if you raise and knock people out, you're equity is going to go down drastically on the turn if you do not make a hand, making bets/raises on later streets a bad move.