In Response to Re: Pocket Queens, facing all in pre for 100 bb plus, call or fold? : Okay, so were hu, 100bb effective. I raise every hand to 99bb and always fold when you shove. So what your saying is that my strategy is 0ev or slightly +ev (from the times you fold) because folding is 0ev? Posted by dub1
Your overall strategy depends how we act, but it's pretty bad unless we are like part zombie part ketamine
When you make the fold its 0Ev, , but calling will be massively +EV so folding would be pretty bad
Rancid - Your so wrong on this it's madness. lets take your range vs. range example and see why you're so wrong about not considering the rake. Effective stacks are 100bb. Action folds to me in the SB and I open shove a range of AA, QQ. You have KK in the BB, call or fold? KK vs. my range has 50% equity. Folding has an ev of -1bb, Calling has an ev of -7.5bb (not including to tiny rakeback Sky offers). Hopefully you can see the massive difference Posted by dub1
Folding has an EV of 0
Calling has an EV of whatever. If its worse than 0 you should fold. Happy days. Feel free to include rake
In Response to Re: Pocket Queens, facing all in pre for 100 bb plus, call or fold? : An extreme example that's maybe not practical but is very much possible. My strategy is to fold 100% of hands from every position. If folding is 0ev then this strategy will guarantee that I never lose any money? As you can see this strategy will lose me money so folding 100% of the time can never be 0ev. Posted by dub1
I'm not sure how pedantic this is getting but w/e, I've had a few
You are talking about a strategy. As an overall strategy it sucks obv. But your individual decision to fold each hand is 0Ev. You don't own any money already in the pot . Your pot odds take account of this. Hence why we don't need 50% to call usually.
In Response to Re: Pocket Queens, facing all in pre for 100 bb plus, call or fold? : I'm not sure how pedantic this is getting but w/e, I've had a few You are talking about a strategy. As an overall strategy it sucks obv. But your individual decision to fold each hand is 0Ev. You don't own any money already in the pot . Your pot odds take account of this. Hence why we don't need 50% to call usually. Posted by grantorino
I wish people would think before posting! Please back up any posts with mathematically prove. It doesn't matter if the strategy sucks. I could employ this strategy if I so wanted (I wont for obvious reasons, but I could). It proves that folding is not 0ev (when in the sb, bb or after putting money into the pot) otherwise a strategy of folding 100% of the time would never be -ev.
In Response to Re: Pocket Queens, facing all in pre for 100 bb plus, call or fold? : I wish people would think before posting! Please back up any posts with mathematically prove. It doesn't matter if the strategy sucks. I could employ this strategy if I so wanted (I wont for obvious reasons, but I could). It proves that folding is not 0ev (when in the sb or bb). Posted by dub1
So I need proof but you don't? Your strat has nothing to do with it.
Obv you could employ this strategy. Obv you would lose money
Proof, ok
There is 30bb in pot we both have 85 behind
You jam. I win x%
I fold.. I don't win or lose any money so it's 0Ev
I call. I win (115*x%)-(85*(1-x)%).
If the calc above results in a number >0 I should call
In Response to Re: Pocket Queens, facing all in pre for 100 bb plus, call or fold? : So I need proof but you don't? Your strat has nothing to do with it. Obv you could employ this strategy. Obv you would lose money Proof, ok There is 30bb in pot we both have 85 behind You jam. I win x% I fold.. I don't win or lose any money so it's 0Ev I call. I win (115*x%)-(85*(1-x)%). If the calc above results in a number />0 I should call Posted by grantorino
In Response to Re: Pocket Queens, facing all in pre for 100 bb plus, call or fold? : I give up. Posted by dub1
Ok, I must be wrong.. You have had a couple of digs at me , doesn't really make your argument any stronger.
I get your point about having an overall strat that loses money. I also think you need a coherent strategy through a hand. But an individual decision to fold is 0ev, you don't gain or lose chips. If you want to think different I think you also need to think differently about pot odds than the calcs earlier in this thread (I realise you didn't post them).
In Response to Re: Pocket Queens, facing all in pre for 100 bb plus, call or fold? : I wish people would think before posting! Please back up any posts with mathematically prove. It doesn't matter if the strategy sucks. I could employ this strategy if I so wanted (I wont for obvious reasons, but I could). It proves that folding is not 0ev (when in the sb, bb or after putting money into the pot) otherwise a strategy of folding 100% of the time would never be -ev. Posted by dub1
Folding all the time is -ev as an overall strategy
Folding an individual hand is 0EV. Once you put that blind in its not yours
An overall strategy can obviously be -EV. So we can create toy games where we would obviously lose money using this strategy specially using a one street game example.
But we are working out EV on a one street situation where folding is 0EV.
We can safely assume that folding is never +EV so it's alwasy 0EV or -EV.
So if you wanted to use a straegy of folding the sb 100% of the time then it would be a -EV strat even though as a one street ev calc it would be 0EV.
You would have to work out multi street ev calc's to actually work out the EV of a srategy.
When you look at folding in certain point on any one street then you have to branch your ev calc. So for example if you 3 bet and you get 4 bet and you branch you ev calc for call, fold, 5 bet. You could possibly see that folding is -EV as villians can make us -EV while calling or 5 betting are both +EV. If calling or 5 betting are actually -EV then folding resuts in 0ev. Because it's all comparable and 0ev is essentially a baseline for what play's are -EV or +EV.
Comments
So we can create toy games where we would obviously lose money using this strategy specially using a one street game example.
But we are working out EV on a one street situation where folding is 0EV.
We can safely assume that folding is never +EV so it's alwasy 0EV or -EV.
So if you wanted to use a straegy of folding the sb 100% of the time then it would be a -EV strat even though as a one street ev calc it would be 0EV.
You would have to work out multi street ev calc's to actually work out the EV of a srategy.
When you look at folding in certain point on any one street then you have to branch your ev calc.
So for example if you 3 bet and you get 4 bet and you branch you ev calc for call, fold, 5 bet. You could possibly see that folding is -EV as villians can make us -EV while calling or 5 betting are both +EV.
If calling or 5 betting are actually -EV then folding resuts in 0ev. Because it's all comparable and 0ev is essentially a baseline for what play's are -EV or +EV.