that is not what EV is.

EV is your average profit or loss.

EV of a call 45 in the pot 20 to call.

you guys say you win 75% of the time.

EV=.75*45 - .25*20=33-5= 28

EV=.75*72 - .25*47 = 54 - 11.75 = $42.25


The EV of the call is $28

The EV of a push is $42.25

Of course a push is the best.

EV of a push if your opponet will call with 100% of the hands he will bet $20 with

Yes. I would take B because of a one time EP is higher that my LAY, but my ROI is higher with A, so if we did it 100 times, I'd take A.

This poker decision should be treated in terms of EV, not a one time EP.

Consistent gambling on EP is what makes 90% of people sign up for an online cardroom and deposit $1k of their $3k bi-weekly checks and sit in 30/60 games. Lose it all and do it all over again in 2 weeks.

__________________

Alex, I'm not sure that return per invested dollar is relevant here.

It's a cash game and therefore we want any advantage we can take - right? If we are playing properly rolled we don't mind gambling with odds 52:48 in our favour - right? If we assume that we ARE 100% getting called.

Pot is $25.
Bet is $20

We call, we are risking $20 to potentialy win $45.

75% of time we win $45
25% of time we lose $20

This gives a PROFIT of $115 (45x3 - 20)
Or $28.75 per hand.

We raise, we are risking $47 to potential win $72

75% of time we win $72
25% of time we lose $47

This gives PROFIT of $169 (72x3 - 47)
Or $42.22 per hand.

Therefore given these circumstances, raising is the more PROFITABLE play.

That is complete giberish.

I would treat it as a per dollar or normally per $10. If you wanna treat it as for every $25 or $20. I do this because I play games with so many different max. buy ins and blinds. Not treating it per dollar would morph results in my stats in a ridiculous manner. That's why PT calculates bbs and BBs/100.

I think this topic is done. Everyone's repeating the same thing in different yet equivalent numbers.

__________________

i have no idea what alex is talking about either

in this hand, i would figure out a hand range for the villian. i wouldnt use math because guestimation is fine for this. i would put the villian on a range of hands to possibly bet on the river. i would think(and this is what i think before nearly every bet i make, especaily in complicated post flop hands like this)

"what hands that i beat call? do any better hands fold?"
then i match hands from his range into these catagories, hands that i beat that call, and better hands that fold (of course there is also what better hands call but thats implied)
results of live hand: i check and i take it.

and if i think there are more hands that i can beat that will pay me off than not, i will value bet. if i think the only hands calling me are hands that have me beat, i will check and save myself a bet.

for instance i was in a live hand today with this lag player.

he raised pf (any 2 cards) i was in position with ATs, i thought this was ahead of his range, but a raise would blow hands that i beat out of the pot. (he was a lag, not an idiot, he would fold in a tough spot)so i called, essentially hoping to flop the best hand or take the pot away. the flop came
Q T 7

he pot bet (standard) and i thought i was either way ahead/way behind so i kept the pot small and just called (twas head up)
the turn brought a T, hopefully he has a queen as i value bet about 2/3 of the pot size.
he just called this bet. he wasnt dumb, he didnt have air. he probably had an OESD, a T, middlePP, or a weak queen. the river brought a queen, SHIT! now im toast if he has a weak queen. but, he checks, essentaily saying he is weak.

some people would bet this. "i have 10's full, the only hand that beats me is a queen!" and would bet. however, and bet here is largely incorrect in this particular spot. if his hand range is what i think it is, the correct play is to check
why?
lets go over what all the hands i thought he might have do if i bet the pot
a draw: easy fold. hes a lag, but he wouldnt check raise bluff, i havnt been full of shit yet
a T: call, but i dont make any money, we chop the pot
a q:i lose money as he will call this 100% of the time and beat me
a middle pp: easy fold, the only thing he could have above the board is JJ and thats still probably not good

so, all the hands that i can beat fold. if i check i still beat these hands, but its cheaper b/c i dont give the Q a chance to get paid.

thats how i think about value betting in tough spots. i dont go through mathamatical calulation, i just ask myself every hand
"what hands that i beat call? what hands that beat me fold??"
and i correspond the hand range i have assigned the villian to this criteria, and see if a bet is worth it.



oh, and in the hand in question, calling is leaving chips on the table

One time, you'd take A. I'd gamble a bit still getting better than even odds on a one time deal.

In the second or third sentence of my first reply I said:

__________________

Most times in similar spots, I'd push him in too for the sole reason that my read is that he's calling and I beat an overwhelming amount of hands that he'll call with like KT, JT, T9, and J9.

In this individual spot, with the min. raise and that reaction to the Ace ALONG with the river bet, I'd call. I put Villian on Aces after the river bet, as I posted in this thread. So, in this one spot, I'd call ONLY because I can't lay down a full house on the low chance that I'm right. Then, I'd say "Why did I call? Why did I call. I knew I was beat. Why did I call?"

He shows AT, I'll just smack myself in the forhead.

__________________

i would yell and probably scare my cat.

edit: or throw my cat...

This was a similar situation, but in this case I had the nut straight and I put the guy on two pair on the flop. The river paired the top board card and I raised him all in knowing he had 2 pair on the flop.

http://www.pokerforums.org/showpost....94&postcount=9

__________________