[SumZero]

[ QUOTE ]
Based on the webpage that Jay provided, where I got my numbers...

Of the 169 starting hands, 89 win more than 50% of the time and 80 win less than 50% of the time. This means that of the top half of hands in terms of equity, four of them will win greater than 50% of the time but you're still correct to fold.

Here's an example:

With 22, there are 86 hands with better equity and 82 hands with worse. If you fold, odds are you will pick up a better hand next time and thats why you should fold 22 on turn 9.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. Wrong. Still Wrong. That's the very crux of the problem. (And also would indicate a serious flaw in your poker thinking if you were to apply this type of logic to other poker situations. It is as if you are saying if there is a 51% chance that the guy has you beat when he bets $1 into a $100 pot you should fold because odds are he has you beat.). Your goal shouldn't be to ask "is it more likely or not that I get a better hand" but rather it should be to ask "is it more likely or not that I get a better equity situation". Just think about what you are saying. You are saying that you are better off folding a hand (22) that has greater than 50% equity so that you can play all-in blind on the next hand. That is just plain wrong. When you both go all-in blind you are in a 50/50 equity situation. When you go in with 22 your equity is greater than 50%. Therefore going in with 22 is correct if you get 22 on the last hand you are allowed to make a decision.

The reason again is that the quality of hands aren't equally spaced. For instance image there were 6 hand values possible for you to have (this time no opponent, you just get the $ value associated with the hand). Hand 1 is worth $52. Hand 2 is worth $51.50. Hand 3 is worth $51. Hand 4 is worth $50.50. Hand 5 is worth $1. Hand 6 is worth $0. You are told you get to see what hand you have and if you don't like it you can "fold" it and get a random hand (with replacement), but you can only do this once. You want to maximize your $EV. You are looking down at hand 4. Your one buddy, call him nicho, says "dude, there are 3 hands better than this hand and only 2 hands worth so clearly your $EV is maximized by folding this hand and picking a hand at random since it is 3:2 that you pick a more valuable hand". Your other buddy, call him joeq, says "dude, are you insane? Hand 4 has a $EV of $50.50. Picking a hand at random has a $EV of $34.33. Clearly you have better $EV from sticking with Hand 4. Sure 3/6 times you would have ended up with more if you folded and only 2/6 times you would have ended up with less but the miniscule amount more that you end up with doesn't make up for the large amount less that you are risking". Who is right in this game?

Now the hand distribution isn't as extreme as my little 6 handed game above (it is more similar to if hand 5 were $48 and hand 6 were $47 in which case $EV of random would be $50 and sticking with Hand 4 would still be correct), but the distribution isn't completely uniformily spaced which is why your method of calculating what to do gives the wrong answer even though it is reasonably close to the right answer (I.e., your method is wrong, your answer is wrong, but your answer isn't that far from the correct one in terms of what hands to play).