Raising the river with less than 66% equity vs strong made hands
 

Um, firstly, I'd like to use this hand for the basis of discussion: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...e=0#Post9000035

Here's my approach: We're up against {AA(1), KK(3), AK(6)} and we have AA on ~K54r and we're a 2:1 favourite. Ignoring small factors, we expect to have him slow down with AK if we put in a raise and keep up the betting with KK. However, we can't fold. Obviously, if we can fold, then raise/folding becomes correct, but we can't. So, then here's the math of raising:

As a 2:1 favourite, raising the river gives you: +1*6 -2*3 = 0 ev, and therefore this makes raising the river bad (it's zero EV, but it's increased variance).

Yet, I think in either HPFAP or TOP it says that you only have to be a 55% favourite on the river to raise. I have NO IDEA why they would say that, but I believe it may be because on average they assume that villain will not three-bet frequently. Comments on this would be appreciated.

Shill said that he'd stick in a raise on the turn or river, and he's basically always right, so it pisses me off a little because I don't understand it. How can you guys justify a heads-up raise vs made hands with little possible in the way of changing equity with less than 66% equity, or if you want to simplify this, how could you raise the river with less than 66% equity when the better hands will three-bet you and you must call?

I mean, I can't justify this, but clearly there are those that do... somehow... Please help me understand this.

FWIW, I thought Jaran's idea of donkbetting in a similar spot when OOP with AA was very cool (even though it was in jest), as an attempt to flatten the pot sizes by luring him into raising equally with AK as AA/KK, but it didn't work: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...e=0#Post9002887