[bilbo-san]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm saying that raising *should be* less -EV than folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Folding can't have a negative expectation. Ever. The EV of folding is always zero.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless you have money invested already, which you obviously do already. So your ev of folding is -4.5BB

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the sunken cost fallacy.

If we assume that a bet here is EV, it is because we win less than we bet. Not because we win less than what we bet + what's in the pot.

Again, the EV of folding is always 0. This is by definition less than what may already be in the pot, but that doesn't make it -EV.

When you give a decision an EV label, you are referring to the decision point -- i.e. what would you do if someone plopped you in the chair at this point of time.

What you are saying is that raising pre-flop and then folding every flop is -EV, but that's not what's being discussed.