[Fonkey123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My mind is going to explode.

Yes, having 65 has better equity against any perceived calling range; however, it has no correlation to the fact that pushing 88 is +EV.

I don't know how you want me to explain this.

Yes, his calling range is part of the equation; however, light 3 bettors generally spew hardcore postflop. If he's 3 betting insanely light, and cbetting most any flop shoving any 2 is +EV because he's bet/folding air so often.

His calling range is only important IF YOU ARE CALLED; however, he's going to be folding so often the difference is equity of 88 v 65s isn't going to cause pushing this flop to go from +EV to -EV.

Again, I would prefer to have top set every single hand. Theoretically there are of course better hands to shove the flop here with that have better equity against his calling range (like top set for example), but unfortunately we don't get to choose our hand in every situation in poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

fonkey, you're are probably right that pushing 88 is +ev, HOWEVER, calling with 88 here is MORE +ev.

Also, pushing 65 is more +ev then calling with it because there are more better hands u fold out, and you have better equity when called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Read my other posts. I was willing to debate the merits of calling versus pushing. I was just flipping out at the people that were pokerstoving and obsessing over his calling range.

I also prefer a flop call [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

But pushing is +EV is as well

edit I don't get your last point the only hands in between 65 and 88 are 6/x>5 and pocket 7's