[greggg230]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've voted fold still, although this is very enemy dependent. I just went over gregg's calculation again and tried them with Villain just overplaying AAA 20% of the time, and the call should still be slightly positive. The main problem here is figuring out if Villain is capable of overplaying his hand like that. You should always assume that Villain is capable of doing something really stupid some of the time, but it's hard to quantify that for this situation. As I stated initially, Villain was more on the passive side, so I expect him to overplay his Hand at most as often as in gregg's initial assumption, which means the eV of the call is at most +3$, I expect it to be more around the $1 mark. I don't really mind giving up one Sklansky Buck in a one in 20000 Hands situation to save 12 real Dollars right in front of me at the table. I feel I have enough of an edge at the game to be a winner without making such a low eV and high Variance call and keep those 12$ to be invested in better spots =) I definitly see why one can and maybe even should call, though, and I'd definitly call if I intuitivly put a set into villains pushing range there.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think unless villain is a complete nit, calling or folding here won't save / lose a lot of money in the long-run. It's a really close decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's precisely why I'm leaning towards folding here. Calling is pretty ev-neutral, which is why I prefer reducing variance in that case. These kind of situations are so rare that it will take a LONG time before I'll enter the long run. Why gamble when I have an edge in many other situations? I can definitly see why one would be interested in calling in even such a marginal +eV Spot as this, and I don't feel bad about my call at all anymore, although I'd still prefer having folded. Unique or very rare situations may require a different approach than the usual goal of maximizing ev for some players, including me.

In any case, I see both options to be valid and the choice depending mostly on personel preference.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hear ya. For me, spite would outweigh wanting to reduce variance, so I'd call. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]