Equity Value Betting: Getting the Best Return on Your Money

[Poker Plan]

Awesome post- many thanks

Ian

[slowplayj]

Wow, thanks for the post. I don't think I really understood the concept until I read your post, twice.

[Jake (The Snake)]

1. Great post Six. I love posts like this and you have inspired me to write some more myself.

2. Guys, if you want to get really good at poker, these are the kinds of things that you need to be thinking about on your own. Doing math away from the table like this is so important. Often it will help you understand a concept that you didn't previously. Other times you will figure out an answer in a way that is different than the way most poker authors explain it, but it makes more sense to you the way you did it. This is something that Sklansky talks about often. Next time you are unsure about a concept or even a play in a hand, do the math on it. Make some assumptions, use PokerStove, and then make some adjustments and do it again. It will be worth it.

[JJH3984]

[ QUOTE ]
That's true, and it's something to always keep in mind. However, it's something that should come into your estimation of your equity. For example, if 20% of the time you are drawing dead, but the other 80% of the time you have 40% equity, your average pot equity is 32%. If you have 4 opponents, this gives you an average equity edge of 60%, even counting the times you are drawing dead. So it's still a big enough edge to push, even though sometimes you may be drawing dead.



[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Extreme example: You hold pocket kings and the flop comes KTT. You have a huge amount of equity against a loose aggressive opponent even though some very small% of the time you will be drawing thin against quads.

[sweetjazz]

Really interesting post, but I think the KQ example is very misleading. The equity is so high because you chose hands where opponents duplicate each other's pair, nobody has a J and nobody has a club. It's unlikely that pumping a gutshot plus BD flush draw is ever going to be a good play in reality, because over a realistic range, the gutshot equity is rarely going to have much, if any, equity edge and, moreover whatever small equity edge it has is only maintained if everyone stays in, so it will be hard to raise it for value without either pushing people out by forcing them to face two cold or risking a 3bet that will do the same. Since you will need to improve to a straight or flush or runner-runner trips to win just about always, raising just isn't a good theoretical play even with 5 other people investing 1 SB on the flop.

Anyway, I like your post and overall I agree that in loose games where many players call with very weak holdings before and on the flop, it is important to ram and jam when you have an equity edge.

[freeDegas]

sweetjazz, it's absolutely correct what you say.

[ QUOTE ]
you chose hands where ... nobody has a club...

[/ QUOTE ]

Also your argument with 3-betting is absolutely correct. A halfway decent small blind will not bet into a crowd with only one pair. But on a halfway coordinated rainbow flop, where you are drawing to a gutshot, his most likely holding is two pair or a set. So the SB will often 3-bet you, protecting his hand. And so, your raise drives people out. In reality, with so many callers, you will also often find outs in the hands of your opponents or you will split the pot. So, raising into a crowd with only a straight draw is often a mistake.

On your K [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] hand, I give your opponents the following:

Flop: A [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] T [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 4 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

SB: A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 4 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Two pair, reasonable to bet.
BB: Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Drawing to a gutshot, not wanting to drive people out.
UTG: A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] T [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] One of the few hands, people call preflop from UTG. I don't think, UTG is calling the flop with an underpair. With 88, he cannot think he's ahead, and drawing to a set with the risk of people raising behind him would make calling a big mistake. In our example, he is calling to slowplay his 2 pair.
MP: T [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] He's drawing to 2 pair and thinks, he has the pot odds to do so.
You on the button: K [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
I gave your opponents the fair share of spades (2 from 8 cards), and also one of the four Js in the deck.

So, and suddenly we have on pokerstove:

SB: 10%
BB: 13%
UTG: 58%
MP: 4%
We: 15%, but we would need 20% to raise profitably.

No edge in raising.

[Hielko]

Yeah, I agree raising a gutshot + bdfd for value is almost always a bad idea.

Also something that should be considered is that not all players will call your raise and that raising hurts your implied odss.

A simple example:

You hold a flushdraw in a 4-way poy. First opponent bets, two call and you have to decide between calling and raising. When we assume that the other players have weak hands it wouldn't be uncommen that one of the players is going to fold for the raise. This isn't going to cost you money, but you aren't making money either (3 players and 33% equity). Now when you hit on the turn the other players check to you you bet they call. When you would have called the flop the probability of a bet on the turn that you could raise would be a lot higher.

[Bob T.]

[ QUOTE ]
That's all - sorry I took up so much of your time!

[/ QUOTE ]

No apology necessary. I'm sorry I didn't read this 6 years ago.

[Bob T.]

And, I thought I was a numbers guy, but now I feel like a poker dinosaur, my thougt process goes like this, I like my hand, and I got a back door flush draw, and the pot is kinda big, I guess I'll peel one here.

[Entity]

Your post is good, but there are a lot of fairly significant errors, at least from my perspective:
[ QUOTE ]
Now, everybody folds around to you, and you have pocket Kings in the big blind. Of course you 3-bet him! But what is the true value that you are getting when you 3-bet him? What is your equity edge? Plug his range into PokerStove, and we can see that your KK will have about 69.687% pot equity, for an equity edge of 39.4%. Wow - look at that! 3-betting with pocket Kings when heads up preflop STILL isn't even as profitable as raising that gutshot plus backdoor flush draw when the flop is 6-handed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your equity edge is much larger than 70% vs. that range in a typical game, because you do not see the river anywhere approaching 100% of the time vs. this opponent (nor does he, versus you). The only case in which a stove equity analysis is as you stated here is when one of you is all-in, guaranteeing a showdown for both of you.

[ QUOTE ]
You are getting 6.5-1 on your call, and you are 70-30, or 2.3-1, to win. So you want to continue with the hand. What if it was just you and the BB? When he bets the flop, you are getting 3.5-1 on your call, so you still want to continue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Getting 3.5:1 on your call, your call would not clearly force you to continue. Your draw is only 2.3:1 when you are guaranteed to see both cards. If the pot is 2.5SB, and BB bets into you, offering you 3.5:1, and you call, the pot will be 2.25BB on the turn. On the turn, when he bets, you will be getting 3.25:1 but will be requiring 4.75:1 to be making a profitable call -- that is to say, the overlay that you quote in the first hand (3.5:1 on a 2.3:1) is nowhere near present given the bet size doubling on the turn.

There are many variables that change the "pure equity" looks that you took at all of these hands, and while the examples are ok from a pure theory standpoint, I feel that the article as a whole is missing some very important concepts, and is generally taking an overly optimistic approach (especially re: the KQcc AT4 board).

It is incredibly important to understand equity in poker, but it's equally important (actually, probably moreso) to understand the practical applications of it and to make sure one does not overapply all-in equity calculations to a game which will rarely feature all-in moments. Ramming and jamming is great and it's useful to know when to do it, but there is always going to be another side to the coin, and often in examples like the ones you gave it is better to consider other variables such as preserving implied odds and how other postflop streets will play as a consequence of you flop play before you start throwing out the chips because you've got an X% edge vs. Y range of hands. As others have shown, the slightest degree of difference in your handreading will have dire consequences on your return on investment, and at the same time, you will be sacrificing other benefits for your current "hopeful" EV returns.

Rob