I have a relatively simple question on equity:Villain jams 10bb effective, not including blinds. The pot odds are 48.19%. Does this mean that we should call with any hand that has 48.19% equity or better? Or should it be a certain % better than 48.19%?Follow-up question:Is it ever better to make a slightly under pot-odds call because you have them significantly out-chipped and surrendering the blinds would improve their chip equity too much? So, calling with 45% equity in the above example when you have 10x his stack?Thanks.
villain jams 10bb eff. you have to call 9bb to win 20bb so equity you need is at least 9/10 = 0.45 to breakeven.
I believe the answer would be yes because the pot odds calculation is for 0EV and folding in this instance is -.5 or -1.I could be wrong on that though.I believe erdnase is also correct, the pot is 11bb and you need to call 9bb, so 11-9 or 9/20 which is 45%.
I phrased the hand kind of wonky, influenced by Chubakov charts. I meant that villain jams 10.5+.5 for sb, so you have to call 10 to win 12. In any case, say your pot odds are 45%, do you call if you have exactly 45% vs villains range? Or do you need 45.0001% I know this is purely theoretical.And again, is it ever correct to take a slightly -ev call when you have the villain outchipped by a wide margin?
If you see poker as long term game (as it should be imho) you are indifferent to calling or folding with 45% equity since you are breaking even in the long run.
45% would be the breakeven point where folding = calling in terms of expected value. I guess that would include the blinds too (yea, duh, 45% is negative without a blind, so including the blinds in the pot odds should make 45% equity call equal to that of a fold).I don't think it's correct in a husng to take -EV spots. I mean, if a call is worse than a fold, why would you call?The answer of "to finish off your opponent" does not apply in heads up sngs like it could in MTTs.So I don't think there is any reason to call if it is worse than folding in that situation.
But obv folding is going to keep variance more controlled because you will avoid losing (or winning) many coinflips consecutively. Which should be better if you don't feel like gambling. I want to post a few math questions but I don't know if it's ok to post them here or creating a new thread is better. Ideas?
I am a little confused. So if you need lets say 45% to break even. Would you call with 46%, 47%, 48%, 49%, 50%, or 51% vs. his range. Lets disregard the fact that you are having a bigger edge if you let that little +EV spot go.
Yes mate your hand must have an equity greater then 45% of breakeven
Taking a 50/50 shot at $1000 is better than handing $50 away for free in a situation where calling is higher EV than folding (different from all things equal situation).The only time this might not apply is if your edge is massive for the rest of the game, but that's only applicable in a very narrow definition of situations you'll ever encounter (and if you don't play regular speeds with rematches vs a verified huge fish or play no blind increase HUSNG structures it will basically never apply).Now if you're just strictly talking about having a breakeven point, then folding might be better than calling, by a little bit, but likely not worth thinking about too hard, especially towards the end of a match vs a random opponent. I don't think there are any helpful variance considerations to lend to folding being better than calling if they are equal EV at 10bb stacks.
Yeah, certainly, but when we fold our 45% equity hand we're giving away money in the pot that we would NOT be getting back if we called, if I understand this right. Calling with 45% equity getting 11 to 9 odds is like taking a 50/50 shot at $1000 without handing anything for free if we don't take the shot, right? I disagree about there being no helpful variance considerations. From the math point that's obvious, and I do think that it SHOULDN'T really matter, but many people get psychologically affected because of losing/winning too many flips. If someone doesn't get affected at all because of losing/winning many flips, than it certainly is indifferent if you fold or call. So it would be correct to say that the more you get affected by this type of situation, the more -ev it is if you call, and the best case you can get is a breakeven point where folding or calling is totally indifferent. Or maybe I'm just overthinking this.