regarding the article about equity on this site

A more common situation is when we have the nut flush draw on the flop (although it doesn't have to be as extreme as it was here where we also had straight and overcard outs). Our flush will arrive somewhere around 35% of the time before or on the river, which means that unless the board if paired, we have 35% equity in this pot. With two or more opponents, raising this flop is correct! We expect to win 35% of every bet that goes in, and if we put in less than one third of the bets (which we would be with two opponents), then we're winning money in the long run.

Click to expand...

BUT, since you don't always know that your opponents will call, it isn't always correct to raise this flop is it? if only one opponent calls, you have raised incorrectly.

carrico said:

BUT, since you don't always know that your opponents will call, it isn't always correct to raise this flop is it? if only one opponent calls, you have raised incorrectly.

Click to expand...

your equity in the pot increases then

still, it would have been better mathematically if you would've checked to the turn

carrico said:

still, it would have been better mathematically if you would've checked to the turn

Click to expand...

Not allways cause if u miss the turn u lose equity.

The fewer the opponents, the better.

A raise is the best move.


---

We bet these flops for value (because our equity is good).
We bet these flops because our opponents may fold hands that would beat us if we don't improve (fold equity).
We bet these flops because it can buy us a free card on the turn (when our equity is much less).

I've been doing OK at online poker without a warm fuzzy understanding of equity. I own a house, or at least the bank and I own it so I do have a notion of the term and its consequences.

To me equity is something tangible that I can retrieve fairly easy. I never want to complicate things more than necessary when retrieval is the goal. If I have equity in the pot, and I am satisfied with the amount, I DO NOT WANT IT TO GET COMPLICATED. I am not so greedy that I let that greed cause me extra complications to get satisfied. Greed kills, and unbridled greed kills with no mercy.

All that said, there are times when pushing a situation is better than floating a situation or visa versa. Remember that those odds are calculated using pure numerics with no consideration of the external influences of either your bets, or your opponents bets.

Given the nut flush draw on the flop example, those influences can be huge. If you hold the Ace to the nut flush draw in your hand, it is a different situation than if the Ace is on the board and you hold the King in hand. If you are first to act or are reacting to a move those equity odds are in wild fluctuation.

The temperament of your villains is a huge influence on your response.

As has been said so many times, poker is about playing the players as much as playing the cards. The effect of a raise and its sizing become huge factors in almost every hand where you are able to approximate odds. So in this example, being first to act warrants a big raise, where as reacting to a raise could easily warrant folding this situation. Same cards, same players, but NOT the same situation.

Moral of this diatribe? None, and since it is my first serious attempt of the day to seem knowledgeable it should probably be considered written by a sleepwalker......

FullTilt commercial in the making?

WVHillbilly said:

We bet these flops for value (because our equity is good).
We bet these flops because our opponents may fold hands that would beat us if we don't improve (fold equity).
We bet these flops because it can buy us a free card on the turn (when our equity is much less).

Click to expand...

We play at FullTilt

?????