Thin value article I read, lets discuss

X

xtncx

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Total posts
47
Chips
0
I read this article and im unsure what I think about it.
http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/articles/thin-value.html
I understand what hes trying to say im just stuck on how this scenario would equate with winning poker. Im the one leaving the confused comments at the end of the article. Just wanted to see what others thought . His final reply to me so far is a good point, just begs the question if you should be playing this differently altogher. Its almost like hes describing how to make unprofitable play a little less unprofitable.
 
thepokerkid123

thepokerkid123

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Total posts
917
Chips
0
Chris
@ Fri Feb 05, 2010 12:58:47 PM
3
I’m probably missing something here. But how can winning one out of fourth of your bluff catcher calls be profitable? You loose 3 and you win 1. What am I missing?


Ed Miller
@ Tue Feb 16, 2010 08:17:08 AM
4
Chris,
It’s profitable because you’re risking $180 to win $582. So you can be wrong more often than you’re right and still be ahead in the end.


Chris
@ Wed Feb 17, 2010 03:20:38 PM
5
Know I’m beating a dead horse here but hear me out. Your committing Money 3 times and losing an amount of 290 each time(being that this is 580 pot). The 4th time you call and win the 580 pot(only 290 of which will be the other persons money). So your losing money here. I understand the 180 to win 580, but thatseems to only be taking into account the final bet.


Ed Miller
@ Wed Feb 17, 2010 03:39:22 PM
6
Chris,
You’re not wrong, but compare two numbers for me. Compare how much you lose on average when you call the river to how much you lose on average when you fold the river.


This is what we're looking at?


The point in his last comment is that on the river your options are calling or folding and calling is more proffitable than folding. $180 to win $580, if you're ahead about 25% of the time then calling is more proffitable than folding.


What you're looking at is all of the money you've invested throughout the hand. However that money is already in the pot, it's gone, it's not yours anymore, forget about it.


In this hand the money invested before the river call was invested because at the time it was presumably proffitable to do so.


Consider if you've got AK pre-flop, 3bet to 12bb and get called. You put the money in because it's highly +EV to do so, you're ahead of a lot of hands, you've got the benefit of card removal against AA/KK, you've got fold equity.
But you miss the flop, and cbet 16bb into 24bb, you're not still thinking about the 12bb you invested pre-flop, most of the equity you had then has dissapeared this time (they didn't fold and you didn't hit the flop) but it was still proffitable. That money is lost now, but the decision will in the long term prove proffitable. Now you're only betting 16bb, hoping to win 24bb.

I hope that maybe made it a bit more clear..

Just consider any money that you put into the pot before showdown to be lost by the next street, gone, dissapeared. You invested it to improve your equity in the hand in one way or another (fold equity, improving implied odds or just because you think you have the best hand, whatever).
 
Top