Beginner Limit Hold'em Poker Forums

I didn\'t check your math but in principle I believe you are right. This is interesting, feel free to link to that thread too.

-DeathDonkey

Hi all

So there is a long thread on 2p2 about river play. This one.

Cliff notes: Is it ever best to bet OOP on the river even if the bet has no value. I.e. can betting without value be better than c/f when you can not c/c..?

So some claim that if you can not c/c and if the bet has negative value then you should c/f. These include respected posters such as Danzasmack and Gehrig.


So I tried to construct an example that proves them wrong - at least I think it does.

It would be cool if some of you poker experts could tell me whats right and whats wrong because I really suck at river play.

The example:

Say we are at the river OOP against a villain where we estimate our eq to 30%

EDIT: Potsize = 5BB

Estimated actions by villain

- If bet to:
Ahead: call 60% raise 10%
Behind: call 25% fold 5%

- If checked to:
Ahead: bet 70% check 0%
Behind: bet 10% check 20%


This gives

EV(c/f) = 0.2*5 = 1

EV(c/c) = -0.7*1 + 0.1*6 +0.2*5 = 0.9

So we cant c/c because we are not good more than 1 in 7 (only 1 in 8). On the other hand we will be folding the best hand with 10% probability.

EV(b/f) = -0.6*1 -0.1*1 + 0.25*6 + 0.05*5 = 1.05

The value of the bet in it self is negative: -0.7 + 0.25 = -0.45, but the overall EV of bet/folding is better than c/f\'ing because it prevents us of being folded of the best hand when we c/f.<br><br>Post edited by: Oink, at: 2007/07/28 03:58

I did link. Click \"this one\" at the top of my first post