I am not sure if I have a complete understanding of what realizing the equity of your hand means. So lets go for an example:

Say we are 10/20 with stack sizes all 1000

Say we have QJo in CO
UTG raises to 65
we call from CO
BTN 3 bets to 150
UTG calls

Now it is reasonable to assume that our UTG and BTN ranges must be reasonably tight by this point. If for simplicity's sake we assume that they are:

UTG 66+, AT+, KJ+,QJ
BTN 99+, A6+ KQ

Now our hand has a decent amount of equity in this spot so we should call right? However, in terms of realizing our equity there are very few flops that we can be crazy about and out of position in a 3 way 3 bet pot we are going to have to throw away our hand even if we hit a Q or J on a lot of flops in this situation. So in this hand it will be hard to realize the equity if hitting a J or a Q?

Is this the correct(ish) way to be thinking about the concept of realizing our equity?

Thanks for any help

Its part of the correct way to be thinking about it.

Any help with the rest of it?

You seem to understand it fine.

A (2-card) hand's equity in NLHE is determined by

(1) the range of best absolute-value 5-card hands it makes in conjunction with the 5 community cards

and how this range compares to

(2) the range of 5-card hands that villain(s)'s holding(s) make

If we don't get to see all five community cards then, normally we're folding it before it's made the best possible hand it can make. This is a failure to realise its equity.

Given that equity is in part determined by our hands relationship to villain's holding(s) it also arguably fails to realise its equity when folded on the river - when villain's actual holding is left indeterminate.

There are exceptions to this. Sometimes, at any point in the hand from the flop onwards our hand will be drawing dead vs either villain's actual holding or villain's range. Our hand will have zero equity. Folding in this case secures just as much of the pot as calling all bets to get to show-down, and as such could be said to "realise its equity".

All said, in practice we never know villain's actual holding, and can be confident our hand has at least non-zero equity against villain's range. Folding as opposed to getting to showdown or making our opponent fold just fails to realise this equity.

It's a weird expression. The main idea is that the amount you are actually expected to win as the hand plays out and the amount you would win if there were no more chips to bet can be very different.

The reasons for this are obvious: Sometimes you get bluffed off the best hand or don't get to see all the cards that may have improved you to the best hand. Even if you do get to showdown you might put in more money when you're behind than when you're ahead.

Of course all these factors can work in your favour too: you might bluff with the worst hand, win more when ahead, etc.

The problem with the expression "realizing your equity" is that it assumes that all-in equity is a good place to start your analysis when you want to figure out the value of your hand. That is, you estimate that you have 28% equity and then try to figure out if you're expected to do better or worse than that by looking at some common postflop situations that might arise.

Unfortunately that's not the case. Almost all of the situations have to be considered from scratch. There's some amount to be made from bluffing postflop. OTOH almost none of the equity related to flopped gutshots or 2nd pairs is "realized". So the correct analysis is actually to look at flops that you can continue on (top pair or better, OESD, maybe T8x, 98x, some KQx) and try to estimate if they provide enough value to justify a call.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/15...ation-1375961/

cliffs:

Stop thinking of it as equity realization and start thinking of your pot share, which yaqh calls the "capture factor."

+1

It's responsible for a lot of flawed thinking.

And also for whatever the hell this is:

Does not compute. Given it's a 9-handed tourney table the single raising range of UTG is going to be tighter than that, let alone the calling range vs a call and a 3bet and being out of position. BTN is not going to have A6+ but rather some low suited aces and then only AQ or maybe AK and depending on the player not even 99+ and KQ. The thing here is that QJ flops reasonably well but only if you have the initiative or are against a pretty wide range where any pair is going to be good. Even if you do somehow get the right odds preflop compared to the amount of times you'd win if all 5 cards are dealt you are never going to "realize your equity" purely based on that. You're going to be forced into making mistakes and top pair can be costly and you might need to bluff a decent amount to make this work and justify the pot odds you're getting. Of course knowing how often you're going to make the best hand by the river is important but let's say you have 56s and somehow get the right odds against their ranges you are almost never making a profit on a call purely based on that. This is the whole reason why a lot of the times 89s is a better hand to play than 22 even though technically 22 has better equity.

Thanks for this amazing post which is so much helpful for me. I am new to poker and just started to learn the rules of poker by reading some book. I know a few things about the equity in poker. But the Ace Poker Drills which is a free equity trainer has helped me a lot.