Quote:
Originally Posted by KKingDavid
That's asking quite a lot, and once UTG ships it is a clear fold. Also raising can be profitable if it drives out all of the draws and also drives out UTG with 2 overs. Both of these "can be profitable" scenarios require somewhat of a perfect storm 6-handed on this flop and I think a call-and-evaluate approach is a much better line.
This is the Conjunction Fallacy. It's not sufficient to list a lot of things that have to go right. For you to win
any pot, you're also relying on the dealer not misreading your hand, gambling not being illegalized in the time it takes to ship the pot to you, and so forth. This argument only becomes meaningful once we assess the probability of each of those happening.
So there are 17 combos from each of the 4 left to act that we're most worried about. If they have 20% of all 1326 combos of hold em, then sets+ only represent 6% of each players' range, so there's a 76% chance that none of them have those hands.
24 combos out of an UTG opener's range is more substantial, but again, I'm relying on the population read that a bet this size is rarely a strong overpair.
Of course we still need either AcKx and so forth to either fold or to fade all their outs to the river, but this is more relevant when we're comparing raising versus folding. As compared to calling, it is clearly superior to force these hands to either invest more money as a slight dog or to forfeit their equity.
All factors considered, we're probably winning this pot <50% of the time, so a raise isn't for straight value, but the value in protection is massive here. I would even argue that investing $80 more on the flop with a raise rather than a call doesn't even mean we're investing much more with this hand than we would with a call, as the raise earns us initiative on the only player who's acted on the pot and forces the players in position to play more straightforward on the remaining streets.