Where are you coming up with this number? How about some math to support your passive-aggressive criticism?

I've already provided two ranges for villain. In the absolute worse case scenario (against a purely nutted value range), we have about a $10 equity edge.

In a more realistic scenario, where we include at least some AK combinations (which we should, since V limp/raised UTG)

We have somewhere around a $40 equity edge when we call.

You're also underestimating the value of having a large stack at the table. The largest stack is typically the table captain, which is hugely +EV.

Correct me if im wrong, but doesn't a positive EV always mean a call? It shouldn't matter how big your EV is, as long as it's positive. Even if you're risking $180 to earn $7, its worth it because no matter, you'll still earn back your $180

Also, how does 2:1 = 33.33% equity????

Yes long term you win 7$

We are getting 2:1 on a call meaning for everytime we put in $1, we stand to win $2. That means we only have to win 1 out of 3 times or 33% to break even. Or in other words we need at least 33% equity to break even.

Ex
Run 1 we lose $1
Run 2 we lose $1
Run 3 we win $2

We Breakeven when we win 33% of the time

This is a classic example of why many people on this forum stay stuck at 1-2. If you ignore the math of the game you will never beat the game

If you were 8 tabling online I would agree with going for the $7 in EV.

But you're not. You're stuck at 1 table seeing 25 hands per hour dealt and probably only playing like 5-8 hands per hour (if you're only playing 20-33% of hands). You cannot leverage the number of hands you can play live. So "the long term" is an extremely long time in live poker.

At LLSNL, you crush the game by going for fat value and crushing the weaker players. Calling a "limp/raisepre, shove flop" with a double gutter is not crushing LLSNL. Even if it is slightly +EV. (And BTW... calling pre was such a huge mistake that the flop discussion is in and of itself horrific. We should never even be in this spot.)

Having said that, it is obviously important to know what the EV is in every spot. You want to know when its close so you can decide whether you should be putting your entire stack at risk to chase a small +EV result. You might also realize that its better to let some small +EV spots go, protect your stack, and go for bigger EV in a more advantageous position later.

Even if it might be true that as you go up in stakes you need to chase smaller +EV spots (and I'm not convinced it is), or even if it would someday become true that the player pools in LLSNL collectively get good enough that you need all these tiny +EV spots (and I'm 100% certain that will never happen) -- today, you simply do not need these spots.

It always means its profitable to call. (Assuming your range estimates are accurate. In this HH, I'm sure they are if we put V on QQ+.)

IMO, it does not always mean you should call. I generally do not risk my entire stack to chase 4bb. I require much more dead $$$.

I hope you someday figure out why this is so very wrong.

The big stack plays at the mercy of the smaller stacks. Always.

Alright, you're just asking for it at this point. I asked you to mathematically demonstrate how you came up with the $7 EV.

You posted 3 times, and failed to mention anything about how you derived the $7 figure.

Let me ask you this question:

How big of a favorite must you be to call an all in?

I've estimated that our edge in this spot is between 2.4% and 8%.

So our EV is between $12.96 and $43.20.

Again, this $7 figure is nowhere to be found...

Thanks for the condescending tone. I am sorry you feel so lonely in life.

Villain has QQ+ here. Any other range is optimistic at best.

Our break even equity is:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Board: 9d 7h 5s
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 63.990% 63.38% 00.61% 11295 108.00 { QQ+ }
Hand 1: 36.010% 35.40% 00.61% 6309 108.00 { Jd8d }
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The final pot will be $183 + 180 + 180 = $543. With $180 to call, we need 33% equity to break even.

Since we have 3% more equity then we need, our EV in $$$ is 0.03 * $543 = $16.29.

So fine, genius, our +EV line nets us $16.29 in the long run. So after going to McDonald's, you can go to Starbucks and get dessert.

Does the phrase, "penny wise, pound foolish", mean anything to you?

Awesome... let's put $180 at risk to win $16. I hope you guys live forever to realize your long-term equity.

There's clearly not going to be a good enough answer for you. And that's fine.

Downswings happen to everyone. But if you're routinely putting your money in as a 2:1 dog chasing small +EV spots, you're going to find that your downswings are longer in duration, and more soul crushing in nature than necessary. Or perhaps you won't, because you'll be otherwise comfortably sitting on your La-z-boy chair that you've bought $10 at a time in G-bucks. W/e... it no matter to me at all.

I cannot say specifically how much dead $$$ must be in the pot for me to want to call as a 2:1 dog, but I'm thinking at least 25-30bb would be a good starting place. Probably more.

But this HH is great for pointing out the fallacy of chasing small +EV for BIs. We know Villain's hand to an unusually high precision. So we don't have to worry about our EV computation being way off. Villain is never weaker then we think he is because we would need specific history to put him on AK- here, which we don't have, so we should not include a weaker range for Villain.

Again, if we find our opponents so tough that we must chase these small +EV spots at all costs to attain our win-rate, then that is what we must do. But it is not the case. We can let this one go, protect our stack, and get our $$$ in much better. And by much better, like way, WAAAAAY, better.

This is a little confusing, but I assume you mean you'd need a 25BB edge to win 270BB (this hand). So you're saying you need a 9% edge to put your money in as a 2:1 dog. Okay.

So let's make the pot a little smaller. Instead of calling $180 to win $540, let's simplify the scenario, and make it $10 to win $30 (still a 2:1 dog).

Would you call the $10 all in to win $30, with a 9% edge, knowing that on average, you'll profit $2.70?

Define "long run".

You have one chance to gamble $10 to win $30 with a 9% edge. That's the scenario. Will you gamble, or not?

LOL...

I'll gamble $0.1 to win $0.3 with a long term (1000 trials) expectation of $0.027 per trial.

Stop with the foolishness. Really, if this is how you think about LLSNL, then you'll forever be at best a break-even player.

Think about it like this:

Will you gamble 90bb to win 271.5bb as a 2:1 dog with an expectation after 1000 trials of 8bb/trial?

Will you gamble 1 BI to win 3 BI as a 2:1 dog, with an expectation after 1000 trials of 0.08 BI per trial?

I don't know why any rational LLSNL player would take such a poor return when the game can be beaten without risking an entire BI to win 8bb. You can win 8bb any time you want with much less risk, even if it is short term risk.

Unless you are a live pro playing every day, 6 days a week, 8 hours a day, you'll never get enough hours in to justify routinely getting 1 BI at risk to win 8bb. And even if you are a live pro, its almost certainly unnecessary to take such risks.

DaYu i really like that name and I know exactly what it means. I also support your position and agree that this should probably be a call. I think that the raise preflop is fine but I would probably fold to the 3 bet. I do think, however, that limping might have been a better option then raising in this specific scenario..

Lapidator...

Taking these small ev spots means the difference between beating the game for 7-8bb/hr

And crushing for 10+bb/hr.

As cash game poker players we should always take any spot that yields positive ev. A tournament is where you can make the argument to pass up on a small ev spot.

Passing up on small ev spots in cash just to "reduce variance" is backwards logic. Sounds more like a bankroll issue to me.

If you had 100 buy ins at this game, are you telling me you would still fold? If your bankroll can withstand the variance and you are not prone to tilting why wouldnt you take every + ev spot.

Pretty close to the actual EV which is less than a dollar, plus or minus.

Huh its way more than that
3% equity * total pot size of $540
.03*$540 = $16.20



We net $16.20 on a call in the long run

That would be the length of time that a college graduate returns to live in his parents' basement in order to grind 2NL micros until his mid-40's and unfortunately realizes that life has passed him by.

I included sets in V's range but just going with OverPairs we have only have +$11EV.

$543(pot) x 35.75%(equity) = $194

$194 - $183(call) = $11 EV

Unlikely he has any sets, since he limp raised utg.

Its actually $194-$180 (call was only $180)

+1

also maybe not this particular hand but occasionally, in some of these "close" (barely profitable) spots, villain surprises you with a hand that dominates you

Take 5 minutes and try to understand what I'm saying.

It has nothing to do with bankroll management.

I'm talking about time management.

Unless you're a poker pro, playing 2000+ hours a year, you're not going to put in enough hours to make chasing these small +EV spots worth while.

I've already said that playing online where you are multi-tabling and getting many more hands/hr in make it correct to chase small +EV spots at the expense of large BI bets.

If I was playing 40+ hours a week, every week, then yes, I would take smaller +EV spots at the risk of BRM. But I'm not. And the vast majority of the readers of this forum are not.

LLSNL is a entry-level forum. FFS, an unfortunate amount of strategy posted in this forum is counter productive to the guy that plays 1 or 2 days a week. (Though I suppose that is the point much of the time, isn't it?)

Its one thing to accept the variance in the game. Its another to play in such a way that increases your variance because you think you're going to increase your win-rate by a tiny amount.

"Diminishing Returns" mean anything to you?

The reality is, nobody is exploiting you.

You don't have to make this call, in this HH, because Villain never has anything but what he's representing. You have exactly the small +EV situation you think you have, and nothing more. Sure, its +EV if you do make the call, but giving up this spot, to preserve your stack for the rest of your 8 hour session is the better route.

I DGAF if you have an unlimited BR. You can only play 1 hand at a time. It doesn't matter if you have 100BI in your pocket, and you GII every single hand you play. You're only going to see ~25 hands per hour.

You can make all these folds and give up little bits of +EV all the time and crush the hell out of this game because you're making better use of your time, not your BR.

Most of the time, nobody is playing back at you. Most of the time, nobody is hand reading you good enough that you need every tiny +EV spot to scrape out a positive win rate.

And what if someone starts to exploit you? Then either the table is good, or you have great position, and you adjust and maybe start to shave off some of these little +EV spots and continue on as a winner, or you decide the table is too tough, or your position sucks, and you table change to a better table.

Again this is a bankroll issue. If you are properly rolled you should always take every +ev spot