On average you may have greater than 25% equity but it probably isn't much greater.

Getting 5 to 1 odds pre-draw is an optimist viewpoint because the flop peel is neglected. Incorporating that you are only getting 3.5 to 1 over the first two streets and there is very little overlay left (if any) as you head into the big bet streets.

Limit Hold'em is different in that you can fold a lot of flops three handed but in Deuce we have to try and peel. So to get the true odds we must at least consider the first two streets. If we say we aren't supposed to try and peel all the time due to the weakness of our starting hand, then we have major realization issues.

You have 28% vs 245 and 247 which seems like one of the worst case scenarios and 25% against 245 and 245 which is actually the worst so I’d guess you have far more than 25% on average. Plus the continuation bet may never come... like in this case. Or we can just make a fine hand on the first draw. You’re acting like our hand can’t improve and we have to call the additional sb with our hand as it is.

Cc is cold call xc is check call. I think you’re drastically underestimating the negative effects this strategy will have on your range. Of course you do well with this line. You have the nuts. Any line that doesn’t involve folding is going to do well.

I have 873 at 20% vs (for example) 247 and 248, using default Galt break rules of patting Nines on flop, patting Tens on turn. Galt went buggy recently and now doesn't run at all but I'm curious how we could come to such different figures.

If I'm wrong by 8% in such a common situation I'm screwed.

Of course I realize that we can improve and and that there may not be a continuation bet. Some really bad stuff could happen too like we were dead from start, we get trapped by a raise trying to peel etc etc. We obviously don’t know what will happen on draw or on the flop, but mathematically since we are a dog predraw it is correct in our analysis to assume that we are that same dog on the flop on average. And with three people in hand in most cases there is a bet on flop.

But just saying we are getting 5 to 1 we have to call is essentially assuming it always gets checked around which is clearly not the case.

Have to view the situation as getting true odds over the first two streets as somewhere in between 3.5 and 5 to 1. We can assume 4 to 1 on average and call it a day.

I saw electrical’s post below, 28 does sound high, I’ll probably fire up Troutulator later

I think you’re overestimating the impact rio have on the current pot odds we are receiving.

I don't think so, if you calculate the more realistic effective odds by including flop peels in the analysis your hot/cold is basically so close to the pot odds that any RIO at all probably makes it a losing play

But you are hand waving these more “realistic” effective odds. They seem quite pessimistic.

How so? Regardless how anyone catches everyone has to peel right? Ignoring flop betting round and just saying we are getting 5 to 1 pre and have to call is way too optimistic

It’s not like limit Hold’em where we can fold flop

Seems like I’m doing the opposite of hand waving and taking the analysis further

Actually we do fold sometimes. Just not for one bet. And unlike lhe it’s somewhat likely the flop gets checked through. In fact in lhe you can fold sometimes but many times you cannot, this is more and more true as lhe has evolved. There are a lot of factors after the flop including our ability to improve that make me think your estimate of the potsize being one full sb smaller than it is is far too conservative.

Yeah I know we would certainly fold for more than one bet the term peeling to me already connotes to me that we are calling just one bet , think you might be missing the main point that 5 to 1 odds is a best case scenario. Probably the scenario that happens more often than other scenarios is that we do not improve but we are faced with one bet on the flop and under that particular scenario we are getting 3.5 to 1 effective. So real effective is somewhere in between and our equity situation is not overwhelming to begin with. I mentioned 4 to 1 effective overall in weighted average feels right, it might seem like hand waving but I was employed many years as a mathematician for many years and used to estimating fairly quickly but accurately. And there is no need to be more precise here.

I realize we can improve, stop saying that lol. But they can improve as well. We don't know what will happen on the draw. The only thing we can say is that since we know that we are equity dog on the pre draw betting we are theoretically an underdog on the flop betting with no knowledge of how the draw will turn out. And that's relevant here because we have to try and peel.

But the main point of the comparison between LHE and 2-7 is that in 2-7 we would try to peel 100% of the time, what % of the flops would we try to peel in LHE with 76s? Whether or not it is in evolved or non evolved LHE it is certainly less than 100%.

Therefore just looking at preflop odds in LHE is more relevant but in 2-7 my premise is that you should more accurately reflect the amount of money in relation to the size of the pot

Scotch I don’t get your 2-7 and hodlem comparison. If anything our equity preflop is 2-7 is far truer as we are going to relize it far more often and preflop stoves matter more.

For example we call with 6-7s vs the cutoff. It comes 922 and we check fold a considerable amount of risotto away vs non pair hands but our preflop stoves account for seeing the turn and river in all runouts.

Ok I’m not talking about equity realization I’m comparing the two based upon how we should view pre flop pot odds

In Deuce I don’t think we can say “we are getting 5 to 1 pre so this is a clear call” when it completely ignores money that we are putting in on flop as well so our true effective odds are lower which eliminates the overlay and thus with RIO probably makes the 873 a losing call. At very least it’s very close

You are describing rio. It is not a separate thing.

No I’m not. Due to the nature of the game and lack of visibility of the draws (ie no flops to gauge how you doing) you can’t just view the money you put in predraw compared to the pot odds, you must also incorporate into the analysis the money put into the flop as well. Essentially view the two streets as one.

Then going forward after that one “street” you can view your hot/cold, pot odds, and whether you have RIO or IO and come to a conclusion.

Yes I understand your argument but money that you will win or lose on future streets are your implied odds. No matter how you dress it up, you are talking about rio. This is the way implied odds manifest themselves in 2-7. Frankly, I think you are overestimating the impact of these implied odds on the current pot size, but the bigger problem with your argument is that you can’t see that the thing you’re describing is identical to rio.

Still don't think I'm talking about RIO, quite simply have to view pre draw and flop betting as linked

Maybe taking it step by step will help clarify

1) We are an equity dog before the draw

2) Result of the 1st draw is random, we don't know how that will go so all that we know at this point is that on average we will also be an equity dog after the draw

3) Whether we catch AA or 24 on the next draw we are going to be putting money into the pot. Unless of course we check and it's two bets to us. So on average when money goes in on the flop we are an equity dog. Notice I say on average, of course I realize we can improve, sometimes big, where they brick. But reverse is of course true too.

4) Given #3 it would be a mistake to only consider pre draw pot odds in determining whether or not to play a hand such as 873. You must also consider money going in bad on average on the flop.

5) In other games such as LHE just considering pre flop odds has more relevance as you can fold flops. For example if you hold 7s6s and the flop comes AhKhQh you have a check fold but in Deuce you could peel with 873 against someone holding 23457. But you don't know it, you lack visibility.

If at this point if it's just a semantics thing and you say I'm talking about RIO that's cool, I don't have the strength nor desire to argue!

I just think watevs was right in that the SB will often call with smooth hands to entice the BB to call with such hands. And I think overall it is a losing play with such a hand, therefore the SB is gaining along with the CO open. At minimum I'd say for certain it certainly is not a big deal to fold that hand as there is much more to consider than getting 5 to 1 predraw.

Yes you are. These are reverse implied odds. You restating your argument (which I do understand) ad nauseam does not change my objection to it. The reason I object is not that you are wrong in principle but in degree.

In a game like lhe you often don’t realize all of your equity. So if we defend a btn open with 76s and the flop comes AK3 and we xf against our opponent who had T9, we don’t get to realize our equity. In 2-7 this problem isn’t nearly as pronounced. We get to realize most of our equity. The main problem with our hand here is not that we are forced to peel after the first draw, it is that when we make our hand, we may be up against a better made hand. That being said, taking a full small bet out of the pot and giving it to our opponents BEFORE considering our hot/cold equity is too pessimistic.

Another reason this is way off is bc while 2-7 and LHE both use 5 card hands, in LHE we share 3 of these cards w our opponents. That contributes a great deal as to why we will be folding 97ss on a lot of flops.

You are incorrectly applying some basic concepts wrt to RIO, artificially doubling its negative effect on our hand (by ascribing them to the hand once and then twice, using different terms to define the same exact thing), in order to support your argument.

Though I agree w you that regardless, 873xx is not some fist pump call. But it is a call against lagtag predraw ranges. Mostly, I think the issue seems to be with your thought process.

Nope not double counting, just accurately reflecting the next betting round. We must realize that we are an equity dog on both streets and gather our true effective odds instead of ignoring that fact. But I’ve done enough typing on the subject for free!

Ok edited to add that I don’t view it as RIO because flop is basically a mandatory peel. Since it’s an auto peel best viewed as an extension of pre draw. RIO to me connotes that there is some tough decision involved. For example RIO would occur in this hand if you were pat and then got raised and had to figure out whether or not to call two big bets.

But it seems like we are arguing semantics. This really is not rocket science, not much about Poker is imo. I kindfully disagree about an issue regarding my thought process lol