What is mean Raw Equity?

Whats is mean Hot Cold Equity?

Are they the same thing?

Not sure. Around 10 years ago a friend mentioned hot/cold equity to me. I looked it up and it seemed like a fictitious thing. Something to do with being given credit for a stronger holding if you've won the previous x% of hands iirc.

Raw equity is the equity you have on any street (but mainly preflop) against villains range.

Realisable equity (it's called other things too) is the equity you hope to realise if the hand plays out the way you expect it to.

Example

100bb eff stack

Hero (reg) utg AA Villain (reg) btn calling range (it's made up, its not meant to be real) JJ-22,AKs,KQs,QJs,JTs,T9s,98s

Preflop hero raw equity 80.87%, and on most flops raw equity and realisable equity will be pretty close

Flop

JT9

Raw equity is now 69.57% and if hero cbets and is raised, realisable equity is (probably) now down to 38.87%. (since villain probably only raises his 2P, sets and draws, and mucks all his small pairs and whilst he will semi bluff a ton, he is never pure bluffing on that flop))

Conversely if hero checks flop and gives a turn free card any heart and any card above a 7 destroys his raw and realisable equity as well.

I never heard the term hot/cold equity, but I would guess
cold equity = raw equity

and hot equity = realisable equity.

equity is also described as vulnerable or non-vulnerable, which is connected but different).

example KQo on an AKx rainbow flop = non vulnerable (because very few cards change the equity you have).

Whilst 22 on an AKx rainbow flop = vulnerable (because every card except a 2 reduces your equity on every street).

Overvaluing raw equity, preflop, and comparing it to pot odds, especially oop in the big blind, is one of the single biggest mistakes poor regs continuously make and you see it posted in BQ pretty much weekly

Does “hand plays out” include your folds and/or villain folds or is it for only when there is a showdown?

Hot and Cold refers to all-in preflop situations.

I believe so.

I always took the terms to mean "how much of the pot you would win in the long run if you were all in" (most commonly used when talking about pre-flop equities). i.e. A percentage for "raw equity" or "hot and cold equity" is the number you get when you plug ranges into Pokerstove/Equilab

They are different to realizable equity, as described by Fatboy.

disclaimer...poker definitions can be tricky as they are frequently interpreted differently. It seems we are all on the same mountain top re raw equity; realisable equity might be a different kettle of fish because:

Not everyone will agree
I've seen different terms to describe what i call "realisable equity"

What I mean by "hands play out" is simply your expectation of the way the hand will go.

By example:

You have 56s in the BB and a reg tag opens utg of a 11% range (77+, A9s+, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, ATo+, KQo)

You have 34% raw equity ie if we get to s/d

However, an sc only flops a hand better than TP (which useless with an sc this small) 25% of the time. So your realisable equity to the flop is at best 25%, but in fact it is nowhere near that, since that 25% includes an absolute ton of weak (8-9 out) draws (to low straights and baby flushes).

Playing weak draws, sometimes with poor reverse implied odds, out of position to a tight aggressive player (who will cbet and barrel you all day long) on a strong range is just spew, so in reality your realisable equity preflop is probably in the region of 15% or worse.

You can of course increase your realisable equity if you plan to raise all your weak draws, which is a common strat these days.

Conversely, if villain is post flop passive (an increasingly rare beast ) you realisable equity climbs hugely because your gonna see a ton of free turns and rivers.

I agree with the above post, but I do believe that you chose a wrong hand example. Suited connectors are the hands that tend to realise their full equity most easily, both passively and as semibluffs. Better example would be a hand like 64o, which has similar raw equity vs open as 65s, but will really struggle to realise it, since it will rarely have better than 3rd/4th pair.

Another example, this time from the realm of hands that are actually playable, are small pairs, which have close to 50% raw equity vs most opening ranges, but pretty much never realise it, since most people play them as pure setmines (which is often a mistake). In general, one of the traits of top players is their ability to realise most of their raw equity, which for example allows them to defend blinds and opens vs 3bet really wide.

I don't disagree (although I do think sc are overplayed), it was really meant to be just to be a semi-hypothetical example, to demo the main (simple) message. Your right, though 64o would have made the point more demonstrably clear.

I'll take that point on board for my upcoming coaching career/book/video series

and yeah, this is spot on and very topical if you read Janda's latest offering.

That's my understanding, too.

I’m not sure my question about folds was answered.

I define equity realization as follows: Given a game situation (GS) – player, hand (or hand type), board, position, etc., you realize your equity if you win with a frequency equal to or better than the raw or showdown equity. This differs from Fatboy’s definition of realizable equity where he defines that as the equity you expect, although there is certainly a connection between the two definitions. Janda defines to realize equity as "how effectively can you actually get this hand to showdown when you want to.”

With my definition, here is my take on equity realization (ER):

1. I don’t think there is any reasonably accurate way to predict ER without data, but it can be measured and modeled. (A Bayes model using the beta distribution for the prior is one way.)

2. If you always go to showdown, you will always realize your equity. The more frequently a hand reaches showdown, the closer it will get to realize its equity.

3. Doing so is not necessarily good. If villain never folds and you never fold 72 offsuit, you will always realize 72o equity!

4. Define a bad fold as a hand that would have won if it went to showdown. The only way to realize your equity is if villain bad folds equals or exceeds hero bad folds. Not a practical concept but a true one. (Think of hero and villain always going to showdown except for one bad villain fold.)

5. Realizing your equity, therefore, has to consider folds and this in turn will normally involve bet sizing and EV as they affect folding frequency.

6. A playable hand is one likely to go to showdown – suited connectors are more playable than low pairs and therefore SCs are more likely to realize their equity than low pairs.

7. If E_act is your actual equity for a given GS, and E_raw is the raw equity, then define equity realization factor as ERF = E_act / E_raw . Instead of E_act, the Bayes estimate E_bayes can be used.

8. Adjusting raw equity by ERF is necessary for proper EV analysis.

I prefer my equity medium rare

statmanhal, I think we are pretty much on the same mountain top, you just explain way better and waaayyy more scientifically than I do. Nice 1.

Great. A problem may exist, however, in that the realize-equity-mountain-top appears to me to be often covered by a cloud.

....and the "playability" top covered by dense hill fog.

anyway, seems like others have answered ops original question.

Bump because this topic is awesome.