Quote:
Originally Posted by statmanhal
For a mathematical justification, if you make a bet of B into a pot of P, the minimum showdown equity to assure +EV is B/(P+2B) assuming a villain call.
You can easily show that the required equity decreases with B. As required equity decreases, more hands can meet the requirement. Therefore, the smaller the bet, the wider you can bet.
Note, this simple math ignores many factors such as future betting, folds (equity realization), raises, EV maximization, etc. but does support the contention that a smaller bet can justify a wider opening.
thanks for answering.
I didn't played poker since a long time, so I restarted the book from the beginning, and you answer will certainly help me when I will be back at this area of the book.
Well by restarting the book I discovered a new problem that I don't manage to solve myself.
at page 61, Matthew says that the example used to figure out what the EV of the worst hand in our BU open range is when SB or BB call "treated all flats from SB and BB the same" and that stands for simplify the problem.
I can't figure out the "slightly more complex formula" which Matthew speaks to separate SB and BB calls. In fact I believe Matthew is speaking about something to find different EVs for SB calls and BB calls.
Something like:
freqfold*EVfold + freq3bet*3bet + freqSBcalls*EVSBcalls + freqBBcalls*EVBBcalls = 0
It seems to me that this equation have infinite solutions (believe me I tried hard to solve this especially I tried with a raise from MP...) and can't be solve.
I'm not an expert on maths (I also tried to answer my question with solvers, and I'm even less expert at programming) so if someone meets the same problem or want to solve this, help is welcome !
I start to believe that either Matthew didn't realize that this equation is not solvable or that I misinterpreted what he wanted to say.
