Quote:
Originally Posted by QTip
True. However, position isn't the concern (afaik). In the example, we're on the button.
good point. let me try one more time.
it's checked to you on the river holding A9 UI, and you think you are usually beat are sometimes are good, and that your opponent's range contains many hands that can't stand a large bet, but some that will call. now, what you would like in ideal world is for an angel to tell you "now is a time to check back," and you check back those times, and then bluff the others. but this is exactly what the case would be when you hold the nut low. except in that case the angel always tells you, "don't check back this time, you'll lose."
let's do some numbers and see if this reasoning holds up. let's say he has 10% hands you beat (which fold to any bet), 70% better hands that fold to your pot size bet of P, and 20% hands that call and win.
when you have your angel and check back the 10% of the time to win, then what's left over the other times is a 70:20 ratio of hands you beat to hands that beat you. so your bluff will be effective 7/9 of the time.
EV = .1*P + .9*((7/9)*P - (2/9)*P) = .6P
In the case with no angel where you always bluff we have:
EV = .8*P - .2P = .6P
so it looks like there is no difference. but since we're talking about GTO, your opponent will rebluff some % of the time, and when that happens with him holding those 10% of hands you beat, you would have rather checked back, since that locks up your win right there, whereas if he rebluffs and you fold it's "wasted equity." this argument would only apply when your pot size was not an allin bet, and when he holds some value c/raise hands ofc. if those assumptions don't hold then the two cases really do look the same.
i'm curious to hear matthew's thoughts on this. because that's a fairly subtle distinction which isn't worth a lot of money. but of course as he says in the book the hand is much more effective on the flop and turn, and this point only addresses its river advantage.
Last edited by gaming_mouse; 07-03-2013 at 09:09 PM.