Hi all,

I am trying to wrap my head around a couple concepts. If you get it in with sufficient equity relative to your share of the pot, you're making a +EV play - a winning play.

But what if you get it in with 35% where you are calling a PSB otf multiple times over the course of several sessions (with no or very little money to play for on subsequent streets)? Seems like a losing proposition even though technically correct. Won't you just . . . lose . . . a lot? Isn't that why we try to get it in a 55% or 60% favorite in this game, so we maximize our EV and are more likely to win? So why should we put our money in with much less equity, even if we expect to win only occasionally in those spots. "Wait for a better spot" comes to mind here.

Do big winners regularly fold in marginally +EV spots?

Thanks,
DT

If its ev+ you go for it, that’s what your bankroll is for.

The only spot where i see myself giving up a slight ev edge is if the hand is vs a massive fish live who is known to lock down or leave if he wins a big pot.

The one exception to this is fixed-buyin games where having a big stack can allow you to take advantage of a bad opponent and losing a big chunk of that and not being able to reload hurts.

Example: bad player has $2000. I have $2000. good player has $1500, table is $500 cap buyin. Good player gets it all in against me, and I have small EV on the call. It might be better to fold, then use my massive advantage on the bad player to stack him later, since if I lose here, I am down to $500 and lose a big edge I have on him.

Imagine a prop that theres 10$ to win and somebody told you that you get a 35% chance of winning it if you pay him 3$. Would you pay?

Yes you would lose around 65% of the time. But you would also have a 5% edge on the action. So if it is a $200 call then you are making $10 in one hand. Good work if you can get it.

If you are on a short bankroll, it might make sense to pass on some marginal edges, in hopes of getting our money in much better later on. But if you are properly bankrolled there is really no reason to pass on a marginal spot.

That being said, in the 2:1 example with a 5% edge, you really wouldn't want to bet more than 1 or 2% of your bankroll in this scenario (see Kelly Criterion).

Being a winning player in poker is not about just getting it in when you have a large +EV situation, its about maximizing all of the spots where you have a +EV situation.

In the situation you described we are assuming that we are going to make the exact same play time and time again over X number of hands, sessions, months, years etc. If you have a 35% edge in a hand that will give you a positive expecation then eventually overtime you will realize that positive gain. It might only be $20 bucks over the same 1000 hands, but at 10K its $200 and 100K its $2000 etc.

If you do the same thing as the above example with all of your +EV situations they all begin to add up to substantial winnings.

The problem with EV is that no one knows how long it will take them to realize that positive expectation. For you it could be 10K hands, for me it could be 10 million.

You simply have to have faith that the mathematics of poker will eventually work out.

No, they don't...that's what makes them big winners. They can find the extra ev in plays that others don't or are afraid to take.

Much like you, I'm a huge nit, but I'm able to take solace in knowing that I'm making a good play based on the odds presented. Losing will happen and sometimes you will lose many many times in a row or at least it'll feel that way. As Dinus said, you gotta have faith. Even in those times you lose money with correct odds, you're actually profiting as long as you have the bankroll to handle the swings and keep grinding.

Hi DumbosTrunk,

You are correct that this situation is bad for us and we will lose money if we repeatedly are in this situation, but this is the worst case scenario and the fact is we are NOT repeatedly in this situation.

Let's say for example we 4-bet QJT9ds and have 40% equity vs. a 5-bet for pot all in. At this point we're already losing money compared to folding pre no matter what we choose. However we've already committed a lot to the pot and we have done so because out of the times we 4-bet QJT9ds and don't get 5-bet (i.e., most of the time), we make money. In fact, usually by 4-betting we are putting our opponent in this exact position.

Once we do face the 5 bet, at this point, we are losing money no matter what we choose. We lose less if we call then if we fold. But we hope to not face the 5-bet to begin with

One more point I wanted to mention that is related to the responses of always taking the +EV action, I agree to some extent, but poker is a marathon, not a sprint (for professionals and recreationals alike).

I think if you're frequently making marginal EV sacrifices (say, more than once every 200 hours, or if you get the urge to do so for "only" a 400bb pot) then that is definitely an issue that needs to be fixed, but occasionally paying for some mental health is totally fine

If you’re finding yourself in a lot of 35% and not many 65% then you might want to look at earlier streets.
But of course take every spot

Thanks everyone. I've been getting into this situation pre recently with ds rundowns in plo5, 45% against AA usually. But once the 3! is in it's time to go with it. Appreciate the wisdom. Run good all!

You might be 3b too much. I remember A9986 or something similar. A 20% opening range is going to have AA over 1 in 5 times in 5card, and letting AA get all in pre is a huge win for the AA (or even letting them get in a committing chunk)