Quote:
Originally Posted by bicyclekick
It's not unreasonable to think the reverse implied odds would matter to a point where this wouldn't be a good hand but it's just not the case. After post flop plays out it saves quite a bit off of the 1bb you posted. Maybe if somebody is inexperienced post flop they could possibly screw this up badly enough to make folding better but I'm not going to factor in playing horribly postflop to my responses.
If the equity is in the 30-35% range (as Abbaddabba suggested) then you win about your fair share of the pots. There is a small bet of dead money (your BB) and your share of that is 1/3 of a small bet. Is it really unreasonable (assuming competent postflop play from all 3 players) that you lose more than 1/3 of a small bet in EV postflop due to reverse implied odds?
For clarity: I'm thinking specifically about the fact that when you make top pair, no kicker, you lose a lot when you are dominated, but don't win that much against someone who doesn't have an ace. The low end of your opponents' wide ranges are just not paying you off on ace-high flops.
It's also worth pointing out that as the capper from the BB you have the tightest range of anyone. So, assuming equal play from all 3 players, they have a better read on you than you have on them -- they can play more accurately than you can.