Break Even Odds

Just a quick theoretical question I think is quite interesting.

You're on the turn with a drawing hand. Villain shoves and then turns over his hand. You see that you have the exact odds to call (no rake) so you have an EV of 0.

Do you call or fold?

assuming you've factored rake into your EV calc you don't really give a shite at all which one you do - or if you disconnect and time out for that matter. depends how much you like teh gamb00l i guess

so yeah i call.

Originally Posted by rpm

assuming you've factored rake into your EV calc you don't really give a shite at all which one you do - or if you disconnect and time out for that matter. depends how much you like teh gamb00l i guess

so yeah i call.

I said no rake, exactly for that point. It'd be a situation where if there was rake it'd be included in giving you the right odds for it to have an EV of 0.

The reason I said no rake though is because if we're playing online rake has it's advantages.

I think there's a better answer than how much you like to gamble, but I'll see if anyone else comes up with it or anything better.

sorry, must have skim-read your first post. from an in-a-vacuum EV standpoint, we're indifferent. from a metagame standpoint, we could probably gain/lose some future EV if villain knows we are calling/folding 0EV hands and we can anticipiate if/how he will adjust (spoons maths of EV thread touches this i think, or maybe game theory and poker), from a personal psychological standpoint, it depends on your personal perspective, how risk-averse you are etc.

edit: also, if you suffer from results-oriented tilt then i'd probably just fold 0EV's because calling and losing will cost you more EV due to your likely future tilt than calling and winning will net you.

these answer are "afaik" and quite possibly just my misguided opinions/beliefs

Originally Posted by rpm

sorry, must have skim-read your first post. from an in-a-vacuum EV standpoint, we're indifferent. from a metagame standpoint, we could probably gain/lose some future EV if villain knows we are calling/folding 0EV hands and we can anticipiate if/how he will adjust (spoons maths of EV thread touches this i think, or maybe game theory and poker), from a personal psychological standpoint, it depends on your personal perspective, how risk-averse you are etc.

edit: also, if you suffer from results-oriented tilt then i'd probably just fold 0EV's because calling and losing will cost you more EV due to your likely future tilt than calling and winning will net you.

these answer are "afaik" and quite possibly just my misguided opinions/beliefs

Villain would only know if we're calling 0EV's, not folding. Would take a lot of history to work out the latter.

Versus a random fold, who needs more variance?

Versus a reg we should be calling or folding depending on if he is exploiting us with his shove. Basically if we have enough hands in our range to call versus his range without being exploited we can fold and avoid the little bit of extra variance. If we are getting exploited it's a call and it isn't close even though the call is 0EV for us.

The problem becomes a lot easier if he flips over a range since we can now figure out how to play perfectly and whether to call or fold.

Just look at it on a case by case basis.

Originally Posted by Icanhastreebet

The problem becomes a lot easier if he flips over a range since we can now figure out how to play perfectly and whether to call or fold.

If he flips over a range instead of two cards you're likely playing against dynamo, which is clearly an -ev situation to be in because he's a dirty rotten cheat.

By exploited you mean we fold too much, call too much or both?

As yAAwn already said, since EV is zero, other things to take into consideration to decide whether to call or fold are metagame, balance and information. If none of these are relevant, then fold because why take a risk for no benefit.

i don't understand how we could be being exploited if we are making all the +EV calls and folding the rest?

Originally Posted by ImSavy

if we're playing online rake has it's advantages.

What advantages are those?

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

What advantages are those?

As in rakeback basically, so if it was breakeven with rake it'd be slightly profitable in real terms.

If you were playing to max VPP you'd be calling 0EV as well I assume, but I'm not sure as there may be other more important things which come first, like making sure you aren't exploitable.

I feel like I always end up calling shoves in what I perceive to be close to 0 EV spots. I'm not really sure why that is. Making cause folding seems weak?

It's an interesting question though. I really should stop calling in those spots, because for me the EV of losing a number of those in a row is way worse than just having folded in the first place. (ie: start playing less optimally in other spots).

If you have a legit hand he would expect, then calling has the bonus of seeing villains hand and getting reads. If you have a hand he wouldn't expect then calling gives you both information on each other.

To OP's question, if it's 0EV including range considerations, then in a perfect world, I would decide whether or not to call on how much it would tilt me vs. tilting my opponent.

Originally Posted by rpm

i don't understand how we could be being exploited if we are making all the +EV calls and folding the rest?

What you describe is an optimal exploitative strategy, and that's not the same as a balanced or unexploitable strategy. Here's a quick example:

Suppose that your opponent makes an all-in shove on the river for the size of the pot. For your opponent to have a +EV bluff, he needs you to fold 33.3% of the time. Suppose that you can only make a +EV call with 20% of your range. However, if you call with only 20% of your range, then you can be exploited like a motherfucker since you're folding 80%.

ha, too easy. crystal clear now. thanks spoon