Get Better at Continuation Betting in One Lesson

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

I'm not sure about that equation you listed there, but it looks like it would have something to do with an all-in semi-bluff.

i got it from here: http://www.thepokerbank.com/strategy...s/equity/fold/

is it bogus, or am i just not understanding it?

btw - pretty stoked at having my own private thread here

Originally Posted by DoubleJ

i got it from here: http://www.thepokerbank.com/strategy...s/equity/fold/

is it bogus, or am i just not understanding it?

btw - pretty stoked at having my own private thread here

Using those "equations" to illustrate what's going on conceptually seems fine. However, how the guy starts doing math-like things with them to try to determine what your total equity is in a hand is like the poker equivalent of bro science. It doesn't take into account future bets, like your shove or your opponent's call on an AI semi-bluff, for example. It looks like it's confusing equity for EV or some kind of halfway in between idea.

Just estimating the EV of a semi-bluff is probably easier and more useful.

OK, so concept = sound, cobra-mathic formula = not so much.

thx

going back to the calc for pure bluffs to be +EV - can we recap this, plizz, as i'm trying to understand why to/how to use the rule and how it works, but just thinking myself round in circles.

Firstly, what are the arguments for the formula?

My first assumption was that we are using Pot_Size (given) and expected_Fold_% (from combo counting) to correctly size a pure bluff bet.

But then it occurs that we could also be using it to test whether a Bet_Size (planned) into Pot_Size (given) compares favourably to Expected_Fold_% in order to decide whether to bet or not.

or are they interchangeable?

Secondly, is Expected_Fold_% a constant? Doesn't Bet_Size have some impact on how likely Villain is to fold?