Interpretations of "R"
Posted by AF3
Posted by
AF3
posted in
Mid Stakes
Interpretations of "R"
If that's the case, then for R > 1, this would mean that we win the pot more than our pure equity would have us winning, so for example, if our pure equity was .35 and our R was 1.2, then we would entitled to the following amount of the pre-flop pot: 1.2 * .35 = .42 or 42% of the pre-flop pot that we create.
When constructing a range based on R, we measure R for each specific hand, is that right? We do this because R fluctuates across hand-type.
What's kind of interesting is if you think about what it means for R to be 1, it means that for every time we fold the best hand, we need to have another instance where we make more than equity.
I'm having trouble seeing how we make more than equity when we do anything other than make our opponent fold out their equity share. I guess the idea is like, if we gain 5 BBs postflop by value betting and being called down, then our R for that instance would be like:
5BB/(Raw Equity * Pre-Flop Pot Size)
This would give R >> 1 in many cases, which makes sense since it kind of explains why unpaired high-card hands do well. Namely, we have a very large gap of which to value bet into upon making our pair, since Villain must be calling down with worse in order to neutralize our bluffs.
If anybody can confirm what I'm asking/stating or point out where my ideas are not good, I would really like to hear.
Loading 46 Comments...
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.
This thread has been locked. No further comments can be added.