EV of folding

DeucesLive

Obviously folding always has an EV of 0- but something I remember coming up some time ago, and being pulled on, is how literal this is?

If calling is significantly -EV, and raising even more so, would you not say that in this instance folding is +EV? Is the +EV move in any spot not the best move to take at that time- even if that action is folding? It's how I always viewed it, but after a number of people said otherwise I just assumed I was misunderstanding. But currently reading through the poker blueprint, and one sentence in there reminded me;

"Fold. This is probably the most important factor regarding floating. You don’t have to take down all the pots. Sometimes, there’s nothing you can do and you have to fold. That’s fine, and it doesn’t make you a bad player. Being a good player is all about making the play with the greatest EV. In this case, you maximize your EV by folding."

yb

Folding would still have an EV of 0, but in the example above you would be maximising your EV by folding because calling or raising are -EV.  Δ EV of folding compared to calling or raising will be positive, but by definition folding always has an EV of 0 as you are winning and losing 0 100% of the time.

DeucesLive

Ok good, that's basically what I perceived it as. Wish I could remember the post in question to see if I phrased it badly, but yea- cheers for confirming that, anyway.

LOL_RAISE

yea its the most +Ev out of the 3 options, but still EV of 0

BrownnDog

*Head asplode*

unknown_username

you may as well be talking chinese!! <scratches head and wonders off>

BigBluster

Often in tournaments you turn down a +EV move because there could be a better one later. Likewise you will often make a -EV play to avoid being forced to take an even worse one later.
Many cash game players find these concepts a little difficult: being brought up on the 'profitable play' +EV ethos that emerges from the infinite game.

yb

In Response to Re: EV of folding:

Often in tournaments you turn down a +EV move because there could be a better one later. Likewise you will often make a -EV play to avoid being forced to take an even worse one later. Many cash game players find these concepts a little difficult: being brought up on the 'profitable play' +EV ethos that emerges from the infinite game.
Posted by BigBluster

why would you ever choose to make a -EV play? just fold if you have to.

BigBluster

In Response to Re: EV of folding:

In Response to Re: EV of folding : why would you ever choose to make a -EV play? just fold if you have to.
Posted by yb

QED!

DeucesLive

See, this is another thing I kind of see differently-

Let's say calling is, technically, a +EV move. Wouldn't you then say then folding is -EV (again- has an EV of 0 I know, but you're missing out on a +EV move, meaning by folding your EV from that hand is lower than it could have been?)

and I agree with sometimes not taking the most +EV move in a tournament always- in a cash game, if you get 2 allins and you're holding the nut flush draw with overs to the board, you call all day long since you're getting the price. But if the same happens in a tournament, you might well choose not to and fold- calling is the correct mathematical play, and the most +EV decision, so what does that make folding? Neutral or negative EV?

BigBluster

You're overcomplicating it.
EV is meant to be about whether a bet is a good one or not - not placing the bet is irrelevant.

DeucesLive

Ok, so taking a simple position preflop- we have aces. 3 choices- fold, call or raise.

Calling is obviously +EV- we're putting money into a pot where we are always a statistical favourite at this point, regardless of what the opponents have. 

Raising a normal amount is also +EV, but more so than calling- putting more in a pot and inflating it, blah blah. Raising an obscene amount (10x+) is still +EV, but the worst of the 3 options.

Folding has an EV of 0- you have no chance to gain money, but also no chance to lose any. But based on your other choices, this is clearly the worst option, and when you look at your session results, you're looking at a lower profit margin than you would be, long term, than if you always play aces. Therefore, can it not be said that folding aces preflop is -EV- you're lowering your long term expected value if you fold them preflop?

Is there another term for this perhaps that I should be using? (other than being an idiot)