I think most of who will vote would have done so by now, so here's what I wanted to say:Dorkus Malorkus said:
Chris has got it precisely right, and even (which I was hoping someone would) used the odds Calculator to see why. We know precisely where we stand, here, and we know that our hand is 33% to win at this point, but we have four opponents. Put in other words, since we will win this pot 33% of the time, you could say that 33% of THIS pot's money belongs to us. What happens if we raise?
... we get another 5 dollars in the pot.
... Another 5 dollars that we "own" 33% of.
... 33% of $5 is $1.7.
... In other words, we're getting a 70% return on our investment. That's awesome.
This is the basic idea of "equity". We want to push as much money as we can into this pot right now, because every cent that goes in means more profit for us. The point where it breaks even, of course, is at 20% - so the guy with A-10 is close.
In other words, the only reason that we would ever consider doing anything but raising here is if we believe that we could somehow win something on disguising our hands. However, I don't believe this to be a good enough reason, because we have such a strong lead here that we want to make the maximum of it right now.
Now, as for calling and "safing" (checking that there are no queens or aces on the flop before continuing), there's a problem with that: Don't you suppose the other hands are also safing? If this is a good flop for you, it's often a bad flop for them. Woo, you hit a safe flop and bet! ... aaand they fold. You raise now, because now is when they're likely to pay you off. When people talk about aggressive poker players, this is what they mean: Pushing your edges. You have an edge - backing down and not taking advantage of it is passive, and it's costing you money.
And never - ever - fold.
