This seems like just common sense to me, as is most of the stuff the TV pros write.

I'd really like to see them tackle some of the tough questions we run into on the NL cash forums, rather than talking about bankroll management or how to play against fish and stuff like that.

There are a few points that are not considered here.

What is the value of Ted doubling through Daniel.

What is the value of Teds stack if he checks and loses

What is the value if Ted busts?

Maybe Daniel thinks there is a 0 percent chance that he has a 6, but that doesn't mean Ted thinks that.

Daniel is getting 2:1 immediate odds on his money, and he is likely to get some free cards if he wants too.

Daniel's little bet of 3k seems quite strange.

What is Daniel going to be able to call a push with? only an ace or a 6. Sure there is a very low probability he has a 6, but there is also a low probablility he has an A.

with 3 aces gone, coming up with a range hands for daniel is pretty difficult. Maybe 77-QQ ? Would he call with AJ with Ted in the pot? Probably not AT.

I agree with the premise of Daniel's article, and Howard is only doing half the math with his 50/50 comment, but Daniel seems to be over simplifying it too.

There was a big discussion on this a year or so ago when the article first appeared in cardplayer on "4" but I don't remember what the general take was.

I hear ya Beav, but I haven't ever seen a pro lay down a FH anyways, at least not the best possible FH the board is offering (I think Farha went broke this year against quads).

Since you believe too that we're ahead more often than not, we must bet here regardless of whether we go broke or not.