My Answer To Flop Question

The most important factor here is what will the SB bet with. If you assume either two pairs, a set, a pair and a draw, but NOT just a pair without a draw, not just a draw, and not a made straight, you are probably about right. Given that:


Your hand is in big trouble. You need, to overcome the SB, overcome a possible bigger pair behind you, and pray for no straight or flush. In general these situations are more likely to be folds than most players think. I have given examples in my book. The fact is that if you play, you can expect that a great majority of the times you win it is because you improved (via a jack a backdoor straight, or maybe a running small pair). A flop bet of $60 would push you toward a fold and in fact would be the right play.


But with a $30 bet, you are getting 13-1. Even if you viewed your jacks totally as a drawing hand, those are just short of good enough odds. Throw in a 3% chance of winning unimproved, and you can't really fold unless you are fairly sure you will get raised behind you. (That is especially bad because the SB will often reraise.) Against typical players this won't happen all that often so against them I would rate folding a "9". But there are often times when it is the right play.


So if we can't fold, should we fold or raise? Notice that if everyone called the raise, we would be getting 6-1 odds on that extra bet. Compared to 13-1 on the first bet. Given the approximate 10% chance of winning this hand, a call would be right and a raise wrong. But that's assuming they all call. The better reason to raise is to knock out hands that could cost you the pot. And if the pot was much bigger still, it would certainly be the right play. What about this size pot. What's the downside? There are two. You lose an extra small bet when you lose, often two small bets when the SB reraises. You also lose an opportunity to make a fourth st. raise when everyone calls the flop and a good turn card comes. What about the upsides? One possible upside is that a raise gets two queens to fold behind you. If the preflop raise will fold queens, there is no question you should raise.


The more reasonable gain from raising is that overcards will fold. The thing is that isn't much of a gain. First of all 30-60 players wont' call even one bet with hands like KQ and no three flush. Secondly overcards don't hurt you those times they hit their hand and you are beaten by others anyway. Although I am a strong advocate of spending a small bet or two in order to increase your chances of winning decent pots by even a smidgeon, I'm not sure it is worth it here. Especially because you lose your turn raise option. I'll give the flop raise a 9.5


Of course what bothers me the most is that so many of you gave your lesser choices such low ratings. Didn't you see Tommy Angelo's post where he rated them 10,10,10?

So they're all equal--what a trick question that was.

I'm a little disappointed with this answer, David, I was expecting a computer simulation with 6 players all playing HPFAP or something. Oh well, still a nice question, though the rating scheme needs a little work. If 10 is the correct play and 1 is sacrificing a big pot (as I figured it), any close call should be 10 vs 9.x vs 9.x.


I'd be curious to know what you estimate the e.v.'s of raising and calling to be? And as you placed folding at 9.0, raising at 9.5 and calling at 10, do you put calling at exactly twice the e.v. of raising (since folding is obviously 0)?

In fact, now that I think about it, if you intend your rating system to be linear, we should be able to calculate your e.v.'s from your rankings:


Since "fold" is always a 0 e.v. play, wherever you place fold should be a baseline that establishes the range for potential error. If we presume that raise10 call10 fold1 (should be 0, but whatever) implies that folding direcly costs you a standard-sized pot, and scaled that linearly, such that raise10 call10 fold5 implied that it would cost you half of a pot, etc, and we assume that our standard pot is 20 bets (arbitrary), then raise10 call7.5 fold5 would lead to e.v.'s of fold 0, call +5 bets, raise +10 bets.


The e.v.'s for the respective actions would be ((.1*ACTIONRATING)-(.1*FOLDRATING))*POTCONSTANT.


If the potconstant is 20, then your estimated e.v.'s for 9.0, 9.5 and 10 are 0, 1 and 2 bets respectively.


Is this around where you were thinking? or did you intend the scale to be exponential/logarithmic in some way?


ben

Sometimes, there is no substitute for experience. I have been in this siutuation a zillion times in the games that I play in; over time, calling seemed to me to be a little better than raising. Folding never seemed right but I appreciate the analysis (both yours and others) which goes to show that folding ain't that bad an option either particularly when you factor in what the bb needs to bet the flop with in this sutuation (a point made in my original reply)


Good question and good job, Tommy!

30-60 players won't call with just overcards like K-Q? I don't mean to be too sarcastic David, but who're you playing with? I've been playing at the Bellagio for the last few weeks(extended visit) and one of the first things that I noticed(and was surprised by) was how many players call with "just overcards." I adjusted quick enough, but still I was surprised.


And what's with all the praise for Tommy? Last week you puttin' him in his place, now building him up? How 'bout a little consistency.....just kidding guys. I obviously didn't even understand how the choices were meant to be rated, and I couldn't figure from this post what the rating of "call" was, still I'm glad that my choice to raise is in the ballpark. I didn't give much consideration to the other choices because I won't assume that the bettor in the sb has to have as good a hand as the player that you describe....there's too many goofballs--even at 30-60.


Mike

How good is the 30-60 at the Bellagio?

Hey Sklansky nice guess but I believe you are wrong. Of course I'm not sure what you are saying so you could be right. It is possible you know. That you can be wrong, that is. Of course you can prove me wrong by showing us some meaningful numbers to back up your claims not some ficticous percentiles that you designed to prove some thing or other. 3% chance of winning unimproved? A 10% chance of winning this hand? Where do these numbers come from?


And why would you say that the most important factor is what the sb would bet with and then define what he would bet with to suit your purposes. Even if you are correct that the most important factor is what the sb would bet with that does not alter the fact that the pot is big enough to take a shot at winning it. What a raise costs is some percentage of a big bet while winning the pot could be much more. I'm rambling on because I believe that your answer points to a leak in your game. And if you leak we all leak. Please be more specific so I can shore up this hole in my game if indeed you are correct. You see I believe a fold to be a non play only to be used by someone afraid of a high variance and not very skilled at playing poker. In my opinion a DECENT player would never fold in this situation nor would he call and pass up a golden opportunity to isolate a likely drawing sb especially with a $60 bet. To rate the options 10,10,10 is facetious. Just as Tommy meant it to be.


Vince

Folding is definitely an option.


Now if you had black tens instead of jacks, calling is OK due to three nearly clean outs to a straight.

i didnt answer because i figured it was so close between the 3 choices that it wasnt worth posting about. i found it to be one of the least compelling (least cute?) oz problems ive come across.

The sensitivity of David's scale is definitely a reasonable question here. I assumed each point was a tenth of a BB, but using your scale which seems more like 1BB per point I would have said Raise 10, Fold 9.9, Call 9.4.

"I believe you are wrong. Of course I'm not sure what you are saying so you could be right."


-LOL! If only we were all as honest as you, Vince, the world would be a much better place.


"if you leak we all leak"


-If David leaks, I am a sieve.

What do you estimate are the chances you flopped the best hand? How many safe cards do you think there will be for you on the turn/river if you just call the flop? How many safe turn/river cards do you think there are if you raise on the flop?


And do your answers of Call-10 Raise-9.5 Fold-9 assume each point is around 1BB, 1SB, or something else entirely? I was using each point of the scale as roughly one tenth BB, so if each point is roughly 1BB or 1SB I would recalculate my answers to Raise-10 Fold-9.9 Call-9.4 (for BB), or Raise-10 Fold-9.8 Call-8.8 (for SB).

Yes, I didn't use my scale with that sensitivity either. I was just noticing, after the fact, that in order for the scale to be linear and comprehensive, it would have to be that sensitive.


ben

I guess it depends on your perspective. I can't help but remember someone scolding someone else(Dynasty, I think) for talking subjectively about a certain game's "beatability." Let me just say that I've been here for about three weeks and have done quite well(tonight notwithstanding--tonight sucked). I was surprised that the game wasn't tougher than it often(but not always) is.


Mike

Yes in order to scale the answers you have to know what the scale is. I prefer a raise most of the time with a call a close second and a fold to be the least attractive alternative for the given situation.

see me tomorrow night.

"Good question and good job, Tommy! "


skp,


You misspelled "Vince" above. There's no "T" in it.


Vince

It's probably coincidental, but I also came up with a 10% chance for winning the hand (when you just call) based on having 24 "safe" cards for the turn/river combined with a 40% chance of holding the best hand on the flop.


I arbitrarily decided raising created 7 more "safe" cards for you, which (combined with your 40% chance of having the best hand on the flop) gives you a 17% chance to win the hand. This was why I calculated raising was (barely) better than folding and a bit better than calling, but folding would be best given something like a 35% chance of having the best hand on the flop and only 24 safe cards. All in all, the 3 options are very close, as I assume David designed them to be.

I think 40% is a bit high, as are your outs. I guesstimated roughly 10% counting outs as pot share...


1) Running straight, that holds up, 1+ out.


2) Winning trips/houses, 1+ out.


3) Two running blanks , 2 outs.


Total, 5 outs ~ 12%.


So my 2) and 3) correspond somewhat to your 24 and 40%, yet you seem to have a higher value on the flop (40%) and a better draw for it to hold up (half the deck...)...


In any case, it is a situation where your share of the money going in is such that you don't want to put money in the pot, put the pot itself is quite large and you have a decent share of it.

How accurate do you think you can make EV calculations for a situation like this? Seems to me your margin for error would be larger than the margin between raise, call and fold.


I guess what I'm really asking is, do EV calculations really work for situations with many opponents with many unknown holdings and multiple rounds of betting to follow?

"A %40 chance of holding the best hand on the flop.'


O.K. so now you raise and get heads up with the SB. Doesn't that sound like the best way to play this hand?


24 safe cards? Are you saying that there are 24 cards that allow you to win and the rest will cause you to lose? No, I don't think so. I think that there are maybe 24 cards that you will probably play your hand one way and the rest that you will play your hand another way. And that will change drastically depending on the results of your raise. On the other hand if for some reason that no one has yet made clear to me you decide to fold then there are 47 cards that will not help your hand nor hurt it for that matter. Wow, such a deal. When I think about this more and more I realize that perhaps my rating was a little off. I rated it as Raise 10, call 5, fold 0. I was wrong. It should be Raise 10, call 0, fold 0. There are a number of reasons to raise. One is to isolate or knock out opponents, another to define your hand, another to gain information. Well all three apply here.


Vince

The reason all three are close is that when you do have a good share of the pot you are usually getting a bad price on what you put into the pot unless it reduces the field, and you have a positional problem with respect to predicting how much will go in on the flop and the effect of your raise.


Raising is probably slightly better than calling, because it probably doesn't change the cost of seeing the turn, but it may reduce the field. Folding is probably slightly better than calling because the likely cost of seeing the turn hurts your hand and doesn't change your fundamental problem -- but it's close. Folding is probably slightly better than raising, because raising will be a complete disaster some of the time and just correct the rest of the time. (I've lost transitivity (F>R, R>>C, F>C) , now, so I can't give a linear ranking.)

If you can make a decent guess here about share, e.g. that you have between 8%-14% -- then the question takes a different form -- even though the difference between raise, call, and fold is less than your margin of error.


If you only look at your hand's present showdown value, you may be more likely to make a bad decision.

Check out the first paragraph from my actual analysis for the hand (in David's original thread). But basically yes, EV calculations become both much harder and much less accurate (and hence much less useful) in multiway flop situations. As you say, there are just too many variables to account for properly, and the shortcuts you have to take lead to a significant chance you will arrive at a wrong answer if it was a close decision. On the other hand, if it's as close a decision as this seems to be, you can do whatever you like without getting hurt too badly. /images/wink.gif

Technically, I wasn't saying you have 24 outs, but 24 blanks (which only matters for those 40% of times you are leading, obviously). There is actually a fairly large difference between having "outs" or "blanks" on the flop, right? Clearly you would much rather have a draw with 12 unbeatable outs on the flop (wins 50% of the time), than a made hand with 24 blanks (wins 25% of the time). Actually, I'm pretty sure you already knew this from reading some of your other posts, but just thought I would point it out anyway.

I think I understood both the difference and your analysis. .5^2 * .4 = .1 ... right?


Our strategies for determining share are different, and I'm not sure how you account for sucking out. If you aren't, then I think .1 is a bit ambitious for non-suckout share, and precisely because 24 blanks (which can be mapped/transformed to outs, akin to what you did by squaring them) is too many (non-suckout) outs. Either that or the hand's share is significantly higher than you and I have valued it (15% or so)

-- which may very well be the case, but in which case I think folding is wrong.


Or so I think... In any case, thanks for clarifying things.

I know Henry Gandorf is. You're no Henry Gandorf!


Slightly better? Is there any meaning in slightly better? Slightly better means that one is only slightly better than the other. Now what does that mean? Does that mean anything at all? Please help me for I know not what I know. O.K then let's see. If I call then calling = x. O.K? So according to you Folding = x + sb(slightly better) and Raising = x + sb. Therefore Raising = Folding when compared to Calling. So since both Raising and folding are better than calling when would you Call? And since raising and folding are equal when would you raise? Would you ever fold? Now since we are speaking of a specific situation then when you are faced with it you can play Mike Caro poker. That is, play according to whatever whim suits you at the time. Now I get it! Thanks.


Hold it, hold it, hold it! Don't even think about it. Vince does understand, so don't go there.


Vince

What else can I say? I don't think I understand your point. I've explicitly punted by producing a valuation that isn't transitive. And "slightly better" and kin may be mealy mouthed and fuzzified thinking, but I remain they aren't meaningless or useless.


I've probably done all of raising, calling, and folding in that spot, and I don't know what I'll do the next time I'm in it -- and the answer may indeed depend on my blood-sugar level. You, apparently, seek a more scientifickally satisfying solution. I applaud your attention to rigour.


Oh. And if it is an insult to be called Caroesque, then I, in the immortal words of Dan Quayle, "wear your scorn like a badg of honor." He's better than I think you think he is.


Good Luck, Vince.

"I've probably done all of raising, calling, and folding in that spot, "


Really? Then I guess you are more experienced than I. When faced with the described situation I raise. No ifs, ands or but(t)s. So, by the way, I believe will Sklansky, skp, Tommy Angelo, Rick Nebiolo, well maybe not skp, he's a lawyer. Regardless of what may be said here.


My point about "slightly better". My contention is that the most correct play in this situation is to raise. The other two choices are of no consequence. They should not be considered. Now I make this claim with no proof of which option produces the best EV. I don't know which one produces the best EV. I make my claim based on my experience with PLAYING poker. Raising is the best tactic in this situation. I suppose I should yield a bit here and admit that if I say "best" I imply that there are indeed other options that may just not be as good. I truly do not feel that folding is a valid option. I have very close to the same feeling about calling. The reason I even give minor consideration to the calling option at all is that it gives you a better chance of raising the turn if things go well on the flop and you get favorable conditions on the turn. I would need to be reasonably confident that the sb would bet if the turn was a favorable card for me. But what really pushes this situation to a raise is that I am the BB. No one behind me knows what I have. If I (a decent player) raises with this board they must seriously consider folding with a hand even as good as Q,Q as David mentions.


As for Caro. I have never played poker with Mike Caro. Maybe you have. I do not know how good a player he is. I do know that Mike has written before about playing poker on a whim. That was my point about Mike. So I think that your thought about how good or bad I think Mike Caro is was not well thunk out. What do you think of that? I like the Dan Quayle thing though.


Vince

Without having looked at David's answer I knew that he would lean towards folding. I don't know what games you people have been playing in, but in LA they take cards off with all kinds of shit, especially when the pot is big. Three card flushes and KQ takes a card most all the time. And if you are playing with in a game where one raise on the flop will shut out QQ with that flop, please deal me in. I don't think I could lose a day in a game like that.