Misapplied concept? pt. 1

[Nick Royale]

I read in HPFAP that when your bet is pretty likely to get raised by a hand that has you beat, you should instead check/call if you have outs (ie can't fold). Is this the place to apply this concept? (and did I get the concept right?)

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with K/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG folds, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, UTG+2 folds, MP1 folds, MP2 folds, MP3 folds, CO folds, Button calls, SB folds, BB calls.

Flop: (6.50 SB) Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, J/images/graemlins/spade.gif, T/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, Button calls, BB folds.

Turn: (4.25 BB) K/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero...

Button is overall to loose. Sure, the pot is small, but check/folding top two pair just ain't an option. So how to proceed?

[jskills]

You're betting the turn no? If you get raised, call it and check call the river. You have 11 outs in the event he's holding an ace.

[tiltaholic]

i'm not sure on the concept.
but i bet the turn, because it is not a foregone conclusion that he will raise -even if- he has a hand that can beat you (ie, an ace).
there is no reason for "him" to assume that "you" don't have an ace...often, he won't raise because he assumes you will chop even if he does have an ace.
and you will call a raise because you have a billion outs anyway.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
You're betting the turn no? If you get raised, call it and check call the river.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes I betted, but why? What will it achieve? Rarely get called by a worse hand and guaranteed raised by a better. I don't mind giving a free card since it will only very rarely beat me.

[ QUOTE ]
If you get raised, call it and check call the river. You have 11 outs in the event he's holding an ace.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yup, I can't fold 10.5-11 outs. Nice counted btw.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm not sure on the concept.
but i bet the turn, because it is not a foregone conclusion that he will raise -even if- he has a hand that can beat you (ie, an ace).
there is no reason for "him" to assume that "you" don't have an ace...often, he won't raise because he assumes you will chop even if he does have an ace.

[/ QUOTE ]
Don't agree. I can have KK, QQ, JJ, TT, KQ and a couple of more hands ni this situation. Almost everyone would raise the straight.

[ QUOTE ]
and you will call a raise because you have a billion outs anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but because I have the outs to call a raise it's not certainly the best play to bet out.

[tiltaholic]

[ QUOTE ]
What will it achieve? Rarely get called by a worse hand and guaranteed raised by a better. I don't mind giving a free card since it will only very rarely beat me.


[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe it's also read dependant. Against a bad player I see KJ, KT, Kx, 9x, QJ, QT, sometimes even Qx enough to bet thinking I likely have the best of it with a huge redraw. Against an unknown player, fine, he's raising a straight. Are we talking about an unknown player?

There are also so many draws on the board that a worse hand will definitely call, not raise.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe it's also read dependant. Against a bad player I see KJ, KT, Kx, 9x, QJ, QT, sometimes even Qx enough to bet thinking I likely have the best of it with a huge redraw. Against an unknown player, fine, he's raising a straight. Are we talking about an unknown player?

[/ QUOTE ]
He's a little to loose, but certainly nothing extreme.

[tiltaholic]

also, any spade is definitely calling one.

for the record, i completely agree that it is possible that a typical opponent will call 2 cold with ace-rag. it happens all the time. but that doesn't mean there aren't tons of other hands out there for this board that will call one on the turn. clearly it's the least desireable, as in, we really don't want to see a raise. but by no means does that mean we shouldn't bet in the first place. (i think).
-t

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
but by no means does that mean we shouldn't bet in the first place. (i think).

[/ QUOTE ]
You just might be right to. I'm trying to apply HPFAP in my micro game sometimes, but often it's worthless /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm not sure on the concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Check with outs - bet without them"

-&gt; If you know he will *only* raise better hands, then you'll pay two bets when you're trailing and one bet if you're ahead.
-&gt; This is even more true if the player is tight and is willing to lay down his decent hands when it's pretty clear he's trailing (you don't win as much when you're ahead, but you lose more when you're behind).
-&gt; The 'having outs' condition is there becuase you're compelled to call the raise because you have pot odds to call even though you have (in essence) cut your odds in half by having to call 2 bets instead of 1.
-&gt; It's applicable when the pot is small because the size of the error is larger compared to the overlay the pot gives you on the mistake of betting.

This is a read based move. Against bad players who are capable of raising less than top two pair on the 4-straight board and calling down a single pair heads up here, betting is clearly right.

I think in against a generic loose passive opponent, I'd go ahead an bet because there are lots of ways he would call with worse hands. However, if the opponent has shown that he has some level of reasoning, checking is better (you might even induce a bluff from him).

[tiltaholic]

well articulated. thank you.

it's an interesting situation, because the reads are crucial.

assume a "good" player. he will definitely raise a better hand, he will call if he is drawing based on odds, or will fold if he is behind and not drawing.

in this situation, i still think betting is best, because there are so many draws on the board. checking may become -ev because we then give a good player infinite odds to draw, and we stand a good chance of pulling the pot on the turn.

however, the range of hands a good player would call two cold with preflop makes the situation more complicated, so, forget that part /images/graemlins/grin.gif.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a read based move. Against bad players who are capable of raising less than top two pair on the 4-straight board and calling down a single pair heads up here, betting is clearly right.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think the player has to very loose to call down from here with less than top pair. And extremely aggressive to raise with a worse hand than mine (if it's not a bluff).

[ QUOTE ]
think in against a generic loose passive opponent, I'd go ahead an bet because there are lots of ways he would call with worse hands. However, if the opponent has shown that he has some level of reasoning, checking is better (you might even induce a bluff from him).

[/ QUOTE ]
This guy was pretty loose, but as said I think he nneds to be more than pretty loose to call down with just a pair. On the other hand, it's likely for a quite loose player to call 2 cold preflop with KJ, KT, QJ, KT or JT. And the same loose player will most likely be calling down with these hands.

Overall i think concepts like these in general won't play until 2/4$ and beyond. And betting this turn can't be to bad with all these outs.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
in this situation, i still think betting is best, because there are so many draws on the board. checking may become -ev because we then give a good player infinite odds to draw, and we stand a good chance of pulling the pot on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's a good point. He might call with a lower /images/graemlins/spade.gif, thinking he might be drawing live. And he might be drawing with a hand like JT. Make him pay, getting raised with all these outs isn't to terrible.

[Nick Royale]

These are the results:

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with K/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG folds, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, UTG+2 folds, MP1 folds, MP2 folds, MP3 folds, CO folds, Button calls, SB folds, BB calls.

Flop: (6.50 SB) Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, J/images/graemlins/spade.gif, T/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, Button calls, BB folds.

Turn: (4.25 BB) K/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero thinks for split second about something he read in HPFAP, but then throws in a <font color="#CC3333">Bet</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Button raises</font>, Hero calls.

River: (8.25 BB) 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, Button calls.

Final Pot: 10.25 BB
Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">
Hero has Kh Qs (flush, king high).
Button has 3h Ah (straight, ace high).
Outcome: Hero wins 10.25 BB. </font>

[ucfryan]

Bro, you have top 2 pair and an open ended straight flush draw, you should cap this turn if given the opportunity. You have a boatload of outs.

[DrBob]

I make it 11.5 outs. If he has the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif you have 4 outs to win. If he has another ace (3 cases) you have 13 outs to win (9 spades incl A + 2K+2Q) and 2 outs to tie (one of the remaining 2 non-spade Aces). So count this as 14 outs. Then (3/4)*14 + (1/4)*4 = 11.5

[tiltaholic]

[ QUOTE ]
If he has the A /images/graemlins/spade.gif you have 4 outs to win.

[/ QUOTE ]

plus the 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif, so plus one across the board.

calculations like these make me think about outs in terms of none, too few, close enough, enough, or boatload.

sorry, i'm grouchy.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
I make it 11.5 outs. If he has the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif you have 4 outs to win. If he has another ace (3 cases) you have 13 outs to win (9 spades incl A + 2K+2Q) and 2 outs to tie (one of the remaining 2 non-spade Aces). So count this as 14 outs. Then (3/4)*14 + (1/4)*4 = 11.5

[/ QUOTE ]
True. Except the fact that if he holds A/images/graemlins/spade.gif you'll have 5.5 outs (add the 3 aces for 0.5 outs each for the split).
5.5(1/4)+14(3/4)= 11.9 outs
Well, that's not much of a differance

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
plus the 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif, so plus one across the board.

[/ QUOTE ]
Missed that one. Lets call it 12, ok? /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
Bro, you have top 2 pair and an open ended straight flush draw, you should cap this turn if given the opportunity. You have a boatload of outs.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have only 12 outs if I'm raised, so 3-betting and capping would be really bad.

EDIT: You might realise a raise would come from an ace and my straight outs won't do me much good since it's on the board...

[detruncate]

I'm not sure the concept your talk about directly applies to this situation. The reason that HEPFAP suggests checking with outs is that you should often be betting and folding to a raise when your hand might have been ruined by the turn. The reason is that a reasonable, thinking opponent probably won't raise the turn without the goods, so you can safely fold if you have no outs. When you have outs, however, you'd rather not put 2 bets into the pot when you're drawing, and aren't overly concerned about the prospect of giving a free card to your opponent.

They warn, however, that you have to adjust your thinking if your opponent is likely to bluff. I think it's probably safe to say that you'd also want to consider betting if your opponent will frequenly not raise hands that beat you. The key is how often you'll have to pay 2 bets when drawing. As the frequency of bluffs with worse hands/calls with better hands goes up, you should be less concerned about betting when you have so many outs -- the error is far less severe when you're raised drawing to 11-ish outs in this sort of situation than, say, 4 to a boat holding 2-pair vs a likely flush.

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
Rarely get called by a worse hand

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong.

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
Bro, you have top 2 pair and an open ended straight flush draw, you should cap this turn if given the opportunity. You have a boatload of outs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also wrong.

Nick, I see you already answered this one.

[Nick Royale]

Guess you're right. This concept really doesn't play well against somewhat loose players.

[jskills]

At 1/2 I believe you will get people calling your bet with hands you have beat.

On the outs: I stand corrected. Maybe 7 outs though? 2 kings, 2 queens, 3 aces?

More if he doesn't have the Ace of spades too right?

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
The key is how often you'll have to pay 2 bets when drawing. As the frequency of bluffs with worse hands/calls with better hands goes up, you should be less concerned about betting when you have so many outs

[/ QUOTE ]
Along with how often I get calls from worse hands, which I consider as the most important.

[ QUOTE ]
the error is far less severe when you're raised drawing to 11-ish outs in this sort of situation than, say, 4 to a boat holding 2-pair vs a likely flush.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're totaly right! Drawing to 11 outs make the bet much less bad than a bet when drawing to 4. Good point.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
I make it 11.5 outs. If he has the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif you have 4 outs to win. If he has another ace (3 cases) you have 13 outs to win (9 spades incl A + 2K+2Q) and 2 outs to tie (one of the remaining 2 non-spade Aces). So count this as 14 outs. Then (3/4)*14 + (1/4)*4 = 11.5

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the most accurate calculation of outs in this thread. But it neglected that 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif always is an out and that when your opponent holds A/images/graemlins/spade.gif you'll split if one of the 3 aces falls on the river. It should land at about 12 outs.

[ucfryan]

You said he's overall loose. He could have a jack, a ten, a queen, lower two pair, or a low spade. One of those hands is a lot more likely in this situation than an ace, 9, or two small spades.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
You said he's overall loose. He could have a jack, a ten, a queen, lower two pair, or a low spade. One of those hands is a lot more likely in this situation than an ace, 9, or two small spades.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, he's loose compared with 2+2 standards. He's a pretty average party player, which supposed would fold the most hands that I had beat in this situation.

To keep a long story short I agree to bet the turn is the best option since:
1. He probably will call with a flushdraw worse than mine.
2. He probably will call down with KT, QJ etc.
3. I have tons of outs making getting raised not so terrible.
4. He might not even raise an A (not likely IMO)

This HEPFAP-concept won't apply here since it'll need a good thinking player.