Chasing the full house

[Alchemist]

I don't have the HH handy but it shouldn't be necessary in this case.

I complete the SB and six of us see the flop.
Flop is A /images/graemlins/spade.gif T /images/graemlins/spade.gif 4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif
I've got the nut flush with no redraws for high and very weak low possibilities. I bet and get 4 callers.

Turn: 9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif pot = 5.5BB, 5 players
I bet and get one caller (the big blind).

River: 9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif pot = 7.5BB, 2 players
I check, chaser bets and I pay off his full house: tens full of nines. Needless to say I was pretty annoyed. Chaser also had no (or else very poor) low draws.

I ran a simulation on the hand and found I was about a 68% favorite (IIRC) on the flop against his hand only. So was this truly a poor play by the chaser or did he have pot odds to call me down?

[Alchemist]

Ok I just realized this post is almost identical to Beavis's below. So what it comes down to is this:

Is it correct to chase a FH with a flopped set when there's a flush out and assuming all your outs are still live?

[djr]

You'd have to look at pot odds, but with 5 people seeing a flop and all your outs being live its usually right to at least see the turn,esp with no possible low out yet. However, I wouldn't chase with bottom set against multiple opponents without a reasonable low draw. Too likely when you hit your draw someone hit a bigger one.

[gergery]

On flop, he can assume 43 unseen cards (assumes he’s up vs. a flush), he has 7 outs to hit while 36 cards miss for him. But if he hits then a low will be possible about 45% of the time on river which will take 50% of the pot – meaning once he hits the value of his equity needs to be reduced by .45*.5=22.5%. So if we reduce 7 outs by 22.5% we get about 5 effective outs here. So 36:5 is 7 to 1 odds to hit his card. However, depending on his position, he needed to invest 1 small bet to win 10. So yes, he had correct odds to call. Note: I believe you are in SB, he is BB, so this makes his position worse since he might get raised behind – but assuming no raise he has odds to call.

On the turn, he can assume 42 unseen cards, he has 10 outs while 32 cards miss, or 3.2 to 1 odds to hit his card. We don’t need to discount now since if he hits no low is possible and he scoops. With your bet, he is offered 4.5BB to 1 pot odds, and if he can expect you to pay him off then that’s 5.5 to 1 implied odds, so again yes he had correct odds to call.

--Greg

[Alchemist]

[ QUOTE ]
On flop, he can assume 43 unseen cards (assumes he’s up vs. a flush), he has 7 outs to hit while 36 cards miss for him. But if he hits then a low will be possible about 45% of the time on river which will take 50% of the pot – meaning once he hits the value of his equity needs to be reduced by .45*.5=22.5%. So if we reduce 7 outs by 22.5% we get about 5 effective outs here. So 36:5 is 7 to 1 odds to hit his card. However, depending on his position, he needed to invest 1 small bet to win 10. So yes, he had correct odds to call. Note: I believe you are in SB, he is BB, so this makes his position worse since he might get raised behind – but assuming no raise he has odds to call.

On the turn, he can assume 42 unseen cards, he has 10 outs while 32 cards miss, or 3.2 to 1 odds to hit his card. We don’t need to discount now since if he hits no low is possible and he scoops. With your bet, he is offered 4.5BB to 1 pot odds, and if he can expect you to pay him off then that’s 5.5 to 1 implied odds, so again yes he had correct odds to call.

--Greg

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting, thanks for the analysis. It just seemed like a bad play on his part--holding onto middle pair with 2 low cards and an all spade board flopping, particularly out of position. But once I counted his outs I began to think maybe it was closer than I originally thought.
It still scratches my ass...I mean if he had AA and/or 23 in his hand I could deal with it better /images/graemlins/crazy.gif
Now if you were in his position, how do would you determine how to play? Can you do those calculations that fast at the table or do you take some sort of short cuts?
What should the BB's action be if it does get raised behind him on the flop?
Anyway, that's poker, and I've sucked out way worse than this myself...

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
It still scratches my ass...if xxx I could deal with it better

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that’s poker. But if he has a set, he’ll win 1 of 3, you’ll win 2 of 3. That is often enough that I wouldn’t even call it a suckout or bad luck. It might be slightly unexpected on this particular hand, he really should be winning a large minority of the time. Of course thinking that vs. feeling that is an ongoing struggle for me.

[ QUOTE ]
Can you do those calculations that fast at the table or do you take some sort of short cuts? Now if you were in his position, how do would you determine how to play?

[/ QUOTE ]

Good god, no. I do the calculations now so that when I’m at the table my intuition is more accurate. Since half the pot is worth ~40% of the whole pot, at the table I would have said, “10:1 on flop for half pot is about 4:1, I’m getting about that for a set so it’s really close”. The math actually turned out to be more favorable for the set than I expected.

Of course, if its raised behind him, then he’s putting in more money at 5:1 (# opponents) with only 7:1 odds, so he starts losing money at that point. So personally I probably call with good position and passive table and fold with bad position and aggressive table. He also has to worry about getting jammed out by two lows on the turn if a low hits. So the math I laid out is not totally cut and dried.

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting, thanks for the analysis. It just seemed like a bad play on his part—

[/ QUOTE ]

An interesting question is whether you should have played it differently. Look at what happens if you check-call on this flop. You forgo your equity share of the add’l flop bets put in. But that doesn’t cost you that much with this being only a small bet, since sometimes the board will pair and you’ll have to fold, and very often a low hits so you’d have split that money anyway. And any low and any set have correct odds to call, so they’re not even making a mistake by calling. But if it lets you bet or check-raise on the turn when you have a favorable card and significantly more equity, the added deception could more than offset the lost flop bets.

In essence there are a number of common situations where you are ahead, but not by a lot, the turn card will significantly change your equity in the pot, your opponents can scare easily but bluff easily (many smaller flushes might fold to a bet but bet if you check), and deception has some value. In those instances it can be better to forgo a small EV edge now to take advantage of a better one on the turn.

In this case, I fiddled with some numbers and think betting out is probably better, but not by a huge amount, and against overly loose/aggro opponents it might be a better play.

--Greg

[Alchemist]

I knew I should have looked at the actual HH before posting. I actually did have a decent low draw as well, which obviously gives me a lot more outs for at least half the pot.
Paradise Poker 0.50/1 Omaha/8 (7 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is SB with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 4/images/graemlins/spade.gif, K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
UTG calls, MP1 calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, Hero completes, BB checks.

Flop: (5 SB) T/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif, A/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, BB calls, UTG calls, MP1 calls, MP2 calls.

Turn: (5 BB) 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, BB calls, UTG calls, MP1 folds, MP2 folds.

River: (8 BB) 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">BB bets</font>, UTG folds, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 10 BB

Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">
BB has Jd Td 9h Th (High: full house, tens full of nines).
Hero has Ks 4s Kd 3d (High: flush, ace high).
Outcome: BB wins 10 BB. </font>

Sorry about that...but does that significantly change the action on anyone's part? I do like your idea of checking the flop for deception a lot. I think my reasoning for betting was this:

I won't likely get rid of any low hands, but I want to get rid of high-only drawing hands like the sets and 2-pairs (should they fold if bet into here? The sets it would appear not.). Often my thinking in these situations is that I'd rather take down a mid-sized pot now than roll the dice on a larger pot later, even if I'm a favorite in the long run. It's kind of naive of me to think I'm going to force anyone out of a pot in limit O8 (esp with 2 low cards on the flop).

[DasLeben]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry about that...but does that significantly change the action on anyone's part?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. On the flop, the BB is still getting 6:1 on a 5:1 call. On the turn, he's still getting the appropriate odds to call (6:1 on now a ~3:1 call). So, he's kosher for sure. Of course, that's also assuming no raises, and everyone behind him calling.

At any rate, I tend to like the idea of betting out, even after flopping the nut flush. At most of these $0.5/$1 tables, I've noticed that you'll get all sorts of callers, no matter what. Also, you might get some "reverse" deception action, since many folks won't believe that you'd bet out with the nuts. I dunno...just what I'd do.

Don't also forget that you don't want to give those pesky low draws a free card. If they check through, you might just end up letting them take half of your pot for free! Granted, you have a solid low draw yourself, but not to the nuts.

[ QUOTE ]
2-pairs (should they fold if bet into here? The sets it would appear not.)

[/ QUOTE ]

The sets have every right to stay, but the two pairs have nowhere near the odds (roughly 10:1) to stay in the pot. I wouldn't put it past them to try though.

[ghostpoker]

Quick note on figuring odds. Does the the Rule of Four apply in Omaha? I use it knowing that it may have some additional margin of error.

If it does work that would help you quicky calculate your odds and his odds if you can put him on a hand.

Another note, In pot limit it would be possible for you to take away the pot odds from the set holder. (Not that your opponent would recognize this at lower levels.) That way you can really punish him the 2/3 times your hand holds.

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
Quick note on figuring odds. Does the the Rule of Four apply in Omaha? I use it knowing that it may have some additional margin of error.

[/ QUOTE ]

It will be slightly off because 1) you are usually calculating off a flop of 45 unseen cards not 47, and 2) you must discount an extra amount if you anticipate getting only half the pot, since every bet you put in only returns you half of it.

--Greg