HoH v.2 pg. 38 on flopping flushes...

[blackaces13]

I don't understand the following quote referring to the dangers of flopping less than the nut flush:

[ QUOTE ]
Slow-playing a flush when the Ace is on the board is the safest situation; good players will often play Ax suited but are much less likely to play 2 lower suited cards. If the Ace is on the board your chances of facing a DRAW to a better flush go down. (Online weak players love to play any 2 suited cards, so this logic doesn't apply here.)

[/ QUOTE ]

The section refers to flopping the made flush, not a draw. So what does players playing Axs, or any 2 suited as in the case of online players, have to do with facing a DRAW to a better flush?

Perhaps this would make sense if you had 2 low suited connectors and flopped a draw yourself, here you'd rather see the A of your suit on the board for the reasons mentioned in the quote. But if you flop a made flush then you are in danger of redraws if its not the nuts or close to it, and the propensity of the other players to play SUITED cards of any variety has absolutely nothing to do with your hand anymore since it only takes 1 big suited card to wreck your hand when the flop is monotone.

Even mentioning suited hole cards as threats to DRAW OUT on a made flush is an obvious mistake. Did Harrington forget what he was talking about halfway through the paragraph here?

[AZnuts]

Harrington said this in the sentence prior to what you quoted:

"The danger here is that a player with a high card which matches the board will stick around and draw to a flush that beats you."

So, I think his true sentiment is what you would expect concerning flopping a non-nut flush.

However, his next comment about "Ax suited" maybe is not clear. Perhaps he's saying that "good" players will tend to make flushes with the A suited, but online that's not as true, and therefore you don't have to worry as much slow playing a non-nut flush online? (because your JQs flush will still beat the 56s flush online even when another suited card hits the board).

[blackaces13]

[ QUOTE ]
Harrington said this in the sentence prior to what you quoted:

"The danger here is that a player with a high card which matches the board will stick around and draw to a flush that beats you."

So, I think his true sentiment is what you would expect concerning flopping a non-nut flush.

However, his next comment about "Ax suited" maybe is not clear. Perhaps he's saying that "good" players will tend to make flushes with the A suited, but online that's not as true, and therefore you don't have to worry as much slow playing a non-nut flush online? (because your JQs flush will still beat the 56s flush online even when another suited card hits the board).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but in context the sentences that I quoted are of no relevance whatsoever. Why is he talking about Axs and any 2 suited having DRAWS against my already made flush?

Trust me, I like these books as much as anyone, but as I'm reading them things like this really put me off. To me its pretty clear that the text here is referring to things other than the situation which they are discussing according to the section title. If you mention Axs and any 2 suited as having DRAWS out against you when you FLOP A FLUSH, clearly something is wrong.

I'm simply bringing it up, if its wrong its wrong. Let's not try to make excuses.

[AZnuts]

My goal in responding to your post was honestly trying to interpret his actual meaning, that is afterall the point of buying and reading his book - to understand what concepts he's conveying. (It has nothing to do with making "excuses").

If you simply want company in finding gotchas and blasting about errors, fine. I'll find other posts to involve myself in.

[RowdyZ]

Whats is hard to understand?
IF you have a made flush you face 2 dangers and it might not be wise to slow play it.
1. That someone has a higher flush already
2. That someone has 1 higher card of your suit and can make a higher flush then you if a fourth hits.
Then he says your risk is less if one of the on the board is the Ace because good players might typically play Axs but probably not Kxs and bad players might very weil play Ace anything and beat you on a redraw to higher flush.So if the Ace is out there 2 less things you have to worry about.
Then he points out this doesn't apply online because you will run into bad players who not only play Axs and Axo but ANY 2 suited cards so they might have K3s or some other rag hand to make a higher flush. Not sure how well I have explained it but I understand exactly what he means.

RZ

[blackaces13]

My point is that he's speaking about the dangerous DRAWS out there against your already made flush and talking about SUITED hands. You don't see the problem there?

Why is my 56s "safest" when I flop a flush with an A on the board? It certainly has nothing to do with how often people play Axs or any 2 suited. So why are those hands even mentioned in a paragraph which is specifically about flopping a made flush?

[blackaces13]

[ QUOTE ]

If you simply want company in finding gotchas and blasting about errors, fine. I'll find other posts to involve myself in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm simply bringing up an instance in the book that I think is wrong as written, and makes little sense. I even mentioned in my last reply that I like the book. I'm not just knit-picking a typo or something and saying, "look at this". I posted it because if the error lies with me and I'm misinterpreting it then I'd like to know about it.

But if as it appears, I'm not misinterpretting anything then I think I bring up a valid point and by no means do I care to be the one who says, "gotcha". I already paid for the book and it has helped my play. That doesn't mean that it is beyond reproach however and for you to read my first 2 posts in the thread and basically tell me that I'm not worth talking to anymore is completely ridiculous.

[RowdyZ]

[ QUOTE ]
My point is that he's speaking about the dangerous DRAWS out there against your already made flush and talking about SUITED hands. You don't see the problem there?

Why is my 56s "safest" when I flop a flush with an A on the board? It certainly has nothing to do with how often people play Axs or any 2 suited. So why are those hands even mentioned in a paragraph which is specifically about flopping a made flush?

[/ QUOTE ]

All I can say is keep reading it really isn't that hard to understand.

RZ

[AZnuts]

[ QUOTE ]
for you to read my first 2 posts in the thread and basically tell me that I'm not worth talking to anymore is completely ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I offered a polite, plausible response to your original posted question and your rebuttal was:
[ QUOTE ]
if its wrong its wrong. Let's not try to make excuses.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's ridiculous about not wanting to continue? But, I'll overcome that impulse and add this . . . I've reread Harrington several more times, and find myself agreeing with RowdyZ. It does make sense, just not in the way you would like.

Harrington is mixing two different ideas, first is you flopped and flush and don't want to be outdrawn (which is the main point). The second thought is more of an aside, that with an A of your suit on the board you're less likely to already be beaten by a better made flush.

Granted, the second concept is not about being outdrawn anymore, but still within the topic of flopping a flush and how to play it.

I find myself more comfortable with Harrington's paragraph now than when we started this discussion; although it could be made a touch clearer.

If I've just been making more excuses, I don't know what else to say.

[PokrLikeItsProse]

Warning: I haven't actually bought the book. I think that the passage makes more sense if the parenthetical statement comes before rather than after the sentence about draws.

[ QUOTE ]
Slow-playing a flush when the Ace is on the board is the safest situation; good players will often play Ax suited but are much less likely to play 2 lower suited cards. (Online weak players love to play any 2 suited cards, so this logic doesn't apply here.) If the Ace is on the board your chances of facing a DRAW to a better flush go down.

[/ QUOTE ]

reads much better to some. However, it is a stylistic choice and some feel that insertion of a parenthetical remark detracts from a paragraph's train of thought if inserted in the middle. Personally, I think it could be modified to say that "Online weak players love to play any 2 suited cards or draw to a non-nut flush, so this logic doesn't apply here."

[Easy E]

"Why is my 56s "safest" when I flop a flush "

Slow playing is safest as compared to flopping a made flush when a lower card is out there, meaning more weak flush overcards to your 56 are likely to take one off to catch.

While it was pretty clear what Dan/Bill meant when they wrote this, I think their use of "safest" and "much less likely" were poor word choices...

As was the phrase "your chance of facing a draw to a better flush go down" Of course they go down, because it's an overcard to your flush that's not in someone's hand. But the same is true for a King, Queen, Jack that comes out on the flop- the Ace isn't overly special in that regard.

Now, for the 4-card drawing hands, lower than facecards, most good, tight players aren't hanging on past the flop just to catch a 4-flush if there's any kind of pressure, because they don't want to run into an overflush either. If the Ace flops, they might think their out is stronger than it is, or that you're more likely to be bluffing the flop, possibly.

Also, and this is was I believe the passage's point was, you're less likely to see people calling oreflop with Kx or Qx unsuited than you are Ax and therefore, when the Ace is on the board with your flush, you have a better chance of successfully slowplaying your own made flush.

While it's close, I have to agree with Brocktoon point, that this passage is a bit misleading as worded. If I'm holding paint overdraw, I'm much more likely to draw to the the flush only if the Ace is on the board- whether most people would have gotten to the flop much more often with Ax vs face-x is a question for your particular game.

That might need a little cleaning up in the 3rd printing.

[Beavis68]

[ QUOTE ]
My point is that he's speaking about the dangerous DRAWS out there against your already made flush and talking about SUITED hands. You don't see the problem there?

Why is my 56s "safest" when I flop a flush with an A on the board? It certainly has nothing to do with how often people play Axs or any 2 suited. So why are those hands even mentioned in a paragraph which is specifically about flopping a made flush?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe you should try reading Poker For Dummies

The explanation is really simple, you seem to be trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

Stop trying to prove it is wrong, and try to figure out how it could be right.

[Easy E]

My problem with it was it was a short section intending to make a simple point, yet complicated the message due to the verbage.

Is the goal of 2+2 confusion, in your mind? Or maybe a Darwinian filter?

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]
My problem with it was it was a short section intending to make a simple point, yet complicated the message due to the verbage.

Is the goal of 2+2 confusion, in your mind? Or maybe a Darwinian filter?

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether the reputation is accurate is debateable, but 2+2 has never been known for strong editing or absolute clarity of explanations.