who's right?

[rkiray]

3/6 Paradise game, sligthly tougher than normal.

MP limps, I limp 8 /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif 9 /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif mp poster checks button and both blinds limp. Flop : J /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif K /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif a /forums/images/icons/heart.gif
sb checks bb bets mp raises I call poster folds button calls sb folds AND BB RRs (he will showdown 7 /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif 5 /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif ) 3 of us call. Diamonds don't get there, rest of hand irrelevent to this discussion. After this hand I type "Brillant reraise, player's name". He replies "I'm just playing by the book, you would do better if you did". Now the only reason I typed this or cared about his reply is I think he is a really solid player. I don't harass fish, I like it when they made dumb plays. I usually don't bother solid players, unless I know them and want to kid around a little (I've only played about 400 hands with him, but he is tight and aggressive and this was the first mistake I'd seen him make). I think the re-raise was terrible. I had no problem with the bet, I would have done that in his place. But when it got back to him he should have called IMHO. What can this raise do? He won't get anyone else out. He is down to three opponenets, so he's not getting proper pot odds on our calls. His diamonds are small so they could be easily beaten. The original raiser might reraise giving him terrible implied odds. The pot is now big enough that people should chase with almost anything. In the position he's in he can't get a free card. This looks to me to be a horrible play. You could argue that in my position I should have raised to get people out, perhaps buy the button, perhaps get heads up with the raiser and maybe have an opportunity at a free card. But with a drawing hand I prefered to keep as many people in as possible to help my implied odds. Normally I would not care about this, but I do respect the way this player plays. Who's right?

[Bob T.]

I don't like his reraise that much, but I don't think that it was that bad either. He thought that he was drawing to a flush, and if his draw would have been good, he would make it one out of three times, so he thought that he had a reasonable value bet for his draw. You have to at least give him points for playing fearless poker. As it was, you had the better flush draw, so you would have won, one out of four times. Because the pot was conducted 4 handed, you lost no theorhetical money on his reraise, but he did. I don't understand why you are upset.

I guess, I think he was wrong, because he put in action with almost no outs, and you were wrong for making your snippy comment.

Oh yeah, the question was, who was right? Oh well.

[Homer]

This isn't a question of pot odds. It is a question of whether his raise is for value. With three opponents, he is getting 3:1 on every bet he puts into the pot, but he is only 2:1 against making a flush. So, it appears that his raise is correct. However, there is the possibility that his flush will be no good, so if he does have an overlay it is not as big as it appears to be. If his flush is beaten 25% (see Calculation below) of the time or more, then his three-bet is incorrect. With two coldcallers it seems likely that there is more than a 25% chance of him making an underflush, so his raise appears to be incorrect. However, it isn't incorrect by much.

Note that there are other things I am not taking into account such as the possibility of his three-bet knocking out a hand like K7 making runner-runner 7-5 good, the increase in the size of the pot making it more likely for hands drawing dead to chase even when the flush gets there on the turn, and the possibility of MP capping, causing either you or the button to fold.

Calculation - He is getting 3:1 on each additional bet he puts into the pot, which means it is a breakeven proposition if he wins 25% of the time. He will make a flush around 33% of the time. This means if his flush is good more than 75.8% (25/33) of the time his raise has value, so if he is beaten 24.2% of the time or more his raise is incorrect.

-- Homer

[JTG51]

I don't have a problem with his play. You certainly shouldn't play all of your draws that way but you probably should play some. There are several benefits.

Many players announce that they flopped a set or a straight when they check raise 3-bet, this player is going to be harder for you to read now. Next time he pulls this move he may have the nuts and you (or anyone else that is paying attention) will have a hard time not paying him off.

You said he's not going to get any free cards, but I disagree. An early position check raise 3-bet will often get a free card or even a free showdown. That play usually puts the fear of a monster into everyone, and for good reason since most players only use it with a monster.

Finally, with 3 callers on a 4-1 shot he's almost getting the right price anyway.

[rkiray]

It wasn't a check raise. If he would have check raised semi-bluffed I would have been impressed. He bet the flop.

[rkiray]

Do you really think K7 would get out? This is a big pot to fold for one more bet when you have already put two in this round. I think the only way anyone gets out is if the mp caps it. If he does the RRs is a really bad play IMHO.

[JTG51]

It wasn't a check raise.

Sorry, I guess I misread your post.

I still stand by my point though. Just replace everywhere that I said "check raise 3-bet" with "bet and 3-bet". /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

[Schmed]

I tend not to raise my flush draw unless I have the K or A but I don't see his raise as a bad play. I actually thought you might have considered raising trying to knock him out. In your position I would have certainly contemplated raising....remember good things happen when you bet.....

[rkiray]

I agree that I could have raised and stated that in the original post. If I had the A or K I would have. In retrospect I should have Red to try to get the BB out since I know he's dangerous.

[Louie Landale]

On his side: He's only a 2:1 underdog to make the flush (with 2 cards to come), and if nobody has a bigger flush he's making money getting 3:1 for his raise. With that big flop, there is a pretty big chance people hit it because of their big cards rather than because they have a flush draw. Getting people out is irrelevant, as is making the pot bigger, as is the out-of-position ability to snag a free card or steal it.

On your side: there is still a chance the tight cold-caller (you), of course, has a flush draw; he can easily be up against 2 pair and so lose to a full house, and of course the raiser may raise again dropping the weaker calls. He's only getting 3:1 for a 2:1 shot.

He's making money if he has the only flush draw, but his main consern, of course, is that he's drawing dead.

All-in-all I'd say it was a "slightely bad" raise, but NOT a "horrible" one. Its a "slightely good" raise if the cold-callers are loose (they can have anything) or if there was one more cold caller.

You definately made a mistake if you text message was broadcase to the other players. Lets not teach just because you are frustrated. I'd say you made a slight mistake even if your message was private, unless this was some sort of "friend".

You seem to have forgotton that, even though he has a drawing hand, he can EASILY be "betting for value" if he gets enough callers. Implied odds have nothing to do with that.

- Louie

[Homer]

No, it's not likely. I was just saying that it isn't quite as cut and dried as I made it seem, as there could be a few more things that effect the odds.

-- Homer

[rkiray]

Yeah, I still don't like the play but you guys have convinced me it was much closer than I thought and is probably at least a good way to mix up how you play draws sometimes.

[bernie]

youre taking into account that you have a higher flush draw too. he doesnt know that.

if he thinks that his flush will be good if he hits it, and he has 3 callers, and he thinks he has 9 outs, hell even 7 outs, he's making a +EV play here. notice i said IF his flush is good if it hits. he has plenty of odds to see the river with this. unless the board pairs. look at it from his perspective. if he's a solid player, it will be tougher to put him on a hand when he 3 bets the flop again when a draw is there too. as his range is a little wider.

flush over flush also isnt that common. primarily because when most good players have a flush they have the high end of it. so they wont be subject of that kind of beat too often. usually, if you make a flush with 3 on the board, youre good.

it also sounds like you misread his hand. would it matter if he had a higher flush than yours, and it hit? then how would the post sound?

his raise isnt intended to get anyone out. it's intended to keep them in and build the pot bigger. maybe, MAYBE get a higher flush card out who may have a pair and a B-door flush.

this play isnt as horrible as you may think.

that said, ive jammed flushes like this. and ive called with em here too. i much prefer to jam higher flushes obviously, but once in awhile.

btw...the one who's implied odds are going to crap are yours. let's say you know he'd 3 bet the flop here ahead of time. it is possible to make this read sometimes. with that read, youd be coldcalling at least 3 bets here on your initial call. with that in mind, id call it. but i wouldnt like it very much.
especially if i knew one of the players could jam a draw like this and i could be drawing dead for the flush.

youd be drawing calling 3 bets to win 12. you can count on a bet on the turn from one of them so your odds at this point figure to 1 card coming. if your figuring 2 cards to go, where your drawing odds are better, figure it about 5-16. or just over 3-1. you still have the odds to call for your flush on the flop figuring this, but you still have to take into account whether it may be good or not.

in hindsight his play wasnt that good, but in his perspective, it's not that bad a play.

b

[bernie]

"If he does the RRs is a really bad play IMHO."

this line, and your post above make me wonder if you only 3 bet if you have the goods or only if you have the absolute nut draw. you dont have to have a made hand to jam a pot. there are times you can jam on the turn, knowing youre beat. even if they turned their hands face up, and it would still be +EV. wait til ya run into one of those types of hands.

knowing when to jam a draw, even less than nut draws, can make alot of chips. though id be a little careful of the lower value flush or str8 draws.

b

[rkiray]

Yeah, I'm somewhat conservative about jamming pots. I won't do it unless I think I have some kind of a edge. First to act on the next two rounds with a seven high flush draw and a pot that is already so big that I'm pretty sure everyone is in to the end on doesn't show any edge to me. If it was an Ace high draw I would to it. If I was on the button and there were players between me and the originally raiser who I might force out I would do it. If I thought the other players were loose raisers I would do it. Note that I stated this was a slightly tougher than normal game so I didn't think either of these guys were loose. Actually by far the most pot jamming I do is in Colorado 5/5 games where there are lots of maniacs. I love to sit on the immediate left of these guys and jam pots with them when I have good hands.

BTW the pot was definitely big enough that everyone chased to the end. Rags on both turn and river. Turn mp bet everyone called. River was checked all the way. mp won with a pair of kings.

[rkiray]

you wrote :

youre taking into account that you have a higher flush draw too. he doesnt know that.

No I'm not.

you wrote :

flush over flush also isnt that common. primarily because when most good players have a flush they have the high end of it. so they wont be subject of that kind of beat too often. usually, if you make a flush with 3 on the board, youre good.

This is true but it's not the case here. If he had a high flush draw I would have never written the post. He plays tight so I'm sure he wouldn't have been in this hand if he didn't get a free flop in the big blind. Therefore the "regular" case of not losing to flush over flush doesn't apply this time. He should be much more worried about a biggger flush with these cards. Also all four of the people left in the pot were playing solid, no one was getting out of line. As Homer pointed out with two players cold calling a raise he should have at least considered a higher flush draw. This is especially true since both of us were tighter than normal on-line players.

But I have also stated elsewhere that this thread has convinced me that the play was much better than I thought. If nothing else it's a good way to mix up how you play draws (assuming he doesn't do it every time, and I don't think he does).

[J.R.]

flush over flush also isnt that common

Just to expand, you're right. This is an overused phrase. Yes it is true in general, but when you're in a multiway pot, a two flush is on the board and decent players are jamming, "general" rules and guidelines need to give way to the possibilities presented by specific hand in question.

[Nottom]

The fact that you have a bigger flush draw here is really pretty much irrelevant since he certainly doesn't know that. He feels that he has 9 outs to win this thing and is getting about 2:1 odds of hitting it by the river, so anytime he gets 3 people calling his bets thats +EV.

I really don't think hes too worried about the guy re-raising, since the 2 others cold-called once so why wouldn't they do it again. Basically I think this is a fine play. I also think I would have gone ahead and capped this if I were you for the same reason.

[Nottom]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
If I was on the button and there were players between me and the originally raiser who I might force out I would do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are making this sort of play for this reason with a flush draw on a regular basis, you are losing money.

[rkiray]

I did make a mistake here. The way I tend to think about draws is in terms of making them on the next card. So for a flush draw I need 4:1 to call adjusted up or down as my best estimate for implied odds allows. What I overlooked here was the pot was already so big that I (and probably eveyone else) are going to the river. Therfore I should have been thinking in terms of 2:1 and yes I should have capped it (the first call to try to keep people in I believe is correct).

[bernie]

actually, many authors tend to fear flush over flush much more than normal. IMO i think by not fearing it, for reasons i gave, is a minority opinion in many circles. the 'regular' rule also doesnt mean you wont lose like this, it's just not as often as some think. an easy test? when you see it happen, look at the losers hand and ask yourself if youd have played his hand in that position. usually the answer is no. hence, you wouldnt have been beat in this manner.

however, i do agree that with the players involved, more account shouldve been taken for the possibility. not just the information from the jammers, but the guys calling in between. THOSE guys usually have at least a flush draw that may beat yours. especially with chips flying. on top of that, with that many callers, you dont have 9 outs. some of your outs are likely gone.

i was also pointing out the opponents possible perspective. taking into account how he may have misread the situation a little.

lastly, some of the biggest pots ive seen were won by baby flushes...

just some idee'ers

b

[SoBeDude]

Calculation - He is getting 3:1 on each additional bet he puts into the pot, which means it is a breakeven proposition if he wins 25% of the time. He will make a flush around 33% of the time. This means if his flush is good more than 75.8% (25/33) of the time his raise has value, so if he is beaten 24.2% of the time or more his raise is incorrect.

I would guess that the number of times 2 players are drawing to the same flush is less than 24% of the time, or less than 1 time in 4.

Especially when many (most?) players will muck two small suiteds from most positions on the board.

-Scott

[bernie]

of course, one can also factor in that on a full table, it's rare you will ever really have all 9 outs to your flush draw. so the odds, in general, are actually worse than what we hope for.

but that doesnt change how i play it.

b

[tewall]

I would raise some of the time and some of the time not. Whether the raise for value in that situation is on or not is close, so why not vary your play?

Whether the odds are there to raise for value is not the only consideration. If a raise on the flop can cause an opponent to misread your hand, that's a small price to play for that benefit, especially here where the decision is close.