Playing the nut flushdraw

[Nick Royale]

This is a fictive hand, inspired by a discussion I had with a friend about this thread (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=3757451&page=0&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=1). Anyway, here’s my line and I don’t think it’s close. What do you think?


Party 5/10
The cast:
SB is 25/6/1.2
BB is unknown
UTG is 27/3/0.7

Preflop: Hero is CO with A/images/graemlins/heart.gif, T/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
UTG calls, <font color="#666666">4 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, SB calls, BB calls, UTG calls.

Flop: (8 SB) 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, K/images/graemlins/club.gif, 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, SB folds, <font color="#CC3333">BB raises</font>, UTG folds, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, BB calls.

Turn: (7 BB) 7/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>…

[SeaEagle]

I'll be interested in the discussion I guess. BB's c/r almost always means he has something he's taking to S/D HU, especially on this board. I don't mind the flop 3-bet, but I don't understand the turn bet.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
BB's c/r almost always means he has something he's taking to S/D HU, especially on this board.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with this. His flop check/raise could be hoping we've missed the flop and are betting missed AQ/AJ/AT etc, hands we'll often have. When we 3-bet the flop we buy folding equity on the turn and if this folding equity is greater than 13% we make an immediate profit. I think he'll lay down TT-77 often on the turn and weak K's sometimes (but not frequently). If he had a really good hand he would probably had bet out hoping to get raised. I think he'll fold the turn way more than 13% of the time. It would suck to get check/raised on the turn, but I think that will happen very infrequently, the only likely hands he could have check/raising the turn with is 66/33.

[ QUOTE ]
I'll be interested in the discussion I guess.

[/ QUOTE ]
Me too. I know I have a tendency to play my draws aggressive HU. This is a case where I think it's clearly justified, but I would like some opinion since it might be a leak.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with this. His flop check/raise could be hoping we've missed the flop and are betting missed AQ/AJ/AT etc, hands we'll often have.

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe party 5/10's changed since I played it last, but I don't recall many people bluff raising into the PF raiser and a 3rd player when he has nothing. If the board had draws, I could understand, but here he most likely has a K-weak kicker. At any rate, this appears to be an unarguable point. Your play essentially hinges on a read of how often BB is bluff raising (or raising really light) or willing to lay down a pair HU against a single overcard.

[ QUOTE ]
When we 3-bet the flop we buy folding equity on the turn and if this folding equity is greater than 13% we make an immediate profit.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is not accurate. You also put in an extra bet on the flop specifically to make this play so you need to count 1.5bbs as your investment. Also you have to consider that you might get capped on the flop and you can't fold. So really, when you 3-bet the flop with the intention of bluffing a ragged turn, you're going to have to have him both call the flop and fold the turn about 18% of the time for your play to show a profit (this assumes that he'll cap you about 1/3 of the time and that you'll hit your flush on the turn 20% of the time, and that he'll never c/r the turn).

[jakbse]

BBs check/raise on the flop is probably meant to protect a marginal made hand such as KQ. The reasons for us to bet the turn would be:
1/ We definetly have some fold equity. When we 3-bet the flop and bet the turn on a coordinated board I think we are representing a set or TPTK against which villian probably has very few outs.
2/ It could allow for a free SD, but I don't think it's worth much as we are quite likely behind here.
3/ If we take the free card it is now obvious that we're on a flush draw (at least I would look at it that way). By betting the turn we might collect an extra bet on the river if the flush hits.
No, I don't think this is very clear. I think I take the free card and fold the river UI without specific reads.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe party 5/10's changed since I played it last

[/ QUOTE ]
But probably not.

[ QUOTE ]
but I don't recall many people bluff raising into the PF raiser and a 3rd player when he has nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]
A medium pair is a favourite against our range, I don't think he's bluffing. Since he's getting 9:1 on his money when he's ahead more than 50% (with a mid PP) against my range folding shouldn't be an option and raising&gt;&gt;calling. Wouldn't you be raisinh with for example 99?

[ QUOTE ]
If the board had draws, I could understand, but here he most likely has a K-weak kicker

[/ QUOTE ]
As said, no reason to exclude mid PP's. He could be on a fd, but not likely.

[ QUOTE ]
At any rate, this appears to be an unarguable point. Your play essentially hinges on a read of how often BB is bluff raising (or raising really light) or willing to lay down a pair HU against a single overcard.


[/ QUOTE ]
I ain't got no read so we're just going to have to assume average 5/10-player, and I think you could still argue about his possible holdings.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When we 3-bet the flop we buy folding equity on the turn and if this folding equity is greater than 13% we make an immediate profit.

[/ QUOTE ] This is not accurate. You also put in an extra bet on the flop specifically to make this play so you need to count 1.5bbs as your investment. Also you have to consider that you might get capped on the flop and you can't fold. So really, when you 3-bet the flop with the intention of bluffing a ragged turn, you're going to have to have him both call the flop and fold the turn about 18% of the time for your play to show a profit (this assumes that he'll cap you about 1/3 of the time and that you'll hit your flush on the turn 20% of the time, and that he'll never c/r the turn).

[/ QUOTE ]
You have already agreed about 3-betting the flop so I was comparing to the option of betting the turn or taking a freecard. I'm not sure how you calculated, but if he's folding the flop I'm fine with that. Since you agreed about 3-beting the flop the risk of getting capped when comparing my line with a freecard play is the same.

If we instead compare calling the flop c/r with my line that line would have to pay 1SB less to get to the river, but without having any folding equity on the turn. And investing 1SB extra (2SB if capped, which I do believe we'll get less than 33% of the times) when we're having ~45% equity really isn't that bad. We're only losing a small fraction of a SB to gain folding equity on the turn. I'm pretty certain 3-betting the flop is better than start calling down from the flop c/r so I think the comparision should be made between taking the freecard and semi-bluffing the turn. In that comparision we need to fold a better hand 13% of the times to bet and I stand by my opinion we'll do that.

I'm openminded about this hand, but I still believe my line is the best alternative.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
BBs check/raise on the flop is probably meant to protect a marginal made hand such as KQ.

[/ QUOTE ]
He will (or at least should) raise with mid PP's too.

[ QUOTE ]
1/ We definetly have some fold equity. When we 3-bet the flop and bet the turn on a coordinated board I think we are representing a set or TPTK against which villian probably has very few outs.

[/ QUOTE ]
In a summary, this is what I believe justifying a turn bet.

[ QUOTE ]
2/ It could allow for a free SD, but I don't think it's worth much as we are quite likely behind here.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's true, if he's calling the turn we don't have much value of a free sd. Only if he was playing another fd aggressive, which isn't very likely.

[ QUOTE ]
3/ If we take the free card it is now obvious that we're on a flush draw (at least I would look at it that way). By betting the turn we might collect an extra bet on the river if the flush hits.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think he'll pay off a bet on the river with a K anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
No, I don't think this is very clear. I think I take the free card and fold the river UI without specific reads.

[/ QUOTE ]
I suspected this would be the case, which was why I posted even though I thought my line was clearly the best alternative. Either I will plug a leak or many of the other posters/lurkers here will learn something. However I already think the discussion I've had have been giving and I think this hand might be worth an interesting discussion. I think I've made my reasoning clear in the discussion with SeaEagle so I won't be posting these thoughts again.

I value all your opinions, but would also like some input by some of the more experienced posters.

BB has a made hand, he isn't folding, you got your free card. I think you should take it. I think this is a money losing play in the long term.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't you be raisinh with for example 99?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but I also wouldn't be folding on the turn with only a single overcard on board. Actually, I might be folding against a weak/tighty, but I'd guess it wouldn't take too many hands to identify you as an agro. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Incidentally, what's your plan on the river if called?

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't you be raisinh with for example 99?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but I also wouldn't be folding on the turn with only a single overcard on board. Actually, I might be folding against a weak/tighty, but I'd guess it wouldn't take too many hands to identify you as an agro. /images/graemlins/smile.gif


[/ QUOTE ]
Hero is the pfr and he's betting and 3-betting in a hand that was 4-ways on the flop (even though it's hu now). What hands could we be ahead of? 88? He could be aggressive enough to 3-bet JJ/TT here, but that's not likely and we're losing to them too. Him 3-betting missed AQ/AJ isn't likely either. I'm not calling down 2BB just to hope he's on a fd or pure bluff. Maybe I'm weak/tight /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Incidentally, what's your plan on the river if called?

[/ QUOTE ]
Check and pray he's on a lower fd or is a retard. He's not calling the turn but folding the river with a hand that beats us, ever.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not calling down 2BB just to hope he's on a fd or pure bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]
But you're willing to invest 1.5BB just to hope your opponent is c/ring an underpair into 2 players. I'm failing to find the consistency here.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not calling down 2BB just to hope he's on a fd or pure bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]
But you're willing to invest 1.5BB just to hope your opponent is c/ring an underpair into 2 players. I'm failing to find the consistency here.

[/ QUOTE ]
And I'm failing to see your connection. And I only pay 0.5BB more than if I was going to call down.

I'm not playing against myself here and even if I were I will be holding Ax/images/graemlins/heart.gif very rarely if you compare how often I will be on Kx or AA-TT.


If I were playing against myself my odds would look like this to call down with 99:
AK/KQ/KJ/KT/K9: 60 combos
AA/KK/QQ/JJ/TT: 27 combos
AQ-A2/images/graemlins/heart.gif 10 combos

You're behind 90% against these holdings with 99 and you are drawing to 2 outs. When you're ahead of my Ax/images/graemlins/heart.gif hands I have 12-15 outs against you. You get 8:2 on your money calling down from the turn, calling down would be bad against me. Even though I most often don't 3-bet JJ/TT on the flop, but I think that gets somewhat compensated by the fact that I don't always raise A5-2/images/graemlins/heart.gif preflop. Sometimes I might make the same move with QJ/QT/images/graemlins/heart.gif, but we're still not near the ~25% you need to be ahead to be able to call down me with 99.

As said, I can't see your connection, but you have to realise that even if you KNEW I would 3-bet the flop with Ax/images/graemlins/heart.gif you still can't call down profitable.

Please post again if I missed you. And try to address what about my thinking you think is flawed instead of drawing some vague connection. I'm not trying to be a jerk, just try to understand what you're saying so we can have a discussion.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
As said, I can't see your connection...

[/ QUOTE ]
Nick, I appreciate all the work you're doing on this thread, as it is an interesting line. I wasn't trying to be snippy - I was trying to point out that you are assuming that villian will fold to your aggression because you hold the goods almost all the time (best case for you). Yet you also surmise that villian may fold because he's not holding a SD-quality hand (best case for you, too). So while there's a chance that you are looking at the parley of someone who has a hand strong enough to c/r but not strong enough to take to SD, the hand counts are heavily in favor of Kx, 6x, 2 pair, set, or a non-folding pair vs. a turn-folding 6x or PP.

I'm too lazy to work out the hand counts, but I'd say there's a lot better chance you don't beat 99 than there is that villian isn't going to SD.

[W. Deranged]

The key point here is that we should only be betting if one of the following two things are true:

1. We have a hand that has legit showdown value. We can choose to put in a big bet here rather than a big bet on the river if we check.

2. Villain might fold a hand he should call with (like a small pair or something).

If neither of these are true we should check.

I made a post that's currently in the digest about this exact issue. My theory is that you should follow through with a bet here if one of the above two are likely true, and if villain is unlikely to check-raise.

I think this is a pretty clear check. Players don't often check-raise without at least a pair. You're only beating another busted flush draw, really, and that doesn't seem all that likely given the pre-flop action. Villain has a pair here far more often than he has a flush draw.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
I wasn't trying to be snippy - I was trying to point out that you are assuming that villian will fold to your aggression because you hold the goods almost all the time (best case for you). Yet you also surmise that villian may fold because he's not holding a SD-quality hand (best case for you, too).

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, I understand. What I ment was that when I bet this flop he's a favourite, but when I 3-bet it he's certainly not. I rarely do that with a hand worse than a K here. I often find myself holding a marginal hand in a pot where I need to raise because it's better than calling and letting others in cheap. But when I meet heavy resistance I let it go. This is probably the way I would play 99/88 in this hand for example. I might be wrong doing so or I might be wrong assuming others will

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this is a pretty clear check. Players don't often check-raise without at least a pair. You're only beating another busted flush draw, really, and that doesn't seem all that likely given the pre-flop action. Villain has a pair here far more often than he has a flush draw.

[/ QUOTE ]
I 3-bet the flop and bet the turn because I think this flop check/raise is often coming from PP's realising I've often missed the flop. I have no doubt villain is on a pair far, far more often than a fd. I would play hands like 99/88 from BB this way and fold for a bet on the turn, am I wrong doing so?

Showing this aggression, you don't think villain will fold 13% of the time if I bet the turn? More importantly, what hands do you put villain on and with which of these do you think will call down?

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think this is a pretty clear check. Players don't often check-raise without at least a pair. You're only beating another busted flush draw, really, and that doesn't seem all that likely given the pre-flop action. Villain has a pair here far more often than he has a flush draw.

[/ QUOTE ]
I 3-bet the flop and bet the turn because I think this flop check/raise is often coming from PP's realising I've often missed the flop. I have no doubt villain is on a pair far, far more often than a fd. I would play hands like 99/88 from BB this way and fold for a bet on the turn, am I wrong doing so?

Showing this aggression, you don't think villain will fold 13% of the time if I bet the turn? More importantly, what hands do you put villain on and with which of these do you think will call down?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're probably being a little too optimistic in thinking that villain is often check-raising with air here. The flop contains a K, which is a reasonably scary card to villain. Without knowledge of his playing style, I don't think we should base our turn decision on this possibility.

Another key thing to realize is that a huge percentage of the time villain folds the turn, he's folding a worse hand. I don't really see any K or even a hand like 99 folding here often enough to make it worthwhile.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
Another key thing to realize is that a huge percentage of the time villain folds the turn, he's folding a worse hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I realise that. I just don't think he'll check/raise without any part of the board (pair or fd) or a PP.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't really see any K or even a hand like 99 folding here often enough to make it worthwhile.

[/ QUOTE ]
I guess this is where my reasoning is flawed. I've suspected I've been playing draws too aggressive HU when reading other post on the forum (important is also to consider this hand was 4-ways on the flop). I think the articles I read by Jason Pohl have messed with my mind. Thanks for the input, all of you.