Preventing Flush Draws in Party NL

[strawdogg]

Hey all,

Was wondering if anyone here has any advice if for example u flop trips and there are two suits on the flop. In order to prevent flush draws, I usually bet the pot on flop and turn. Is there a better way of preventing draws? Thanks!

Strawdogg

[vector]

If you mean you are getting called incorrectly by flush drawers, you should be happy about this. Its painful when they hit (and you should be prepared to lay it down if they come back at you after it has hit) but this is how you make money.

If you think they will call anyway you should bet all in when you have a set and there is a flush draw out. This is extracting maximum $ from the "I can feel that flush coming" brigade, and saves you from a tough decision if the flush hits and you still have money.

But note that the last thing you want is for a flush drawer to lay down his hand when he doesn't have the odds to call. Sometimes we forget this fact when the fourth consecutive heads up flush drawer sucks out on you...

[fireman664]

hes getting 2-1 or worse against a 4-1 draw, with no implied odds (since you will lay it down if it hits)......why would you want to change this? This is a profitable situation for you. Seems like they hit it many more times than they should, but you are playing this correctly.

[KingToad]

It seems like most of my sets are the ones I have limped in in EP/MP probably even late with 22-88. At this point the pot is maybe $3. So depending where I'm at, I might check/raise. But most of the time I do play like you would not giving them odds to call, hoping they don't hit.

[Zag]

First, let me echo what the others have said: Even though we use the phrase "protect your hand," we don't really mean that you always want to drive everyone else away. We mean that you want to make sure it is a mistake for your opponents to call. Then you hope that they do it. Sure, sometimes they suck out on you, but, if you were to repeat the hand a billion times, the amount that they would profit by sucking out on you will be less than the amount you would profit by them trying. That's the definition of "them making a mistake."

So, how much do you have to bet to make sure that they are making a mistake? It depends on stack sizes and number of opponents, but it ranges from 1/2 of the pot (with deep stacks and only one opponent) to an all-in overbet of 2.5 times the pot (against several opponents and that is all in for you or for all of them).

Finally, if you bet and are called, then the flush hits, you should not ALWAYS plan to lay it down. If you are out of position, then some small percentage (maybe 10%??) of the time, you should bet out again (and try to look relieved that "your" nut flush draw just hit). If you then face a big raise with no other callers, you can know lay it down confidantly.

If you have position and he bets out, you should consider that it could be a bluff. (Was there a straight draw possible that might be his real draw?) If you are out of position and check, obviously a bet might be a bluff. (Again, look to see if there was a straight draw out there. I often make this bluff against players who I know do not bet their draws and can lay down a hand.)

Depending on the player, you still need to call some percentage of the time, ranging from hardly ever to almost 3/4 of the time. Remember that you still have 10 outs, even if you are behind, so it isn't a disastrous call. You can't be so easy to push off a hand that everybody and his little sister will be taking shots at you. Even if the only thing you can beat is a bluff, the correct game-theory calling percentage of a pot-sized bet is 1/2 of the time.

Note that a couple of people have mentioned just pushing it in when you have a set and the flop is two-suited. Unless you have the nuts, this is a big mistake if your stack is, say, 20 times the size of the pot. You will probably only get called by a bigger set. Sure, you usually win it -- then one loss wipes out 20 wins.

[vector]

[ QUOTE ]
Note that a couple of people have mentioned just pushing it in when you have a set and the flop is two-suited. Unless you have the nuts, this is a big mistake if your stack is, say, 20 times the size of the pot. You will probably only get called by a bigger set. Sure, you usually win it -- then one loss wipes out 20 wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

I did recommend this with the proviso that you know you are against the type of player who will call his flush draw regardless of the odds you give him (these people are amazing, and I am convinced they simply never regard the bet they are facing, they simply envision their flush card falling on the turn/river). I would further add this is only a good idea if you are heads up or three way on the flop, and the pot was raised preflop, and your effective stack size is no more than four or five times the current pot size.

Finally I think the standard pot size raise is a better play, but if you are unable to play rationally after the flush is possible (and constantly make crying calls) then you are far better off to get the money in while you are [most likely] ahead.

As for set over set, as described above you obviously hope the flush does come so then you can get away from your hand, but if it doesn't I know my stack is doomed in this situation. If you are able to lay down a worse set against a non-threatening board I suggest you are playing far to weak tight (but then I play only at Party, and my effective stack is rarely more than 200 times the BB, deeper money games may well require large adjustments to my play).

[Zag]

I have certainly gotten away from the underset in PLO, but it is a lot easier there. I don't think I have ever done so in Hold'em, but I also only play on Party, where the stacks are usually a small multiple of the blinds. I'd like to think that, if the stacks were upwards of 200 BB's, there are times that I would lay down a set when the only hand that beats it is a higher set. But maybe not.

[tewall]

"So, how much do you have to bet to make sure that they are making a mistake? It depends on stack sizes and number of opponents, but it ranges from 1/2 of the pot (with deep stacks and only one opponent) to an all-in overbet of 2.5 times the pot (against several opponents and that is all in for you or for all of them). "

I'm interested in this part: "1/2 of the pot (with deep stacks and only one opponent)"

This seems like an easy call. How does a 1/2 pot bet make calling a mistake in this situation? If the money were shallow, not deep, then it seems more likely that it could make a call incorrect.

[tewall]

"Note that a couple of people have mentioned just pushing it in when you have a set and the flop is two-suited. Unless you have the nuts, this is a big mistake if your stack is, say, 20 times the size of the pot. You will probably only get called by a bigger set. Sure, you usually win it -- then one loss wipes out 20 wins."

If the stack is 20 times the size of the pot, then all-in would be bad if it would only get called by a higher set and that were more likely to happen than 1 in 20 times. Going all-in would still be profitable if it's less than 5% likely that someone has a higher set.

I would say (just on intuition) that it's less than 5% likely that someone has a higher set (I'd guess around 2% likely), and when you couple the possibility that someone with a flush draw will call, going all-in with stack size = 20x pot seems fine (not saying it's the best play, but should be +E.V. so not a "big mistake").

I certainly agree with your reasoning, however, just not where to draw the line as to where it would become a big mistake. It would be interesting to know what parameters would make the all-in play the best (ratios of stack size to pot and probability of being called by a flush draw being the parameters).

[Zag]

I don't know what the exact odds are, either, but I do know that when I have a set which isn't the top one, it seems that someone else does have the top one about half the time. Maybe 2/3. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

The reason that you can bet less when the money is deeper is because the caller has to go purely on pots odds on the turn card only, and can't count implied odds at all. He can only count the turn card because you are going to bet again if the turn misses him. He can only count pots odds and not implied odds because you are not going to pay him off if the turn hits him.

If the money is short enough that a flop bet is all-in for one of you, then the flush draw can call a bigger bet because he will have both the turn AND the river to hit his flush. A flush is almost exactly 3-to-1 behind ( http://twodimes.net/h/?z=147632 ) so a half-pot all-in bet would leave him adequate odds to draw. If he knows that another bet will come on the turn if he misses, but no more money is going to come if he hits, he would be making a mistake to call a half-pot bet.

Note that this lowest range is applies only if there is only one draw possible, and only one opponent. If it is possible that your opponent could have both a straight and flush draw, then he has 14 outs, so your correct bet is nearly the size of the pot (with deep money). Also, with two different draws out there, you have to fear a bluff when one of them hits, so you have to call him down some percentage of the time. Therefore, the opponent also gets some implied odds for his draw, making your correct bet on the flop even higher.

Finally, if there is more than one opponent, then you have an issue with the "schooling of the fish" where if first one to call is making a mistake, but the second one to call is not only doing so correctly, but also making the first call correct as well. (If they are only different draws, say one a straight and one a flush.) On the other, other hand, with multiple callers on the flop, your top set is now getting reasonable odds for turning into a boat so you are still happy to put in a lot of money against several people drawing. If some of them are drawing dead (i.e. to a losing flush), all the better. But you want the money going in on the flop.

[tewall]

Thanks for the thorough explanation.

The flaw I find with the reasoning is that it assumes you know your opponent is on a draw. Let's say you bet half the pot, and your opponent calls. What should you do on the turn? Against a decent opponent a good percentage of the time you'll be checking. And who's to say the draw won't get paid off if it comes through? You can't give up every time a possible draw hits.

So given the possibility of a free card on the turn, combined with the probability of getting paid off if the draw hits, makes calling a half-pot bet on the flop very easy I think. The deeper the money, the easier the call.

[CoinLaundry-CptC0ckwell]

If you spike a set with QQ-AA and lose money... pobre cito. If you spike a set of Qs, Ks, As, stick all of your money in if anyone plays with you at any point. If they're merely on a flush draw, you didn't raise enough pre-flop unless they have AKs. Even if the flop's TJQr and they actually have AK, well, you have 10 beautiful outs. I'm going to use 77 for my examples.

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=147692
Let's say you're trying to prevent *this* flush draw. You're mister 77 and they're AQs. You're 2.5:1, and AQs is *not* going to put you on 77 here. How is this person to know they're behind on the flop? If I have AQs with top pair four-flushed and I'm behind you, there's no preventing my draw. If I checked it to you, I'm check-raising. I'll probably get every dollar in there. Call me a fish, but I have a hard time smelling your little set online. When you win 5 out of 7 times, congratulations. The other 2 times mathematically *have to happen* and are the only way, in the end, you'll make money.

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=147694
Here's a weaker hand, A9s in the same situation with the exact same odds.

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=147698
Another scary one vs JTs. You're 2:1. This is no-limit, not pot limit, and it's almost never right to bet the pot anyway. If you realllllly don't want a fishy player or an aspiring-to-be-good player playing with you for two more cards, BET A LOT. Overbet the pot, bet TWICE THE POT, stick all of your money into the pot. Bet more than a person's comfortable with.

... Other than that, let them get their money in with yours and win 2 out of 3 times. Losing sometimes (but less than the amount of times you just win) is the only way to win in the end.