A slowplayed draw

It was one of those games where I was sidelined for an hour because the game was wild and I didn't pick up a decent hand in a late seat. So when I got A-5 of spades on the button, I was committed to seeing the flop. So happens they forgot to raise, so I did. About six of us saw the flop for two-bets each.


The flop came K-Q-x with two spades. Everyone checked. I checked. What do you think of that play?


A spade came on the turn and at least one guy refused to believe I had the nuts and I think that's because he couldn't believe that I'd check the nut flush draw on the flop. The turn got capped (five bets), four way action. The river went bet, call, fold, raise by me, call, call. And that's after I capped the turn. Wow.


I've little doubt that the second-nut flush was out, which of course means chips are going to fly no matter what. But I wonder, had I bet the flop, and then started pounding away when the flush came, would the second-nut flush have backed down a bet or two sooner? I think he would have, I mean, this particular player on this hand, and also the average opponent spread through poker-time.


Tommy

I think you should have bet the flop, you believe that not betting the flop gave your hand more deception, but you raised before the flop and many people would expect you to bet on the flop of KQx. Usually someone would put you on a pair and the sort in this type of situation, so you would have still gotten a lot of action on the turn. What do you think of this???


Just my opinion, Take care

- Jessy

Another thing to think about is how many bets you might have gotten in on the flop if someone was waiting to check raise. Maybe the 5 bet turn you got is mooted out by a 3-4 bet flop and 3-4 bet turn with more players involved for the increased pot size. It's probably going to be a big pot any way you cut it, since it certainly sounds like you ran into another flush and possibly a set as well. /images/wink.gif

I think you need to bet the flop. You got an excellent flop to your hand in a 6 way action pot, i want this pot to get bigger as i have the nut draw and a very nice overlay. Sure it gives your hand more deception not betting the flop, but not worth giving up all the calls and maybe raises you'll get on the flop had you bet. If somebody has a flush there gonna jam with you anyway as there are so many hands they would put you on before they would give you the nut flush because you raised preflop. Checking the flop might be something to think about in pot-limit and no-limit as you won't have to worry about someone moving in on you after you bet the flop and making it very expensive for you to try to draw out. And for the deception factor of now being able to get paid off with the nuts if you hit by other hands. But in limit i think a bet is called for in this spot.

ni han T! well played. i'm with you here... i'll trade a few small bets for a few big bets any day...also, the NEXT time when you pound away on the flop with the nut flush or nut draw, they won't think you have it (he-he, but you will)

I have started using this play now and then and I think it's a good play for a few reasons.


1. Against opponents who will expect you as the raiser to bet a flop with big cards regardless of your hand, this foils their check-raise plans if they have a pair.


2. This mixes up your play so that in the future observant opponents will sometimes bet into you when you flop a monster after raising preflop.


3. With 6 people calling your raise preflop and a KQx flop, you are almost certainly losing right now. If you bet, you can end up facing a single check-raiser heads up and completely lose any benefit from betting your flush draw in the hope of getting six callers for value. You are in a tough game, although loose-aggressive, but you can't expect 6 check-callers like at the 6-12 tables. The free card is SOOOOOO nice here because you might just make the nuts on the turn for free. What's cooler than that?


4. It will inspire EXTREME action from anyone who makes a flush or straight on the turn since your aggression now looks an AWFUL lot like AK with the A of flush. This is exactly what happened in your case. Nice. Not only that, but since THEY didn't bet or check-raise their own flush draw, they are probably going to feel that their OWN flush (or straight) is disguised and put you on a set.


5. In tough games, you MUST throw curveballs now and then and checking a nut flush draw after everyone checks is very unusual in aggressive games where any draw, any pair or even ace high is often bet and raised on the flops. If you will sometimes make moves that nobody else will make, it means you have one more weapon than the others.


Nice one Tommy. Glad to see it worked. I was going to post this question myself, no kidding (but without an actual example hand where I used it to great effect). For me it cames up in some games with tough aggressive opponents that became short-handed. Since shorthanded concepts are often magnified versions of concepts that come into play in full games, I hit on this idea at that time and have used it in full ring game play. I've got another one I'm going to post as well.


natedogg

I have no strong thoughts about checking the flop. Coilean and pokerguy made good cases for betting and Nate made an excellent case for checking.


What caught my attention is the raise with A-xs on the button followed by "everyone checked" on the flop, despite "about six" players in a "wild" game with a highly coordinated drawing flop.


One small bet preflop was what gave you the OPTION of checking or betting the flop.

Coilean and Pokerguy,


"Maybe the 5 bet turn you got is mooted out by a 3-4 bet flop and 3-4 bet turn with more players involved for the increased pot size."


If the money works out the same, then isn't checking the flop a clear theoretical winner since with the worst hand we put in exactly nothing and with the nuts we put in the max?


Tommy

"If you will sometimes make moves that nobody else will make, it means you have one more weapon than the others."


I'm with you all the way on that. Been giving it lots of thought lately. Some of the value of odd plays is down the road and barely tangible, like when a guy tenses up heading into battle making him easier to read, or just by leaving peculiar options unprerejected fewer of the rare-and-perfect thieving opportunities are missed.


Tommy

nice change-up. normally i pump the nut flush on the flop, but with a free card,why not take it. i like nate's thinking on this. change up the obvious plays. i recently have been betting flopped fullhouses on the flop. i know theyre thinking top pair and they all usually call if they have anything. most of em wait for the turn to bet this hand. then later if i flop another great one i do it on the turn.

somewhere on the turn when you raised i woulda put ya on a nutter.


nice hand...


b

Tommy,


Since you are on the button, am I safe in assuming you raised soley to get more money in the pot, figuring if people are in for one bet, they'll stick around for 2, at least to see the flop? This is what I would do, but I ask because wouldn't it disguise your hand more if you just called and then called again on the flop?


Also, I'm not a big fan of A5-A9 suited. If the pot had been raised once or twice, would you have stayed in?

Tommy -


I like the play here, but one other thing that nobody has mentioned yet is the 'what if'. What if the flush doesn't come on the turn.


By betting the flop, it is a lot like the 'free-card raise'. Yeah, it's nice to put in nothing when you are behind, and the max when you have the nuts, but the flush only comes on the turn 1:5 times.


I am NOT saying that I dislike this play (it is an ideal and profitable to mix up your play), but I'm not convinced that your previous post thoroughly discusses all of the pros and cons.


Nice hand,


worm

In a 6 way pot, even if the flush card comes on the turn, your non-bet on the flop will not usually create action unless there are other big hands out there i.e. your non-bet on the flop may very well mislead them into thinking that you don't make the flush on the turn but each of your 5 opponents will still be unsure that no one else has now made the flush.


This play of checking the flop in fact may be more effective against 2 or 3 opponents particularly if they are of the aggressive ilk. If you catch the flush on the turn, your flop check will have misled them. On the other hand, if a blank comes and they bet, you could represent a slowplayed monster set by hitting them with a raise then.


On balance (while I understand the pros of checking the flop), I believe the better play is to bet it for the reasons given by some of the others including Coilean and Pokerguy.

If the money is the same, I can see your point about the advantage of waiting until you make the hand to put your money in.


I like your play here as a kind of deception/variation play, but how much "extra" action would you be getting from your opponents on later streets if they knew this was your standard play? I think the standard play should still be to bet (and jam with) your nut flush draw on the flop when you should be getting anywhere from 4-6:1 on your money and are 1:2 to make your hand. This is also a clear theoretical winner, right?


My point was really that there are so many bets at play here that it's really impossible to quantify what's best in this specific case because the $20 edge you might make playing it one way verse another is lost in the sea of bets at play here.

"Since you are on the button, am I safe in assuming you raised soley to get more money in the pot,..."


No. No solies ever, since there are always multiple reasons to raise.


"Also, I'm not a big fan of A5-A9 suited."


I rarely fold suited aces.


"If the pot had been raised once or twice, would you have stayed in?"


Yes.


Tommy

This is in reply to the latest batch of posts, re: betting the flop or not. Just so's you know, in spots like this I bet the flop and reraise if raised nine out of ten times at least. So I'm in full agreement that betting is the best play on a case by case basis. (Sometimes I'll "defend" a play as if having drawn one side or other to the argument in a bebate.)


And I'm not really into varying much from a standardly accepted winning play just for the sake of variance because the way I figure it, there's enough variance built into my default game (whatever that is!).


So that's why I wanted to run this hand by ya'll, because when I made the check, it felt new and strange, but surprisingly profitable, given how "right" it is to bet the flop. And when alleles work equally well, or feel like maybe they do, it gets me questioning again where the profit really comes from, when so many situations appear unable to generate advantage. In other words, if I always bet the flop in these spots, and another player never does, how much edge do I have over him? I'd say not much, if any.


The point I overemphasised in the initial post was that checking could be better than betting because of deception. Actually, at the time, I though of that as a secondary benefit, second to the infinite-drawing-odds-to-the-nuts.


And even with those two things as plusses, and others I'm sure, it still seems best to me to bet the flop, long run and short. Thanks for the replies.


Tommy

I actually like this play and think it should be done more often. My reasoning is that it is deceptive and it will build you larger pots. Not to mention that if you don't hit your draw on the turn or the river, you saved yourself one bet. I make this play more often than not - in fact, usually the only time I will bet out on a flush draw is if I have paired up as well.


I know this won't be the popular opinion, but it works rather well for me and when the flush does hit, a majority seem to think that I am not holding it and bet their top pair like it's gold.