[TheHammer24]

[ QUOTE ]
U called 2 sbs to make 12bbs. In my example you would call 1 sb to make 14bbs, and I doubt sb tries to cr entire "trapped field." By not betting you let villain turn an easy call into a borderline one and allowed him to shut 2 players out of the pot who might have paid you off when you hit your card. I like my plan better. You lost value by check calling, so yes my bet is for value.

[/ QUOTE ]

For a bet to be for value, you must have an equity edge. For instance, if I have 50%+ chance of winning a hand and it is HU, I should bet for value because I will will win more money than I lose. If i have a flush draw and there are 4 other people in the hand, I have 30% chance of winning. I earn 30% on each bet put in the pot. I lose .7 Bets on my investment and win .3 bets of every one who called my bet. 4*.3 = 1.2 bets. In this hand I have a ten percent chance of winning it. Therefore I earn .1 on every call. For htis to be plus EV, I would need ten plus callers, I do not have that in this hand so my bet cannot be for value.

However, I can use it to manipulate the actions of my opponents. In this hand, that is not a good idea. You propose betting so that I only have to pay 1 bet instead of two. That would not work. Only using this specific example, my bet would either lead to MP raising and SB c/r or MP calling and SB c/r. Either way I put 2 bets in on the flop and my odds are still the same than had I called two cold, as i did, after SB c/r. You need to look at effective odds here. If I want to take my draw to the turn, I have to pay 2 bets whether it's 2 at once or 1 at two separate occasions.