who's right?

rkiray · #1 05-05-2003, 11:19 AM

3/6 Paradise game, sligthly tougher than normal.

MP limps, I limp 8 [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img] 9 [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img] mp poster checks button and both blinds limp. Flop : J [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img] K [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img] a [img]/forums/images/icons/heart.gif[/img]
sb checks bb bets mp raises I call poster folds button calls sb folds AND BB RRs (he will showdown 7 [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img] 5 [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img] ) 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. · #2 05-05-2003, 11:44 AM

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 · #3 05-05-2003, 11:46 AM

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

rkiray · #4 05-05-2003, 11:59 AM

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.

Homer · #5 05-05-2003, 01:52 PM

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 · #6 05-05-2003, 02:36 PM

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 · #7 05-05-2003, 07:26 PM

"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

SoBeDude · #8 05-07-2003, 10:15 AM

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 · #9 05-07-2003, 10:27 AM

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

JTG51 · #10 05-05-2003, 11:48 AM

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.