Big draw OOP against a possible steal

Is seems like every person advocating a bet is trying to have their cake and eat it too.

Is this a semi- bluff or a value bet?

Make up your mind.

I don't see this as a semi bluff. There needs to be a reasonable chance that everyone folds for this to be correct.
I've already admitted that I could be severely underestimating this frequency. But for me, a general rule of not trying to semibluff 4 villians has done me well.

If it's a value bet, you expect two callers.

What is someone calling this flop with?
This is what I don't understand....
You've already said that this is a good flop to bet because of the lack of legitimate calling hands.

Does middle pair call your bet, but not bet it?
Does top pair only call this bet and not raise?
Does bottom pair call your bet, but not someone elses?


I think the most likely outcomes after betting this flop, leave your bet with no or less value.
ie. one caller, one raiser or 2 villians you could have c\r anyway.

After checking, the most likely outcomes
checking through, c\r opportunity, or the situation that occurs in the OP.

I prefer the checking options.

<font color="blue">
It may seem after some of my recent posts on the subject that I never advocate betting a draw. This would be a mistake to assume.

1. If there was one (preferably two) less villians in this case - I bet. (semi-bluff)
2. If there was a PFR is late position - I bet.(value)
3. If the board was more connected - I bet. (value)

I think you have to make a clear distinction between which you are trying to achieve. </font>

[shant]

[ QUOTE ]
By saying this, are you agreeing with me that any callers have Hero in bad shape?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, I'm not agreeing. You will be called by middle pairs, any pair on this flop, straight draws that don't include a J, etc. You will not be in terrible shape if called here, you'll probably have 12 outs.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm going to be very happy. I don't know why you wouldn't be.

The only situation that would make me unhappy, is if had Hero bet, he gets 3 callers, followed by a LP raise, Hero 3bets and everyone calls.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't play micro-limits, so I may be wrong here, but this seems like a fantasy flop action. On this board, what hands are calling 2-bets cold after all that raising? The check-raise cap oppurtunity seems completely ridiculous.

I don't quite understand why you're so happy if the flop gets checked through. Could you explain?

[ QUOTE ]

you can't only bet made hands...

[/ QUOTE ]

See above in blue.

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm going to be very happy. I don't know why you wouldn't be.

The only situation that would make me unhappy, is if had Hero bet, he gets 3 callers, followed by a LP raise, Hero 3bets and everyone calls.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't play micro-limits, so I may be wrong here, but this seems like a fantasy flop action. On this board, what hands are calling 2-bets cold after all that raising? The check-raise cap oppurtunity seems completely ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, this is a fantasy situation. I was trying unsuccessfully to make a point.

[ QUOTE ]

I don't quite understand why you're so happy if the flop gets checked through. Could you explain?

[/ QUOTE ]

It goes back the EV equation from before.

The pot is 5.5sb. Hero is definitely behind at this point but Hero has ~35% (flop to river) equity, without a made hand.

If checked through, Hero is granted (by the current leading hand) his chance to make the best hand for free.

Hero will make his hand 19% by the turn.

19% of 5.5sb granted for free = .19*5.5 = 1.045sb.

Having this checked through is marvellous.

Now outside of callers and bettors the only other options are checking through or everyone folding to your bet.

Everyone folding to you bet wins 5.5sb.
Getting checked through wins 1.045sb.
So everyone needs to fold ~20% to have equal value.
I think in a field of 4 villians this is not likely.

Then, IMO, your betting and calling options are in favour of checking aswell.

Here's an excersize for everyone. I may be biased, so I'll leave it up to you.

List in order of %frequency of occurence, what you think happens after a bet and a check.

EG.

After a bet.
60% one caller.
15% one raiser
15% two callers
5% three callers
5% all folds

EDIT to say: I think it's the distribution of these percentages that makes the difference between betting and checking. These percentages will change between levels aswell but an interesting excersize nonetheless....
MAYBE EVEN WORTHY OF ITS OWN THREAD

[ QUOTE ]

Everyone folding to you bet wins 5.5sb.
Getting checked through wins 1.045sb.
So everyone needs to fold ~20% to have equal value.
I think in a field of 4 villians this is not likely.



[/ QUOTE ]
This should actually read: ~31% to have equal value.

Hero is investing .65sb to win 5.5sb. Fold equity needs to be only ~11% but to have neutral EV, it needs to make another whole sb clear of neutral EV to have equal value.

BTW. if you estimate that there is a roughly 20% chance that everyone folds this flop. You should be making this play with ANY TWO CARDS. In fact, you should be more inclined to do it with any two cards than on draws because having the flop check through has no value for you.

[shant]

Thank you for taking the time to do that analysis. You've made a convincing argument. I'm starting a thread on this in SS because you've made me doubt how standard a bet is and I'd like to hear more analysis on it.

[ QUOTE ]
Thank you for taking the time to do that analysis. You've made a convincing argument. I'm starting a thread on this in SS because you've made me doubt how standard a bet is and I'd like to hear more analysis on it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thankyou. I appreciate a quality discussion. Always.

[MrWookie47]

This is a very good post. Hopefully it has challenged most of the board to think critically. It took me a while to think about it in order to come up with a good response. You have neglected one thing, however, and that's you're assuming there are always no bettors.

See, our EV from betting out is not just the chance that we fold everyone. We have our fold equity PLUS our current equity in the pot. In this case, the pot is 5.5 SB. If it gets checked through, our EV (to showdown, with no furhter betting) is 35% of 5.5 SB, or 1.925 SB. If we bet out, our EV is, instead:

P(no callers) * (5.5 SB) + P(1 caller)*(0.35*(7.5 SB)-1) + P(2 callers)*(0.35*(8.5 SB)-1) + ... + P(HU raised pot)*(0.35*(9.5 SB)-2) + P(3 way raised pot)*(0.35*(11.5 SB)-2) + ... + P(3-way, 3-bet pot)*(0.35*(14.5 SB)-3) + ...

A similarly more rigorous calculation of our EV for checking would be:

P(0 bettors)*0.35*(5.5 SB) + P(1 bettor HU)*(0.35*(7.5 SB)-1) + P(1 bettor, 3-way)*(0.35*(8.5 SB)-1) + ... + P(3 way raised)*(0.35*(11.5 SB)-2) + ...

Now, working further from this is difficult, and it's going to require some approximations. Let's assume that this is a loose, passive game, and all the players are the same. This implies that, for any given player P(call) &gt; P(bet) &gt; P(raise). This is a little disjoint. I might use it later, but I typed it out, and I'm going to leave it here in case I do. I see now that it's not all particularly relevant to what I'm going to say next.

Thus, P(no callers) &lt; P(no bettors). However, P(no callers) needn't be greater than or equal to 0.35 (0.19 in your example) for checking to come out ahead when comparing these two terms in the sum. Instead P(no callers) must be greater than or equal to 0.35*P(no bettors). In my estimation, I think that this condition is pretty much a wash, or perhaps slightly in favor of betting out. In a 5 way pot, usually someone will have caught a piece they like enough to bet out, or else as a late position bluff.

Now, the discussion may still be interesting when we estimate the relative sizes of the other terms. For example, it's safe to say, that P(3-way raised pot) if we check will typically be greater than P(3-way raised pot) if we bet out. OTOH, P(3-way, 3-bet) pot is greater if we bet than if we check. We also get to set the least desirable outcome, P(HU raised pot), to zero if we check, whereas it's non-zero if we bet. And yet we get to have P(fold the one remaining player on the turn) be greater if we bet than if we check. I'm undecided of yet.

Holey crapola Wookie.

Awesome effort.

I think there's too many factors to make a feasible EV calculation possible. Which is what makes poker so great.

I also understand the points you make about the comparisons I make in my equations. If I could have come up with the rest, I would have tried.

FWIW. Shant has started his thread in Small Stakes and it's already produced this beautiful thread from the Qtip archives.
<a href="http://
<a href="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=smallholdem&amp;Numbe r=2878462&amp;Searchpage=1&amp;Main=2878462&amp;Wo rds=%26quot%3Bsick%26quot%3B+QTip&amp;topic=&amp;S earch=true#Post2878462" target="_blank">
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=smallholdem&amp;Numbe r=2878462&amp;Searchpage=1&amp;Main=2878462&amp;Wo rds=%26quot%3Bsick%26quot%3B+QTip&amp;topic=&amp;S earch=true#Post2878462[/url]

[McGahee]

Though I'm not one who frequently uses the "1/2 players are idiots" rationale - you are severely overestimating your opponents IMO. People will call on a Q75 flop with any pair, gutshots, overcards, backdoor straight draws, lots of things.
If you have a LAG read on somebody to your left, then I can see checking. Without any reads, your estimation that you will get EXACTLY 1 caller 60% of the time on a bet is just absurd.

[ QUOTE ]

Does middle pair call your bet, but not bet it?
Does top pair only call this bet and not raise?
Does bottom pair call your bet, but not someone elses?


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm quoting these questions not to short-change your POV, but because - correct me if I'm wrong - it is the main crux of your argument.
My answers would be:
Yes, especially if middle pair is in early position.
Yes, you should know this if you've played 1,000 hands or more of microlimit poker.
They'll probably call either, but not for 2 cold - and it will be 2 cold if you decide to C/R a LP bet.