Sklansky Theory - making someone pay for a draw

[wmspringer]

Hmm. In limit poker it's obviously correct to put in another bet (since he won't fold either way and you'll win an extra bet 4/5 of the time) but in NL I wonder if it wouldn't be better to make him fold. Gonna work this out as I go along...

You bet $1250 (rounding up a dollar to make the math easier) He calls. Now, four out of 5 times this means you win an extra $1250 and 1 in 5 times you lose an extra $1250, so it would seem this move makes you $3750 over 5 hands.

However....if you were to bet $2000, he would fold (or at least call incorrectly) Assume he folds (otherwise he's making a mistake and you're happy) This means you're eliminating the 1 in 5 chance of losing the pot, which saves you $3,750 over 5 hands.

So it would seem that making the maximum raise he is correct to call has about the same EV as making an oversized raise, assuming that your opponent plays correctly. (If he doesn't play correctly, of course, that changes your preferred move)

Did I make an error anywhere?

[Rah]

His chances of making the flush are 4.5-1.
He may be making a correct call, but those times when he misses his flush you gain one bet while you lose one bet when he makes it.

Since the odds are in your favour, this bet will make you money in the long term, *regardless of how much is in the pot already*.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
now why, according to sklanksy, if you know he has a flush draw, why must you make him pay for it?

your not offering a bet which means by calling he is making a mistake, and he'l never fold, so he's not making a mistake and you do not gain. the only purpose it serves is surely to increse variance by increasing the stakes on a draw.


[/ QUOTE ]
You are thinking about poker in terms of encouraging your opponent to make mistakes. That's an ok accounting system, but you can't neglect your own mistakes. You're making a big mistake if you fail to bet for value. If you make the mistake of not betting, your opponent gains.

Another accounting system to use is money. You win more money on average by putting money in while you are ahead.

[lightw1thoutheat]

in terms of limit-

say if i flop top two on a monotone board with a crowd of 4, and i am first to act, and the button is a solid TAG who was pfr, which makes it less likely that he has a flush, the rest are avg party 2/4 or 3/6 players.

Is it better to check call the flop, assuming that the button will bet and will be called by at least one of the others, and c/r am offsuit turn, thereby decreasing the odds of someone drawing to a flush?

this seems right, but am i talking out of my @55?

by betting and raising the flop, i am only building the pot and giving people correct odds to draw, whereas if i wait til turn, when the bet sizes double and can pull of a c/r, their odds will be incorrect?

am i right or wrong, here, ive been wondering about this for a while.