$30/$60 hand for Andy B.

[Clarkmeister]

" if it's a big King, why so confident it doesn't go with a big diamond?"

It can. But he's only going to have a big diamond 1 in 4 times. So you need a 25% premium on your pot odds to hit your presumed 11 outer. Vehn is getting 8-1 here, a considerable overlay over the 3-1 odds he requires assuming his outs are clean. Add in premium for the 25% of the time his flush outs aren't clean and he's still getting double the price he needs. With that kind of overlay, he can even compensate for the times his opponent does have a flush. Folding with that kind of overlay definitely is a big mistake.

Its just as easy a turn call as the one you made against Beetz with 66 vs his AQ with all the overcards and the flush draw out on the board. The pot is simply way too big when you have a 1 card flush draw and your opponent likely has only a 1 in 4 chance of having you "covered". And even then the set is usually good.

[Vehn]

I think your response makes sense, however, think about what I said in the results post. When he hesistantly called my flop bet basically what he's telling me (or what I thought he was telling me) was that he has a hand that can beat a semibluffing flush draw if two black deuces come. Now when I'm raised on the turn I think my course of action is pretty easy and I have an easy river checkraise. I would have called a river 3-bet also; and just bet out if a 4th dime came on the river instead of my supersuckout card.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
The point is that Chris says he had a solid read.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that after Chris told us this:

[ QUOTE ]
He hesitantly called my flop bet in the "not sure if I should fold or call" way, not the "call or raise" way.

[/ QUOTE ]

that things become much clearer.

But most of the comments were based on his initial description of the hand, which had no such details. Based on the initial post, I still don't think the turn call is automatic.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
I think your response makes sense, however, think about what I said in the results post.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I just responded to MK, I agree w/ calling the raise and your river plan after you gave us the additional info in the results post. My response was based on the responses people were giving to your initial post.

[AceHigh]

[ QUOTE ]
It can. But he's only going to have a big diamond 1 in 4 times.

[/ QUOTE ]

King is King of clubs, so won't that change the numbers to 1 in 2?

[Clarkmeister]

True enough. So you want 4.5-1 instead of 3-1.

8-1 still looks mighty tasty to me.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
" if it's a big King, why so confident it doesn't go with a big diamond?"

It can. But he's only going to have a big diamond 1 in 4 times. So you need a 25% premium on your pot odds to hit your presumed 11 outer. Vehn is getting 8-1 here, a considerable overlay over the 3-1 odds he requires assuming his outs are clean. Add in premium for the 25% of the time his flush outs aren't clean and he's still getting double the price he needs. With that kind of overlay, he can even compensate for the times his opponent does have a flush. Folding with that kind of overlay definitely is a big mistake.


[/ QUOTE ]

OK, so he has 8.75 outs (11 * .75 + 2 * .25) vs. a King. And 10 outs against a small set. For kicks, let's say 9 outs against those two hands. In reality, I think an average opponent is less likely to raise with a non-diamond King, so the situation is probably a little worse than this.

Against those hands, he gets about 4:1 w/ the pot laying him 8:1. So, the EV in those cases is about 20%(9 - most of the times it'll be the diamond and he'll only get one more bet) - 80%(1) = .8.

But he is drawing dead to a flush. In those cases, he'll lose 80%(1 - the times he "misses") + 20% (2 - a little more if he always pays off the raise and pays 3 bets when an eight hits) = -1.2

So, if his opponent has a flush 40% of the time here, this is a break even proposition. If his opponent only has a flush here 25% of the time, this is like a +.3BB situation. Lacking any other info (such as the flop read Vehn makes), I think this turn raise indicates a flush more than 25% of the time.

I did these odds of the top of my head and didn't check anything, so I'm sure something is off, but I don't think anything is outrageously wrong. I just don't agree with you that when opponents raise the turn in this situation that they will have a flush so seldom as to make folding a "big mistake."

[ QUOTE ]
Its just as easy a turn call as the one you made against Beetz with 66 vs his AQ with all the overcards and the flush draw out on the board. The pot is simply way too big when you have a 1 card flush draw and your opponent likely has only a 1 in 4 chance of having you "covered". And even then the set is usually good.

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, no fair bring up old hands of mine to make your point against me. That's cold. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] In that situation, though, I put him squarely on AQ/AK. I can read that kid like a book. There were no As, Ks, or Qs on the board. Three hearts on the flop, fourth on the turn, fifth on the river. I knew he'd bet the whole way with or without a heart. I called him down the whole way, thinking there was a good chance I was in the lead start to finish. I agree that there are similarities, but I don't think it's really the same situation.

[Ulysses]

based on what AceHigh pointed out, the outs against a King are .5(11) + .5(2) = 6.5, not 8.75. Not going to bother revising the derived numbers, but that means that this is a breakeven situation when the opponent has a flush somewhere lower than 40% of the time.

[Andy B]

I think that this is the first time I've ever seen set over set where neither player had his hand on the flop. It made my night. Or was it my afternoon? vehn_'s opponent had suffered a couple of tough beats during this session, and was already steaming. This put him over the edge, though. I thought that vehn_'s play was a little unconventional, but I liked it the more I thought about it. I'll bet an underpair into a pre-flop raiser once in a while, and it seems like I never drag a pot that way. I liked vehn_'s flop bet a hell of a lot more than opponent's call, though. I think that if you're going to play an underpair on a two-tone flop, you should have a card in the trump suit so that your money card doesn't put a possible flush out there. Clarkmeister's analysis is on the money. I don't usually play smallish pairs hoping that I'll hit a flush, though. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Chris Nichelson]

I like the flop bet.

On the turn, there is too much stuff out there that can beat you that a caller could have. You could also easily have him beat. Why not check/call here? I am usually not an advocate of this, but heads up with a large pot with the most obvious and second most obvious draws getting there simultaneously, I would give someone with an underpair or a busted straight draw a chance to bluff at it here.

Calling the turn raise as a 21-1 dog in this spot, with a few questionable flush outs (most of the time the fourth flush card on the board is going to beat you if you if you have an eight high flush draw), in a spot where you could be drawing dead--I just don't get it. If I bet in this spot, I know that I am throwing it away to a raise, so with the pot being big, i am not betting.

The river checkraise is OK I guess, since you do beat most nonflush hands, and somehow you are convinced he doesn't have a flush.

I'm perplexed.