ADVICE SEEKED!

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
so when theres a capped flop with PASSIVE people comprising the majority of those in the hand, you must give a little more credit to their hands than you would in the game you describe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have given somebody more credit if they hadn't all checked the turn. It's as if all you checkers think players are going to jam and jam and jam with their flush draw on the flop and then suddenly decided not to bet when they actually make their flush on the turn.

When it gets checked on the turn, it's unlikely anybody has a flush. You've got bottom set. Bet your damn hand. Maybe one of the other posters are in the pot and will actually laydown middle or top set the way they were reccomending folding bottom set on an unimproved river.

[JayKon]

My initial thought was to bet, Why, because I may very well have the best hand and I want to know if there are multiple good hands out there. Maybe there is only small clubs and they will fold.

I still like the bet option. However, some of the reasoning behind the check option sounds smart and not necessarly weak.

I wonder what Mason thinks?

[UTGunner]

How can you not bet? You are getting great odds from the callers against their flush draws. If the flush comes, you lose a bet. If it doesn't you gain a bunch of bets - and this outcome is 3 times more likely. This is related to this John Shaft thread

[astroglide]

given a 5-way cap on a ragged 2flush flop, it is not irrational to assume that when the 3flush turns that some people have MADE FLUSHES, not flush draws.

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so when theres a capped flop with PASSIVE people comprising the majority of those in the hand, you must give a little more credit to their hands than you would in the game you describe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have given somebody more credit if they hadn't all checked the turn. It's as if all you checkers think players are going to jam and jam and jam with their flush draw on the flop and then suddenly decided not to bet when they actually make their flush on the turn.

When it gets checked on the turn, it's unlikely anybody has a flush. You've got bottom set. Bet your damn hand. Maybe one of the other posters are in the pot and will actually laydown middle or top set the way they were reccomending folding bottom set on an unimproved river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it reasonable to think a made nut flush would check here??? i think so because he'd expect a bet for sure. further, i would only say to fold the river unimproved for a bet a raise and an overcall...and even THEN it MAY be worth the call but highly unlikely you have the best hand here in that case.

the pot is made interesting by the whole field checking but i think a check here is still a good idea but, as we can see by all this discussion, its clearly a close decision.

-Barron

[Senor Choppy]

I don't think I've ever played in a game in my life where betting would be correct here, from .50/1 online to 20/40 b&m. It's hard to imagine a scenario where 8 people limp preflop, then suddently put in 5 bets on a flop this ragged without either a flush draw or a one of the two possible sets.

The only way a bet is correct is if you get all bigger flush draws to fold by betting, but I doubt by the flop action that this is going to happen.

You protect nothing by betting, the only thing that can happen is you can open yourself up to putting in another $100 with a hand that might be almost dead.

I think it's a miracle your 3s were good here, even if it's CA.

[MRBAA]

Put all the posters in this thread (with the possible exception fo David Steele) at a table with Dynasty and I know who I'm betting on to get the money .

[Senor Choppy]

Those that advocate betting the turn here might be the greatest 10/20 players of all time, but they're still wrong IMO.

You don't protect your hand by betting here. If someone has any kind of a draw they aren't going anywhere. The worst draw that could hurt your hand would be a gutshot and they're still calling regardless of what you do considering the size of the pot and the fact that they put in 5 bets on the flop without it. It's great to charge them for this if you have the best hand, but that isn't obvious here.

By betting you also open yourself up to who knows how many more bets if you're caught between two flushes or a flush and someone with a set that feels like gambling. And as far as falling back on 10 outs, most of the cards that pair the board are either in someone else's hand or make someone a better full house, (unless you really are playing against entirely random opponents, and in this case, hands from that type of game really have no reason for being posted here).

If we look only at the odds of your hand being the best based on none of the betting, but on the probability of a certain hand being randomly dealt...The odds of one of the 7 other players being dealt tt, 88, or 55 are around 1/360. The odds of one of the other 7 being dealt two clubs is 1/30. The combined odds when you apply both possibilities to all 7 players is 105/360. So greater than 1 in 4 times you won't have the best hand here (assuming tt and a flush draw wouldn't fold on the flop). And this assumes that all random hands are equally likely to see a flop, (when we know that with 8 people taking a flop it's a lot more likely that they are playing pairs or suited cards), and that people putting in 5 bets on a flop doesn't increase the likelihood of them holding one of these hands.

Does the fact that everyone checked decrease the likelihood of someone having the flush? I can't imagine that the same people that are putting in 5 bets with worse than bottom set wouldn't also go for check-raises in situations where it wasn't warranted.

I think it's very easy to tell someone to bet this hand given the outcome. In most situations, (the ones that don't get posted to 2+2 because it seems obvious that you're losing to a flush, a set, or both, and you actually are), this is just bad advice.

[astroglide]

it's very easy to sound correct when the results back you up and your recommendation is more manly. however, the fact remains that it was a bunk 2flush flop, it got capped, and the 3flush showed up on the river. under ordinary circumstances this indicates you are beaten and drawing thin.

[JohnnyF]

Bet the turn here, and IMO it is not even close. You are leaving all sorts of bets on the table when it looks like you're ahead (ie - they all checked!). You are getting at a couple of big bets when hands with singleton big flush cards call, and you still have outs on the river if behind. I would say that in a limit game (where you are "seeking" out a BB an hour), you are looking at a huge mistake by checking here.

Best of luck, JohnnyF