I still don't understand raising flush draws

[celiboy]

The only book I've read is Matt Hilger's which is decent but does not fully explain raising a flush draw on the flop. I think these are the reasons. Let me know if these are right, if there are more, or whether I do not understand the concept fully.

1. Cleans up your outs. If you have A/9 suited for example, raising could get a better ace out of the hand so that if an ace hits on the turn or river this could now give you top pair

2. You could win the hand outright - unlikely, but a possiblity.

3. Disguises your hand. For most beginners this is not a standard play and when the flush card hits, they will not put you on a flush and will pay you off on later streets.

4. Effectively increases your odds. If you raise and get callers your odds are improving as you are only putting in a fraction into what will now be a bigger pot.

I am uncomfortable raising a flush draw because to me it is incongruent with a fundamental rule of poker. Bet/raise when you feel you have the best hand and fold when you think you are behind unless getting proper pot odds. We are raising with what is the worst hand at the moment so it's a tough concept to grasp.

[MediaPA]

I'm not going to get into it, because I'm a pretty terrible limit player. However, here's something else that raising does early.

A raise on the flop can sometimes buy you the turn if you have position. If people check the turn to you when you haven't made a hand, then you've won to me. Seeing the river for 2 versus 4. Just wanted to throw something else in there.

[ QUOTE ]
We are raising with what is the worst hand at the moment so it's a tough concept to grasp.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have to stop thinking in terms of who has the best hand at the moment. What's more important is the odds of you winning the hand after all the cards have been dealt. If you play a little pot-limit Omaha, it will help you get rid of that mentality very fast.

You have to consider your pot equity (the percentage of the time you expect to win the hand compared to the number of players still in). For example, you have the nut flush draw and there are 4 other players in the pot. You have a 2-1 chance (or 35%) of hitting the flush on the turn or river. If there are 4 other players, that means each player has a 20% average chance of winning. Since you have this equity advantage, you want to get as much money in the pot as possible.

In Roy Cooke's excellent book Real Poker 2, he explains it this way: Volume x Equity = Profit. Volume meaning the size of the pot, and equity meaning the chance you will win the pot.

[GrunchCan]

You can have the best of it without having the best hand at the moment. Think about this for a while.

Say you have Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] in late position

The flop is 3 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] and someone bets and there are a couple of callers.

The best hand so far is probably 1 pair so you are behind.

But -

Any spade (9 cards) or non-spade K/Q (4 cards) very probably puts you ahead. And any non-spade A/10 (6 more cards) gives you additional draws. With so many cards you'd be happy to see a raise is worth it.

And, even if you draw a blank you bought a chance of getting to see the river for free, as many players will check to the raiser.

[GrunchCan]

[ QUOTE ]
With so many cards you'd be happy to see a raise is worth it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're on the right track here, but you've glossed over the fundamental result. You need to be able to quantify in what way a raise is 'worth it', and in fact specifically by how much. Otherwise you'll be making these raises in spots where it isn't worth it, even though it looks similar to cases where it is.

[Jordan Olsommer]

[ QUOTE ]

I am uncomfortable raising a flush draw because to me it is incongruent with a fundamental rule of poker. Bet/raise when you feel you have the best hand and fold when you think you are behind unless getting proper pot odds. We are raising with what is the worst hand at the moment so it's a tough concept to grasp.

[/ QUOTE ]

The distinction between "made hand" and "drawing hand" is completey nominal. What matters is how likely you are to win the hand (either to win at the showdown or by getting everyone to fold). A good example you may have seen is from the 2004 WSOP when Greg Raymer and Mike Matusow butted heads - Matusow had top pair with a pair of 9s and a 7 kicker, and Raymer had a flush draw with two live overcards. There Matusow had the "best hand" at the moment (the made hand) but Raymer was actually a favorite to win. You have to get your money in in these spots if you want to maximize your profits (as an aside, getting your money in with a drawing hand, even if it's a favorite, is great for future profits, since many people will see that and incorrectly assume you're some kind of donk who puts his money in with "nothing but a draw"). Another good example is in Phil Hellmuth's book "Bad Beats and Lucky Draws" (I think it's available for like $5 on amazon in the bargain bin or whatever - not a terribly wonderful book, but it's worth five bucks), where he describes an Omaha hand where the person in question had the stone cold nuts on fourth street but, because of the other players' hands, there was not a single card that could come on fifth street that wouldn't give someone a better hand - every card in the deck was a loser for him. I don't know about you, but I really wouldn't want to put in much money in that situation [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

Now you would do well to ask about the (majority of) cases where you have a flush draw yet you're not the favorite to win the hand - why bet then? Firstly, there are times when it is mathetmatically correct to bet your flush draw, even though you are certain you don't have the best hand - it will be correct to bet because you will get so many callers that your bet serves to put an amount of money in the pot disproportionate to your chances of winning. You can look at it this way: say you're playing $1/$2 and you hypnotize the cardroom manager into reflexively tossing a bundle of $100 bills into the pot every time you bet on the flop - you'd start betting the flop with some pretty awful hands that barely had a chance to win, no? I know I would, because when you do finally get those running deuces or whatever you need to win, the payoff will be enormous.

That's exactly what you're doing when you bet a flush draw for value (eg against four opponents) - you're 2-to-1 to win, but every bet you make (if you know everyone will call) adds 4 more bets to the pot (so you're getting 4-to-1 on your money for each flop bet).

Also, there's the chance for a free card (check behind your opponents when they check to you to see the next card for free - you must be in last position for this) or to set up a semibluffing opportunity on fourth street, but the "betting flush draws for value" concept is probably the one you're having the most trouble with, seeing as how it is quite counterintuitive at first.

Hope that helps

[playersare]

you're right in terms of that it's not technically the best strategy to ALWAYS raise flush draws (and open-ended straight draws) after the flop on EVERY instance. factors like your position to the button, your position to a pre-flop raiser (if applicable), whether you're drawing to the nuts, how many potential callers are there behind you.

in late position, raise draws on the flop in hopes of getting a "free card". meaning, you spend an extra 1/2 BB on third street and there's a good chance that the flop bettor will check the turn, and you can check through to the river if you don't hit. you also try and milk extra bets from other callers to increase your expectation when you win, because people are less likely to call down an extra full BB on the turn.

in early position, especially to the left of a pre-flop raiser and with multiple players behind you, you might be more inclined to just call, and then accumulate overcalls around the table. raising before others have acted may be a risk for a re-raise, possibly indicating a stronger draw, a flopped set or a straight.

it's probably true that when you're drawing to a hand when others already have something made, the chances of you winning are roughly the same whether you raise the flop or not. but the strategies outlined in Hilger's and many other limit hold em books will give you many small edges, all of which should be profitable in the long run.

[4_2_it]

The conversation so far has centered around limit. In NL, it is important to look at stack sizes and calculate your implied odds. If can push all in for 100bb when your card hits and get called 25% of the time, it is + EV. Think about that.

This is also the reason that most NL players will play any two pocket pairs (when stacks are 50bb or higher) for a 5bb raise or less. Hittign your set and stacking someone for 100bb makes it worth missing 6 out of 7 flops.