Raising the flop w/overs

[me454555]

I feel like I don't this enough and by enough I mean almost never. This could be a significan't leak in my game but I don't raise the flop w/just overs and a bd draw, usually I'll need at least a gutter to raise the flop. Is this a good time to do it?

Hero is UTG w/AhQc and raises. Sb and BB call

Flop: 7h 5c 4h

Loose passive sb bets out, bb folds, I raise.

Is this a standard raise for you guys w/overs + a bd flush draw? Would you make this raise w/out the bd flush draw?

[EvanJC]

even loose passives try to pick up pots on flops like this sometimes. i think this would be a good spot to raise the flop.

[me454555]

Lets say you don't have the bd draw, is this still a clear raise?

This is not a particularly good raise.

- the LP bet out into the PFR... you're not folding him. Wrong sort of opponent to raise the flop.

- you have last action and the pot is HU, so there is no protection rationale to raising the flop.

Really the only reason to raise this flop is so you can see the river w/out paying a turn.

There may be some merit to this, but OTOH, you're a 3.2:1 dog to make a pair with overs by the river, and this pot is tiny. You're getting 7:1 to peel so you have the odds to hit your 6 outs (assuming they're clean). If you raise, you're only getting 4:1 so you're taking -EV odds when you're drawing.

But more to the point, why fight a loose passive? I peel the flop and fold the turn UI. This LP has you beat 100% of the time.

[RunDownHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
But more to the point, why fight a loose passive? I peel the flop and fold the turn UI. This LP has you beat 100% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]
I also peel this flop and fold the turn UI, although I don't agree that you're beat 100%. However, the times he hasn't paired up he likely has some kind of a draw on a board this coordinated, so even if you river a pair you could be toast. Low boards are good for bluffing the pfr, but a) this board is particularly coordinated, and b) LPs bluff less than other types.

[me454555]

Don't forget my bd draw as well which should give me more equtiy on the flop. The free turn card was a big part of this flop raise which is why I did it against a LP as he's not likely to 3 bet me on the flop and is likely to check to me on the turn.

While I'm cutting my odds on the flop, do you think the free turn card makes up for it? The pot is also 7sb so I wouldn't call it tiny, its definatly decent sized enough for me to want to take some risk in winning it.

[ QUOTE ]
There may be some merit to this, but OTOH, you're a 3.2:1 dog to make a pair with overs by the river, and this pot is tiny. You're getting 7:1 to peel so you have the odds to hit your 6 outs (assuming they're clean). If you raise, you're only getting 4:1 so you're taking -EV odds when you're drawing.

But more to the point, why fight a loose passive? I peel the flop and fold the turn UI. This LP has you beat 100% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is completely skewed thinking. When you have a passive opponent who is going to let you see two streets for a raise you should do so. If it's profitable to pay X to see Y chance of making your hand then you show a greater profit paying 2X for a 2Y chance (your rate of return stays about the same, but the net increases).

If it was an aggressive opponent donking out, or a passive opponent who'll still stop'n'go a blank turn, then you'd just peel, since you'd be paying more but rarely getting more.

This is a simple, correct, raise.

I laid out the numbers, but maybe not the thinking for why I think the odds are bad.

You are 3.2:1 against hitting an overcard by the river.

You are taking 4:1 odds if you raise the flop and villain calls.

On the surface this might seem like you have +EV edge. However, consider that:

- you are assuming clean overs
- he is on an OESD, you are facing a 5th street redraw, or he can have you dead on the turn (but you will call a river bet if you hit)
- some amount of the time (small perhaps, but measurable), the LP will donk the turn or three-bet the flop
- you could be drawing perfect-perfect on the flop, if he flopped two pair

Bottom line, while a raise could be correct against a tight player where there is some fold equity, against a loose passive leading into the preflop raiser (and the BB, by the way), I think the EV isn't there.

Folding is an entirely different argument here (btw: don't). If you're going to take a card off, though, raising will always be better than peeling in this spot.

[RunDownHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're going to take a card off, though, raising will always be better than peeling in this spot.

[/ QUOTE ]
I said I would also peel and fold. Can you respond to the math in Despot's post and explain why its so clearly a raise, or maybe just elaborate beyond "always better?"