Theory (possible SSH mistake) on flop/turn bets and not giving odds

[DCWGaming]

I think I read this in SSH...

The general thought behind the concept is that it sometimes better to put in a raise on the turn instead of the flop as to give worse odds to the drawers, making them make bigger mistakes, and in turn collecting more.

I think i may have found an oversight that makes this incorrect...

For the record, we're going to be using the TOP definition of mistake - any move that you normally wouldnt make if you could see your opponents cards (or something like that).

Example hand:
You're in the BB with 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

UTG (loose passive) limps J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

Button (solid TAG) raises A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

You call, UTG calls

Flop A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

A very safe board to slow play. The gutshot could be out there but 1 bet isnt going to chase him away, so (correct me if im wrong here) SSH would advocate a flop call and a turn raise to give UTG the worst possible odds to draw. A flop check/raise might be supported here as well.



What I think is the oversight though, is that if you bet out, chances are high that the button is going to raise you. This is something that UTG is probably not good enough to realize, and this oversight a big mistake that you can force him to make. While a turn check/raise is one even bad players can often fold.

So if you were to bet out your set, UTG has odds (well, implied odds) to call here for his gutshot. But a thinking player would know that a raise will come behind him, and that the gutshot will cost him at LEAST 2SBs. In this case, its 3.

So what looks like a 9:1 call followed by a raise and a reraise and another 7.5:1 call for a 11.5:1 draw is in fact just one big 5:1 mistake for a 11.5:1 draw that has been stretched out. Because the bets are stretched out, the mistake looks much less severe.

In the end, the same amount of money goes into the middle if you decide to check/call check/raise or bet/raise bet. And he is actually making the same amount of mistakes. But the difference is -

If button has nothing, he regular bets the flop and check/folds the turn. Your turn is missed completely. If you bet out, he wont call, but UTG probably will and you will get some action.

In the example above, if button actually had AQ or AK, you've just trapped UTG and made yourself a money sandwich. You get to have a bet/raise war, UTG will probably see the turn and fold. And you get to pull alot more out of the button than if you waited till the turn.


So has this been discussed before? Have i just discovered something that is common knowledge to everyone already? I do that alot...

[wackjob]

That is not a safe flop to slowplay, unless you mean you know this because you know everyones cards?

[DCWGaming]

Use another example if you want.

But I think when there are only 12 cards (as far as you know) in the deck that could give someone a straight and no flush possibility. A slow play is safe, but not a correct move.

*edit*
Worst case scenario (aside from already being beaten), someone has a gutshot and a backdoor flush, and someone has AQ, giving you 9 outs to lose in a 3 way pot.

Aside from flopping the nuts, it would be very difficult to have that much of a stranglehold on a multiway pot

[kidcolin]

This isn't a safe flop at all. Basically, you've made a scenario where you presupposed that slowplaying was good, then reasoned out why it wasn't. Your conclusion is correct: you shouldn't just call the flop, but mostly because slowplaying is bad here. Either lead out or check-raise.

Also, in this specific example, I think you counted wrong. If you lead out, UTG is only getting 7.5:1 to call. I think you counted the big blind twice, maybe. So his call would be a mistake anyway, especially with the further action that is to be expected.

[kidcolin]

[ QUOTE ]
Aside from flopping the nuts, it would be very difficult to have that much of a stranglehold on a multiway pot

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. That's why you don't slowplay in a multiway pot. You just miss bets. People often have a piece of the flop to continue.

[DCWGaming]

well i'm playing so i cant fish out SSH and get the example they used. But i know it was a hand where someone had a gutshot and they said it would be better to put in a turn raise than a flop raise.

Off the top of my head, I cant think of any situation where someone would have a draw and your odds would be all that much better than my scenario.

[DCWGaming]

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, you've made a scenario where you presupposed that slowplaying was good, then reasoned out why it wasn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to reconstruct the SSH example best I could. I know that the hand was vulnerable in the book example, probably more vulnerable than my example. After my session is over, I'll try to find it.

[wackjob]

For me the reason to fastplay a 2nd or 3rd set is not protection - you are not getting it from your typical player. I want to get in a lot of bets quickly. I know they are going to draw, but many fish are habitual peelers with any draw or any piece. By not getting in that extra 1 or 2 SB on the flop I am missing money when your habitual peeler misses the turn(which they do most of the time) and folds. That 1 or 2 SB that you don't charge because you expect to get a turn raise in is HUGE. There is also the possibility you will get action on the flop and still get a raise in on the turn - donks are your friend.

[DCWGaming]

Just realized I lent out my SSH book...

So uh... Either I completely made up that example and convinced myself I read it, or I read it and the example was wrong.

[waffle]

You are correct, you are forcing the guy with a gutshot to make a mistake in this example. But it only works if you are certain the TAG will raise. If he doesn't raise, then the fish is getting about the right price.

The good thing about facing someone with two bets cold is that they can either fold, giving up their equity, or make an unprofitable call. You usually don't really mind either way. When you bet, hoping the button will raise, he can raise according to plan, or he can fold or call which don't help you all that much.

As far as waiting for the turn, it's been a while since I've read the book, but I'm pretty sure it advocates it in these two spots:

1. When the pot is large enough on the flop that a flop raise still gives people good odds

2. When a safe turn card would substantially increase your equity.

Basically, you're asking about inducing people to make a mistake on a street by calling large bets in increments. The thing about this plan is that it usually does not have much folding equity and it can go wrong if the person does not raise. I would only do it if I had a lot of equity and the pot was small.

I like betting out here, because it sets up a flop 3bet or a turn checkraise.