QT suited, raised and reraised behind me

[feelixthegreek]

Good analysis, although I wonder if it takes into account how many marginal flops we're going to end up playing, such as top pair/middle pair/back door flush/back door straight-type hands.

Folding or seeing a flop depends heavily on a) what you anticipate post-flop play to be like (i.e. reads), and b) how you assess your own postflop playing abilities.

[ihardlyknowher]

[ QUOTE ]
So, you think the analysis is reasonable? and the conclusion as well?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes sir.

[mtdoak]

With no reads on the preflop 3 bettor.....probably an easy fold. I don't want this hand in a 3 handed pot, esp with such strength shown. Now, if it were going to be 5 handed fo sure. ...

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
To make the figuring simple lets see if we can justify this by the flush alone.

[/ QUOTE ]
Here's the long and short of it. If you can only win with a flush, you'll make a flush about 1 in 25 times. Which means you'd need to make up 96sbs when you win to account for the times you don't. There's no way that playing just for a flush is good call when you know you're putting in 4 bets PF.

The good news is that QTs has decent straight and some high card value. If we do H&C analysis of QTs against 4 random hands, QTs has 29% equity. Even though you'll be out of position and won't win 29% of your hands, you don't need many callers to make limping a +EV play.

The problem with it coming back to you for 2 more bets is that someone probably has a big pair. If we change our H&C to QTs vs 3 random hands and one hand w/ QQ or higher, then your equity plunges to 14% - and you'll actually win a lot less than 14% since you're going to fold a lot of hands that might have runnered a winner.

Unless you're pretty sure nobody has a big pair, this a pretty easy fold.

[ckessel]

6-handed, I end up calling preflop. I'm most assuredly dominated, but I'll win more than 1/6 with that hand. And with the pot so bloated preflop, if you hit your hand it'll make a mint.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
If you can only win with a flush, you'll make a flush about 1 in 25 times.

[/ QUOTE ]

With any two suited you're 15:1 to make a flush by the river (it happens about 6.4% of the time).

Rob

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
With any two suited you're 15:1 to make a flush by the river (it happens about 6.4% of the time).


[/ QUOTE ]
If we factor out runner-runners, then you make a flush about 4.5% of the time. If we then arbirarily say that .5% of the time you make Q-high flush but lose anyway, it seems like 4% is not a bad working number.

Incidentally, even if we say you always go to the river and you win 6.4% of your hands, you'd have to recover 56sbs when you won, which ain't gonna happen.

[Malcom Reynolds]

I like folding preflop, without reads on the bettors.

If the decision is in the preflop betting, you shouldn't show any of the postflop action, it won't help the discussion and might add some results based comments.

[ihardlyknowher]

[ QUOTE ]
If we then arbirarily say that .5% of the time you make Q-high flush but lose anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

Arbitrarily, indeed. This could be greatest overestimation in the history of mankind (irony intended).

Also, equity calculations have little merit here. If you hit a OESD or flush draw, you continue and ram the flop b/c you now have a +EV situation. If not, you fold.

That is the beauty of implied odds.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Arbitrarily, indeed. This could be greatest overestimation in the history of mankind (irony intended).


[/ QUOTE ]
So what arbitrary number would you pick here? With this hand being 3-bet, how often would you say you make your flush but lose to either two bigger clubs, or a 4-club board and a bigger club in someone's hand, or a FH? I realize 1 in 200 is high, but what number is good?

[ QUOTE ]
Also, equity calculations have little merit here. If you hit a OESD or flush draw, you continue and ram the flop b/c you now have a +EV situation. If not, you fold.


[/ QUOTE ]
This is absolutely not true.

First off, it's handy to know the difference in your equity when your opponent holds a high-pair (likely here) and when he doesn't. One of the reasons QTs is a decent hand is because of it's high-card value. With a 3-bet, virtually all of that high-card value disappears, which is roughly half the value of QTs.

Second, your equity gives you some kind of feel for how often you're going to like your hand. In the case here, say you have 14% equity. How often are you going to win the hand? I know it's somewhere south of 14%, probably around 10%. Based on that I can then roughly calculate how much implied odds you need to justify your call. If you're paying 4 sb PF and will win 10% of the time, you're going to need to collect 18bb to break even.
[ QUOTE ]
That is the beauty of implied odds.

[/ QUOTE ]
The beauty of implied odds is that so many otherwise good players drastically overestimate them.