83s

[donger]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The question you need to ask yourself is is flopping a draw that PAYS FOR ITSELF worth it when I flop it 1-8 and the pot offers me 1-7.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have no idea what "pays for itself" means, but the thinking here seems very fuzzy. You are "drawing to a draw" which is not a winning hand. Heck, even the eight-high flush you are hoping to make might not be a winning hand.

Here is an analogous situation. The cutoff and button limp, the small blind completes and I check 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] in the big blind. The flop is 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. It's checked to the cutoff who bets and it folds back to me. The pot is offering me 5:1 and roughly a fifth of the time the turn card will give me a flush draw. If I pick up a flush draw, that will be a profitable situation. So you would recommend calling here since the flush draw will be profitable and I am "getting odds to draw to it"? This really doesn't make sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

By pay for itself all I mean is futher bets are subsidized by your pot equity. So those extra bets are not really a cost so to speak.

Why do we say we need to make up bets when we flop a set. That's because we know the exact odds of hitting a set and it's easy to figure out how many bets we need to make up on each hand.

Now we can do the same thing with flush draws except it's more difficult to figure out the EV since we don't win the hand. We just have to estimate how much we win.

What I do know is that flush draws are profitable in almost every situation. So what do you think the EV of each flush draw is? 1 SB? 2 SB? 5 SB? I'd guess it's around 4 SB. You get a lot of implied odds generally. I just looked in my database and I win about 5 BB with each flush.

Therefore if we win on average 5 BB with each flush. Each draw is worth about 5/3 BB. We are getting 8-1 odds to flop the draw but we win 3.33 SB each time we actually flop a flush draw. For a tidy profit of 1.33 SB.

I'm pretty tired so some of this could be wrong. I'll try and correct any mistakes you see.

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your EV calcs are neglecting the times that:
1) your flush gets there and loses
2) you get strung along with a hand like bottom pair and a BD flush draw.

I also think that in the more marginal scenarios, you need to look at effective odds. Part of the reason you have odds to draw to a flush on the flop is because you called preflop.

I'm going to run a TTH sim on this and post what I find. I'll use 83s, raised pot, BB, 3 other players in the pot.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]

1) your flush gets there and loses

[/ QUOTE ]

This is at least partially taken into account by the 5 BB per flush since that include hands that lose at showdown. It's not a very big consideration.

Krishan

[Peter_rus]

[ QUOTE ]
I am curious whether these are the hands that you expect to be the weakest performers.

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

[ QUOTE ]
1) Did you also defend with any two suited when there was no one else in the pot besides the raiser (it will be heads up) and what is your opinion on defending with them heads up?


[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's quite probably my leak.

[ QUOTE ]
2) As I progress to higher limits, the impact of the rake and the blind structure will become more favorable to looser defense standards, but the increased ability of my opponents will encourage tighter play. Which of these forces, if either, prevails over the other?

[/ QUOTE ]

Players mean more for me.

[ QUOTE ]
3) What is your current opinion about defending with these trashy suited hands as the limits move higher: 10/20, 15/30, 20/40, 30/60?

[/ QUOTE ]

I defend any cards i defend 2-way - 3-way. I do not defend any2 against steal.

[sthief09]

pumping flush draws is so last year [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] but seriously, the problem with ti here is while you'd like some extra money in the pot, you'd HATE HATE HATE to make anyone fold with such a big draw. those big bets when they're drawing, or drawing dead, are a lot more valuable than the half a small bet in equity you gain by building a pot. and when he doesn't 3-bet, you end up with the lead, which is something you don't want. if you miss, you'll have to check and announce that you have a flush draw. if you hit, you'll lose your opportunity to checkraise since there's no guarantee anyone will bet.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
I defend any cards i defend 2-way - 3-way.

[/ QUOTE ]


I think this might be a mistake. while I have nothing to back this up, and am not even sure how to utilize this theory, but there are some hands that play much better 3 way and vice versa. the hand that comes to mind for me is A2o. headsup it is an ok hand to defend with because you can go to showdown on some favorable boards. 3 ways the likelihood that you get to showdown with A high AND it's good are minimal. the other problem is 3-way, if neither player has an A and you flop one, they will both be suspicious that one of the other players has one, and you won't get much action unless you're drawing to 3 outs. I think this probably goes for most of the weaker offsuit aces. when you don't hit, they're no good. when they do hit, you get no action or you find out a few bets later they're no good

[donger]

OK, i ran a simple TTH sim. Calling a raise from the BB with 83s in an average-aggro game with three other players in the pot was -1.05 SB of EV. For compairson, folding your BB is -1 SB. The sim was a 6-handed, PP 5/10 style raked game, with the 6h adviser manning the helm. He plays reasonably well postflop.

This is a computer simulation, but it's close enough to show that calling there getting 7:1 isn't exactly a slam dunk, it's neutral or slightly positive at best.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
OK, i ran a simple TTH sim. Calling a raise from the BB with 83s in an average-aggro game with three other players in the pot was -1.05 SB of EV. For compairson, folding your BB is -1 SB. The sim was a 6-handed, PP 5/10 style raked game, with the 6h adviser manning the helm. He plays reasonably well postflop.

This is a computer simulation, but it's close enough to show that calling there getting 7:1 isn't exactly a slam dunk, it's neutral or slightly positive at best.

[/ QUOTE ]


TTH is awesome. I need to get an updated copy because my disc broke. good work sir. that's probably pretty accurate