A couple of questions

[ajv]

Hi

1. Assume you are getting 6:1 pot odds at flop to call. You are drawing to nut flush. So it is wise to call a bet or bet oneself at least. When it is wise to raise and why? If you raise, you get only 3:1 pot odds. How can it be rational? Any mathematical formulas to clarify the situation?

2. Assume that small stakes preflop hand recommendation chart recommends you to do something if there has not been a raise and you follow the recommendation. The chart has no recommendation, if there is a raise. Assume somebody raises in a later position. a) What should I do? b) What should I do in a otherwise similar situation, if the chart recommends to call, if somebody raises?

I have not read SSHE yet. It is in the mail [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[donkeyradish]

1. Just for example, 5 other players have already called the bet before you. Its a loose game and you know if you raise they will probably all call. You are growing the pot and improving your pot odds at the same time. Another good reason to raise with a flush draw, in late position, is that you can get a 'free card' on the more expensive betting round if everyone checks to you.

2. If someone raises you need to think about what they have, based on their previous actions, what the pot size is, whether a re-raise might be coming, and so on. There isn't really a simple formula.

[playersare]

[ QUOTE ]
small stakes preflop hand recommendation chart

[/ QUOTE ]
that chart is for loose, low-limit B&M games, 6-8 players to the flop (SSH pages 82-83). that is TOO loose and aggressive for even 50c/$1 games online (excluding Pacific Poker). you should instead use the guidelines for "tight" games on SSH pages 80-81, which is actually "normal" for internet low limits. another good set of starting hand charts are in Matthew Hilger's "Internet Texas Hold Em" pages 91-93.

[Rosencrantz1]

[ QUOTE ]

that chart is for loose, low-limit B&M games, 6-8 players to the flop (SSH pages 82-83). that is TOO loose and aggressive for even 50c/$1 games online (excluding Pacific Poker).

[/ QUOTE ]

In my experience (pokerroom .25/.50), the SSHE loose standards play just fine. I've played a bit at .50/1 on pokerroom as well, and have adjusted based on the # of players seeing a flop. In loose .50/1, I haven't had a problem playing the loose starting charts from SSHE.

[KJL]

[ QUOTE ]
Assume you are getting 6:1 pot odds at flop to call. You are drawing to nut flush. So it is wise to call a bet or bet oneself at least. When it is wise to raise and why? If you raise, you get only 3:1 pot odds. How can it be rational? Any mathematical formulas to clarify the situation?

[/ QUOTE ]
Say for instance that you are only getting 5-1 from the pot. If you call it is correct because you have a little more than a 4-1 chance to make you flush draw by the turn. However if your oppenent bets again on the turn, because the bets double, you will only be getting 4-1 for your bet, when you need to be getting about 4.1-1, so it is a slightly incorrect call. Now if you were to raise on the flop getting 5-1 and your oppenent calls, you would be getting only 3-1 from the pot. However, if you know your oppenent will now check to you, instead of betting the turn, you are getting 3-1 on your 2-1 odds to make the flush between the flop and river.

[Pov]

[ QUOTE ]
1. Assume you are getting 6:1 pot odds at flop to call. You are drawing to nut flush. So it is wise to call a bet or bet oneself at least. When it is wise to raise and why? If you raise, you get only 3:1 pot odds. How can it be rational? Any mathematical formulas to clarify the situation?


[/ QUOTE ]

The free card play is one reason, but there is another great reason in a multi-way pot though the concept is not simple: Pot Equity. To make it easier to understand, let's step away from poker and pretend you, me and 3 other people are all going to make a bet. Each of us will put equal amounts of money into a hat. Then you get to roll a die and if it comes up a 5 or a 6 you win all the money in the hat. Think about this situation for a minute and then decide if you would prefer we put a small amount of money in the hat or a large amount?

Clearly you would want as much money going into that hat as possible because you are going to win 1/3 of the time but you're only putting in 1/5 of the money. On the flop against several opponents with a flush draw you're basically in this same scenario. So assuming 3 of your opponents are going to stay in with you a raise is correct even if there were no pot to begin with. The fact that there is already a pot built up is just icing on the cake.

Disclaimer: Clearly your flush will not *always* win if you make it but then again you could also runner runner two pair or trips or even just one pair to win without making your flush - also keep in mind raising may cause some of the other players to fold so you won't always get the necessary callers to make this play profitable for pot equity reasons. However the added benefits of disguising your hand and the free card play make it frequently correct even if this is the case.

[SheridanCat]

The friends and the hat example is an excellent explanation of pot equity. Thanks, pov.

T

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
The friends and the hat example is an excellent explanation of pot equity. Thanks, pov.

T

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, very good illustration.

The OP has made a pretty sophisticated observation: the decision to raise isn't as +EV in % terms as the decision to stay in. It's merely +EV, but that's enough to make it worth doing.

If I offer to toss you a black $100 chip at the table, your best move is to say, "OK, thanks!" If I then follow up by saying that since you took my black chip, I'd like to offer a red $5 chip as well, you shouldn't say, "Oh, but accepting this would be less +EV than accepting that black chip, so I decline." In fact it IS less positive-EV, but it's still positive EV. If I had asked you to choose between the two chips, that would be different, but I didn't. You're not choosing between calling or somehow raising without calling. You're choosing to call, which is really really +EV, and then given that you call you also raise, which is less +EV. But they're both +EV.

OK, I've muddied the waters. Go read pov's post again to undo my damage. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]