Cold calling a turn raise with straight-flush draw on a paired board ?

[Shillx]

Why did you not raise the river? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Jaran]

[ QUOTE ]
Why did you not raise the river? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

[DavidC]

PF: I like the limp preflop, as long as there's commonly 5 people to the flop for one bet.

---

F: In order to find out how often someone will have the queen you need to use a poisson distribution. Though I'm not sure how to do that.

This hand is showing me how little I know about poker math, in terms of evaluating the semi-bluff too. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Um, if you were to be semibluffing a gutshot here, or some other hand where you could fold to a raise, then you want ot look at a few possibilities:

A) chance you get them to fold
B) chance they call with a hand that will fold you on the next street
C) chance that you will improve on the next street

You want to bet if: A+BC > bet/pot, I think.

In the circumstance that we find ourselves in, though, we will be calling a raise. Therefore:

a) chance you will get them to fold
b) chance they will call and be able to fold you on the next street
c) chance that you improve on next street
d) chance that you are raised
e) cost of them raising (in this case: 0.66 bets is the absolute "antivalue" that you achieve in EV when you're raised, but I'm not sure if I should use this number or if I should use, instead, the difference between check-calling and bet-calling as the value for this number... probably the latter)

I think that we want to bet here if: A+BC-DE > bet/pot.

The "A" value in these formulas depends heavily on the value in the poisson distribution (how often they'll have a Q or I guess even how often they'll have a 4).

---

T: This is cool. This is so incredibly cool that I'll reply to this post twice.

Anyways: There's some chance that MP has a 4, but it's more likely that he has either a pocket pair or a Q. 99 is less likely for him to hold than any other pair because of the 9 hitting the turn. Also, it's possible that anyone has 44, but not likely because of course there's only 2 left. BB has a huge range of hands A4-42 that include a 4 in them, but he could also have q4,94, or 99, that you would be drawing dead against. MP2 is unlikely to three-bet here without a real crushing hand, and he probably doesn't have it, since the BB is showing such strength already.

Therefore you're getting 4:1 on with a flush draw that has probably 8 outs, but maybe 7, as well as a straight draw that has between 3 outs and 6 outs (because we have no way of knowing what kicker BB has with his 4, and we can bail if the 9 pairs up and gives us our flush). This leaves us with 15 outs gross, less whatever our chances are of drawing dead, as well as less whatever our chances are of hitting a tainted out. I'd say you have a lot of room left to call.

Please note that while I said that you should bet if x>y, your bankroll as well as personal risk tolerance will tell you how close you want to get to x=y.

---

R: I'm replying to this message twice. Seeing the action has spoiled my objectivity, but I'd still like to talk about it.

::grunch::

pre-flop - fine

flop - you've got a flush draw but a paired flop. I see no reason to go crazy here. The check/call looks good.

turn - you're looking at calling 2 bets to win 7 (8 if MP2 doesn't fold) and possibly more since you're not closing the action. However, you've got a gazillion outs between the straight and flush draws, so I like the straight call here (and hope MP2 doesn't 3-bet).

river - you've got to raise here. I don't see BB having KK/QQ, unless you know him to limp in with those hands. Since he just checked, he could literally have anything, and I'd expect to see trip 4's here far more often than I'd see a full house.

[RatFink]

If you were afraid of the full house you shouldn't have called the turn hoping to catch your straight or flush.

If you called the turn hoping to catch your straight or flush, then you can't be afraid of the full house and need to raise the river.

Either pick optimisim or pessimism and then be consistent.

Well I expected the 3rd player to call so I would win the same 1 bet if there were no full house and not lose 2 more bets against a full house.
Now I have to read the long reply on Poisson [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[DavidC]

If you're playing vs experts, from the turn forward:

They're both putting you on a flush draw. MP2 calls the BB just to keep him honest I guess, not sure what's going on there, but when the flush card hits, if BB has a 4 he'll check-call the river and MP2 will fold when you bet, because the chance of him being ahead of both of you is really rotten, and he's not closing the action.

It's therefore really neat that you happen to have a straight draw here too, or else the river would be really easy to play: if you hit your flush and BB bets, call, because he knows you have the flush.

If you hit your straight, though, it's more interesting; they think you missed your flush. I'm not sure what to do in the case of hitting a T (just fold, because you're not closing the action and you have to beat two players?), or in the case of hitting the K...

... this is where it sucks that I got to see the river action.

... If MP2 is a good player who can read you on a flush draw, when you call on a K hitting the board, he's going to be very suspicious. He'll probably fold anything other than KQ, thinking you hit top pair with KTs flush draw or something, again, he'll have to lay down his Q, because he's got to beat two players, which may not happen very often (although this may be overly conservative, since he only has to win something like 8% of the time). At the same time BB is betting into MP2, expecting you to fold. Therefore you can go ahead and raise BB, and he'll have to pay you off. If you're three-bet, I probably call it rather than cap it. I'm pretty weak on this part of theory though (when to cap vs when to call the threebet)...

Because people who three-bet the river can count on being called almost all the time, it would make sense that people would commonly three-bet without the nuts, and that therefore you dont' have to have the nuts to cap it, since you'll almost always get called by any hand that three-bet. I'm not sure of the validity of this theory, but if it's true, then I have to start capping the river more. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

---

If you're playing against a bunch of 1/2 donks, then I guess just raise the river because mp2 has something that he wants to call with anyways and bb will pay? I guess go ahead and cap it too.

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
7:2 with 14 outs

[/ QUOTE ]

If MP2 folds all the time. If he folds 25% of the time, it's 7.75:1.

Not sure what to think if MP2 reraises though.

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
If you were afraid of the full house you shouldn't have called the turn hoping to catch your straight or flush.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think that this is true in principal.

Imagine that the pot was 10,000,000 BB on the turn, and there was a 99% chance that you were drawing dead. Would you still draw? Yes. If you hit, would you raise the river or call, assuming you had no folding equity? You'd call again, right? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]

Now I have to read the long reply on Poisson [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Baha! I strike again!

Edit: for more on semibluffing, see either HPFAP or TOP, or both. This is just my best memory of a hazy subject.