Good Draw?

[Jorge10]

I got 10 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]9 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]8 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]6 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] in middle position. Pretty passive game, a lot of limping and a lot of one guy bets the flop and no one really challenges him. .25-.50 Pot Limit Omaha. I got 50 bucks same as most of the table.

Preflop: 3 calls when it gets to me, I call, Villan pots it to 3, small blind calls, 2 of the original callers before me call everyone else folds, I call.

Flop:7 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]5 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img](Pot Size: 16)

First two guys check to me, I pot it for 16, Villan moves all in, everyone folds to me, I call.

Thoughts?

Edit: Ill post results later.

-Thanks

[RickyG]

The two most reasonable hands that I can see him doing this with are KKxx and AAxx suited in diamonds.

If the KK is not accompanied with diamond draw higher than yours, you are a very slight favorite to win, Most likely scenario IMO
if he does have higher diamonds (which will be rare, but will occasionally happen) you are around 30-70, slightly -ev
if he has AAxx suited in diamonds, you have >33% chance to win the hamd
If he is a fool with a bare AA, you are a 2-1 favorite.

Overall, calling his all in is the clear +EV decision over folding. unless you could 100% put him on KK with higher diamonds, which you cannot. You made the right call.

[Jorge10]

Great Reply, Thanks.

Well he had K [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]8 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

He actually had smaller diamonds and a set of Kings I ended up losing the hand. I was just wondering if it was a good shove considering he could have AA with nut diamonds.

[gmunny]

I agree with the above comments about calling the allin.

What I am not sure I agree with is betting the pot on the flop before his all-in re-raise. With a decent pot and this type of board, I like to try to control the pots size depending on what I have as "nut" outs. Since I don't have the flush "nut" outs, i would check and call the flop bet with a wrap straight draw. The other thing that complicates it is there are 2 others that act after the villan and any of those guys could also have the nut flush draw and or wraps as well. Doubt if they would have checked a lower set on flop, but I've seen people do that too. If there were no flush draw, then I have good nut outs and would prob. bet the pot.

My motto is that if you are going to build a pot, build one that you will probably win if you hit. I'm not saying if the flush card comes you won't be good, but I've double through many folks that commit their stack on non-nut hands. Anyways, that's my .02.
G$

[joewatch]

[ QUOTE ]

What I am not sure I agree with is betting the pot on the flop before his all-in re-raise. With a decent pot and this type of board, I like to try to control the pots size depending on what I have as "nut" outs. Since I don't have the flush "nut" outs, i would check and call the flop bet with a wrap straight draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agee with this at all. The weaker your flush draw is, the more aggressive you have to play it. See Reuben & Ciaffone's chapter in PL+NL Poker.

[ QUOTE ]
The other thing that complicates it is there are 2 others that act after the villan and any of those guys could also have the nut flush draw and or wraps as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly, these are the hands you want to fold with a big check-raise.

[gmunny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What I am not sure I agree with is betting the pot on the flop before his all-in re-raise. With a decent pot and this type of board, I like to try to control the pots size depending on what I have as "nut" outs. Since I don't have the flush "nut" outs, i would check and call the flop bet with a wrap straight draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agee with this at all. The weaker your flush draw is, the more aggressive you have to play it. See Reuben & Ciaffone's chapter in PL+NL Poker.

[ QUOTE ]
The other thing that complicates it is there are 2 others that act after the villan and any of those guys could also have the nut flush draw and or wraps as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly, these are the hands you want to fold with a big check-raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay. I just got home an re-read the draw chapter. This is what it says related to a straight flush draw or a similar good drawing hand, "..i am much more likely to prefer a raise to a call when I have a good drawing hand, but am not hitting to the nuts...I can never be sure if my flush is good when it comes. My tendancy is to whack my opponent with a big raise and hope he folds. If he goes with me, I know my hand has plenty of outs.."

So you either want to take the pot down with the bet/raise or get your money in the middle on the flop. If you just check and call and a flush card comes, you may be beat for sure and you either fold and forfeit the pot or call of the rest of your stack anyway. Is this what he means?

Let me ask another question, what if the draw was weaker, say only the same flush draw and maybe only a outside straight draw (no wrap/redraw). Would you still pot it and where do you draw the line? Thanks,
G$

[sahaguje]

[ QUOTE ]

What I am not sure I agree with is betting the pot on the flop before his all-in re-raise. With a decent pot and this type of board, I like to try to control the pots size depending on what I have as "nut" outs. Since I don't have the flush "nut" outs, i would check and call the flop bet with a wrap straight draw. G$

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree here. The problem is that against a player who knows what he is doing, you cannot just check-call then check-fold that 48$ for 34$ if a diamond hits. Since he has position on you, when you check a flushed board on turn, you accept giving him a free card, while he had bet the flop. I hope you wouldnt do that with the nut flush at a 50$ table. So if a flush card hits and you check, he can confidently bet with anything. And he can have a lot of hands, since he bet the flop after everybody has checked. So you are giving up way too much by just check-calling.
But you might say that is is the same problem if you bet and he just calls. That is totally true : I think betting here is clearly a bad option.

With that good a position, I would check-raise most of the time here. I have hit a very good draw, but a lot of non nuts outs, so what I want is to be all-in head's up on the flop OR to fold if I see two other players are interested in that flop, since that would mean some of my outs are dead. And here the situation is perfect : if you check and he bets, you can see what your opponents do before commiting any money. If someone calls the villain's bet, you fold (or sometimes call, if you think you have very good implied odds if you make your straight, but I would really need a good reason) ; and if it is folded to you, you can confidently raise all-in : there is a good chance your straight and/or flush outs are live.

To sum up, IMO the only good way to play non nut monster draws (I mean by that draws that are favorite over a set with two cards to come) is to find a way to gain that crucial information : how many opponents will I face ? If the answer is "just one", you should try to go all-in on flop or at least avoid to find yourself OOP on turn with a stack close to or bigger than the pot. If it is "more than one", you dont belong to the hand ; wait for a nut draw.

++

sahaguje

[Phishy McFish]

[ QUOTE ]
unless you could 100% put him on KK with higher diamonds, which you cannot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vizzini: Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.

[joewatch]

Yep, easy call.

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, easy call.

[/ QUOTE ]