|
|
#1
03-10-2005, 03:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
A hypothesis-Flush draws in LHE against passives
I've come up with an idea/hypothesis that I have no way of testing. But I think it is interesting nonetheless.
<font color="green">My hypothesis is that not being the FIRST aggressor on the flop with a flush draw will save us money by letting us get free cards when our opponents don't want to bet either.</font> If we ALWAYS bet our flush draw into the field, we'll NEVER receive a free card. But if we wait till someone else bets the flop, we still get to pump our flush draw. I'm not sure how anyone can quantify how often we'll get a free turn card, but it's definitely not a rare occurence. 
|
|
#2
03-10-2005, 03:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A hypothesis-Flush draws in LHE against passives
[ QUOTE ]
I've come up with an idea/hypothesis that I have no way of testing. But I think it is interesting nonetheless. <font color="green">My hypothesis is that not being the FIRST aggressor on the flop with a flush draw will save us money by letting us get free cards when our opponents don't want to bet either.</font> If we ALWAYS bet our flush draw into the field, we'll NEVER receive a free card. But if we wait till someone else bets the flop, we still get to pump our flush draw. I'm not sure how anyone can quantify how often we'll get a free turn card, but it's definitely not a rare occurence. [/ QUOTE ] Disagree. You make money by getting bets in on the flop. If you check the flop and it's checked around, you've cost yourself more than you gain by getting a free card. If your argument is that you check, because no matter what happens, you gain (it's checked around - you get a free card; it gets bet - you raise) I still disagree because depending on where the bet comes from, you may be knocking out players by making them face 2 bets cold.
|
|
#3
03-10-2005, 03:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A hypothesis-Flush draws in LHE against passives
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I've come up with an idea/hypothesis that I have no way of testing. But I think it is interesting nonetheless. <font color="green">My hypothesis is that not being the FIRST aggressor on the flop with a flush draw will save us money by letting us get free cards when our opponents don't want to bet either.</font> If we ALWAYS bet our flush draw into the field, we'll NEVER receive a free card. But if we wait till someone else bets the flop, we still get to pump our flush draw. I'm not sure how anyone can quantify how often we'll get a free turn card, but it's definitely not a rare occurence. [/ QUOTE ] Disagree. You make money by getting bets in on the flop. If you check the flop and it's checked around, you've cost yourself more than you gain by getting a free card. If your argument is that you check, because no matter what happens, you gain (it's checked around - you get a free card; it gets bet - you raise) I still disagree because depending on where the bet comes from, you may be knocking out players by making them face 2 bets cold. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think the point about knocking people out is valid, since we know already where the bet came from, and who is left to act, and who has already called. Besides, you can make the same argument against betting out.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
