Clarkmeister definition?

[onthebutton]

I'm kind of new here, have heard this term thrown around. Can anyone enlighten me?

[droolie]

When you are OOP HU on the river and the fourth flush card hits bet out no matter wou have.

[jrz1972]

You're heads-up, out of position on the river. The river card puts four to a flush on the board, but you don't have the flush. According to the Clarkmeister Theorem, you should bet and fold to a raise.

[kapw7]

Or better, when you play against a 2+2er and there is a 4th flush falling on the river and he bets OOP raise him with nothing.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
but you don't have the flush.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isnt part of it.

You bet regardless of whether or not you have a flush.

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
You're heads-up, out of position on the river. The river card puts four to a flush on the board, but you don't have the flush. According to the Clarkmeister Theorem, you should bet and fold to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think that's part of it. Everyone keeps saying it, but nobody has ever been able to show me where Clark says that.

And it was already pointed out that "have the flush" isn't part of the play, either.

[onthebutton]

Nice...thanks. I knew how to do it, I just didn't know the name for it. I'll have to look into this Clarkmeister's Theorem.

[JordanIB]

Why?

[A_C_Slater]

Why does it have to be the river? Can't it be used HU OOP on the turn when a 4th flush card hits? The intent behind this therom I believe is that if the pot has say 5 BB's in it and you bet the opponent almost can't call without a flush at that point. He might call, but will he not have a flush more than 1 in 5 times? Most likely he will not. Of course, the bigger the pot, the greater the EV+ of this play.

[A_C_Slater]

I would like to add that I always use this play when presented the opportunity and the fold ratio is amazing, beyond my expectation.