Raising with a Flush on the End

centja1 · #1 07-07-2005, 12:24 PM

Here is a hand I played on AP the other day. No particular reads on villain at the time since this was on my first orbit at the table.

I worked out some quick and dirty math and I'm pretty confident that raising with the second nut flush on the end is a positive EV play. I simply called his check raise on the turn because I wanted Villain to bet again on the river if he was bluffing.

My question is where is the dividing EV line between calling and raising on the end with a flush and could anyone who is well versed in EV math post how you come up with this answer? I figured that raising with the queen high flush if he always called was positive EV, but wasn't quite sure how to take into a account the times he is bluffing or will re-raise, which i figure is a disaster for a queen high flush and even a large percentage of the time for the king high flush.

Anyway, I'm very interested if anyone has some insight to share.

Absolute Poker 0.50/1 Hold'em (8 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is Button with 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
1 fold, UTG+1 calls, MP1 calls, 1 fold, CO calls, Hero calls, 1 fold, BB : Villain checks.

Flop: (5.50 SB) 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (5 players)
Villain checks, UTG+1 checks, MP1 checks, CO checks, Hero bets, Villain calls, UTG+1 folds, MP1 folds, CO folds.

Turn: (3.75 BB) 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players)
Villain checks, Hero bets, Villain raises, Hero calls.

River: (7.25 BB) T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
Villain bets, Hero ???.

Entity · #2 07-07-2005, 12:25 PM

1) .5/1 goes in micros.
2) 3-bet the turn. Call a cap.

Rob

Clarkmeister · #3 07-07-2005, 12:29 PM

3-bet the turn. Failing that, raise the river.

centja1 · #4 07-07-2005, 12:32 PM

Is there no merit to calling the turn and allowing villain to bluff one more big bet on the river and then raise?

Entity · #5 07-07-2005, 12:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Is there no merit to calling the turn and allowing villain to bluff one more big bet on the river and then raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, because usually he's not bluffing. If he's bluffing it's a great line, but usually he has 2pr or a smaller flush and you're missing bets against those hands in general. Also, when a [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] falls, you're killing the action you'll get unless he has the A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], at which point you've gotten less money into the pot when ahead and more in when behind.

Rob

Clarkmeister · #6 07-07-2005, 12:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Is there no merit to calling the turn and allowing villain to bluff one more big bet on the river and then raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, there's merit to that.

Clarkmeister · #7 07-07-2005, 12:43 PM

It's not as bad as you make it out. But I aree that raising the turn is superior.

Entity · #8 07-07-2005, 12:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It's not as bad as you make it out. But I aree that raising the turn is superior.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said it was terrible, I just think that in general you'll be faced with people who have worse hands willing to go extra bets on the turn more often than people who are trying to bluff-checkraise you.

Rob

RatFink · #9 07-07-2005, 12:45 PM

If you 3-bet and call a cap, he still bets on the river which you can call.

If you 3-bet and he calls, you bet the river when he checks.

If you call the turn raise and he bets the river and you raise, what do you do when he 3-bets because you showed weakness on the turn.

3-betting the turn makes it easier to play for me.

W. Deranged · #10 07-07-2005, 12:48 PM

You have to basically weigh the following two probabilities:

Prob. A: Villain is bluffing, will bluff the river, and fold to a turn raise.

Prob. B: Villain has a solid but not spectacular hand, which he would call down with but may not lead the river.

Prob. C: Villain is drawing to a big heart (the A), in which case he will call a turn raise but not lead the river and not call a river bet.

In case A, you gain a bet by calling the turn and raising the river. In cases B and C, you gain a bet by raising the turn immediately.

In the other clear cases, the two will have similar outcomes; if your opponent does have a flush, he will likely lead the river and call a river raise if you call the turn, or call down a turn raise and a river bet if you raise the turn. So that's a push. There are other situations to consider but I think the two above are clearly the drivers.

So, the decision comes down to which you think is more likely: your opponent bluffing all the way down or your opponent checking the river if you call the turn.

This is pretty read dependent. Against a really laggy opponent, maybe you could argue that it's more likely he's bluffing than raising a marginal hand he'll check on the river. Against standard opponents, it's unrealistic to expect the check-raise, lead bluff sequence all that often. It will generally be much more likely your opponent is raising a decent low flush or non-flush hand or getting overly aggressive with the nut draw.