Roy West's Poker Insight-Post Flop Play

You're in a pot in ANY type of hold game-low limit, meduim, no limit. The flop comes XXX rainbow. Seventy Five percent of the time, the turn card will quite possible give the 'ol flush chasers the flush draw they've been looking for. We know you've been paying attention to which players chase the flush and which haven't. Thus you need to put them off of their hand (to protect your own hand, assuming you've hit, of course) by betting enough to make them fold. My philosophy is, "Take the gamble out of your game" By putting these flush chasers to the test for a big bet, you're making them think about the +EV of calling. This is the most you can do, short of hitting them over the head with a hammer to get them to fold.

Why put money into the pot, when you know he's on a draw and could win? Because you're not supposed to think about short term results, but long term goals and in the long term, this is the correct strategy.

"Take the Gamble out of your game" , Got to love that

I have some issues with what I'll call "sloppy" statements in this post:

Sorry, but your opponent isn't going to pick up a flush draw 75% of the time on the turn.

Also, while you ARE betting to protect your hand, the reason isn't to "get them to fold"; rather, it's "to get them to make a mistake IF they call".
You actually want your opponent to call getting 2:1 money (pot bet) on their 4:1 event odds.

Sorry Roy, this is cardschat, and you are going to have to be a bit more intellectually rigorous here .

^^ this imo.

Seriously if your goal is to get them to fold when you have the best hand, how do you make your money? Where does your profit come from if you want to discourage them from making mistakes? Also, you are seriously trying to tell me that on a rainbow flop the goal is to bet enough to get them to fold their BACKDOOR flush draw? The backdoor flush draw that will hit (10/47)(9/46) = less than 4.2% of the time? If you have AA and your opponent accidentally shows you he has KK, do you also want to try to get him to fold? He's almost 5 times as likely to suck out on you here.

Also, what about the people who have the 2-pair and sets to beat you? How do you KNOW they are on a draw? I'm sorry if I misunderstood your post, but am I really to believe you're a professional poker player and your guide to people trying to learn the game is to bet to try to get people to fold a backdoor flush draw? No offense meant, but this seems kinda naive.

I may be mistaken here AG & ZAC , but I think the point behind this is if you are in a hand with a "known" flush chaser & you have a hand you need/want to protect put them to the test with a big bet. There is always a chance you are up against a hand that has 2pr, set etc. but this bet will give you more information to determine what your actions will be on the turn & river.

I may be totally off here ??????? , but this is the way I read this statement.

Well if he's a known flush chaser that chases backdoor draws, I definitely want him to call my flop bets all day.

First of all, Roy, I wanna say I'm a big fan of your articles from Card Player Magazine. However, its pretty apparent that you spent a while longer preparing those articles than this one...

As some of my fellow posters have pointed out, your article seems a bit sloppy. I hope you'll stick around, but I also hope that you'll explain things a little better/accurately.

Well to be fair, he's probably getting paid for those, and making these just to be friendly. But still I agree.

I think the only part of the OP's post I agree with is you need to bet. How much is another subject, but, yeah, umm, the betting part seems right.

I may be way off base here AG, BUT I THINK what Roy was saying is to look to the FUTURE and not merley one hand---I THINK that's what he meant by +EV down the road, not just this one hand.

But that's AG and Zach's point; you want them to always be calling when they don't have pot odds to do so. If they only have 9 outs and you always make it 3-1 pot odds and they always call, then you may lose this one hand but over time you'll come out ahead. That's assuming that you have the discipline not to pay them off big when they hit.


But one of the things for me that comes out of what Roy is saying is that if they like to chase the flush, why not bet bigger and get more out of them, put them to the test, make it 2-1 pot odds and if they keep calling, you get even more winnings. I don't know that you want them to always fold their flush draw though, unless you always pay them off when they hit.

Roy says,> to protect your own hand, ASSUMING you Hit, < i think roy means assuming you made your hand already, you want to bet enough to get them out so The Chaser has to Fold, otherwise if he makes his flush your beat,, if you Didnt make your hand yet, then thats a different story, at least thats what i think Roy was trying to say,,,,,,,,,,,,,buck

The point is that if they have a flush draw (especially backdoor) and you already made your hand, you don't want the chaser folding...

Well i understand what he is saying, i think... if you are playing inexperienced players that try to outplay everyone, every chance they get... then you would get the impression that they get the draw 75% of the time, even though they actually don't have the draw. They always act like they are drawing with the intention of bluffing on the river. Make them pay i say.

Eeeck...I disagree! Sorry Hun, 4 suits 3 of which are already on board...75% remain to hit one of them. Thus the opponent has one of any 3 (of 4) suits to fall to hit. 75% chance to hit.

I aint no math whiz, but here goes: OK there's 75% chance of a fl draw hitting, but villian needs one of the three possibilities, so that's 1/3 of 75% which is ummm, ahhh, about 25% chance of catching the draw.

BTW I agree w Roy a big bet is good here, also agree with alien you want villain to call... a fold is OK too... a big bet is pretty much mandatory given all the points raised above.

Oh, a big 'ol DUH from me. right-O you are! What was I thinking? I forgot about the fact the chaser needs to hit ONLY his cards. THIS is why I suck at math.

Heads Up anyone?

lol sry

I'm ready. Full Tilt? No offense was taken.

I take Roy meaning here, make the flush drawer pay over the odds to call, that is positive ev

Another "I'm sorry"
Roy ONLY plays limit and only teaches limit. His comments were made without that qualifying statement. He dictated, I typed. In the level he's writing about, raising from $2-4 is a limited raise to say the least. Raising from $4 to 8 is as well. But I forgot to put in there for him that his comments are always and only about low and medium limit poker. Sorry if my failing to put that in started this discussion going in the wrong direction. Mea Culpa.

At these small levels people chase flushes all day long. They chase anything, because they rationalize their chasing as "It's only $2-4" or "Its only $4-8" Its nicknamed "No Fold 'em Hold 'em" And with good reason! From my perspective, as one who really tries to make a living from live cards,they're the bane of my existence.

So why was the OP aimed towards no limit? He talked about bet sizing which doesn't happen in limit and also specifically said no limit.

Umm--errr--ahh--It looks to me that EVERYBODY is a little confused here! Roy, perhaps maybe, just MAYBE a little more explanation is needed here!

I want to thank "aliengenius" for pointing out the error I made in posting yesterday. My first thought was, "How did he come up with quoting me at 75%? It's obviously 25%." But then when I checked my copy I saw the "goof" I had made. Certainly not 75% -- more like 25%, as any sixth grade student could quickly tell me. The error was in my total newness to the world of computers and in nervously messing with this electronic monster that sits mockingly brfore me. The rest of that post I will stand by, as will any of my hundreds of students who are using my strategies, successfully, in online and brick and morter poker rooms all over the world. By the way aliengenius, I thought I had a large poker library, but now I envy yours. Thanks again and have a salibrious day. Roy West

So you stand by the statement that in NLHE when you have a better hand than your opponent, make a bet denying him proper odds (including implied odds), you want them to fold? Can you please explain the logic behind that?

Not to mention that since there are 2 spades on board, its less likely he has two as well... so its not exactly 25%

CONGRATULATIONS!
You guys win. There will be no more poker strategy from me and from me helping any pro I know contribute to this site. If the older pros want to contribute without me pushing them, it's on them. I will no longer encourage them to do so. I will no longer encourage the other pros I know, to join.

Seriously? I didn't expect an "I'll take my ball and go home" response to what seems to be legitimate questions and discussion. The best teacher I ever knew (Joseph Norio Uemura) once said to me that "All good teachers want their students to question and doubt what they are being taught." When I did some teaching of my own I always took that to heart and I still believe it to be true.

Jane,

This is a bit of an extreme response, imo.

If RW can get a point across in a magazine he can surely get it across on a forum, even if it takes some effort and /or time due to technological concerns.

No one is going to get a pass here saying things that are that sloppy, especially a professional player known to be an articulate writer.

Chillax imo

This forum is for discussion, just because he is a pro does not mean spots can not be pointed out that have error to them. It's just like any other strategy somebody posts, and you dont see this sort of response

hmmm well this is interesting. I think that there is a lot going on that ppl are confused about, like the limit, nl thing. We are def not trying to "win" at anything...we are here to "learn" and like zach who is asking questions, especially asking a pro is good, not bad....so this is good imo

I really dont get this post pkr.
Zach was simply asking for clarifacation on something he wasnt sure on in the post,whats wrong with that?
This is a learning forum and u learn by asking questions.

Also whats wrong with people disagreeing?

Any way i think your misunderstanding what Zach,AG and C9 whanted to know,they simply whanted more info from a well established and respected pro author.

Hope you dont stick with the no more pro threads because i was looking forward to reading some of Roy´s posts .

Here it is from my point of view. I asked in advance if Nick wanted me to try to get Roy to join. He said "Sure." Roy finally got a computer. He knows nothing about computers and the minute I get him online I make him make a beeline to CC. Then, I wonder how best to get him comfy here...the poker strategy section seemed like it would have been a good jumping off place where he'd feel at ease. He made an error and I typed it out. Try scrolling down to the replies to see if you all can see the difference between nastiness and discussion. I can and many of the replies weren't discusion, but 'in-your' face coments. I had no intenion of embarrassing the man and he surely didn't want to be embarrassed. So I feel at fault for dragging him in to this. Just because I won't encourage him to post in the startegy section, doesn't mean he won't, on his own. Just cuz I won't put another pro thru this doesn't mean I'm taking my marbles and going home I'm NOT the pro. I am an amatuer. I suck at math and I'm not ashamed to admit it. But give the poor man some respect. Many of you did, but some of you didn't. When you're 74, as he is, PLMK how you'd feel? I know I dragged a 74 year old pro here to try to help; my fault and I won't do it again. I learned my lesson. I'll let the real online pros here on CC guide those who who want to learn. I had no business in the strategy section and will stick to the players lounge where I've been till I got Roy on here. I seem to have gotten in a whole less trouble over there. Good luck in your professional poker careers, guys. I know my place and it isn't as the know-it-all of the site.

OK.. I started to post here earlier, and took it back to think more about it.

I think it's cool that Roy wants to post.

But I think AG was good to point out the problems with the post.

Forums in general can have the tendency of being somewhat hostile seeming. This is ESPECIALLY true for a net-newbie. POKER forums in particular will be filled with aggressive competitive types. It's a wonder that some of the computers that host some poker forums don't just melt.

That said, one reason I personally joined CC was for the fact that it seemed to have one of the friendliest feels of all the poker forums.

I am grateful for smart folks like AG and so many others who can help keep a discussion like this in the right zone.

And I also hope that we don't completely scare away seasoned pros who's input is amazingly valuable.

It's a different world here on the net. Communication is different and so is poker.

Just my .02(nl),
cAPS

Thanks, Caps, that was a nice way to put it. I appreciate your kind words.