Effect of opponents bad play on long term results?
I've generally adhered to Sklansky's philosophy on results. Basically, any time you make a stastically correct play, it is a win for you in the long run, no matter what the outcome of that particular hand is.
You have TPTK on the turn, and make a pot-sized bet. A flush-draw calls and hits the flush on the river. It was a profitable play because he called your bet against the odds
, so in the long run, you'd make money off that play. Fairly basic stuff.
Anyway, what I'm wondering is whether you should assume correct play by your opponent or not.
You have top two-pair on the flop, and make a pot-sized bet. Opponent calls with a flush draw (we don't know that yet). Flush card comes out on the turn. Now, I bet assuming that he doesn't have the flush, otherwise he would have folded on the flop to my pot-sized bet. Now, I'm betting top-two pair against a made-flush. Is my bet here correct, because he called against the odds on the flop? I'm guessing the answer has a fair amount to do with implied odds, which I'm still not great with.
I guess the root of the question is.. should I consider bad play in my bets? When an occasion comes up where you bet to give someone bad odds to draw out on you, should you then play future rounds under the assumption that no drawing hands are left?
I ask this because I lost a fairly big hand in a ring-game yesterday, although I ended up recovering from it and ending up about $1 down for the session. I had flopped a set, and bet just slightly under the pot and got a call from one of the other two people in the hand. There were two clubs on the board and the turn brought a third. I led out another pot-sized bet on the turn to discourage a hand like Top-pair with a big club to try to hit another club on the river. He cold-called again, and I checked to him on the river, he bet about a 1/2-pot size bet and I called. He turned over something like JQs for the flush. He had no straight draw, no overcards, and was on a sole flush-draw. So, was my bet on the and check/call on the river correct in the long-run, or should I have taken in to consideration that he might have called against the odds with a flush draw and been cautious?