How to play an open-ended straight flush draw...

W

wreckoning

Guest
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Total posts
43
Ten-handed ring game in my local casino. 1-2 NLHE, max $500 buy-in. The other players have shown respect for my play. I have been playing for several hours and haven't been caught in a bluff yet. A loose player raises to $15 and I call on the button with 4h-2h. I figure there will be a lot of callers behind me; there hasn't been too many preflop re-raises, and from the button I may come across a situation where I can outplay to win the pot. 5 more players call and we see the flop seven-handed.

The flop comes especially beautiful: 5h-3h-8c. I congratulate myself on my wonderful call. It checks to the preflop raiser who bets half the pot.
One player folds and it remains to me to act. There is about $150 in the pot, $50 to me to call, 4 players left to act behind me. If anyone has a flush draw, it is 100% better than mine; of 9 hearts remaining, 2 give me the pure nuts and 7 give me a hand I'm most uncomfortable with. I'd much rather make one of my straight outs, which gives me eight clean outs. I decide to raise here to chase out flush draws like 10h-7h and Qh-9h. I raise to $150. I have about $500 remaining in my stack; the other players range from $200-$800, with the preflop raiser having $600 behind.

What ends up happening is, the entire table folds to the preflop raiser, who mucks A-Q of spades faceup, and I take down the pot. While I was happy to take a $150 pot with 4-high, I'm still unsure if I played this right. My real targets on this board are A-8, K-8, 5-3 and overpairs; but I'm vulnerable to trips which was not unlikely considering the way the action went. Should I have just called and hoped to make one of my ten clean outs on the turn to break the trips who might decide to continue to slowplay, and hope to stack high flushes if my straight flush hits? I think if the stacks were deeper calling would have been the correct play, but as they were I am uncertain. What do you think?
 
Last edited:
shinedown.45

shinedown.45

Legend
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Total posts
5,389
I don't see any mistake in raising on that board, you took down a decent pot on a semi-bluff...props.
After all agrgessive poker is winning poker and you played the hand very well IMO.
 
zachvac

zachvac

Legend
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Total posts
7,832
I don't see any mistake in raising on that board, you took down a decent pot on a semi-bluff...props.
After all agrgessive poker is winning poker and you played the hand very well IMO.

Do you really consider it a semi-bluff when you're ahead (even if he didn't have AQ, barring another flush draw, the OP was ahead with 15 outs twice)?
 
NuRelic

NuRelic

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Total posts
146
I don't think there's alot to criticize about the way you played it or the way you broke it down in the thread (nice work). But if your looking for something on it, then here's the only thing I might add...

The flop comes especially beautiful: 5h-3h-8c... It checks to the preflop raiser who bets half the pot. One player folds and it remains to me to act. There is about $150 in the pot, $50 to me to call, 4 players left to act behind me. If anyone has a flush draw, it is 100% better than mine; of 9 hearts remaining, 2 give me the pure nuts and 7 give me a hand I'm most uncomfortable with. I'd much rather make one of my straight outs, which gives me eight clean outs. I decide to raise here to chase out flush draws like 10h-7h and Qh-9h. I raise to $150. I have about $500 remaining in my stack; the other players range from $200-$800, with the preflop raiser having $600 behind.

I love this Re-Raise and especially the logic behind it. The only thing I would question is the amount of the Re-Raise. There is a VERY strong kick in poker circles about rounding bets to either 1/2 of the pot or the full amount of the pot and the logic behind that mind set is fairly straight forward, to put the odds against your opponents from out drawing you. When it comes to a bluff you want to represent the strongest hand at the table, so continuing to follow that logic makes since.

However, could you have achieved the same results with a lesser bet? You potted your bet in order to represent a set (the most logical hand that you could have with the size of your Re-Raise) and to push out anyone who might be on a better FD than you and that makes perfect since. But could you have just as easily pushed them out with a bet of $110? The idea here is to minimize a possible loss if you do get called and to minimize any possible Re-Raise that might come back at you so as to give you good odds to stay with your draw?

I'm going back and forth on this because your not just trying to push out anyone with a better FD, but also the initial aggressor (you prolly put him on overs anyway). See, what I keep thinking about is that a big part of the reason this worked out so well for you might have something to do with the remaining players folding for fear that the initial aggressor might push/shove. If that played into it, then a $110 bet might have had the same effect as $150 and thereby saving you $40 if the hand went South. Likewise the table image you've established along with the table image established by the initial aggressor help to frame the hand.

In any event, that's about the worst that I could do in criticizing your play (and admittedly, it's a pretty weak criticism). Well played and good post.
 
NuRelic

NuRelic

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Total posts
146
Do you really consider it a semi-bluff when you're ahead (even if he didn't have AQ, barring another flush draw, the OP was ahead with 15 outs twice)?

I do. I don't think he's ahead, because he doesn't have a hand. But he's got multiple draws including two outs to the nuts. Moreover, how do you simply barre out another FD? Admittedly, he is potentially looking at possibly 15% and giving him a better than 60% chance of winning the hand, but his hand is not made, its just a good draw. Moreover, if there is another FD out there, that reduces his outs to 6 and giving him around a 25% chance of winning.

Anyway, the point is that great odds on a drawing hand do not equate to made hand. Betting the come in that case has merit, but if your logic is centered around you've got the best hand because you've got the best odds to win it, you are potentially looking at busting out big chunks of your BR, but then again, that's just IMHO.
 
S

switch0723

Cardschat Elite
Joined
Sep 2, 2007
Total posts
8,430
Just because it is a draw doesnt mean it is less of a favourite nurelic. It is still called a favourite on the basis it wins 6/10 times evn if it is a draw. Its like 7,8s is suited against pocket 2's pre flop, even thoghu hte pokcet 2's is a made hand
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Just because it is a draw doesnt mean it is less of a favourite nurelic. It is still called a favourite on the basis it wins 6/10 times evn if it is a draw. Its like 7,8s is suited against pocket 2's pre flop, even thoghu hte pokcet 2's is a made hand
Exactly. equity in a pot is all that matters. No matter if you have a made hand or not. And all the more reason to get the $ in now with 2 cards to come, since your equity will drop significantly if the turn comes blank.

I stack off here on a regular basis. Even if your opponent is holding a bigger flush draw, if he isn't holding a pair, you still have 6+8 = 14 outs against him. And your aggression will make it very difficult to stay in the hand with just a flush draw.
 
Last edited:
NuRelic

NuRelic

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Total posts
146
I guess the reason I have a problem siding with of a heavy draw putting you ahead in the hand has to do with the idea that I see so many players willing to push, as well as shove, when they see that they've got 55%+ chance to win the hand. I see a problem here, and maybe someone can point out the error in my thinking.

I play by the odds as much as possible and if my chance of hitting an out that I need falls below the price it’ll cost me to stay with the hand, I fold. As I understand it, that’s what makes me a profitable player. So to better explain what I’m trying to get at, allow me to lay out another scenario;

You and I are at a $1/.5 table and we’re both equally stacked at $100
You’re in the CO holding :kh4::jh4:
I’m the Button holding :qh4::qs4:

Pre-Flop action I PFR 4xBB and you call followed by folds all around. There’s $9.5 in the Pot.
The Flop brings :qd4::10h4::2h4:
I bet out with $10
You pop me back and push it to $20

There’s $39.5 in the pot
I move all-In with my remaining $86

Do you call?

You have 15 outs odds based on the method we use to calculate our odds (forget that’s I’m holding one of your outs, for the moment). So with 15 outs, this should put you at a 60%+ chance of winning the hand. Based upon what you’re saying your the favorite to win the hand so this should be an easy call.

Problem: To make this call it’s going to cost you $86, which constitutes 68.5% of the pot. You believe that you’re the favorite to win the hand, but you are now well outside your odds to call.

Do you still make the call?

Play this out over a period of time and you are losing money. That just doesn’t make sense to me and that’s the way I understand it, if I’m wrong I’d love a good debate on it.

As for my original response, let’s put that aside for the moment because the above scenario clarifies what I’m trying to get at. I will want to get back to wreckoning’s hand and my response to it, but I need some clarification first. I will also add that I'm not above making mistakes so if my calculations are wrong, please let me know. I’m probably going to be crucified for this but this is one of those questions that has bugged me for years!
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
You have 15 outs odds based on the method we use to calculate our odds (forget that’s I’m holding one of your outs, for the moment). So with 15 outs, this should put you at a 60%+ chance of winning the hand. Based upon what you’re saying your the favorite to win the hand so this should be an easy call.
In the scenario you laid out, you're not a 60% favorite. You're a 40% favorite, for a variety of reasons.

But even still, we still call. Even if you flip over your hand and show us, we still call your $86 shove! Here's why:

There's $39.5 in the pot, and you're shoving in $86. That means, it costs us $86 to win $125.5, which is 1.5:1 pot odds. We have a 1.5:1 draw. Because of the money in the pot, this is a call even if we can see your two Queens.

Now, lets change the scenario a bit. Lets say we're doing the shoving, and you're holding a range of hands, not just one particular hand.

If the pot is $39.5 and we shove our $86 into it, we still get the same 1.5:1 if they call. Also, a portion of villain's range will fold, and we take down $39.5 with no risk.

This is why you shove strong draws. Because the fold equity, combined with the 40%ish equity that you *know* you have in the pot, makes for a +EV play almost every time.

The only time where you can get yourself into trouble is shoving this hand (KhJh) into a hand like AhQh, where they eat a ton of your outs. When shoving your draws, you need to first think about the range of hands that your opponent is holding that could eliminate some of your outs (aka, clean outs). If there's a large amount of hands that take your outs away, then I'd consider folding.
 
Last edited:
NuRelic

NuRelic

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Total posts
146
We have a 1.5:1 draw.

Not a fan of ratios (chalk that up to working with Engineers and tolerances for most of my life), but before I comment can you tell me how you calculate that you have a 1.5:1 draw on your outs? I've never gotten that and I'd really like to know the equation for future reference.


<Side Note: Hey, I just hit 100 post! We now return you to your regularly programed thread-post...>
 
willie beaman

willie beaman

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Total posts
66
Great play. Your table image came into play in that spot, seeming that everyone had you on a set. Overall, how did your session play out and where you able to continue making such strong plays on draws.
 
Katie Kards

Katie Kards

Guest
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Total posts
82
I believe you play the hand well, and the way I see it, it's better to win a small pot than to lose a big one, so chasing off those higher flush draws was good!
 
zachvac

zachvac

Legend
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Total posts
7,832
Problem: To make this call it’s going to cost you $86, which constitutes 68.5% of the pot. You believe that you’re the favorite to win the hand, but you are now well outside your odds to call.


First off we are not a favorite, because of the redraws to a full house. Let's just say you have AA instead. Now the quote above is absolutely 100% wrong. If you are a favorite, you ALWAYS have odds to call. Think about it. If you call you're putting half of that money in the pot. If you're a favorite, you're getting more than 50% back on average and thus are making money from the call.

To make it easier to understand, say the pot is 1 dollar. You pick up KK and I have AK. You are the favorite. I bet a bazillion dollars and show you my hand. You now have horrible odds. Do you call?

OF COURSE YOU DO. You will put in a bazillion dollars, the pot will be 2 bazillion and one, if you win you win the entire pot, if you lose you lose your bazillion. Now I don't know how much a bazillion is but assuming you're using proper BRM and you plan to face a decision like this in the future (long run will even out luck), you obviously call.

Also, on your earlier distinction on a draw vs. a made hand. You could turn it around the other way. In my example of AA vs. the OESD + FD they are drawing to no hearts, aces (if there is they are drawing to a full boat), or 9s. There is no prize for having the best 5-card hand when there are 5 cards out. The goal is to have the best 5-card hand after all 7 are showing. If that means your official hand as of the flop is K high, that's irrelevant. What matters is your odds to win the pot.
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Not a fan of ratios (chalk that up to working with Engineers and tolerances for most of my life), but before I comment can you tell me how you calculate that you have a 1.5:1 draw on your outs? I've never gotten that and I'd really like to know the equation for future reference.
Well I have an engineering degree as well, so you'll figure it out :p

Easy, you're 40% to win. 60%/40% = 1.5, thus you have a 1:1.5 shot at winning the pot. I agree, ratios are a little bit backwards. But poker players seem to like 1:3 rather than 25%. Not sure why.
 
NuRelic

NuRelic

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Total posts
146
Well I have an engineering degree as well, so you'll figure it out :p

Easy, you're 40% to win. 60%/40% = 1.5, thus you have a 1:1.5 shot at winning the pot. I agree, ratios are a little bit backwards. But poker players seem to like 1:3 rather than 25%. Not sure why.

<Another Side Note: I don't have an Engineering degree; just worked as Draftsman, then as a Technical Writer/Graphic Technician with degree in eBusiness. There were two reasons I never became an Engineer; (1) I never had much of a personal affinity for equations, formulas, etc. in the work place and (2) I have a personality. You work with Engineers so you get the joke and I only say that joke because most of my friends are Engineers. Nevertheless I have a tremendous amount of respect for Engineers.>

As for calculating the ratios, I know I must look like a complete idiot on this but where does the 60% in your equation come from? Is it rounded pot odds? If so, I don't understand why its a part of the equation and if its not the pot odds what is it? Moreover, your using the 40% as the basis for your chance to win the hand, but that's cheating because your basing that on knowing that your up against a set (forget that I'm holding a set because in a real hand you wouldn't know) and as result your hand odds would be higher with that equation. I obviously get the calculation for the pot odds at 125.5:86 or 1.46:1. So I need to know why you wouldn't calculate the ratio for your hand odds by dividing the number of cards remaining in the deck by the number of outs you believe you have (i.e. 52 cards in the deck minus 5 cards in play that you can see: 52-5=47 cards remaining in the deck the comparing that against the 15 outs you believe you have = 47:15 or 3.1:1 I know this must be wrong <this is largely why I don't use ratios>, but where am I going off track?>

Getting back to percentages (and what I feel more comfortable talking about) can you explain this to me...

In the scenario I laid out, you're looking for one of 9 hearts and 6 more for the made straight for a total of 15 outs. As long as I'm not betting the Come to the Nut Flush draw (something I want to get into after we settle up on this) you should believe you have all 15 outs for a 60%+ chance for winning. This easily makes you the favorite to win the hand. But if it cost you more than 60% of of the pot to call each time (in this case 68%), are you not loosing money? Granted this is VERY hypothetical, but where am I wrong in my thinking?

Finally, I'd respectfully ask that we not change the scenario from what I've already laid out, because what I'm going for here is based on this type of situation.
 
NuRelic

NuRelic

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Total posts
146
First off we are not a favorite, because of the redraws to a full house.
Agreed, but you wouldn't know that you we not the favorite if you were in the hand trying to make the decision. I laid the hand out the way I did for another reason that I hope to get into a little later in this thread. As for right now, if you didn't know that you were up against a set you would normally think you were the favorite, right?

Let's just say you have AA instead.
That's cheating, you don't change the question because you want to answer the question a different way. I don't want to change my scenario because I'm shooting for something. If you change my hand from a Set of Queens to Bullets, then I have a very different opinion, but again that would be a departure from what I'm going for.

Now the quote above is absolutely 100% wrong.
Obviously the quote I gave would be 100% wrong because it's no longer the same situation (hense the reason set it up the way I did. Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to understand something.

If you are a favorite, you ALWAYS have odds to call.
That's a BIG "If" and largely speaks to the reason why I set up the above scenario they way I did. For the same reason you wanted to change the scenario so that I'd be holding an Over Pair rather than a Set, I believe that shoving with a Flush and Straight Draw may not be the most optimal play. I don't believe that simply say, "If you are a favorite, you ALWAYS have odds to call." because you virtually NEVER KNOW that you are the favorite with a draw unless your opponent tells you what he's holding. It's very hypothetical, but I believe there is some practicality to it (at least for discussion purposes) and that's primarily what I'm going for.

Please don't misconstrue any of my words as being hostile, I'm just trying to work this out and I need answers to the scenario as I laid it out.
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
but where does the 60% in your equation come from? Is it rounded pot odds?
That is your opponent's equity in the pot. We're 40% to win, and they're 60%. This is just a ratio of the chance your opponent will win vs. the chance you will win.

the 15 outs you believe you have = 47:15 or 3.1:1 I know this must be wrong...
This isn't wrong, you just have to realize you have 2 cards to come after the flop. So you have twice as many chances to hit your outs. Thus, the ratio would be roughly half. Instead of 3.1:1, its more along the lines of 1.5:1.

But if it cost you more than 60% of of the pot to call each time (in this case 68%), are you not loosing money?
No, because you can win more than just what's in the pot, you win your opponents bet as well. So if your opponent bets 50$, and there's 100$ in the pot, then it costs you 33% of the money that you can win, or 3:1. You have to include the bet you can win from your opponent, not just the money in the pot!
 
NuRelic

NuRelic

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Total posts
146
[/b][/i] That is your opponent's equity in the pot. We're 40% to win, and they're 60%. This is just a ratio of the chance your opponent will win vs. the chance you will win.
This is why I guess I don't use Ratios, it's clear and pretty straight forward if you can see your opponents, but without knowing your opponents cards it's not as clear and thereby harder to arrive at.

This isn't wrong, you just have to realize you have 2 cards to come after the flop. So you have twice as many chances to hit your outs. Thus, the ratio would be roughly half. Instead of 3.1:1, its more along the lines of 1.5:1.
Gottcha, there's my problem and as usual it was right there dangling right in front of me. See, this is what I mean when I said that I didn't have an "...affinity for equations, formulas, etc."

No, because you can win more than just what's in the pot, you win your opponents bet as well. So if your opponent bets 50$, and there's 100$ in the pot, then it costs you 33% of the money that you can win, or 3:1. You have to include the bet you can win from your opponent, not just the money in the pot!
On this one you loose me. When I bet my remaining $86, I'm effectively All-In and the total amount in the pot is $125.5. There isn't anymore that you can win and I think this is where we are having our discrepancy in how we view this.

I purposely set the scenario up the way I did so that I get all my money in the pot while I'm "ahead in the hand" (the phrase that basically prompted this debate) so that I could get a clear understanding of the situation that wreckoning first laid out before addressing some of the responses I got.

See I know that if there's more money available then that effectively changes everything, but because there are other factors in wreckoning's scenario that also weigh in, I needed to change the discussion first. So I laid out another scenario to limit most of those other factors to make sure I'm clear on the points I want to address. Ratio's are clearly my Achilles' heel when it comes to poker, but I don't really thing it's that detrimental because it's still about the same as my original outline percentages:

In my scenario, you would normally think that your a 60%+ favorite to win the hand, costing you 68% in pot odds to find out if you could make your draw, while with ratios your at roughly 1.46:1 to out-draw and win while costing you 1.55:1 to find out.

So my question remains: Why is this not a loosing situation for you if played out over a long period of time? Is it because your odds of winning are 10%+ over 50% and when you subtract the additional 8% over the price you must pay to stay with the hand, you are still profiting 2%+ of the time?

If so (and I think that's right), then what if we each had $150 at the start of the hand, instead of just $100, and I shove with $136 instead of $86? Now there's $175.5 in the pot (with no other money left to win) and your odds of winning are still 60%+ but now your pot odds are at 77.5%. I know it sounds like I'm changing things to suite my agenda, and that's partially correct, but it's for a reason and evenso, it's still a realistic and plausible situation.

So, do you still call?
 
V

viking999

Visionary
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Total posts
512
I think you need to take a step back and think of it in very basic terms. If you think you're 60% to win the hand, is there any amount you shouldn't call? No. You should call if your opponent theoretically bets any amount into a zero dollar pot, giving you 1:1 odds. You win his bet size 60% of the time, and you lose the same amount 40% of the time.

--------------------

The real calculation you must make is this EV calculation:

EV(calling) = (chance of winning) * (amount won by calling) - (chance of losing) * (amount lost by calling)

EV > 0 justifies calling.

p(W) * ($ won) - p(L) * ($ lost) > 0
p(W) * ($ won) > p(L) * ($ lost)

So you should call if:

p(W) / p(L) > ($ lost) / ($ won)

This proves the "never fold if you're better than 50% to win". If you're favored to win, the left side is greater than one. The right side cannot be greater than one, because you can always win at least the size of the bet you have to call.

So your 68% pot odds is the right side of the formula. This is actually the reciprocal of what is normally meant by pot odds, but it's all good as long as you compare the right ratios. The left side, however, is not 60%. It is 60% / 40%, or 150%. 150% > 68%, so calling is best.

--------------------

For those uninitiated in this formula notation:

EV(A): expected value of action A (how much you win/lose on average by doing A)
p(X): Probability of event X occurring
W: Event where you call and win the hand
L: Event where you call and lose the hand
 
Last edited:
NuRelic

NuRelic

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Total posts
146
I think you need to take a step back and think of it in very basic terms. If you think you're 60% to win the hand, is there any amount you shouldn't call? No.

Of course your right and as is my modus operandi, I've gone and made something more complicated than it needed to be. Regardless of anything else if your favored to win the hand 50% of the time or better your looses will never exceed your profits whether you exceed your odds or not.

Yep - I can be dense sometimes!

I gotta head out for the day, so I'll get back to the original scenario tomorrow. Sorry about hijacking your thread wreckoning but we'll get it back on track tomorrow.
 
W

wreckoning

Guest
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Total posts
43
shinedown- thanks

zachvac said:
Do you really consider it a semi-bluff when you're ahead?
switch said:
Just because it is a draw doesnt mean it is less of a favourite nurelic

As the others pointed out, I was behind to a set or a higher flush draw, neither of which were unlikely.

Nurelic said:
I'm going back and forth on this because your not just trying to push out anyone with a better FD, but also the initial aggressor (you prolly put him on overs anyway).

Well no. I want the better flush draw to fold, but I want the preflop raiser to call because I am ahead of him if he holds overcards or an overpair.

c9h13no3 said:
Even if your opponent is holding a bigger flush draw, if he isn't holding a pair, you still have 6+8 = 14 outs against him. And your aggression will make it very difficult to stay in the hand with just a flush draw.

Actually, hands like J-10 of hearts are still ahead of me at 56.5% to win; this is because of the times that I make a pair, but they also make a pair that is higher than mine or their flush; or I make my straight but then they make their flush. Hands like A-10 of hearts are in even better shape (61.6%) because they have one of my straight flush outs blocked. If the preflop raiser has something like J-J and Ah-10h calls as well, I will be 24.6% to win, Ah-10h is 24.4%, and J-J is 51%... and I could still get bet off my hand on the turn. If I can get A-10 to fold, then I am 56.3% and JJ is 43.7%.


Nurelic said:
You and I are at a $1/.5 table and we’re both equally stacked at $100
You’re in the CO holding :kh4::jh4:
I’m the Button holding :qh4::qs4:

Pre-Flop action I PFR 4xBB and you call followed by folds all around. There’s $9.5 in the Pot.
The Flop brings :qd4::10h4::2h4:
I bet out with $10
You pop me back and push it to $20

There’s $39.5 in the pot
I move all-In with my remaining $86

Do you call?

Let's see... 6 cards give me the nut straight, 9 hearts give me a non-nut flush. Three kings may also be good if you hold A-Q. If you hold A-Q of hearts then my flush outs are no good. It's kind of impossible to put you on any other heart hand, since you raise preflop, I have A-K and A-J blocked and the ten is already showing. $126 in the pot, $76 to me to call... (not $86 as you first thought, that is because we put in $4 preflop and $20 on our flop raise) about 1:6-1 odds.

What hands could you make this play with? Overpairs, two pair or TPTK trying to protect their hands on scary boards; sets trying to lure people in with big draws; or draws that are even bigger than mine going for a semibluff.

- three ways to make pocket Aces holding Ah (you are 58% to win)
- three pocket aces with no hearts (53% to win)
- three ways to make kings (43%)
- two ways to make QQ for a set, with the Qh (59%)
- one way to make QQ for a set, no hearts (55%)
- three ways to make TT for a set (60.7%)
- six ways to make Q-10, no hearts (48.6%)
- three ways to make Q-10 holding the Qh (54.2%)
- three ways to make A-Q holding the Ah (40.5%)
- one way to make Ah-Qh (71.4%)
- nine ways to make A-Q no hearts (41%)

So I have a total of 50.5% chance to win this hand. With 1.5:1 pot odds it's a clear call for me. The call is even better if you will sometimes make a move with hands like Ah-10s (which is only 35.9% to win). The call is slightly worse if you won't make this move with A-Q no hearts, my expectation going down to 47.75% to win the hand; but still because of pot odds I should call.

As someone else said, even if I could see your hand I would still call, that is because I am still 40.4% to suck out. So by calling, 40.4% of the time I win $200, and 59.6% of the time I lose $76.

With these pot odds, calling has a positive expectation of $35 per call.

If you are having trouble understanding odds, I suggest picking up Weighing The Odds In Hold'em Poker by King Yao, which discusses how to calculate outs and odds etc. It also has lots of other topics like play through the streets, profiling players, bluffing etc. I bought it thinking it would be torture but it's not a bad read at all.

Nurelic said:
But if it cost you more than 60% of of the pot to call each time (in this case 68%), are you not loosing money? Granted this is VERY hypothetical, but where am I wrong in my thinking?

Don't think in percentages when considering pot odds. Think in fractions, it's easier. Let's say you make a call all-in that is 50% of the pot. The pot is $100 and it costs you $50 to call, and you're 50% to win. By your thinking that is a break even situation? In reality it is not. The pot is laying you 2:1 odds. That number comes from 100/50 = 2 = 2:1. But you don't need 2:1 odds; actually all you need is 1:1 to break even. That is because you're even money to win. So $50 to win a $100 pot when you're 50% to win is actually a very clear call for you.

What may also be confusing you is, you may be forgetting that when you win, you also win back the money it cost you to call. So when you call off $76 or $86 or whatever, you are not just calling to win a $125 pot, because you end up winning a $201 pot, which helps make up for the times when you lose.

willie said:
Great play. Your table image came into play in that spot, seeming that everyone had you on a set. Overall, how did your session play out and where you able to continue making such strong plays on draws.

Thanks. I would have made this same play with an overpair, not just a set. The rest of the session went well and while I continued to be aggressive with draws, they were never as weak as that one.
 
W

wreckoning

Guest
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Total posts
43
Anyway, back to the original topic, the more I think about it the more I come to the conclusion that my hand was simply not as strong as it looked when I first saw that flop. I raised the preflop raiser to isolate; but what if someone had a set? What would their plans look like? Check-raise the flop; check-call the flop and trap on the turn... but when I raise into them that gives them the incentive to push. How would I feel about a big fat reraise at this point? Not good. If one of the stacks that has me covered (not the original preflop raiser, someone else) shoves all-in I have a very tough decision to make. If I get min-raised I am trapped into putting more money in with a hand that's most likely behind; I have to put someone on a set or two pair and hope to hit a flush or straight on the turn.

Trouble is there's no way to get big flush draw hands out that won't also fold my target hands like overpairs or overcards. And if I just call there is no way that big flush draws won't also call, and even small flush draws like J-10 may call.

Do I really want to build a big pot with a hand like this? I guess this is what I get for playing 4-2 suited :D
 
S

soonerdel

Rock Star
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Total posts
195
you won $125 with 2-4 Hearts... pat yourself on the back and dont get greedy.... id say .. hand very well played
 
NuRelic

NuRelic

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Total posts
146
Thanks for the addition breakdown of my secnario Wreck, much appreciated!

If you are having trouble understanding odds, I suggest picking up Weighing The Odds In Hold'em Poker by King Yao, which discusses how to calculate outs and odds etc.
I don't really have trouble understanding odds, I just sometimes get caught up in theory and go off on points that I have no business going off on because the answer is generally readily available. Nevertheless, I will take your suggestion and look for Yao's book. Looks like some interesting reading.

Don't think in percentages when considering pot odds. Think in fractions, it's easier.
That's gonna be tough for me. I like working in percentage, largely because that's been a territory I've been living in with my professional career for some time and I can quickly find my odds without a lot of difficulty. Additionally, I've always had problems with fractions (it has to do with the way my mind works) but I will give your suggestion a chance. This weekend I'll try to implement it a see what come of it.

What may also be confusing you is, you may be forgetting that when you win, you also win back the money it cost you to call. So when you call off $76 or $86 or whatever, you are not just calling to win a $125 pot, because you end up winning a $201 pot, which helps make up for the times when you lose.
Nope, I got that. I just get somethings stuck in my head sometimes and I get stuck there until I can find someone who can point out the error in my thinking. Thanks, nonetheless!
 
NuRelic

NuRelic

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Total posts
146
Anyway, back to the original topic, the more I think about it the more I come to the conclusion that my hand was simply not as strong as it looked when I first saw that flop. I raised the preflop raiser to isolate; but what if someone had a set? What would their plans look like? Check-raise the flop; check-call the flop and trap on the turn... but when I raise into them that gives them the incentive to push.
Essentially, this is what I wanted to come back to after I got clarification on a Drawing Hand being better than a Made Hand. Your hand looks good, but there are most definitely problems with it and instead of it being out-heavy you are really looking at 8 outs (with 5 to the Nuts). You can't really bank on the FD and your right about being worried about someone holding a Set. Moreover...

How would I feel about a big fat reraise at this point? Not good. If one of the stacks that has me covered (not the original preflop raiser, someone else) shoves all-in I have a very tough decision to make. If I get min-raised I am trapped into putting more money in with a hand that's most likely behind; I have to put someone on a set or two pair and hope to hit a flush or straight on the turn.
You hit the proverbial "Nail-on-the-head" for what I was going to get to. If you are faced with any signals of strength after your semi-bluff, where do you stand? Are you going to put that opponents(s) on a Set or someone betting the Come to the Heart-Flush?

Do I really want to build a big pot with a hand like this? I guess this is what I get for playing 4-2 suited :D
In this case I think your intent is obvious, your not trying to build the pot but rather, take it down without resistance. If you are Re-Raised, you'll have to look at you opponent(s) and re-evaluate based on your reads and determine where you stand.

In any event, nice set up and well played.:icon_thum
 
Full Flush Poker
Top