Roy West's Poker Insight-Post Flop Play

[Roy West]

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.

 

[Cowboy8112]

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

 

[aliengenius]

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 .

 

[zachvac]

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.

 

[KICKIN_ACES]

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.

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.

 

[zachvac]

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.

 

[c9h13no3]

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.

 

[zachvac]

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.

 

[Brann6]

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.

 

[RickH2005]

Um-er.....

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.

 

[NineLions]

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.

 

[buckster436]

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.

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

 

[zachvac]

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...

 

[paulwall01]

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.

 

[pkrplr4116]

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 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 .

 

[Makwa]

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.

 

[pkrplr4116]

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.

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.

 

[Makwa]

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

 

[pkrplr4116]

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

Heads Up anyone?

lol sry

 

[Ranny]

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

 

[pkrplr4116]

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.

 

[zachvac]

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.

 

[RickH2005]

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!

 

[Roy West]

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 .

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

 

[zachvac]

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?