Top Pair Nut Flush Draw
#1
Posted 23 February 2009 - 02:18 AM
Table is semi-loose but that seems normal for .05/.10 NL holdem. First hand I am UTG and raise to .35 with AcJc. BB calls and we see flop of Ad Qc 4c. BB started hand with about $7 and I had about $5. BB leads for .50 and i raise to 1.50. BB thinks for about 10 seconds and then raises all in. Is this an autocall because i have outs no matter if he has set or 2 pair?
Next hand i had Ad 9d and was UTG+1 and raised to .30. Two MPs called as well as SB. Flop was Ah Kd Jd. SB checks I bet .60 and MP1 raises to 1.50 and then MP2 reraises to 4. SB thinks for a little while then moves all in for around $8. I started hand with about $6, MP1 has $10,and MP2 has $14. Do i call all in here or assume that one of them also has flush draw and some of my outs are gone?
Thanks for the help. Hope to post more hands to get insight.
#2
Posted 23 February 2009 - 02:33 AM
w/ your stack size these are snap shove/calls.
UFC July 4th weekend. Vegas!
#3
Posted 23 February 2009 - 05:07 AM
And I will whisper "no"
- Rorschach
#4
Posted 23 February 2009 - 08:30 AM
Table is semi-loose but that seems normal for .05/.10 NL holdem. First hand I am UTG and raise to .35 with AcJc. BB calls and we see flop of Ad Qc 4c. BB started hand with about $7 and I had about $5. BB leads for .50 and i raise to 1.50. BB thinks for about 10 seconds and then raises all in. Is this an autocall because i have outs no matter if he has set or 2 pair?
Next hand i had Ad 9d and was UTG+1 and raised to .30. Two MPs called as well as SB. Flop was Ah Kd Jd. SB checks I bet .60 and MP1 raises to 1.50 and then MP2 reraises to 4. SB thinks for a little while then moves all in for around $8. I started hand with about $6, MP1 has $10,and MP2 has $14. Do i call all in here or assume that one of them also has flush draw and some of my outs are gone?
Thanks for the help. Hope to post more hands to get insight.
shove
shove
pokerizez
a lot of times in these spots, you will see naked flush draws and since there are no overs to your pair, you will be dominating dominating dominating. and you aren't dead to a single hand you will see turned up.
#5
Posted 23 February 2009 - 10:42 AM
http://areallybigfish.com/
#6
Posted 23 February 2009 - 12:43 PM
second hand, you are clearly beat on the flop, but with that nut draw you are def priced in to call, whenever you have two other people going along with you in a flush draw situation you are essentially guaranteed the right pot odds... it might be reasonable to think that two of your outs are gone to another guy, but you also don't know if another A or 9 is an added out (which they may be).
both these situations look like + EV call/shoves.
#7
Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:23 PM
#8
Posted 02 March 2009 - 10:41 AM
#9
Posted 02 March 2009 - 11:23 AM
Depends on table, and your postflop abilities.
You can apply that statement to any hand.
#10
Posted 02 March 2009 - 01:06 PM
You can apply that statement to any hand.
you have to be able to lay down ace flops to resistance when you don't hit your kicker, if you can't, then don't do it imo
http://areallybigfish.com/
#11
Posted 02 March 2009 - 01:15 PM
i know u r supposed to play tighter in EP, so it kinda confuses me why raising in EP w/ A-Xs is not considered a standard -EV play. I can see limping, but raising?
This may be wrong, but I would think limping is a better option since you will likely get the suited connectors joining in. You can bust them with your nut flush vs their small flush. Does this happen so rarely that it is not a relevant strategy?
Limping may also make people think that you have a big pair, and are playing the 'standard way', limping in EP hoping to re-raise someone PF. So if the flop comes ragged and you bet out, or maybe even re-raise a bet by the blinds, you will take it down most of the time. Again, is this incorrect thinking?
Thanks!
#12
Posted 02 March 2009 - 02:22 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe its 11% to hit your flush draw with AXs and less than 1% to hit your flush on the flop.
I really don't see a point in limping with AXs. Either get in the hand and raise it, or get out imo.
#13
Posted 02 March 2009 - 02:25 PM
If this is our standard, we should fold AQ> PF
#14
Posted 02 March 2009 - 02:38 PM
yah...makes no sense.
#15
Posted 03 March 2009 - 07:38 AM
I think mt is saying we shouldn't play any A worse than AQ if we are going to be remotely unhappy when we hit our A (but don't make As up)
And I will whisper "no"
- Rorschach
#16
Posted 03 March 2009 - 11:09 AM
#17
Posted 03 March 2009 - 11:34 AM
No I think thats fine. Depending on position, table dynamics, opponents etc.
I think having a hard and fast rule of folding A with <K is -EV. I think that's what mt was getting at.
And I will whisper "no"
- Rorschach
#18
Posted 03 March 2009 - 11:39 AM
#19
Posted 03 March 2009 - 01:58 PM
I think having a hard and fast rule of folding A with <K is -EV. I think that's what mt was getting at.
but to raise A-Xs in EP, what do you think about that (generally)?
#20
Posted 03 March 2009 - 02:03 PM
6-max. I'll raise almost any suited A. And any A over A7, folding the rest.
FR. I think AT is my minimum for raising, I include suited AXs in that range. Mostly because I'm much comfier 6m than fr.
And I will whisper "no"
- Rorschach
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users









