20 replies to this topic

[accolades]

In all the books that I've read, the author says to call raises on 4 card flush or straight draw after the flop, if the pot odds are right... but today I've been trying something new. I've been betting into my draws... What do you guys think of that as a strategic move? I know that it means I'm only allowing the hands that could beat me to stay in the game... but today as a small sampling, it has been working well to my advantage in "No Fold'em" limit games as most people will call anything and it increases my implied odds. I've hit the draw more often than not while also appearing to have a stronger hand from the get go.Any ideas even "You're an idiot" would be appreciated- Tim

[wrto4556]

You're not an idiot.It's highly valuable if your PE is high enough.

[jayboogie]

I will usually bet when I'm out of position just to find out what other players have. If I get raised, typically I can put the raiser on a fairly strong hand, usually not a draw, unless it's a nut flush draw where the may raise. Personally, I prefere betting out straight draws instead of flush draws, because w/ straight draws, your drawing to the nuts if the board is a rainbow as opposed to a flush draw where you can get beaten by a bigger flush. My point is it's probably not a smart thing to bet out a flush draw if you have a weak flush, better to check and then decide whether to call or not based on the number of callers. If there's 4 or 5 callers on a flop with 2 of the same suit and your holding 78 of that suit or lower without a straight draw, it's probably a better idea to fold.

[Eskimo]

Don't bet your flush draws for value. "Betting your flush draws for value" means that when you make a bet with your flush draw, you expect your bet to be called. Do not do this.Bet your flush draws as a semi-bluff. If someone raised pre-flop and its a flop of rags and you have a flush draw, then make a semi-bluff.If someone calls your raise and you don't hit it on the turn then check/fold.If someone re-raises you then fold.Simple as that.

[accolades]

Thank you for all the responses... In regards to jayboogie... I rarely stay with low suited cards anyways unless I'm in late position and nobody has opened in front of me.Great information from all of you though, thanks!

[Smasharoo]

Don't bet your flush draws for value. "Betting your flush draws for value" means that when you make a bet with your flush draw, you expect your bet to be called. Do not do this.Bet your flush draws as a semi-bluff. If someone raised pre-flop and its a flop of rags and you have a flush draw, then make a semi-bluff.If someone calls your raise and you don't hit it on the turn then check/fold.If someone re-raises you then fold.Simple as that.I hope you're talking strictly about NL and aren't really advocating folding flush draws in multiway pots to a raise.Right?You'd raise an A high flush draw for value if you knew you'd get three callers. You'd cap it if you knew they'd call.

[vegasholdem]

there are so many ways to play the same situation...who is to say one way is better than the next......i think you done good...

[jayboogie]

accolades said:

Thank you for all the responses... In regards to jayboogie... I rarely stay with low suited cards anyways unless I'm in late position and nobody has opened in front of me.Great information from all of you though, thanks!

I'm generally talking about in the blinds when you hold these hands, but 78 suited is not such a bad hand to limp in with most of the time if your getting a lot of callers.

[MasterLJ]

There's lots of things to think about. I've seen it time and time again where people pay to draw to the non-nut hand. Why do it? Your pot odds now have another factor, and that is the fact that your 2nd or 3rd nut hand being beat by better hands.Raising with draws is a nice form of semi-bluffing, but it also slaughters pot odds. If you push out enough people, your pot odds will drop. The benefit is semi-bluffing your way to a small pot. I don't particularly like doing it, but I think if the position is right it can be profitable, especially after a pre-flop raise with AK suited or what not.

[wrto4556]

Eskimo said:

Don't bet your flush draws for value. "Betting your flush draws for value" means that when you make a bet with your flush draw, you expect your bet to be called. Do not do this.Bet your flush draws as a semi-bluff. If someone raised pre-flop and its a flop of rags and you have a flush draw, then make a semi-bluff.If someone calls your raise and you don't hit it on the turn then check/fold.If someone re-raises you then fold.Simple as that.

You're joking, right?

[Eskimo]

Smasharoo said:

I hope you're talking strictly about NL

Correct, im only talking about NLAnd in regards to wrto...I recently saw the hand that doyle brunson knocked howard lederer out on in the WSOP main event. I believe it went like this-- Doyle had A K and Lederer had 77. Flop came like 4 7 6 . Doyle goes all-in, and Lederer calls. Doyle hits his flush on the river. Doyle probably put howard on overcards and wanted to take the pot down right there, he wasn't betting for value!. After lederer called, you can see that doyle was disappointed that he called. Obviously a bluff.If thats how doyle plays it, then thats how ima play it. If my logic wrong on this please let me know! I would hate to keep on making the same mistake.

[tekn0wledg]

vegasholdem said:

there are so many ways to play the same situation...who is to say one way is better than the next......i think you done good...

This is the most important point that should be made. I see so many comments that are to be taken as the bible that it's not even funny. I try to emphasize the way I make plays are good for 'me' and nobody else. I offer my suggestions based on how I see a hand or situation in particular.Anyway back on topic, I like betting into my flush draws too, but I wouldn't get stuck in a certain pattern. If you do your opponents will eat you alive after seeing similar situations more than once or twice. So mix things up and go based solely on the feeling for each situation.In addition you are implying that you are betting into your flush draws from an early position, in order to change that up try raising from late position with your draws, or just calling, but beware that will lower your odds on the turn.

[Smasharoo]

This is the most important point that should be made. I see so many comments that are to be taken as the bible that it's not even funny. I try to emphasize the way I make plays are good for 'me' and nobody else. I offer my suggestions based on how I see a hand or situation in particular. No, it's the worst point to be made. The vast majority of the time there *IS* a right way and a wrong to play something. Only when you understand the right way can you situationaly play something the wrong way intentionally.

[tekn0wledg]

There is no correct way to play every single hand. For instance, some will say folding 27 pre-flop is correct, but if the flop comes 227 it's incorrect. See the logic?However, what I meant by my statement is that people on this board should not take each person's comments as the correct way to play each and every hand. Each person has his/her thoughts on how a hand should be played. Until someone can prove the correct way to play a certain hand based on some serious long term statistical analysis [and even that will have situations where it is not the best move] then nobody can say it's definitively the best way to play the hand.In addition as you mentioned, situationally there is the right time to play a hand differently. It's very hard for us to determine the situations within the context of a text based message on an internet message board. We could pickup the wrong meaning from the text or even the wrong intonation which leads us astray. Thus it's very difficult in this environment to correctly understand every situation we thought that we read.

[Smasharoo]

There is no correct way to play every single hand. For instance, some will say folding 27 pre-flop is correct, but if the flop comes 227 it's incorrect. See the logic?No. Because if youplayed 27 pre-flop evvery time you'd lose money. Even though some of the time the flop would be 777.See the logic?There's a play that wins money long term and a play that loses moeny long term.Sometimes there are situations where two plays win or lose money long term, in those cases the best one is the one that wins the most or loses the least.Poker is not a game of playing each hand like a unique snowflake where no one can be sure what the right thing to do is. Poker is a game of playing very simmilar situations in the most prifitable ways possible, again and again and again. That's how you win money long term which is the goal.It's not about winning hands, it's about winning MONEY.

[tekn0wledg]

Smash, I've been waiting for weeks for you to personally attack me and I guess this is the thread you are going to choose and do so; so be it.You are successful in exploiting single words in other people's threads and nit picking them to death. That's fine and that's your style of arguement. Like most people you end up making points against, I am in agreement with you in certain aspects, but you are fixating on one specific item of my post.The point of my original statement is important because as I stated everyone has their own opinion. I could be Johnny Idiot coming in here and saying "ALL-IN" every hand and someone could think he/she is the most knowledgable person on the board. I like to make it known everytime I post that I, nor anyone else on here, is the all knowing being who dictates the correct poker play in any given situation.In respect to your comments about long term profitability, you are correct. However your opinion states that you should play hands in 'very similar situations in the most profitable ways possible again and again and again'. This again and again and again part is the portion that I don't agree with. And again, let me state, I am not the all knowing being to dictates the correct thing here.If I were to have 27 in the blind and the flop comes 227 and there are four players in the pot, I could play this in various different ways. Bet and hope someone raises or calls etc, or check and hope to raise or smooth call. Right there we have four options. Not to mention while I may look like a winner at this point, someone may hold pocket aces and hit an ace on the turn.There could be five different ways to milk the most money out of the given hand, but we have to take a logical approach on howto extract that money. If we were to say "the only way to get money here is to check-raise" we'd be wrong. They might fold and lose some added money you could have won otherwise! Slow playing may get you beat by a better hand.... the list goes on and on.In addition if you look at the poker polls section on here you will see how split people's opinions are. I was merely stating that not every post on this forum is the correct post. Thus my statement.Back to the root of my statement in this thread, no opinion on a particular situation should be taken as the bible. There are circumstances and instances we can't possibly understand while reading someone's text based message on the internet. Even if we were there in the room there is not a 100% fortified solution to the exact way you should play the hand. Long term there is definitely a play that earns you the most money, but there is no definitive way to play a hand.My statement suggests that quite simply. No statement should be taken as the bible. Why? Because there is no 100% gaurantee on what I should do with a particular hand. There is a suggested way, but not 100% definitive. Thus the statement.

[pat_s_lee]

Eskimo said:

I recently saw the hand that doyle brunson knocked howard lederer out on in the WSOP main event. I believe it went like this-- Doyle had A K and Lederer had 77. Flop came like 4 7 6 . Doyle goes all-in, and Lederer calls. Doyle hits his flush on the river. Doyle probably put howard on overcards and wanted to take the pot down right there, he wasn't betting for value!. After lederer called, you can see that doyle was disappointed that he called. Obviously a bluff.If thats how doyle plays it, then thats how ima play it.  If my logic wrong on this please let me know! I would hate to keep on making the same mistake.

Skipping back a few messages - this is interesting. Because in Doyle's book, he talks about never slow-playing a set, especially if there's a flush draw on board. If Lederer had made a healthy sized bet off the flop, I'm not sure Doyle would have moved all-in at that point. To me, Lederer did put himself in a situation he could have avoided (the all-in against a bigger stack) if he had played this right. Doyle made his nut flush on the river. Doyle talks a lot about best hands (at that point) and favoured hands. What would the situation in be in this case with Doyle having 8 outs (the 4 spade doesn't count because it gives Lederer the boat). Who is the favoured?Another situation you can look back on is the Matusow/Raymer show down. I think Raymer had A J diamonds vs. Matusow's 9-7 spades. Flop come with 2 diamonds and a 9 (maybe the 9 was a diamond). Raymer moves all-in and Matusow says "I don't think you have a hand here, I'll call." The 9 was just a mid-pair and was the best hand off the flop, but I don't think that was the correct call because of all the possibilities Raymer had. (i.e. if Raymer caught his nut flush on the turn - which he did - there would be no outs for Matusow; Raymer also had overcards he could catch).Can anyone explain the "favoured" hand vs. best hand idea?

[Smasharoo]

Smash, I've been waiting for weeks for you to personally attack me and I guess this is the thread you are going to choose and do so; so be it.What are you talking about?I'm not attacking you personally, allthough if you'vev been waiting weeks for me to do so I think you probably have deep emotional issues that you should get some professional help with.You are successful in exploiting single words in other people's threads and nit picking them to death. That's fine and that's your style of arguement. Like most people you end up making points against, I am in agreement with you in certain aspects, but you are fixating on one specific item of my post.I'm not fixating on anything, I'm pointing out that there's a correct theoretical way to play most situations. If there wasn't, no one would sell any books about poker.Think that one over for a minute.The point of my original statement is important because as I stated everyone has their own opinion. I could be Johnny Idiot coming in here and saying "ALL-IN" every hand and someone could think he/she is the most knowledgable person on the board. I like to make it known everytime I post that I, nor anyone else on here, is the all knowing being who dictates the correct poker play in any given situation.Why?What does that possibly accomplish? Are you under the impression that people who read posts on a message board assume they are talking to the best poker players on the planet?I don't. When I see someone make a point that makes sense to me logically and fits into the theory I've allready stidued, I think "Well, that makes sense." I don't say "Well, Bob said this, so that's what I'm gonna do by golly!"In respect to your comments about long term profitability, you are correct. However your opinion states that you should play hands in 'very similar situations in the most profitable ways possible again and again and again'. This again and again and again part is the portion that I don't agree with. And again, let me state, I am not the all knowing being to dictates the correct thing here.If you don't play the same situations the same way, what's the point of even knowing the theory?If I were to have 27 in the blind and the flop comes 227 and there are four players in the pot, I could play this in various different ways. Bet and hope someone raises or calls etc, or check and hope to raise or smooth call. Right there we have four options. Not to mention while I may look like a winner at this point, someone may hold pocket aces and hit an ace on the turn.Sure, but one option is going to be the most profitable long term. It may depend on table dynamice, but it's still going to be one play that's the best. The results of an individual hand are meaningless.That's the whole point.It doesn't matter if someone has AA and you get a ton of money in on the flop and they hit the turn. Getting the money in was still right.There could be five different ways to milk the most money out of the given hand, but we have to take a logical approach on howto extract that money. If we were to say "the only way to get money here is to check-raise" we'd be wrong. They might fold and lose some added money you could have won otherwise! Slow playing may get you beat by a better hand.... the list goes on and on.No, the list doesn't go on and on. There's one way to play it that makes the most sense or there are two ways that are so close it doesn't matter. In addition if you look at the poker polls section on here you will see how split people's opinions are. I was merely stating that not every post on this forum is the correct post. Thus my statement.That doesn't mean there isn't a correct ANSWER to how to play a hand.Back to the root of my statement in this thread, no opinion on a particular situation should be taken as the bible. There are circumstances and instances we can't possibly understand while reading someone's text based message on the internet. Even if we were there in the room there is not a 100% fortified solution to the exact way you should play the hand. Long term there is definitely a play that earns you the most money, but there is no definitive way to play a hand.If you don't play hands the way that is most likely to win the most money long term, you're a fool.That's the whole point of playing poker for money. To win money in the long term. No one can play well enough to win money in the short term. My statement suggests that quite simply. No statement should be taken as the bible. Why? Because there is no 100% gaurantee on what I should do with a particular hand. There is a suggested way, but not 100% definitive. Thus the statement.Ok, it's not true though.If you have the best straight flush on the river and it's heads up and someone bets into you, you should raise. Period. There's no debate there.Most situations are that clear cut in holdem. You take all the information you have available and come to what the best play is. You wouldn't take the same information and come up with a diffrent play the next time or you're making a huge mistake somewhere.

[tentenoffsuit]

ha... and then he breaks down everything you said

[JaysonWeber]

Smash, you wrote most decisions were that clear cut... example was the straight flush heads up with the guy betting into you....See I really don't think most things in hold'em are THAT clear cut... most of the time theres more than 1 option... like 3-5 options on how to play it... Thats just my opinion although a lot of the stuff i've read up on regarding hold'em seems to agree with me. All that aside... I missed the tournament tonight because I drank way too much monday night... sorry y'all didn't donate to the pot!