I recently got into a minor argument about a call. I was on 77, the flop came 10 3 7 . I was in the small blind, and completed the bet. There were four people in the pot at the time. There was no raise pre-flop, but my opponent had called from under the gun.

It was pot limit, so I check raised (that is to say that I checked, my opponent bet 350, I raised for all my chips. I had around 1000 chips. My opponent had roughly 2600.

with my raise the pot was approximately 1450. My opponent had to call 650. So he was getting a little more than 2 to 1 to chase the flush. Which he did.

But his flush cards were 8 and 5 .

I thought this to be a bad call because even if he hit the flush, there was no guarantee it would hold up if I were on a flush also. He said the odds were right and his action was right.

Was he right? If so, why? I'm truly interested in educated responses.

(P.S. Obviously, he hit the flush on the river, otherwise it might not have come up.)

Well, usually you would think that a check-raise like that would not indicate a flush draw. He was getting the right price if he was confident you didnt have the flush draw, so he was right. The call was marginal, it just worked out in his favor this time

he's 35% to hit his flush, which is better than 2to1.

The pot was laying him good odds for a call.

There's no way he's going to put you on diamond/diamond considering there are only 9 left in the deck. Get that out of your mind.

His call was fine.

I knew the money was right for the call.

I see your point about him not putting me on diamond diamond.

is this the type of play you would make in a tournament game?

I've pushed with a flush draw, You get about 40% chance to hit, there is no REASON not to call any bet with a flush draw on a board like that.

what were the positions, how many left in the tournament, was it raised preflop

He still would have had a fair amount of chips left if he called and lost. I think the call was okay.

OK, so he couldn't put me on diamonds. But he definitely puts me on a set, which means he can't pair the board or he loses. That cuts his possible outs to seven.

So a followup question for you math junkies is how does that change the odds (if any). And if the odds change, does that change the validity of the call?

Honestly, i'm not belly aching over a tough loss. I really want to know from the standpoint of improving my game. I mean, if it's such a good call, I should probably make it more often.

Your stacks are not deep enough that your raise would have to be interpreted as a set. Your raise could have meant a lot of things, like an overpair, top pair, middle pair that didn't believe the initial bettor, or maybe an open-ended straight draw. I understand that you would like to know if his call is still a good one if he puts you on a set, but there is just no way he can give you that much credit anyway when your stacks aren't that deep. And yeah, you should probably start making this call if you are in his given situation from now on.

Well, I had been playing really tight, and this was my first all in, so maybe he should have put me on the set. But I accept your explaination.

But it begs the question. If I flop a set and there are two of the same suit on the flop, do I still go all in? I think yes, but my thinking on this whole hand has apparently been screwed up.

You aren't screwed up in your thinking. Two players can both play a hand correctly and still end up in these situations. It happens all the time between pros. Poker is just a game of trying to avoid mistakes and also capitalizing on your opponents mistakes. You were correct to move in and he was correct to call. He got lucky and hit the flush. Don't worry about it, I really don't think you misplayed the hand either.

According to the fundamental theorem of poker you played the hand wrong, not him.

35% to hit his flush, but only 27.4% to win the hand.

This is the reason why I don't call all in on flush draws, especialy without 2 overs. If you're up against a set you're in terrible shape.

Please explain how I should have played differently.

Perhaps I should have raised pre-flop, but the end result would likely have been the same. Unless you think I should have gone all-in or put in half my stack on 77 pre flop with a call from UTG.

How did he play it poorly?

You gave him 2-1 on a flush draw. That call is profitable for him, that was your mistake.

the odds give him just enough
2-1 odds
2-1 to hit the flush

and like someone said, a check raise usually isnt signally a high flush draw, but I think you should raised preflop and if not, then bet the flop.

But how do you know he is on a flush draw?

I don't think you played this hand wrong. Pocket 7's ins't exactly a monster (no matter what Hellmuth says). A raise pre-flop would've been more to steal the pot pre-flop because lets face it...very few flops would make your 7's look good. You'd have to get a 7, or atleast 2 undercards, plus you'd be out of position. I don't think a pre-flop raise here is a good move. Then, check-raise your set, I see nothing wrong. You accidentally gave him odds to draw to his flush, but you probably couldn't have known he was betting a flush draw. He could be betting with a pair or betting just because you didn't. I don't think you played it wrong, just got unlucky he ended up with odds to chase the flush and then hit it.

I went back and checked my bible. Doyle Brunson says I was right before the flop to only call, but wrong after the flop to check raise.

I should have led out with a sizeable bet post flop. That would have ruined his odds on the call.

instead of 2to 1, he would have gotten something like 1.2 to one. Which is insufficient to justify the call.

I think my greed got me. I wanted him to bluff at the pot, which he did, but in doing so I set him up for perfect flush chasing odds.

Anyway, thanks for the comments, and I welcome all other opinions or comments.

you didn't play the hand wrong. i don't think sklansky would have argued going all in there. as far as the fundamental theorem of poker is concerened.

the wrong play would be to slow play. yes it's unfortunate you could not give him worse pot odds. but ask wrto if he would have folded his set or given the guy a free card. the answer would be no.

just a tough break

instead of 2to 1, he would have gotten something like 1.2 to one. Which is insufficient to justify the call.

Err...I'm not sure where you got this math. It was pot-limit right? Even if you bet the size of the pot, he's going to get 2 to 1 odds on his money at worst. His effective odds were poor, because he had to face another bet on the turn though. If you don't know what effective odds are, look it up in The Theory of Poker, or let me know and I'll explain it. From a player who probably didn't want to let a flush draw go though, I think this beat was inevitable. It happens. Just move on and go play some more poker.

yup, you caught me. :oops:

I was thinking in terms of NL instead of PL, which was the situation.

So I was stuck either way.

I'd have led at the pot here rather than looked to check raise- you're much more likely to get a call from a flush draw rather than a raise. If the turn doesn't make the flush, the poorer odds with one card to come means you can then bet enough to make a drawing call a bad one

Im going to have to stop joking around at this site.

Of coarse you didn't play the hand wrong. And no, my flush was not a good laydown. :x

There is another way to play this. Flat call on the flop. Then if the turn card is not a diamond, bet the pot. This way he will not have pot odds to call. If the turn is a diamond, dont call you need more than 4 to 1 for a pot odds call.

question settled

As was pointed out, he was far worse than 2:1 underdog chasing the flush due to boat potential the 7s had. He made a bad call that were against the odds, you lost this time. But according to Harrington, he's the real loser since he won a hand where he was a 2.8:1 underdog but only getting 2:1 on his money.

True, that's another way to play the hand but possibly the worst way you would play it. Before you decide any action you should put him on an assortment of hands. If you think he might be on the flush draw, protect your set right off the flop. You don't HAVE to slowplay a flopped set even though most people always do, especially with two diamonds out there. Check calling here is horrible, it's basically saying "Here, try to catch up with me. I'm going to let you see each card for as much as you want and not even try to protect my hand." Protect your hand or check-raise him. Those are the only decent choices here, and even if he does have odds to call on the flop who cares? ( He doesn't by the way) You've gotten all your money in when he's only going to hit roughly 1/3 of the time. The 10 of diamonds isn't an out and you have redraws against his flush if he hits it on the turn. You were a little less than 3:1 to win this hand, anyone who says you were only 2:1 needs to check their math before they give you advice. You put yourself in an extremely beneficial situation and got unlucky. It happens. Good play.