Strategy: Flush Draws

marius

I guess this has probably been discussed ad nauseum bit im interested in what people do in the following situation. It probably crops up at least once a day for most people....comments on all streets appreciated.

10 seater STT blinds 20 40 average stacks all round - no reads.

im in SB with Ac 7c

3 limpers and I complete (??) BB checks

flop 2h 8c 3c

I check

checked to mid posn who bets 85 folded to me

I call ??

everyone else folds

turn 5h

I check ??

Villian bets 260

I fold.

Im kinda interested on the aggressive vs passive approach here.

Would most people lead out on this flop? Or check raise the turn here? If so how much do you raise here? Are you looking to get it all in at this stage?

Is this just purely a style question and anyway you play it is fine?

bops

marius wrote:

I guess this has probably been discussed ad nauseum bit im interested in what people do in the following situation. It probably crops up at least once a day for most people....comments on all streets appreciated.

10 seater STT blinds 20 40 average stacks all round - no reads.

im in SB with Ac 7c

3 limpers and I complete (??) BB checks

that's fine - your in the worst seat and are semi-disguising your hand

flop 2h 8c 3c

I check
also fine for the moment...

checked to mid posn who bets 85 folded to me

I call ??
Pot is 200 and he bets 85 here...i'd raise it 170 more - it's a good flop for a limped SB - if he has 2 overs he'll probably fold, if he has an OP he may call which is ok, or he may raise - then i would think about tanking it in

everyone else folds

turn 5h

I check ??

Another good card for you, more than likely a great scare card - i'd definately have a pop at it here - pot has 370 - i'd bet 250ish - if he comes over the top at you here, i'd give it up

Villian bets 260

I fold.
I like his bet size! - fold isn't so bad here bacause of your play on the earlier streets

Im kinda interested on the aggressive vs passive approach here.

Would most people lead out on this flop? Or check raise the turn here? If so how much do you raise here? Are you looking to get it all in at this stage?

Is this just purely a style question and anyway you play it is fine?

TBH i really think you have played this very poorly, way too passive - you are basically fishing on the cheap, which makes your hand transparent and it won't give you the potential to get rewarded if you hit.

It isn't a style question - it's much more than that, having your hand with such potential to make a good return here, you couldn't have played it worse imo - even open jamming the flop would have been a better play!

i don't mean to sound so mean, i just think you need a kick in the arse!!
how much was the buy-in for this game??
i also think the villain played the hand quite well

hopefully someone will come along amd tell me im a gob****e and have it all wrong - i'll feel beter then

remember passive calling station = bad
aggression is the key to collecting big pots!!

gl

Gholimoli

bops wrote:

aggression is the key to collecting big pots!!

gl

the pot is not big,and aggression is not the key to winning big pots but its often the key in building big pots.

as for the hand some times lead,some times check raise,some times call in that order.

bops

stop trying to get my back up and answer the op's questions - do you think he played it well??

DeVore

I'd lead on the flop and bet the turn that you describe. I dont think the way you played it is too bad but it depends on the stacks because that will determine folding equity if things dont develop for you on later streets. Build and steal is a good strategy in tournies imho and you also have a good draw to the nuts.

DeV.

mdwexford

id lead on the flop and hope to get raised so i can shove.
i want to get my stack in on the flop

marius

mdwexford wrote:

id lead on the flop and hope to get raised so i can shove.
i want to get my stack in on the flop

This is gererally the way I would play it too. When I flop a nut flush draw I am looking to get stack in asap. But recently I find that this is not really working for me. Your are basically telling the villian your hand and letting him play perfectly.

bops wrote:

Pot is 200 and he bets 85 here...i'd raise it 170 more - it's a good flop for a limped SB - if he has 2 overs he'll probably fold, if he has an OP he may call which is ok, or he may raise - then i would think about tanking it in

I check the flop with the intention of calling/raising most bets.

Whether I call or raise will usually be dependant on the size of bet into me, if it looks like someone trying to push me off the pot I will feel I've got a lot of FE and probably raise hard/tank it. With his bet size here I felt he had caught some of the flop (he had limped so could be playing any 2). In this situation I am not going to try to push some randomer off the pot - I have no idea if he is able to let top/midlle pair go here and if he cant then I am marginal dog from here on and I dont want to be going out because donk cant let his mid pair go when he should be able to.

bops wrote:

TBH i really think you have played this very poorly, way too passive - you are basically fishing on the cheap, which makes your hand transparent and it won't give you the potential to get rewarded if you hit.

I agree I played this hand v passivley but I don't think that I have made my hand transparent at all - check/raise check/shove here is making my hand transparent.

bops wrote:

It isn't a style question - it's much more than that, having your hand with such potential to make a good return here

Problem here is the hand also has the potential to bust you quite often aswell - this is why I am trying to find which style is best for playing it. I have tried lots of lines here and still am not sure on which is the best.

bops wrote:

hopefully someone will come along amd tell me im a gob****e and have it all wrong - i'll feel beter then

you're a gob****e;) - but probably not wrong....

Gholimoli wrote:

as for the hand some times lead,some times check raise,some times call in that order.

Gholi - this is what I am trying to get to. Can you explain why you feel lead>check-raise>call? Is there any maths behind this?

Primewise

marius wrote:

When I flop a nut flush draw I am looking to get stack in asap. But recently I find that this is not really working for me. Your are basically telling the villian your hand and letting him play perfectly.

That is definetly a losing strategy! When you flop a flush draw, you only hit about 35% of the time by the river! Why risk your entire stack every time you flop the nut-flush draw?

If you put him on a set / 2 pair , then you should only call if you're getting 2:1 pot odds on your money on the flop, and call on the turn if you are getting at least 4:1.

Raise or shove if you sense weakness (like TPTK / feeler bets / continuation bets). If you raise / shove against a likely strong hand then you'll be called and miss your draw too often

Lissavalley

mdwexford wrote:

id lead on the flop and hope to get raised so i can shove.
i want to get my stack in on the flop

This is one sure way to go broke if villain only call with 2pair or better.

As for the hand in question I make a blocker bet on the turn of about a quarter to half the pot. I usually lead the flop though.

Iago

marius wrote:

Gholi - this is what I am trying to get to. Can you explain why you feel lead>check-raise>call? Is there any maths behind this?

imo

lead is better than check raise for a couple of reasons

1. Your opponent may fold and you pick up a small uncontested pot, this is far better than losing a big contested pot

2. You're still only drawing and you want to give yourself the odds to go for that draw, to do that you need the pot to be bigger going into the turn

3. When you lead you'll sometimes be called by hands that are behind you even without your draw, it also allows you to gauge your opponents relative strength of hand.

check raise is better than call because

1. If you call and a club hits the turn the odds are that your opponent will clam up, you've played it like a drawing hand and now the draw has hit. He probably won't pay you off. If you check-raise the flop it looks less likely that you're just drawing

2. If you check raise then you get more information from your opponent, and you represent a fairly strong hand. You've limped from the SB and then check-raised a low flop, 2 pair or a set are possible holdings in your opponents mind now.

3. Sometimes when you check-raise your opponent will fold and you pick up the pot, average stack is around 1500 I'm guessing and with the villians bet there's 285 in the pot, you should be happy to take it here if you can.

4. If you just call and miss the turn you've given up 10% of your stack and still have no idea what your opponent is holding. Also an 85 bet on the flop smacks of overcards.


In saying all that it depends on what level this is at, and whether the players know what they're doing or not.

if it was me, I call the preflop bet, and I lead out for 150 on that flop.

Macspower

my humble opinion would be to lead the flop for about 130 and lead the turn for about 2/3 of the pot if called on the flop. I don't want to get my stack in here against a made hand. I think you have very good FE on the flop and turn.
If you do hit the river and he has called this far you'll prob get paid off on the river.

Played as is if you had called and hit the river another club would have killed the action and you prob won't get paid.

right or wrong it's prob the way I play it.

Mac

HiCloy

Lissavalley wrote:

This is one sure way to go broke if villain only call with 2pair or better.

.

Even if the villian has 2 pair we're still 5/2 to win, and if he has a set we're 3/1. If they're laying down a lot of their raising range this will be a profitable move

There was an interesting comment posted a few days ago about people who check raise the flop when OOP and their actions on the turn. Basically they would C/R with a flush draw or with a made hand like a set or 2 pair. Then on the turn if the flush card didn't hit they would check the turn with the flush draw and lead with the made hand.

The poster said this was something that was common enough and some players tended to do this all the time, making their holding transparent

This is the sort of very predictable play I would have made before and is definitely something to avoid.

carlop

i'd lead out for around 120. You can take down the pot now and your hand is better disguised than a check-call. Also if someone has a hand that they were going to bet aggressively (i.e. pot-sized) this may lead them to just call, letting you see a cheaper turn, or make a weakish raise giving you nice odds. A lot depends on how the table is playing though and the standard of villains. If min betting is the order of the day than a check call works fine.
I'd never want to be getting my stack in tho at this stage of an STT with only a flush draw

bops

many people seem to think leading out here is a good thing

well i strongly disagree!!

This is a 5 way pot and you are 1st to act, with a nut draw on a soft board.

If you lead out here:
1) you will win a small pot uncontested
2) you will get called by one or more players
3) you will get reraised by one of them

1) i think is not the result you were looking for
2) is fine
3) if you call the raise, it puts you on the backfoot - you are OOP with no hand atm and are not in control of the hand
you of course can push here, but i don't think you want to get it in to quick - many would tho)

...on the other hand, if you check:

1) it will be checked around
2) someone will bet it
3) someone will bet it and get callers
4) someone will bet it and be reraised

1) it's ok - free card, but pot not built

2) you can raise here and take a bigger pot down uncontested than if you led at it, or he may call your raise, and you will be the aggressor in the hand (albeit oop), but the focus will be on you seemingly having a strong hand
If you feel he is strong, you have the option of calling or letting it go

3)same as 2 except the pot is now more juicey to take down now and also you are getting better odds on you money to hit your outs

4)same as 3 except now you can see clearer where the strength is and evaluate what your best move is in relation to the pot size and the price you will have to pay to see the next card

if it was a 2 or 3 way pot, maybe a lead is best, because the chances of someone else betting are less, but in a 4/5/6 way pot i stongly recommend checking and reasessing when it gets back to you

I said this the other day, when there are 5/6 players to the flop, i think it can be advisable to treat the SB as the button - just check and see what's going on - it sorta gives you position!!

bops

marius wrote:

you're a gob****e;) - but probably not wrong....

thanks feel better already!

mdwexford

Lissavalley wrote:

This is one sure way to go broke if villain only call with 2pair or better.

As for the hand in question I make a blocker bet on the turn of about a quarter to half the pot. I usually lead the flop though.

the idea is there is a good chance of the villain folding and we pick up the pot unontested, if they do call we still have at least nine outs and sometimes 12 with ace being live.

carlop wrote:

I'd never want to be getting my stack in tho at this stage of an STT with only a flush draw

it shouldnt matter what stage it is, you should play the hand optimally every time whether its level 1 or heads up.

DeVore

If you CRAI him, you have to consider if he can (or should) actually fold at that point. He may well not be able to get away from it.... Say he has 1000 and he pot bets (200) and you CRAI. He has 800 behind the pot is now 1400 for an 800 call. Thats nearly 2:1 and he may not fold.... just something people dont always think about.


DeV.

jimmii

When playing draws you need to take into account the aggression of the other players and how they will react if you do make your flush. If you know its they are a bit of a station then playing it passively is ok as you know you are likely to get paid off on a decent sized bet on the end if you do make your flush. If they are tight and are likely to run a mile when that third suit hits then play it more aggressively so that they get more attached to the pot and it makes it harder for them to get away from.

Some people seem hooked on trying to get the money in with a nut flush draw. In tournament play this can be right but its not something I want to do in a cash game as much. Drifting too far into -EV too often is never good and your push with the draw is only going to be +EV if you know that people are going to fold a lot so that it makes up for the 66% of the time when you are called and lose. You really want something to go with your flush draw (other than assuming that pairing your ace is enough) to want to get it all in.

insafehands

8 clubs + 3 aces = 11 cards. This is assuming an ace would win, which you can't be sure of.

You're odds of hitting one of your outs is 4.75:1 and you're getting (I think) less than 2:1 on your call.

It's an easy fold, unless you put him on air in which case you raise (risky). You played it less than average, and should have been more aggressive on earlier streets - but boards is a great place to learn and you'll undoubtedly improve in future.

GL.

mdwexford

insafehands wrote:

8 clubs + 3 aces = 11 cards. This is assuming an ace would win, which you can't be sure of.

You're odds of hitting one of your outs is 4.75:1 and you're getting (I think) less than 2:1 on your call.

It's an easy fold, unless you put him on air in which case you raise (risky). You played it less than average, and should have been more aggressive on earlier streets - but boards is a great place to learn and you'll undoubtedly improve in future.

GL.

your maths is very wrong!!!

first of all its 9 clubs not 8, plus 3 aces = 12 outs.

46 cards left and 12 of them are good for you. 46 divided by 12 = 3.83:1

also there is 370 in the pot and the villians bet of 260 makes 630.
630 divided by 260 to call = 2.42:1 on the call

phantom_lord

plus you have implied odds and all that jazz.

Jesus Wept

I don't understand the large desire to get it allin againest an overpair on the flop for a race that some posters have expressed.

It wouldn't be a terrible scenario, but I don't understand the desire to race againest an overpair... (also with the slightly worse end of the race)

Iago

You've actually got potentially 15 outs

3 aces
9 clubs
3 fours

That's presuming you're behind at this stage and your opponent isn't just holding two overcards to the board or K2c or something ridicylous like that.

You also have implied odds if he calls your bet and you have the potential to win the pot uncontested and add circa 40-50% to your stack.

The-Rigger wrote:

I don't understand the large desire to get it allin againest an overpair on the flop for a race that some posters have expressed.

It wouldn't be a terrible scenario, but I don't understand the desire to race againest an overpair... (also with the slightly worse end of the race)

That's assuming he has an overpair to the board and not two overcards. or 66/55 or whatever. It's no so much a desire to get it all-in against an overpair so much as the +EV of the move.

The money won when opponent folds + we outdraw their holding + they call when behind (albeit miniscule) > than the money lost when they call and we lose.

There is also the concept of time spent, you have a chance to add to your stack uncontested, or double up here. If you double up then you have a great chance of an ITM finish, if you add to your stack with an aggressive move you can utilise this later when holding a much stronger holding.

If you lose then you haven't invested a great deal of time into this SNG and you can fire up another one. A lot of SNG players work off the basis of time invested per game, if they can get an earlyish double up or chance for doubling up or going out they'll take it.

This obviously becomes less attractive once you move further into the levels of an SNG

Jesus Wept

Iago wrote:

You've actually got potentially 15 outs

3 aces
9 clubs
3 fours

That's presuming you're behind at this stage and your opponent isn't just holding two overcards to the board or K2c or something ridicylous like that.

You also have implied odds if he calls your bet and you have the potential to win the pot uncontested and add circa 40-50% to your stack.



That's assuming he has an overpair to the board and not two overcards. or 66/55 or whatever. It's no so much a desire to get it all-in against an overpair so much as the +EV of the move.

The money won when opponent folds + we outdraw their holding + they call when behind (albeit miniscule) > than the money lost when they call and we lose.

There is also the concept of time spent, you have a chance to add to your stack uncontested, or double up here. If you double up then you have a great chance of an ITM finish, if you add to your stack with an aggressive move you can utilise this later when holding a much stronger holding.

If you lose then you haven't invested a great deal of time into this SNG and you can fire up another one. A lot of SNG players work off the basis of time invested per game, if they can get an earlyish double up or chance for doubling up or going out they'll take it.

This obviously becomes less attractive once you move further into the levels of an SNG

a four is hardly an 'out'

if the board ends 23894, againest anyone who had a piece of on the flop.


If a four fell it would give you a few more outs, with one card to come, but I couldn't call it an out

Iago

The-Rigger wrote:

a 4 is hardly an 'out'

if the board ends 23884, you won't be collecting the pot againest an overpair.

The board would be 23854 giving you a straight with your A

Jesus Wept

Iago wrote:

The board would be 23854 giving you a straight with your A

I'm aware of that, but counting the 4's as 'outs' on a 238 flop with A7 is stretching things imo

Anyhow, back to the topic at hand.

Iago

The-Rigger wrote:

I'm aware of that, but counting the 4's as 'outs' on a 238 flop with A7 is stretching things imo

Anyhow, back to the topic at hand.

My comment on outs was a response to the odds being quoted after the turn card, when the 4 became an out.


Anyway, as I said earlier in the thread I'm happy to get it in on the flop for the reasons I gave a few posts ago. If he accidently turned over an overpair I'd have to think hard about it, but I'd probably still get it in.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.