|
lonnie
|
11-25-2004, 02:18 AM
Post subject: Giving an opponent infinite odds
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 923
|
|
I've been reading WLLHE by Lee Jones again. One concept that I find weird is:
This is in reference to holding a strong hand like A K on a board with A 2 7
"However, if you check and let him draw at his flush for free, you are giving him infinite odds on his draw, which is far better for him than your charging him a bet for his draw."
Conversely, in the next section Lee Jones is talking about when YOU are the one on a flush draw with a few potential callers.
"In fact, you are often in a situation where you can bet or raise your draws for value."
Obviously, I am betting or check-raising TPTK with AK on a two suited board regardless. The thing that I don't understand is how giving an opponent infinite odds on a flush draw is a good thing for them. Wouldn't it be to their disadvantage to check through the nut flush draw on the flop in just about all situations? If "infinite odds" are so good then why does he later recommend you to bet your draw for value in most situations? (other than for the free card strategy, if in position)
I dig the concepts, but the "infinite odds" thing sounds like a load of BS. I've seen this in several books. You will not knock an opponent off of the flush draw anyway, so I see betting/raising TPTK to be a value move, not a strategic move at all.
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
|~|ypermegachi
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: emo-kid
Posts: 3,580
|
|
he is saying it's better for THEM if you give them a free card, which means worse for you. you do not want it better for them, so you must charge them at least a bet.
raising your own flush draws are to build bigger pots when you hit your flush.
not really contradicting. he's just telling you to make your opponents pay for their draws, and for you to raise and build pots for your own draws.
|
|
|
|
lonnie
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 923
|
|
Quote:
|
he is saying it's better for THEM if you give them a free card
|
How is the free card better for them?
I think it is a contradiction.
Your opponent easily has correct odds to make the call. As a matter of fact it is to their advantage to get a bet into the pot. Not getting money into the pot is as bad for the flush draw as it is for you.
TPTK should bet the hand of course, but not for the reason that it charges the flush draw. There is no benefit to charging the flush draw. The benefit is that they are likely to have the best hand at the time.
|
|
|
|
Fnord
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I'll Do You Like A Truck
Posts: 19,333
|
|
From what I've heard, WLLHE is confused and this is no surprise.
In a large multi-pot, often the best "made hand" and the best "draw" hold the bulk of the pot equity with other hands paying both of them off.
But the bottom line is that if you think you have a lot of equity you should be betting out, period. This only really changes in heads-up situations where you're either way ahead or behind (like AA on a mon-tone flop + turn without any of that suit.) Or against aggressive/weak opponents when you have nearly all of the equity in a small pot (slow play.) This is both to avoid missing value bets and because your bet might outright win you the pot.
|
|
|
|
|~|ypermegachi
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: emo-kid
Posts: 3,580
|
|
oh...i see what you're getting at.
yeah that is weird sounding...
i've never read WLLH but i've heard ppl saying it giving weak-tight advice. maybe you want to give your flush drawing opponents free cards, to keep the pot small. so even if you lose, it's not a disaster as you've only lost 1 or 2BB, instead of 4 or 5 after they hit on the river etc.
it seems like when you think you can be outdrawn they want you to slow down, but when you are behind and have good chances to take down a huge pot you should build it....hmmmm....yes very weird indeed.
|
|
|