Poker Forum

Over 1,246,000 Posts!

REGISTER
Subscribe to FTR web feed
Already Registered?      Username:    Password:   Remember      Forgot Password

Poker Forum

  > 

All Other (Limit) Poker

  > 

Two basic betting questions

  
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
sarbox68
Old 11-17-2006, 02:43 AM     Post subject: Two basic betting questions #1 (permalink)  
sarbox68's Avatar
Full House

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: wondering where the 3 extra chairs at my 6max table came from
Posts: 871
sarbox68
Okay… it’s been a while since I’ve posted up any hands. Was playing like crazy to clear a $500 Pokerroom bonus before they kicked my ass out. Then had to take a break cause I got burned out from too much poker.

But am back (lucky all…), playing at UB and scaled back to .25/.50 to really focus on improving my play as I don’t give a sh!t right now about earning bonuses. That all said, this post focuses on two basic betting questions. Wanted to throw this out there for comment to see if I’m on track, off track, or missed the freakin train entirely…

1) I read on some other post that “pot odds determine IF you bet, EV determines if you raise.” I liked that, so just wanted to get confirmation on applying this. I understand the PFR to accomplish both limiting competition and stuffing the pot when you have a +EV pre-flop hand.

Now post-flop…..

If I have pot odds, I will bet, unless there is a compelling strategic reason to check (i.e. strong expectation I will be raised, going for check-raise, etc.) If my share of the money going into the pot is greater than the number of people I anticipate will call, I should raise.

For example… If I have a 4 flush on the flop (2:1), and at least two other people that will stay in with me, I should raise instead of bet. If I have an OE straight (2.2:1) and have at least 3 other people, I should raise.

This ignores what the flop looks like, player reads, etc., as well as all the other reasons for raising, so I know is gross simplification. But am I understanding that correctly as a basic concept?

2) Sklansky is pretty big on the idea of betting out if you know you would call anyway and are not concerned about a raise. I get this as it fits in the whole “I will be more aggressive, I will be more aggressive…” However, sometimes this means betting where you don't have a made hand (seem to be in this situation alot with combinations of multiple draws... OCs + bdoor flush/straight, etc.) AND you may have been able to get a free card with a check. But this is not my question…

By betting, and forcing other people to bet, the pot gets bigger, improving the chance that you will have the right pot odds to bet/call on the turn. You’ve now forced the pot to be bigger, so even if you miss your turn card on a draw, you may have insured that the pot is big enough to give you odds to justify a bet or call on the turn to see the river. If you hadn't increased the pot, you wouldn't have the odds to call a turn bet and would have to fold.

Is this one of the reasons for betting vs. checking on the flop, or just an unintended consequence?

Any thoughts on these two would be much appreciated!
 
Reply With Quote

Play for FREE and practice your game at...

Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
arkitekton
Old 11-17-2006, 03:57 AM #2 (permalink)  
Flush

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: canada
Posts: 269
arkitekton
Quote:
By betting, and forcing other people to bet, the pot gets bigger, improving the chance that you will have the right pot odds to bet/call on the turn. You’ve now forced the pot to be bigger, so even if you miss your turn card on a draw, you may have insured that the pot is big enough to give you odds to justify a bet or call on the turn to see the river. If you hadn't increased the pot, you wouldn't have the odds to call a turn bet and would have to fold.

Is this one of the reasons for betting vs. checking on the flop, or just an unintended consequence?
With the exception of the above, it sounds like you have a good understanding. Of the paragraph I'm quoting you are in a real sense saying that if you make enough -EV bets on the flop, you'll create a situation where you'll be +EV on the turn. And that's a little like you giving me a hundred bucks each time to get two to one odds on a coin toss where you're willing to wager, say, sixty bucks. That's a nice bet for you, except for the fact that in setting up the proposition you've paid so much that in the long run you're almost certain to lose money.
Reply With Quote
Nehmer
Old 11-17-2006, 04:28 AM     Post subject: Re: Two basic betting questions #3 (permalink)  
Full House

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Decatur, IL
Posts: 666
Nehmer
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarbox68
1) I read on some other post that “pot odds determine IF you bet, EV determines if you raise.” I liked that, so just wanted to get confirmation on applying this.
This quote is wrong. Pot odds determine if you CALL. Equity determines if you bet/raise.
Reply With Quote
sarbox68
Old 11-17-2006, 05:34 AM #4 (permalink)  
sarbox68's Avatar
Full House

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: wondering where the 3 extra chairs at my 6max table came from
Posts: 871
sarbox68
Quote:
By betting, and forcing other people to bet, the pot gets bigger, improving the chance that you will have the right pot odds to bet/call on the turn.
Not quite, and sorry if I wasn't clear. Let's say I'm in EP with a draw that's justified by the pot odds. I could check, and hope that I make a clean round and get a free card, or I could come out betting. Sklansky alludes to the idea that, in general, if you'd call someone elses bet, then you should consider just betting out yourself... especially if there's some chance to win right then. (Hold 'em Poker p46... crappy paraphrase.) So instead of checking, I should bet, which means I'm pretty much gonna force the call or fold.

This forcing of the call makes a bigger pot for the Turn, which increases my pot odds and legitimatizes more draws to call/bet for the turn. My question was is this intentional -- i.e. I'm screwing with the strategic intent if I check to try and get a free turn card -- or is it a coincidence?

Hope this makes more sense....
 
Reply With Quote
sarbox68
Old 11-17-2006, 05:41 AM     Post subject: Re: Two basic betting questions #5 (permalink)  
sarbox68's Avatar
Full House

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: wondering where the 3 extra chairs at my 6max table came from
Posts: 871
sarbox68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nehmer
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarbox68
1) I read on some other post that “pot odds determine IF you bet, EV determines if you raise.” I liked that, so just wanted to get confirmation on applying this.
This quote is wrong. Pot odds determine if you CALL. Equity determines if you bet/raise.
You're right, wasn't complete quote... here's what I was referring to...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinky
In simple terms, on each street .......

1) The equity of your hand v's the pot odds (+implied odds) determines if you should continue or fold.

2) Then your EV determines whether you should raise or just call. Remember, expected value is only looking at future bets.
So... my pot odds dictate call or fold, my EV (gated by pot odds...) determines call or raise. Reapply to the original question please...
 
Reply With Quote
NWNewell
Old 11-17-2006, 12:05 PM #6 (permalink)  
NWNewell's Avatar
Flush

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Kennedy Space Center, FL
Posts: 283
NWNewell
Quote:
Originally Posted by arkitekton
Quote:
By betting, and forcing other people to bet, the pot gets bigger, improving the chance that you will have the right pot odds to bet/call on the turn. You’ve now forced the pot to be bigger, so even if you miss your turn card on a draw, you may have insured that the pot is big enough to give you odds to justify a bet or call on the turn to see the river. If you hadn't increased the pot, you wouldn't have the odds to call a turn bet and would have to fold.

Is this one of the reasons for betting vs. checking on the flop, or just an unintended consequence?
With the exception of the above, it sounds like you have a good understanding. Of the paragraph I'm quoting you are in a real sense saying that if you make enough -EV bets on the flop, you'll create a situation where you'll be +EV on the turn. And that's a little like you giving me a hundred bucks each time to get two to one odds on a coin toss where you're willing to wager, say, sixty bucks. That's a nice bet for you, except for the fact that in setting up the proposition you've paid so much that in the long run you're almost certain to lose money.
Agreed... an easier way to look at it might be ....

You're poker profits over the long run are the SUM of ALL your individtuall decisions.

So, if you build a pot on the flop without proper odds, this is a -EV play. Now, in doing so, you might create a +EV play on the turn. However, when you add up your desicions, the overall will be negagtive.

In reality, if you have to build the pot on the flop in order to achieve the required pot odds to continue on the turn, then building the pot on the flop will almost always work out to be more -EV (or at least less positive than only calling) than your resulting turn call will be +EV, resulting in an overall -EV (or at least less positive).

Quote:
Originally Posted by sarbox68
This forcing of the call makes a bigger pot for the Turn, which increases my pot odds and legitimatizes more draws to call/bet for the turn. My question was is this intentional -- i.e. I'm screwing with the strategic intent if I check to try and get a free turn card -- or is it a coincidence?

Hope this makes more sense....
In regard to this aspect. The same thought as above applies. If you check and get to see a free turn card, your EV for that decision is theoretically infinite. However, if you're turn will be less, maybe not enough to call a bet. So, you might fold the turn and the total EV for your hand was infinite. Sounds good to me!! If you bet out, when you had correct odds to call, and only get called, this would be +EV, and now that the pot is bigger, the you are more likely to have proper odds to continue on the turn. But even though you have proper odds to continue to the river and the had is overall +EV, it is not infinitely positive like your flop check and turn fold would have been.

However, here is the rub....

How often will you get to see that free turn card compared to how often will your lead bet pick up the pot on the flop? This is what you have to evaluate. If the table is extreamly tight but agressive and you are more likely to pick up the pot with a bet than see a free card (meaning the last player to ack will usually bet when checked to, but most will fold to signs of strength when they don't have a good hand ) , then betting out is definitely better. However, if they table is verly loose, but very passive (meaning they will usually call, but play weak and don't like to contribute any more money than nessecary), then you may want to try for the free card.

Now, in reality... the problem is, in a multi way pot (2+ opp), someone probably got a peice of something... middle pair, draw, something... so it will be tough to see a freecard when you are OOP. However, someone will usually call a bet also because they caught a piece of something. So, that is why most advocate betting your good draws (OES & 4Flush). So it is always better to be the bettor than the caller (because you have the fold equity... dispite how small.. it is better than nothing)

But conversly, in a HU pot, it is likely that your 1 oppoenent didn't catch a piece of the flop (and he usually knows the same thing about you, so he proabably will bet if checked to). So, it is usually easier to pick up the pot with a bet OOP than it is to pick up a free card. So again, most advocate betting out.

Sorry this became such a long post... but hopefully this clears up Sklansky's stance a little fore you... and basically illustrates why you stand a better chance of betting out with your good draws (at least when OOP). Not because you are building the pot for the turn or to increase your drawing odds EV, but because your chances of getting a free card are usually less than your chances of picking up the pot.
My "Operation Come Back" Thread: Interupted.
 
Reply With Quote
Reply
Latest Poker News
KoRnholio Old 05-26-2012, 03:08 PM    Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
According to an email sent out by Mark Bryan, a gaming analyst at Merrill Lynch, the Australian government plans to legalize online poker sometime in the next six to 12 months. This move will coincide ...

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:43 PM.

Contact Us - Archive - Top

FTR Testimonials

All content
© FlopTurnRiver.com 		Advertising  |   Partners  |   Testimonials  |   T&C  |   Contact Us  |   FTR News & Press  |   Site Map  |   Search FTR

Full Tilt  |   Titan Poker  |   UltimateBet  |   Poker Stars  |   Ladbrokes Bonus  |   Sportsbook  |   Cake Poker  

Play Texas Holdem Online, Online Texas Holdem Strategy, & Poker Forum
This is not a gambling website.