Guidelines for holding a Flush Draw

I found myself often confused on what to do when holding a nut flush draw. The last few home games Ive played in, I find myself chasing a flush draw and I end up wasting half my stack. Prime Example of something I ran into today:

I get dealt Ad,4d at a middle position and I limp in, to see the flop. Flop turns out to be something like 5d, 6h, 9d. I raise a dollar, and Im re-raised to $2. At this point I call because I know I have at least 10 outs. I forget what the turn was exactly, I think it was a jack of spades (not certain) but at this point I realize I my flush possibility is much thinner at this point, but I try and push my opponent out with a $2 raise, but he calls. River is another card (forget exactly) but I missed my flush, check and Im met by another raise, and I am forced to fold.

Now I know my description of the hand is not precise, but all Im seeking is some tips on how to handle a flush draw after the flop. A situation like this has occured several times in previous games and its appearing as a pretty big flaw that makes me look vulnerable. I feel I play pretty solid most of the time, but I definetly have found a hole in chasing draws.

you only hit your flush draw 1 in 3 times so you only want to be putting in a 1/3 of the pot or less

You did not specify if you play ring games or Sngs, and whether you play limit or no limit

For ring games you have to follow pots odds (and implied odds).
On an unpaired board you have 9 clean outs
about 18% to hit by the next card
about 35% to hit by the next two cards.

So if you have a flush draw on the flop and you think you will be raised again after the turn you need to call if you have to put in the pot <18% of it.

In Sngs only chase draws if you can do it for cheap, dont risk a major part of your stack chasing

you only hit your flush draw 1 in 3 times so you only want to be putting in a 1/3 of the pot or less

Can you possibly explain then why I was a book I'mreading quotes the chance of making a flush draw as 4:1.....................when 3:1 seems more obvious????

first of all 1 in 3 times means you will make it 1 time every 3 and not make it 2 times in every 3. So the odds against making it are 2:1.

Secondly, you were reading about the odds of making your flush on the next card which IMO is a much more sensible way of calculating whether or not you should be calling bets in NL because you have no idea what the bet sizes are going to be in future betting rounds. Chance of making flush with the next 1 card is about 20% or 1 in 5.

1 time you will make it
4 times you will not

odds of 4:1 against making it (i.e. 4:1 actually means 1 in 5 chance)

Also, remember that while the odds of making your flush is clear, this doesn't mean that those are the odds of actually winning the hand.

For example, you hold the A K and the board reads

7 Q 5 .

If you are up against 7 7, you will still hit your flush if the Q falls, but this will make your opponent a full house. Even is a safe diamond falls, your opponent will still have outs to beat you on the river.

The other case is pretty obvious, and that is flush over flush. Those are rare, so generally don't bother. But still, be careful when you make your flush on the turn and there is a chanse that your flush will be beaten by a higher flush on the river.

The solution to this is to not count all the remaining cards of that suit as an out, depending on reads, the board etc. (A paired boards is dangerous etc). Then you calculate your odds on your estimated number of outs.

am i getting this all wrong?
I understand from books and my learned colleagues on FTR that the odds of hitting a flush with ONE card to come are 4:1 (20%)
But shouldn't it be (25%) because there are 4 suits; obviouslly 3 cards that WONT make the flush and 1 that WILL (ie 3:1)



Maybe I am just no good at maths

Originally Posted by liebs

am i getting this all wrong?
I understand from books and my learned colleagues on FTR that the odds of hitting a flush with ONE card to come are 4:1 (20%)
But shouldn't it be (25%) because there are 4 suits; obviouslly 3 cards that WONT make the flush and 1 that WILL (ie 3:1)



Maybe I am just no good at maths

Since four of your suit is exposed (two in your hand and two on the board) and only one or two of other suits, there is less cards left of your suit than the others.

Thanks for the explanation on the amount of the pot to bet. I find myself putting too much in to chase a flush in a SNG myself. Seems like a lot of time you get pushed out of the hand on the turn anyway...

Originally Posted by cardsman1992

Seems like a lot of time you get pushed out of the hand on the turn anyway...

Exactly. Thats why in No Limit it is best to use the odds for 1 cards to come. You have no idea what price the second card is going to cost you so there is no way to count the odds for seeing 2 cards.

Stateing sandstorms post more explicitly.

You hold the A 2

Flop: 7 Q 4

Let us suppose that you are 100% sure that you need at least a flush to win the hand.

You can see 5 cards so there are 52-5 = 47 left in the deck*.
There are 13 diamonds in a 52 cards deck. You can see 4 of them so there must be 9 of them left in the deck. These 9 diamonds are your outs.

The chance that the turn card will be a diamond is simply the number of diamonds / the number of cards left in the deck

9/47 = 0.19 i.e. there is a 19% chance you will make your flush on the turn.

In a hundred trials you can expect to make your flush 19 times on the turn, and not make it 100-19 = 81 times on the turn.
The odds against making a flush on the turn are therefore 81:19 against, which is very close to 4:1 against.


*In fact, your opponent holds 2 cards as well so there are only 45 cards left in the deck. However, since you don't know what your opponents cards are, it is correct to treat the deck as including all of the cards you cannot see (as any of them have an equal probability of being in the deck)

I am a big fan of the check/flat call. If after the flop I am on a flush draw, I would probably check to opp. If he bets (depending on amount) I would usually flat call him, If I hit then a bet will follow. If he bets heavy after the flop, chances are he is trying to protect his hand against the flush. If this is the case I would check again if I made, and re raise his next bet......just me though.

most decent players at the micro limits wont bet again once that 3rd flush card falls if you have been check/ flat calling because it makes it look as though you are chasing. Of course alot of players at the micro limits arent decent players.

Originally Posted by xBULLETTSx

I am a big fan of the check/flat call. If after the flop I am on a flush draw, I would probably check to opp. If he bets (depending on amount) I would usually flat call him, If I hit then a bet will follow. If he bets heavy after the flop, chances are he is trying to protect his hand against the flush. If this is the case I would check again if I made, and re raise his next bet......just me though.

I would very much like to play against you, in this case, because with my TP I will make you overpay to see the turn and the river, and I will slow right down - i.e. there's no way you'd be able to check raise me - should the third flush card come down. You will win 35% of the time, but because I'm making you pay over the odds I will still end up financially positive in the long run.

Lets say someone bets the pot and then someone else calls.

You hold the Ace high flush draw. The board is not paired and there is no straight flush possibility. You are also last to act.

It would make sense to call this then, correct? Since flush draw odds are 1:3 and the pot is laying you 3:1. You are at least even money if you call plus whatever other bets are made. Or would you need another caller to be profitable?

Also, what I have been attempting as of late is to bet the pot on the flop with an ace or king high flush draw when I'm in position and it's been checked to me. If someone reraises me I then push all-in. I figure I have a 36% to make the flush and If I don't I only need my opponent to fold 14% of the time to at least be even money in the long run. Since I otherwise maintain a tight table image I've found this to be fairly profitable so far.

I most likely messed up the math here so feel free to berate me.

If the odds make it a good bet, do it... otherwise fold.

Murdoc wrote

I figure I have a 36% to make the flush and If I don't I only need my opponent to fold 14% of the time to at least be even money in the long run

Your numbers are a bit off - your chances are
(14)(1.) + (86)(0.36) = 45%

You have 100% to win in the 14/100 times that he folds
and 36% to win in the 86/100 cases he calls.

If you are playing Sng you also have to take into account the following:
If you lose you have 0% to make money
If you win it does not guarentee you any money

cardman wrote

Thanks for the explanation on the amount of the pot to bet. I find myself putting too much in to chase a flush in a SNG myself. Seems like a lot of time you get pushed out of the hand on the turn anyway...

In Sngs stack size is a major factor in the decision to chase.
Lots of times even if you have the pot odds to chase it will cost you too much of your stack to make it worthwhile.

Sngs is all about picking your spots and battles, and chasing flushes is more often then not the wrong decision.

I will usually chase flush in the following conditions
1. I have a big enough stack so chasing will cost me relatively very little, and the adventage if I hit (for example knocking off an opponent) is worth it.
2. When the cost is very small (usually early in the Sng if opp minbets) and I believe I have good implied odds.
3. Sometimes as a bluff if I believe that I have a decent chance to push my opponent off the hand

Didn't read all the responses but they seemed kinda long.
You need ~2-1 to see the turn
You need ~4-1 to call a turn bet to see river

Originally Posted by Les_Worm

Didn't read all the responses but they seemed kinda long.
You need ~2-1 to see the turn
You need ~4-1 to call a turn bet to see river

In limit you need around 2:1 to see the turn because you are getting to see 2 cards for the price of 3 big bets.

In No Limit you are getting 1 card for the price he gives you which can be virtually anything on either the turn or river so you need 4:1 for the turn and then 4:1 again on the river. You cant use 2:1 to see the turn in No Limit because you might be overcharged on the river.

You Need 4:1 to see the turn.
You Need 4:1 to see the river.

If your opponent goes allin on the flop so noone can bet anymore you need 2:1 to call and see the turn AND river. This is only because you are paying a one off price to see 2 cards so you get an odds "discount".

.I'm glad this topic came up. I have learned some things already, but I wanted to bring up a question I looked at a little while back and that is the conservatism of the pot odds calculation. I'll use the 18% odds of hitting a flush on the turn for my example.

Pot size: $100, including bet into you.

Obviously we all know pot odds say the largest raise you can call in this situation is $18, which means the pot was $82 before the flop.

Expected value says a much larger call can be made.

To break even, .18 times the pot must be greater than .82 times the call, so

.18p>.82c, so
.18/.82p>c and
~.22p>c

Which means you are breaking even calling 22% of the pot, not 18%. With more outs, the disparity increases as x/(x-1) approaches 1 as x approaches 1. For example, with an open-ended straight flush draw, 15/47 (pot odds)=32% but 32%/58%=47%.

I guess the conservative philosophy works though and artificially accounts for the expected number of cards that complete your draw that are in the folded hands.

Everyone is talking about the odds to call, but the OP didn't call, he semi-bluffed. In that case, he has some fold equity in addition to the flush hitting, and he won't be using the 4:1 odds on the turn. Right?

What we're mssing are the stakes of the game, and hence the original pot size, to evaluate the odds.

Your terminology confuses me because sometimes when you refer to “raise”, it seems like you mean to say “bet”. You don’t tell us how much money is in the pot, so that makes analysis more difficult, too.

In your original scenario, you said that you “raised” to a dollar. If you did indeed “raise”, I think this is a bad play because you want to play cheap and hit your flush. If you actually just “bet”, this would be a bad play in early position or against loose and/or aggressive players or players who showed strength pre-flop because you could make it too expensive and the players probably won’t fold. If you’re in late position or the players are tight and/or passive, a bet could be a good play because you might win the pot right there or buy yourself a free card on the river.

After the turn, you tried to push your opponent out. Betting for the purpose of pushing a player out who just raised the round before doesn’t seem like a smart play. In hindsight, if you think he/she would have checked or bet less than $2, that would have been better.

I participated in a discussion similar to this - you may want to read that over, too.