What play is more valuable in the long run?

Wanted to get everyones thoughts on this? Due to losing my fair share against fish who chase, i wanted to see what everyone elses point of view was on this:

You are dealt QsQd in late position.
In this case, i raise 3-4x BB hoping to get down to 1-2 players max.

Everyone folds around to BB who calls the bet.

Flop comes = Qc 6c Kd

- Fish checks, what is your bet in this spot? Do you bet an amount you think will get a call if the person is on a flush draw or has a K, like 1-2x the pot size? Would you bet higher and try to take it down right there?-

Turn comes = 3h or any other meaningless rag, leaving 2 suited cards on the board

- Fish checks, do you bet high and try to take it down? Bet low and try to get a call? Remember we are dealing with a fish

- River comes = 8c

- Fish bets the pot, do you fold it or call?

It seems like im faced with situations like this all day long...where i am way in front on the flop and even on the turn, just to have someone catch their flush card (9 outs out 49 or 48).

My question = is it more profitable in the long run (assuming the above situation presents itself 10 times a day) to bet larger on the flop or turn and hope he folds, or bet the same way and let the cards sort it out?

Betting larger tends to get smaller pots on average if the guy folds, but it seems like whenever i bet it smaller, the amount i lose when he does catch (3 out of 10 times lets say) is greater than the amount i win if he doesnt - becuase i either fold to his big bet after the river or call and lose.

I just seem to get ths situation enough that if i played it with a little more consistency it wouldnt be such a thorn in my side. Comments and critique appreciated!

-CCIE SOON

On the flop, bet pot or near pot size. Don't give him odds to chase. If he chases that is fine but he did so against proper odds. Over betting the pot is also fine.
Again on the turn, bet the pot or high enough to not allow odds to chase the flush. Hell, put him all in if you think he will call.
The river call is dependent. If you put him on a draw then you have to believe he has it. I fold, its up to you.

If you can trust yourself to lay it down when they make their draw, get them to call as much money as possible. What you want here is to maximize the pot and minimize the reverse implied odds.

If you have troubles laying down when they've made their draw, that's a leak and you should fix that then do the above.

So does it appear that with my betting, he is getting too good of odds to let it go by the turn?

Thinking about this more clearly, i do notice one flaw that this may have hit on. I would typically bet 2x the pot on the flop, then bet the flop or just under it on the turn (hoping he would call a small/medium sized bet and not catch his card on the river). Obviously this seems wrong as considering how much he has in, he would be inclined to call a small bet getting good odds, to catch.

Would you suggest betting smaller on the flop and bigger on the turn? Forcing him out at that point?


CCIE SOON

Against a fish, I bet a healthy amount on the flop. Since you're the leader in this hand, you should actually be wishing that they're drawing, 'cause a fish WILL be calling draws . If they make their hand, that's just too bad but the majority of the time they won't since the odds are against them. The good thing about fishes is they don't know when to stop drawing so they hang on to it until they realize they've gone broke by calling your big bets when they should have fold in the beginning...

If you want to overbet the pot on the flop that is fine. Your call. But don’t bet a flop amount on the turn, that might give them correct odds to chase.

The fish's odds are completely irrelevant, so long as they're <50%. Bet as much as they will call, no more, no less. Every cent in that pot is more EV for you.

Originally Posted by CrunchyNuts

The fish's odds are completely irrelevant, so long as they're <50%. Bet as much as they will call, no more, no less. Every cent in that pot is more EV for you.

It's better to take the pot down now than to bet so little that they have good enough odds to call.

If you give them the odds to make it +EV for them, it's -EV for you.

Bet at least 3/4 the pot.

even if you think they will fold. (unless you beat even the draw they have)

if you think he's on a draw do you then again bet the pot or more on the turn?

Originally Posted by Laeelin

If you give them the odds to make it +EV for them, it's -EV for you.

Can you prove that? With math? I'm pretty sure I can prove that with >50% to win any bet is +EV (meaning it's completely impossible to make a -EV decision in this situation), but I haven't sat down and done it yet, so I could be wrong here...

You got a set.
bet it like top pair on that flop.
imo, if you raised and are winning the pot post flop it should be a nice one to win so bet the pot. If you have the best hand then bet and win the hand, or make him call pot bets to draw if thats what he catches.
I dont mess around with a made hand get the most out of it, if your infront or make the guy pay for drawing just dont call if he hits.
The slow play on a board where letting the other guy see a cheap card that might beat your hand is a waste of chips imo. Theres no point in playing the hand is there?
Make him get chips in while he chases or thinks hes winning.

k, just sat down with a fellow card playing co-worker of mine and we figured this out.

If they're willing to call outside of their odds, bet as high as they'll go.
If they are not, you are better off betting over their odds anyway - not because betting lower is -EV for you, it's not, but because taking the pot down is *more* +EV then betting lower. Key difference there.

This all of course assuming no further rounds of betting, which isn't the case, and removing that assumption throws a pile of dodo into the works. I like to call that pile "playing style". =)

i bet the most i think he will call in situations like this, but I play it on the safe side... it is fine with me if he makes his flush, as long as I make my full house too.

in your specific situation, I would just make pot sized bets and learn to recognize when people make obvious hands. If you learn that these people are super super passive preflop and they raise preflop, maybe take notice. If you notice someone never raises post-flop even with a good hand, and they're pushing at you, keep it in mind.

Originally Posted by CrunchyNuts

Originally Posted by Laeelin

If you give them the odds to make it +EV for them, it's -EV for you.

Can you prove that? With math? I'm pretty sure I can prove that with >50% to win any bet is +EV (meaning it's completely impossible to make a -EV decision in this situation), but I haven't sat down and done it yet, so I could be wrong here...

I'll try to explain...

Lets say the pot is 10bb's on the flop

We assume that he is on a flush draw (35% chance of hitting by the river)

Lets compair going all in, pot sized bets, and making a 1bb bet on flop, turn, and river.

Hole Cards: QQ
Raise 5bb
BB calls

Flop:Qc 6c Kd

==========================

Situation: All In!

Two possible solutions:
He folds: 10bb pot won
He calls (70bb pot) .. 65% of the time you win the 70bb pot

Anyone can see that him calling is the best possible thing to happen for you, but no one but the fishiest of fish will call that, so lets assume he folds every time to make this easy to see.

Result: 5 bb won every time

==============================

Situation: 1bb

Bet 1bb on flop, turn, and river

You will win 16bb the 65% of the time that the flush misses, and lose 35% of the time when it hits.

Result: 8bb profit 65% of the time, 8bb lost 35% of the time.

=====================================

Pot sized betting: (other than river, no betting on river because if he catches, you dont bet, if he doesnt catche, he folds)
Preflop bet 5bb (10bb pot)
Pot bet on flop (30bb pot)
Pot bet on turn (90bb pot)

Result: 65% of the time you win 45bb, 35% of the time you lose 45bb


===============================


Now lets say your in this situation 100 times.

All in betting: 5x100 = 500bb profit.
1bb betting: 65*8bb - 35*8bb = 240bb profit.
Pot sized betting: 65 * 45 - 35 * 45 = 1,350 bb

As you can see, betting enough to give them +EV results in the least profit (240bb)

For more than twice that profit, just push them out of the pot (500bb ) ...

For the most profit, give them very bad odds (1,350bb)

Note: if they will call an all in, thats the most profit for you of all, but only the worse fish will do that =)


Bet as much as they will call as long as the profit is worth the risk to your current pot (aka: give them -EV).

Problem here is that you're counting pre-flop action in the EV for post-flop action, which isn't correct. For instance, in the "All In!" situation, you win 10bb every time, not 5.

But even with that, you see every situation you present is +EV, which is what I was contending. Nothing you can do here is -EV. May not be optimal EV, but it's not -EV.

And yes, the upshot, as I posted earlier, is to bet as much as they'll call, unless they'll only call with odds, then you should bet more and take it down. That's how you'll maximize your EV. Ignoring any action after the flop bet, that is.

Problem here is that you're counting pre-flop action in the EV for post-flop action, which isn't correct. For instance, in the "All In!" situation, you win 10bb every time, not 5.

That was just to make the math easier....

Thats the actuall changes to your bankroll.

Betting low enough to give your opponent +EV calls will cost you more than you win...

Another way to look at it is that when you make the 1bb bets on the second example, your really betting 11bb for a chance to win 1bb on the flop...

and then 13bb for a chance to win 1bb on the turn.

and then 15bb for a chance to win 1bb on the river.

If you bet so little that it's +EV for your opponent to call, then it's -EV for you... Poker is a zero sum game...

Basically your risking your entire pot on a 65%/35% bet to win 1bb... thats -EV ... betting 1bb is -EV... it costs you money...

"If you bet so little that it's +EV for your opponent to call, then it's -EV for you... Poker is a zero sum game..."

that's not exactly true. If the pot is 14 million dollars and you have 1 dollar left, even if a flush scare card hits and threatens your set, if your opponent puts you all-in for your dollar on the river, it is +EV for him to put you all-in with a flush, and +EV for you to call with your set, because odds are greater than 1 in 14 million that your hand is actually good.

Originally Posted by Greedo017

"If you bet so little that it's +EV for your opponent to call, then it's -EV for you... Poker is a zero sum game..."

that's not exactly true. If the pot is 14 million dollars and you have 1 dollar left, even if a flush scare card hits and threatens your set, if your opponent puts you all-in for your dollar on the river, it is +EV for him to put you all-in with a flush, and +EV for you to call with your set, because odds are greater than 1 in 14 million that your hand is actually good.

Even when two player play a hand perfectly, and both are making what baised on incomplete information appears to be a +EV move, they are not.

When talking about "Zero Sum" you need to look at the actual cards and odds that each person has...

To put it another way, if you have a set of 999 against someone with a set of 555, and they make a pot size bet, they think it's a +EV move, and you think it's +EV to call.

But in fact it's -EV for him, and +EV for you.

If he had TTT, then you would still think that your making a +EV move, but now it's a -EV move.

Zero Sum is talking about the actual cards in play, not the cards that you think he has.

In The Theory of Poker Sklansky identifies poker's fundamental theorem, which (paraphrased) states: you have made a mistake when you didn't play the same way that you would have had you seen your opponent's cards. Your opponents make a mistake when they do likewise.