Bet out to have odds to call

[profnabeshin]

I am new to the site, and still a n00b to poker.

I have 15 outs on turn. Stacks are about even with 2500 chips and 1.5K in the pot. I am OOP and put my Villan on an overpair to the board, most likely to Jam the turn.

If I check and he shoves then I have to fold, getting horrible pot odds. I bet out 900 chips and he shoves giving me 3.05:1 on a call. Does this change my EV from if I checked the turn?

[Shotglass]

That depends upon several things, your cards, the most likely range that you put the villain on and any reads...I'm probably missing a few things.

http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ge-177508.html

Why don't you post the hand and let everyone take a look? If the converter won't work for you (due to low number of posts) then just post the raw hand data and someone will convert it for you.

[Viscaro]

Nope, if you *know* he's going to jam with an overpair no matter if you bet or check, you should check and give up because it doesn't matter what order the chips go in and you are getting an awful price to draw.

[OngBonga]

It depends if your bet has fold equity. If there is a % of his range he can fold to the 900 bet, then it might be a +ev move to set up the correct calling odds by betting.

[couriermike]

In the situation you describe, betting to give yourself odds to call, the bet is bad and the call is good, but the bad bet makes the whole play bad. This assumes, like you said, villain is always jamming the turn and never folding. You should have b/3b ai otf with a big draw vs aggro.

[jyms]

If your getting all your chips in the middle with 30% for your tourney life the details of how they go in the middle doesn't matter. That said OngBonga has a point, we can bet/call if there is more than a chance he may fold. But you never said that when discussing his range so its a check/fold.

[Icanhastreebet]

minbet

[profnabeshin]

I have my Opponent on a range that is 100% Jamming the turn, and he is not folding to any bet I put out. So I have no fold equity.

I wasn't sure if creating the proper odds to call made it a better play, as it was pointed out the 'bad bet' makes it a bad play.

Thanks for the feedback, I will adjust my line of thinking and hopefully make much better play next time.

[Smith]

If you know the player will be suspicious and just call a weak bet, then it's fine. Especially if your deep and have good implied odds.

If you put him on an over pair and he has been aggressive then any money put into the pot is now forfeit. (He's not going to fold and you HAVE to win at showdown) If you don't have any fold equity, and no room to shove then it's not worth it. IMO

Sounds like you already know this was a bad idea in this case. Other situations it can be correct against non-thinking players. Jab at a pot, and see if you can create a profitable situation for yourself.

[manfredi]

Is the OP asking if he can essentially 'buy' his way into better odds when the villain is definitely going to shove? I.E. are his odds better if he bets half his stack so that he only has to call with the other half of his stack?

If I understand it right, he has the same number of outs and the same number of chips to call with, regardless of whatever action happens during any given street. So betting part of your stack so that it looks like you have better odds to call the villain's shove is just an illusion. It's the same as if you check/call the villain's shove. The only difference is that you essentially are calling half of his stack before he bets it. Then you call the other half. The odds aren't better, you've just split them into two and ignored the first one.

If you KNOW that the villain is going to shove regardless of your bet size, just check/fold if you don't have the correct odds.

[OngBonga]

I am OOP and put my Villan on an overpair to the board, most likely to Jam the turn.

Likely and definite are two different things. How likely? This is where his range is important. How many combos does he call? How many combos does he fold?

Our 900 bet is a semi-bluff that wins 1.5k when he folds. Therefore, if he folds to this bet half of the time, we make 300 chips before we even see the river.

When he shoves, we now have to call 1.6k to win 4.9k with 15 outs, so we're making money by calling, but only a little bit, just like when he folds half the time we make a little bit.

Basically, if he's folding 50% of the time, we're making a small amount of money. Therefore, we can afford for him to continue a little more often than 50%, but not much. The bet must induce folds at least some of the time, probably around 45%, to break even. (Does anyone know how to calculate this figure accurately?) If we think he continues more often than 55%, we should check and either fold or call based on the size of his bet. And we determine how many hands he folds or continues with based on his range and tendancies. If he has, say, QQ+ AK and we figure he folds all AK except nut flush draw and shoves QQ+ AK nfd, and we have no blockers (we have JTs for argument's sake), then he has 18 combos of QQ+ and one of AK nfd, giving him 19 shove combos, compared to the 15 remaining AK combos that he folds. In this example, he folds around 44% of the time, very close indeed. So really we'd need him to have more fold hands in his range before such a bet can become profitable, perhaps AQs

[OngBonga]

I fucked up the maths, we don't win 300 chips when he folds 50% of the time, we lose 300 chips. We need even more folds to break even.