Betting draws

[sarbox68]

$2 or $10NL.

So have limped PF w/ Axs or suited connectors. Flop a nut flush or straight draw. Assume multiway pot ... play full ring, so if it's been limped all the way around, probably 4-6 people in.

Limped or checked around to me. In limit, my rule of thumb with FD was to bet IF if felt I could count on at least 2 other people calling as that made it EV+. Maybe 3 other people on a straight draw. Trying to apply this to NL.

In the above situation, if I'm first in I'm making a 1/3-1/2 PSB using the following logic: 1) I may just win the pot out, especially if I'm in position and it's been checked around to me, 2) I'm about 2.2:1 against to make my flush by river and 4.1:1 against by the turn, 3) so... with a 1/3 PSB, if I get one other person calling me, I'm EV+ on the bet as I'm effectively betting 1/3 to win 4/3 (the pot (3/3) + the 1/3 PSB...) ... two or more callers and I'm even better off... , 4) the implied odds when I hit improve the odds picture further as it's almost invariably the winning hand and 5) OOP I'm finding this prevents the default PSB from the dude behind me trying to price out the draw as they don't tend to raise me at these levels.

If I miss the draw on the turn, I'll evaluate whether I repeat on the river... 1/2 the time I do, 1/2 the time I check it around.

My experience has been that three things usually happen:
1) I get folded to and win the pot outright
2) I hit my draw and am able to take down a much larger pot
3) I miss my draw, check the river and either have to fold to a bet or lose on SD

I think the combined value of 1 & 2 outweighs 3... but am I just using retarded math??

Oh... and a related question... using implied odds for draws.

Axs, flop nut flush draw. At $10NL there's invariably someone who will make a PSB, presumably to kill the odds for draws like mine. With just the pot odds, I need 2 people to call to give me the 4:1 on my draw... which almost never happens. How do I factor implied odds into the calculation of whether I call and go for the draw or fold? Or is it even an issue, as he's obviously aware of the draw and unlikely to let me stack him when draw completes meaning I'm only going to win what's already in the pot and maybe 1/3PSB more that I can coax out of him on the end...

[Warpe]

...if I'm first in I'm making a 1/3-1/2 PSB...

...retarded math...

Think about the odds you are giving your opponents to continue.

[sarbox68]

4:1+ to call... but don't I ideally want them to continue on (assuming I'm getting favorable odds for my bet) for the 1 in every 2.2 times I make my nut draw?... bigger pot for me, as they'll probably shut down as soon as that 3rd suited hits the board.

Betting less seems too weak and opens me up for a healthy PSB raise...

More seems spewie (is that a word?...)

And I think I kinda want them to limp along with me... enough to get them to call, not too little to make them comfortable raising.

Or again... maybe retarded logic and retarded math...

[Warpe]

You will win more pots by taking selectively bigger stabs with your draws, emphasis on selectively. Most of the time your draw won't complete, so you need to increase the number of times your opponents fold. Betting 2/3<3/4<PSB will accomplish that. 1/3<1/2 gets too little respect to be taken seriously in most games these days. When your draws do complete you take down a bigger pot. You'll also buy yourself more free cards on the turn.

[Dashi]

Flat out, you don't want them to continue. What your doing is called a semi-bluff. It's a bluff because you don't have a made hand, but it's not a total bluff because you have ways to win in the event you get called. Your ideal scenario is to take down the pot right then.

By you throwing out a 1/3psb you are doing many things wrong. 1st off, you are giving the first person who calls 4 to 1 odds which they are absolutely correct in calling with OESD or Flush Draw, thats not to mention the already made hands out there.

Was is Sklansky that said "Your goal is to induce your opponent to make a mistake" For most hands that would even consider anything other than fold to any bet after the flop, calling a 1/3 psb is absolutely correct.

When you have a flush draw to the nuts you have the following situations

1. OOP - I generally like to make a 2/3 - 3/4 psb here in most cases unless I have reads/a board that tells me not to. Paired boards are bad as your flush may not win, as well you may be already drawing dead.

2. Have position and is checked to you .... if the board/reads are any concern at all then take the free card. This means when you do make the flush you might as well been playing face up, but oh well a small pot is better then putting more money in someone elses pot. With luck he is on the same draw and you can get well paid after making it.

3. Have position and >1/2 psb is lead into you. Calling is NOT an option here, as I'm sure you realize you simply do not have the pot odds in most cases, implied odds may change that, but in most cases you can't count on much action after your flush connects. Nothing wrong with folding here at all. However keeping on the semi-bluff theme, I like to occasionally come over the top with 3 or 4x his bet. This is a very hard bet to call unless he hit trips or has an overpair. Problem is it needs to be successful more than 50% to be profitable. Very rarely will someone just call and give you the potential to complete your flush, if they have the goods they will likely shove back.

Hope this ideas help. I am in no way a great player, so don't take what I say as gospel

[Warpe]

"Your goal is to induce your opponent to make a mistake" For most hands that would even consider anything other than fold to any bet after the flop, calling a 1/3 psb is absolutely correct.

bingo bango bongo

By giving your opponent(s) odds to call, the player making the mistake is you.

In a multi-way pot this is even more important, b/c the first caller of a weaksauce bet usually makes the odds irresistible for bringing next to act along.

[sarbox68]

Okay... I understand the semi-bluff concept. Have been applying it in FD or OESD situations where I have TPGK or SPTK by betting 1/2-3/4PSB exactly because of the logic you all described. I'd kept the bets smaller with ONLY a draw 'cause I didn't have anything yet, and was trying to balance "big enough bet to block or take down" with "small enough bet to minimize impact on stack if I completely miss the draw". Kind of my equivalent of why I would call (not raise) a bet in limit with the same draw assuming 2+ callers.

It sounds like the correct line for NL is for me to take the same approach w/ just draws as I do now with the true semi-bluff and focus on taking the pot down immediately vs. building it for the times the draw hits.

I'm still having a little bit of hard time getting my head around the good odds for them, bad odds for me with the smaller bet. If I'm able to get better than 4:1 on my bet (ignoring implied odds), the more callers I get the better, 'cause I'm EV+ on every $ over 4:1 assuming I'm drawing to the nuts. Hate to be a thick headed doof on this, but I still don't get that part....

3. Have position and >1/2 psb is lead into you. Calling is NOT an option here, as I'm sure you realize you simply do not have the pot odds in most cases

This goes to me second question in the post... how does implied odds fit in with these draws? Most $10NL FR games have someone pushing a PSB on any FD board -- as I would -- to eliminate the drawing odds. Are there any circumstances under which I would call that HU or am I pretty much resigned to folding any nut FD if I can't get 2 other callers to this raise regardless of how much the raiser has behind them?

Thanks Dashi & Warpe (as always) for the great info!

[Dashi]

What do you plan on gaining by just calling a psb? If it was a stone bluff you'll likely gain the turn and river by that call. But even if you make your flush, it's highly doubtful you'll earn any more bets, but you will gain the pot. If he does have something.....anything then you'll be facing a bet that again you don't have the odds to call.

When you make your flush unless he has TPTK or better, you will have almost no chance of extracting enough out of him to make the original call worth it.

Maybe I'm not thinking correctly on this but my rule of thumb is in most cases, I will call a bet that is giving me 1 less "expressed pot odds" than I need to make my hand. I may not be getting full value on my drawing hands here, but I don't like not being the aggressor at all.

I aim to be the aggressor 60-70% of the hands I play in. Calling gives you no information. I prefer to know whether I'm beat sooner rather than later

[Chopper]

sarbox,

coming from limit, dont you use the "free card play?" do the same thing here in position. bet the flop, like you would TP, and take the free card on the turn.

oop...bet the flop, like you would TP, check the turn whether it hits or not. if it hits, bomb the river if he checked behind on the turn. use this one sparingly, its a high risk play to be used when you have no respect at the table. after all, moves like these are why we wouldnt have respect in the first place.

one of the big differences between limit and NL is that you can actually take away odds. dont lay them for others even when you are semi-bluffing.

playing flush draws can be tricky. players are smart enough to avoid paying them off big. you need to sweeten the pot, but avoid dumping in too much bad money. that is why you need to semi-bluff them IN POSITION.

[spoonitnow]

I'm not reading through this whole thread, but:

A difference from LHE to NLHE is that it almost never happens that you'll be putting in a bet or raise because of pot equity from people calling you.

Be more apt to call on the flop with a draw based on implied odds than calling on the turn.

Semibluffs are only worth a shit if you have fold equity in NL.