Nutflush vs. Straightflush, can I fold here ever? $25PLO

[JP OSU]

almost all... b/c if he's not completely retarded, he's not paying off your 3-bet unless he has you beat...

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
How about this variation on the theme:

Let's say the hand goes to the river relatively quietly because the players are fairly deep and the straight flush guy doesn't raise. Hero with the nut flush leads on the river and striaght flush villain raises.

Under what circumstances would you consider simply calling?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just calling would be pretty "standard" here. The better question is under what circumstances would you consider folding.

[wazz]

I folded a nut flush on a non-paired board once. The guy played it like a retard but still got paid off by the 2nd nut flush. The flop comes 579 all clubs, I've got A4 of clubs, the flop is checked round, I bet the turn and am called in two places, I bet the river 2nd to speak out of 3 and got checkraised. Dumped it immediately, couldn't believe it when I saw the guy behind me call the checkraise. The sick thing was, we were all 300+ BB deep and if he bets flop or turn he gets soooooooo much more value.

[Slonye6]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Deeper than you will ever have.

[/ QUOTE ]

disagree, assuming you have a read that your opponent plays competently.

pot 5 BB, same board. you lead for half the pot, quite a normal bet size with the nut flush. he min-raises, also a normal action with the mortal nuts. now you pot it back to him, and he re-pots. this requires only 65 BB stacks and i can't see how calling is correct against a good player.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was being deliberately vague/annoyed, my apologies. My point is, if you have to ask about folding the NF against a SF with like what, <175 BB? At quarter stakes? You aren't likely to ever be playing deep enough and/or solid enough opponents to ever do this.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Deeper than you will ever have.

[/ QUOTE ]

disagree, assuming you have a read that your opponent plays competently.

pot 5 BB, same board. you lead for half the pot, quite a normal bet size with the nut flush. he min-raises, also a normal action with the mortal nuts. now you pot it back to him, and he re-pots. this requires only 65 BB stacks and i can't see how calling is correct against a good player.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was being deliberately vague/annoyed, my apologies. My point is, if you have to ask about folding the NF against a SF with like what, <175 BB? At quarter stakes? You aren't likely to ever be playing deep enough and/or solid enough opponents to ever do this.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of low-stakes players would be prime candidates to consider folding against because they're so passive and predictable.

[grizy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Deeper than you will ever have.

[/ QUOTE ]

disagree, assuming you have a read that your opponent plays competently.

pot 5 BB, same board. you lead for half the pot, quite a normal bet size with the nut flush. he min-raises, also a normal action with the mortal nuts. now you pot it back to him, and he re-pots. this requires only 65 BB stacks and i can't see how calling is correct against a good player.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was being deliberately vague/annoyed, my apologies. My point is, if you have to ask about folding the NF against a SF with like what, <175 BB? At quarter stakes? You aren't likely to ever be playing deep enough and/or solid enough opponents to ever do this.

[/ QUOTE ]

It really depends. If he's called you down and decided to raise you on river without board pairing... I'd seriously consider folding against solid players.

[Jamma]

embarassing but true, this one time, I was really tired and tilted (after losing a 400bb pot with top set and NFD to runners for a straight) - and I misread the board and thought I had the nut flush..

I had AsKcxsxc, board Ad 10c 2c 6c 7s

and for whatever reason I was sure the Ac was on the board! I never actually doublechecked, so that was another 100BB I lost..

The point is, you're not _always_ up against the nut just because you get action [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Also at PLO25 I'v seen some really massive pots on monochrome flops when I had the A of that suit and a SF isn't possible.. And it turns out they have something like 7 resp Q high flushes without redraws.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
embarassing but true, this one time, I was really tired and tilted (after losing a 400bb pot with top set and NFD to runners for a straight) - and I misread the board and thought I had the nut flush..

I had AsKcxsxc, board Ad 10c 2c 6c 7s

and for whatever reason I was sure the Ac was on the board! I never actually doublechecked, so that was another 100BB I lost..

The point is, you're not _always_ up against the nut just because you get action [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Also at PLO25 I'v seen some really massive pots on monochrome flops when I had the A of that suit and a SF isn't possible.. And it turns out they have something like 7 resp Q high flushes without redraws.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't have to *always* be against the nut to make folding right.

[Jamma]

[ QUOTE ]

You don't have to *always* be against the nut to make folding right.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but unless he always has the nut folding isnt always the right thing to do

[automat]

i d never be able to fold this in my life since i m just too bad . think i m learning nevertheless. first time i ran into a str8 flush, i had flopped quads so the loss of a full buy-in was sort of mandatory [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]. some days later i flopped the nut flush, bet it all the way down to find myself raised on the river. and i - JUST CALLED with no reads on that player at all. hard to describe how good not going broke on that sort of cold deck felt. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]