15/30 AK

[SackUp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
with the size of the pot and the previous cc, I think that lp and sb are as likely to call 1 as they are 2.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how you can think this. They cold-called 2 small bets previously on the flop, which could mean many things. If they cold-called to big bets on the turn, then i'd agree with you, but most somewhat competent players are folding something like top pair to 2 bets at the river on this scary board. They might even fold 2 pair.

Of course, they might call 2 bets cold with 1 pair or 2 pair, but to say they are as likely to call 2 than they are as 1 is a little crazy to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok as likely is a bit of a stretch, but I think there are a lot of hands they are calling 1 with that they are calling 2 cold with. And I think there are more of these hands, than hands they are folding for even 1 bet. Hence I raise.

[Fat Nicky]

[ QUOTE ]
ok as likely is a bit of a stretch, but I think there are a lot of hands they are calling 1 with that they are calling 2 cold with. And I think there are more of these hands, than hands they are folding for even 1 bet. Hence I raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming we do have the best hand, I think one thing we can agree on is that the EV between raising and calling this river is very close.

[bobman0330]

I like a call. I think you're ahead of BB, but I'm worried because I can't put either LMP or SB on a hand. Either or both might have a smallish flush (would LMP CC with 98s? 65s??) that they're too wussy to raise (and won't fold on the river). Or maybe something like T9 that backed into a river pair. Both of those possibilities indicates just calling. On the other hand, if they have some bizarre two pair, a raise would be better. In balance though, the CCs on the flop suggest that it's one of the first two possibilities, so call.

[busted]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the debate about overcalls is secondary. I agree with the raise on the flop. But IMO, a major mistake was made on the turn by calling a single bet and not raising. On the turn, the pot is big (9 BB so far) and you've now got a nut flush draw in addition to the nut straight draw. You've got to protect this hand and try to drive opponents out. I'd have raised the turn. You'd create a difficult decision for both LMP and SB to CC 2 bets, given the pot odds and number of opponents. With BB's hesitation on the river, he may have folded a raise on the turn, too. You definitely don't want to give 3 opponents another draw on the river to beat you -- without paying a price.

[/ QUOTE ]

What exactly are we protecting? We have a draw, not a made hand. Raising not only makes others pay for their draws, it makes us pay for our own draw. It's also highly unlikely that we're gonna fold 3 players in a pot this big.

[/ QUOTE ]
I guess you think that the concept of "protecting your hand" only applies to made hands, and not to other types of "strong" hands containing: (1) flush draws, (2) OESDs, or (3) other strong drawing hands that have 8+ discounted outs from a combination of gutshot draw, overcards, and/or backdoor straight or flush draws.

Where I'm coming from was best stated by Sklansky in ToP in a section titled "Raising to Drive Out Opponents": "When you raise to get people out, what you are really doing is raising to cut down their odds. ... In so doing, you have created a situation where the player may make a mistake, according to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker, by either calling or folding. Even when he folds correctly after you raise because he is getting insufficient pot odds to call a double bet, you certainly prefer that to his calling an unraised pot correctly and proceeding to outdraw you and win the pot." (p. 125)

[ QUOTE ]
I honestly can't see a turn raise as anything but spewing. Two players behind you have CCed a flop raise, so a flopped flush draw behind you is definiately possible, and you cannot fold to a 3bet. THREE other players have shown interst in the hand to the tune of two bets on the flop, I cannot imagine you will win this hand UI no matter what you do. This is a pure drawing situation, and you need to hit your draw as cheaply as possible, since you are never winning the hand unless you make something on the river.

It seems to me that you'd want to protect a made hand with one card to come, not a draw since you are never cleaning up any outs here.

jvs

[/ QUOTE ]
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Regarding playing strong draws in multiway pots, SSHE advises: "In multiway pots, play strong draws aggressively. Eliminating opponents often improves your chance to win" (p. 144) Also, "When the pot is big, how should you play a flush or straight draw with overcards to the board? You should protect those hands." (p. 324)

[duckman]

[ QUOTE ]
I do not understand why so many people that I have talked to about this hand suggest that they LMP and the SB are as likely to call one as they are to call two on the river. When I raise this river my hand range is significantly reduced and is going to look like AK to all but the most retarded of individuals.

[/ QUOTE ]
that's the hand the put you on always to begin with.........

[bobhalford]

I think that I would call.

I think raising here is asking for it. The way BB played the hand, it looks like a flush. He bets the flop and calls your raise. Then the flush comes and he bets. If he had the flush, would he check-raise? I don't think so. You could have a single diamond, probably the nut diamond and may check behind with it. He loses his market here by not betting. Then, when the 10 comes and completes the obvious AK straight, he bets. What does BB have? I think it's a flush, but I'm certainly not folding this hand at any point. I would just call and hope for the best.

[Fat Nicky]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess you think that the concept of "protecting your hand" only applies to made hands, and not to other types of "strong" hands containing: (1) flush draws, (2) OESDs, or (3) other strong drawing hands that have 8+ discounted outs from a combination of gutshot draw, overcards, and/or backdoor straight or flush draws.

Where I'm coming from was best stated by Sklansky in ToP in a section titled "Raising to Drive Out Opponents": "When you raise to get people out, what you are really doing is raising to cut down their odds. ... In so doing, you have created a situation where the player may make a mistake, according to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker, by either calling or folding. Even when he folds correctly after you raise because he is getting insufficient pot odds to call a double bet, you certainly prefer that to his calling an unraised pot correctly and proceeding to outdraw you and win the pot." (p. 125)


[/ QUOTE ]

Raising to protect overcard outs serves you better and it much cheaper to do on the flop. Not on a draw heavy turn where there are 3 other players in the pot, 2 of which who called 2 bets cold on the flop. Throw in the fact that it would suck royally to be 3-bet here.

and the sklansky quote you gave does not apply here...like I said before....we have A high, we don't not have a made hand, we are drawing. If people don't fold, raising is cutting down our own odds.

[7stud]

[ QUOTE ]
If people don't fold, raising is cutting down our own odds.

[/ QUOTE ]
On the turn, if people don't fold, you are getting 3:1 on your raise. You have 9 outs to the nut flush. 3 additional outs to a straight, but let's discount those in half because of the made flush possibility--1.5 outs. And, 6 outs to an over pair, which once again let's discount in half--3 outs. So, that's a total of 13.5 outs, which is roughly 27% equity. So, a raise could be for value if 3 opponents call.

[W. Deranged]

Busted,

You are making a valiant effort at defending your position, and I appreciate that. I also very much appreciate that you are citing texts.

But I'm going to ask you to step back and look at the question differently:

In considering raising here, we have two considerations: first, what are equity is in the current pot; second, how our equity is likely to change if we raise.

So, answer these two questions:

1. What is our equity likely to be? Do we have value in a raise?

2. How do we improve our equity by raising? Do we want the opponents behind us to call or fold?

-Willis

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Where I'm coming from was best stated by Sklansky in ToP in a section titled "Raising to Drive Out Opponents": "When you raise to get people out, what you are really doing is raising to cut down their odds. ... In so doing, you have created a situation where the player may make a mistake, according to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker, by either calling or folding. Even when he folds correctly after you raise because he is getting insufficient pot odds to call a double bet, you certainly prefer that to his calling an unraised pot correctly and proceeding to outdraw you and win the pot." (p. 125)


[/ QUOTE ]
Busted, it's cool that you did so much research on your reply. Oftentimes I'd rather see an incorrect but well thought out reply over one that is more correct but doesn't provide any reasoning.

Having said that, your interpretation of Sklansky's comments are being misapplied. The person who does not have odds to put money in the pot here is hero, and he is making a FTOP mistake by raising.

If there were a chance the he could either win this pot unimproved or could buy enough outs to justify the raise, then it might be ok, but in this case there is no chance of winning UI and the only possible outs for you to buy are possibly 2 outs if you get AJ or KJ to fold (and technically AQ and KQ but they're never folding). And all of this assumes you're not already only drawing to 9 (or 8) outs.