[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
I am trying to reconcile what Buzz wrote with the following equity calculations.

[/ QUOTE ]Hi Effen - What do you mean by "equity calculations."

[ QUOTE ]
Assume you hold KcTcKsQh. In each flop, you have no backdoor flush draw or straight draw, just top set.

[/ QUOTE ]This hand is a bit different from the hand I used, but fine, let's use this hand.

[ QUOTE ]
Simulated against 4 hands with top 20% of holdings:

[/ QUOTE ]What reasoning did you use to choose to simulate against four hands? How do you simulate against four hands with "top 20% of holdings"?

[ QUOTE ]
The other players have an average equity around 15% in each case. You are a huge favorite with every hand. You are even favored over Ah2h5cAd.

[/ QUOTE ]I'm not sure where you got these numbers. (I'm assuming you somehow got them as simulation results). I'm not sure what you mean by "equity." Do you mean they have random hands such that they each win "around 15%"? If so, how are the wins being counted? (One for a scoop, one half for winning low only, etc.)?

A general problem with high/low simulations is if a hand plays 10,000 times and wins half 4,000 times (losing the other 6,000 times), assuming the pots are of equal average sizes, the hand ends up with exactly as much as if the hand plays 10,000 times and wins the whole pot 2,000 times (losing the other 8,000 times). This might lead one to falsely believe winning half a pot 4,000 times is the same as scooping 2,000 times.

But it's not - unless you play and lose with the hand that scoops more often than you play and lose with the hand that wins half the pot.

If you play and lose with each hand the same number of times, then the hand that scoops is better.

2 half pot wins = 1 scoop + 1 loss,

Keeping in mind that the 1 loss is a negative, when you take that negative away from the one side of the equation, the scoop is clearly worth more than 2 half pot wins.

I think probably what your simulator is doing (or you're doing in interpreting the results) is counting two half pot wins as equivalent to one scoop.

Instead, two half pots wins are equivalent to one scoop and one loss.

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously, you don't want it checked around.

[/ QUOTE ]I agree with you on this point.

[ QUOTE ]
According to OP: "There is a bet and a call in front of you." If I am last to act, I can't see much downside to raising in late position on any of these flops.

[/ QUOTE ]I'm not sure why you've chosen four opponents, but fine, let's say you have four opponents. If the first three opponents check and the player immediately in front of you bets, you confront the player in first position with a double bet with the possibility of a re-raise. And if he folds, then the player in second position......etc. The first downside is you may lose customers.

If the player in first position has bet and the intervening players have called, then when you raise, the player in first position may re-raise, confronting the intervening players with a double bet with the possibility of a re-raise. Again, the downside is you may lose customers.

There's another downside for you. In reading your posts, you seem like a solid player to me. When you raise the flop, rigthly or wrongly at least some of your opponents are going to suspect you possibly have top set. And that will make it more difficult for you to collect from these players later if the board pairs and you have the winning hand. I can think of ways you can (at least try to) get around your probable solid table image dilemma, but if you have that image, I think it's better for you to simply not raise the flop with top set and nothing else.

The third downside is that unless you have at least four opponents calling your raise on this round, you actually net more by not raising.

By not raising here, unless you have four opponents who match your raise, you net more for this betting round and you net more in terms of the final pot. Your sub-total gain (when you win) with less than four opponents is less than your sub-total loss (when you lose).

At any rate, you wrote, "I can't see much downside to raising in late position on any of these flops." Those are three downsides.

[ QUOTE ]
The turn might pair the board or brick the other draws. How well are you going to get paid off in that case?

[/ QUOTE ]You're obviously going to bet and raise on the fourth betting round if the turn pairs the board. If by doing so, you drive out the low draws and scoop without the river card being shown, then that's wonderful. If the low draws stay in the pot and miss, that's also wonderful. You don't have to raise the flop to be absolutely delighted when the turn pairs the board.

Hard to see how the turn bricks the other draws. Well... a high card is probably a brick for most draws after this flop (but it opens other possibilities) - and I suppose it's possible that the turn counterfeits some (maybe all) draws. After the 34K flop, anything that counterfeits the other draws is a pretty scary card for Hero. But, yes, it's possible that Hero would do better by raising after this flop. It's often possible in Omaha-8 (or any form of poker) that you can do the wrong thing, play against the odds, and it will turn out well for you. That's true if you play the slots too.

[ QUOTE ]
I think the hands that you fold out with a raise weren't going to pay you off anyway, and they might even hit runner-runner and scoop you.

[/ QUOTE ]Yes. That's true for some of them. But when they do, you have missed your own draw.

Two questions are, "Will the flopped top set hold up or not?" and "Will low be enabled or not?" When the flop is 34K, usually a flopped set of kings will not hold up and usually low will be enabled. Hero can win anyhow, and Hero is probably stuck in the hand anyhow. But Hero doesn't have to make his situation worse by raising after the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
If there is no bet in front of you, you have to bet unless there was a PF raiser yet to act who is almost certain to C-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]I agree you should generally bet if there is no bet in front of you. What does "C-bet" mean?

[ QUOTE ]
If there is a bet, I am second to act, and there are 3 to act behind me, then I call rather than make them call 2 bets cold.

[/ QUOTE ]Exactly.

[ QUOTE ]
The one danger is that all of the good cards are in one hand.

[/ QUOTE ]That's a danger, but I don't think it's the only danger.

[ QUOTE ]
If the good cards and draws are spread around, you need to make them pay to draw.

[/ QUOTE ]Unless you think your set of kings is going to hold up, you're drawing yourself! By raising, you're making if more expensive for yourself when you lose!

Buzz