to call or not to call

[pencho]

Hi there. I have played poker for about a year now and I frequently stumble over the same situation where I do not know if it is correct to call or fold. Perhaps you can help me.
Let us assume the following situation: In a split-limit game I am on the button and limp in, the Small Blind calls and the big blind checks. On the flop, I get a flush-draw with 9 outs (4:1 odds).
Situation A: The first player bets, the second player calls; the pot contains 5 small bets. With my flush draw, a call has positive EV, so I call. No problem.
Situation B: The first player bets, the second player raises; the pot size is 6 small bets. Since I have to call two small bets, I get 1:3 from the pot and it is obvious that I have to fold.
And now comes the tricky situation C: Let us say, I am in the big blind now. The first player bets (pot size now: 4 small bets), I call because I am exactly on the break-even point. But now, the player behind me raises and the small blind calls. Now, is it correct to call or to fold here?
On one hand I argue, that (like in Situation B) I have to commit alltogether 2 small bets to see the next card. So I pay 2 SB for a pot of 7 SB; this gives me a slightly negative EV. So I should fold. BUT on the other hand, if I regard the first SB as a sunk cost that does not belong to me anymore, then I have (like in situation A) to pay one SB for a pot now containing 8 SB, wich gives me good positive EV.
This is disturbing: If I had to pay 2 small bets from the beginning, I would be in negative EV, but now, after first commiting 1 SB and then the other one, all of a sudden I have positive EV on that last call??? So, when playing, do I have to count ALL my bets that I committed to see the next card or do I have to regard the first bet as a sunk cost and only count my odds for the second call?
I hope I have made the problem clear to you. Thanks for any answers.
pencho

[Kel]

Situation B is not a definite fold depending on the situation. You do have implied odds and position working for you. It really depends on whether you think you are getting in the middle of a raising war or not. Situation C, however, is a sure call after you've put in the first call. You know for certain that it costs one bet to see a card in that case. Whether you make the first call, however, is a different issue. Whenever you are not the last to act in a round, you have to consider whether people behind may do and how it affects your decision.

[pencho]

Thanks Kel for the answer.
You are right what you say about implied odds. To make this problem more simple, let us say: If I make the flush and bet (after I get checked to), both opponents will fold and I win nothing extra, i.e. I do not have any implied odds. Furthermore, let's say in situation B the opponent acting after me just folds every time, committing nothing extra to the pot. I know that this is not very realistic, but it makes the mathematical problem more obvious.
I am not sure though, if situation C is a sure call as you say. That would mean you should actually HOPE to get raised in this situation in order to get far better pot-odds for just one bet. But obviously you do not want to get raised when on a draw, you want to see the next card as cheaply as possible or raise yourself as a semi-bluff and/or to knock people out behind you and/or to buy a free card. Or am I missing something here?

[argybargy2002]

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever you are not the last to act in a round, you have to consider whether people behind may do and how it affects your decision.


[/ QUOTE ]

Great post Kel. This is something we all have to remember, particularly in no limit and pot limit games. Often it is a good idea to fold when you are getting odds to call when there is a strong likelihood that it will get raised behind you. It is important to remember who the preflop raiser is and if he is to act after you, bear in mind that your call could become more expensive.

[ QUOTE ]
This is disturbing: If I had to pay 2 small bets from the beginning, I would be in negative EV, but now, after first commiting 1 SB and then the other one, all of a sudden I have positive EV on that last call??? So, when playing, do I have to count ALL my bets that I committed to see the next card or do I have to regard the first bet as a sunk cost and only count my odds for the second call

[/ QUOTE ]

Once a bet goes into the pot you should not think of it as yours anymore. It belongs to the pot and is indeed a "sunk cost". Do not let how much you have or haven't put into a pot effect your decisions.

(slightly OT)
There is one small exception that Miller talks about in Small Stakes Holdem. This is that it can be particularly bad for your image to bet and then fold for one bet in the same betting round as it may cause people to think you are overly tight AND to take bluffing shots at you more frequently.

To the OP, It is generally better to post actual hands for analysis rather than hypotheticals and to use those actual hands as a basis for your questions.

Welcome to the forum

[pencho]

Sorry, but I just cannot stop thinking about it.

Let's say: I have position on my only opponent. There is only one card to come. I am on a flush draw. When I hit the flush and bet, my opponent will check and fold every time, giving me nothing extra. If I do not hit my flush, I will lose every time. The pot-size is 60. As long as my opponent bets 20 or less, I can call: (0.8 x -20) + (0.2 x 80)= 0 THAT MEANS: AS LONG AS THE NEXT CARD DOES NOT COST ME MORE THAN 20, A CALL IS CORRECT.

Now, let's say he checks and I try for a semi-bluff and bet 20 and he raises me to 40. If I call, I have committed 40 to see the river. If the pot was 160 or bigger, committing this 40 chips would be correct, but now the pot is only 120 (or 100, depends on how you look at it). So this situation is actually the "same" as it would be, when he bet 40 into me and I called, which would give me a negative EV.

The only difference is, that I have already given "half" of my bet before he raised me. But since it is incorrect to see the next card for 40 chips alltogether, I should fold. Or should I not? No! And here is why:

Sure, when I look at the second "half" of the 40-bet in isolation, this call is correct0.8 x -20)+(0.2 x 120)=8 But I will still lose over the long rung when I put 40 in here: (0.8 x -40)+(0.2 x 100)=-12.

Now I can argue: Sure, you have "lost" 20 when betting as a semi-bluff. But if you commit 20 more you might win it all back. So, let us see, if this is true: When I fold after the raise, I loose 20 every time, so my EV is -20. But when I pay 20 more, my EV goes up to 8 for that bet. This means, from my initial EV of -20 I gain 8 back, which is -12, the same figure I came up before.

To sum up: You were actually right from the beginning: Calling here is correct, since it reduces your negative expetation from -20 to -12. But this does not change the fact that you are playing in negative EV when making the call. Strange, is it not?

[argybargy2002]

[ QUOTE ]
The only difference is, that I have already given "half" of my bet before he raised me. But since it is incorrect to see the next card for 40 chips alltogether, I should fold. Or should I not? No! And here is why:


[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Whatever you have put into the pot previously is totally irrelevant. The decision is not a $40 one its a $20 one. In the example you have given you are calling 20 in a 120 pot. Call because you are getting 6-1 and you might have implieds as well.

[pencho]

Thanks argybargy for your comments! I have really learned something. Here some other coclusions I came up with:

Same situation as before, but with 3 opp. Pot-size 60. First one bets 20, I call, then comes a raise to 40, then a re-raise to 60, I call again, then a raise to 80, first one calls and I call. Unbelievably I am not in a worse case now than if I had folded from the beginning! Had I folded, I would have lost 20. And if I call all these raises, my EV is also -20: (0.2 x 220)+(0.8 x -80)=-20! So I am on the brake-even point here.

The all-over conclusion is: As long as the "alltogether-number" of your EV is bigger than your (negative) number of chips you have already committed IN THAT ROUND (in our example above: -12 is bigger than -20), you can call. If it is smaller, you should fold. In this respect, the chips you have committed in a round are not completely irrelevant! But: When thinking about calling, you do not have to take these chips into account DIRECTLY. But by counting the odds on the last call, you take them into account INDIRECTLY: If this last call has positive EV, you call, because you reduce your negative EV. If not, you fold, because you only worsen your negative EV.