Can you really bet this based on pot equity?

[AJay]

Suppose I limp in on the button with A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] with 3 other players in the hand.

Now suppose the flop comes Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Now, I understand that my chances of making my draw by showdown is 35%. So, if I bet on the flop and turn and everyone calls, I've gained.

But what happens when not everyone does call? What happens when someone folds. And my experience is that someone will fold.

Now, if I assume that 2 of my 3 opponents will fold when I bet, my chances of winning goes up (yeah!), meaning my pot equity goes up (yeah!), but I believe my bet now loses me money (not yeah!)

I don't think it would be a stretch to find yourself in a situation like the above where you're on a flush draw and you find your bet to cause 2 players to fold while someone with, say, KQ stays in the hand.

If I use that scenario, according to Poker Stove, I go from having 35% pot equity to 44%...but since I'm assuming that I narrow the field to one opponent, my bet is half of the money going into the pot when I'm expecting to win less than half of the time.

Am I analyzing this right?

It seems to me that if I'm on a draw and I think someone else has a made hand, I have to very seriously consider the effects of someone folding. Is this common knowledge and I've just never read it? (Not that I think I've come up with any new insight...I've just never seen this analyzed before.)

[Absolution]

You wouldn't bet into this field purely because of equity in this situation, you'd bet into them because you may have the best hand, you may gain some fold equity on the turn AND you have equity if they all call. Although a bet not might always be right. Usually when people talk about equity in this flush situation they are talking about raising, not betting. As in, a player on your left bets, at least one other player calls, and you then raise to trap the other two or more players who will most likely not fold for 1 more bet.

[Fryguy]

Any time you can thin the field with a second best hand that has a chance of improving you should do it.

[borges]

If you only want to consider pot equity: You should bet only if you are sure
that at least two of your opponents will call....the argument is that you are putting in one bet...they put in their bets (greater than 2 in total)....and you get back 35% of everything put in....so you gain in expected value.

However, by betting it can be that by folding out some of your opponents, your pot equity will increase....but it will be a smaller pot. You will "own" more of a smaller thing.

If the pot is huge to begin with, you are typically better off to fold out opponents.....if the pot is small, you don't want to fold out opponents...you want them there adding to the pot for your nut flush draw.

[jively]

[ QUOTE ]
Suppose I limp in on the button with A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] with 3 other players in the hand.

Now suppose the flop comes Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
[...]


[/ QUOTE ]
If you are in late position, betting may give you a free card. If it's checked through, someone may bet the turn with nothing or 2nd or 3rd pair.

If you get someone with A8 or A2 to fold, you may have the best hand if you spike an Ace on the turn or river.

If you thin the field on the flop, you *could* pick up the pot even without the flush by betting again on the turn.

-Tom

[bigbrother36]

Did you consider the times that Villain, holding KQ, pays you off when you do make your flush? How does that affect your calculations?

If, as you say, your equity against KQ (assume no [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]'s) is 44% and he will pay you off to the river, your EV calc would look something like this...(lets make it 1/2 for eaasy math)

EV= .56x(-1) + .44x(+5)=1.64

-1 is the one SB you lose by betting and not making your flush (assuming you would check/fold or fold the turn, in the example you may have odds to contuinue for 1 BB) and +5 is the flop bet and the turn and river BB that villain pays you off.

This calc makes a lot of assumptions (Villain holds KQ, Villain will payoff w/ TPGK, Hero will fold the turn UI, etc.), but do you see what I am getting at?

edited because im numerically dyslexic

[AJay]

[ QUOTE ]
You wouldn't bet into this field purely because of equity in this situation, you'd bet into them because you may have the best hand, you may gain some fold equity on the turn AND you have equity if they all call. Although a bet not might always be right. Usually when people talk about equity in this flush situation they are talking about raising, not betting. As in, a player on your left bets, at least one other player calls, and you then raise to trap the other two or more players who will most likely not fold for 1 more bet.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, now that you mention it, I recall that pot equity discussions frequently involve betting vs. raising.

Now let me modify the hand. Suppose the flop comes Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]? At this pooint, with 3 other people in the pot, it doesn't seem likely to me that I have the best hand. So if I bet, it would be based just on pot and fold equity, right? Of course, in that situation, I would have doubts about having the best hand, so if I don't think I have the best hand, I can simply check and wait for the turn, so I guess the question is moot in that situation.

[sean c]

Ajay your equity on this flop is higher than 35% if you include your overcard so even if just one of three opponents calls with a better hand your just a slight underdog. So betting here is good for a couple of reasons if you get more than one caller you have an edge. If you only get called by one and happen to be behind you will likely be given the chance to take a free turn card. You will also be called some of the time with hands you are ahead of. Sometimes you will win the pot with a bet. So the good here really out weighs the times your a slight underdog and bet out.

[AJay]

If my memory worked better I would realize that I've seen this before (and thus was wrong about not having seen it analyzed...I just didn't see it done with the words "pot equity").

From an article by Chris Ferguson:

[ QUOTE ]
...imagine you're in a hand with the same hole cards (As-8s), the same number of players (six), and the same flop (4s-7s-Jc). This time, however, you're not on the button but are in the big blind instead when the small blind bets out. Here, you want to encourage the other players in the hand to put as much money in the pot as possible. If you raise, you're probably going to force players with second pair or a gutshot to fold, so your best option is to call. Give your opponents every opportunity to throw money in the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not the exact same situation, but I think it's close enough to my modified flop.

[Saint_D]

It's good that you are thinking critically about this bit of dogma. Being on a flush draw is very common in Hold'em, so you need to be sure you have it right. Betting out first is the right default move*.

Let me sum it up. Bet this flop for these reasons.

1. You currently have the pot equity to do so.
2. You disguise your hand.
3. You would call a bet anyway, so it's better to be the one putting the bet in.
4. If your flush draw comes on the turn and the hand was checked around on the flop, you will cry.
5. You gain fold equity.
6. Sometimes no one folds and you collect bets from them to the river.

Betting has a higher expectation than checking for a combination of all these reasons.

-D

* As with anything in poker, "it depends". It would not be right if the player who acts next usually raises you and will bet if you check. You don't want him face everyone with 2 cold so you must check. Now is your chance to trap the field.