Raising draws and backdoor draws

[France]

I'm having trouble understanding the rationale or strategy for chasing longshot draws like gunshot straights, backdoor straights, and backdoor flushes. Generally, if after the flop I only have 3 cards to a flush or straight, I'll try to get away from the hand. I understand the odds of easier draws, like open ended straights, or 4-flushes on the flop. The strategy there seems pretty straightforward--if you're putting in roughly less than a third of the pot, it's worth the bet, because you've got about a 1 in 3 chance of hitting after the flop.

But I'll often hear of people raising to go after these draws, which doesn't make sense oddswise. Is it a steal attempt?

I read Small Stakes Hold'Em by Sklansky et al, and if I read it right, they seem supportive of going after backdoor draws--ie.: 3 cards to the hand after the flop, which means that both the turn and the river have to hit. The odds for this seem too high to warrant betting after, unless the pot is multiway. But even in this case, my mind can't justify raising, or even calling aggressive raises which deny me proper odds. For any draw at all to be profitable, I want to play the hand as cheap as I can until I'm positive that I've got the nuts. It doesn't seem profitable to be raising in these circumstances. Yet I read strategies that go in the opposite direction. What am I missing here?

EDIT: Oh, and I'm talking NLHE.

[uDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
What am I missing here?


[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that your opponents may fold if you bet or raise. This is called a semi-bluff.

If you play passively, the equity of your hand is simply the probability that you make your hand. If you play aggressively, the equity of your hand includes the probability that you make your draw plus the probability that your opponent folds. (Of course your opponent may raise, which is bad for you, but let's keep it simple.)

Addendum:

[ QUOTE ]

I read Small Stakes Hold'Em by Sklansky et al, and if I read it right, they seem supportive of going after backdoor draws--ie.: 3 cards to the hand after the flop, which means that both the turn and the river have to hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

SSH is a limit book. In the book, they point out the value that backdoor draws add to your hand. This extra value is small, and will rarely be enough by itself to make a hand profitable. However, it can be enough to make an otherwise weak hand worth continuing with. Continuing may mean betting or raising as a semibluff.

[sputum]

Oh, and I'm talking NLHE.

First SSHE is a limit book.
The rationale of raising with raising weak draws is that if a bluff is profitable the chance of making your hand makes it more so. If a bluff is slightly -EV the chance of hitting can make it +EV. But you want your opponent to FOLD.
No-limit with stacks of any size bring implied odds into play where occasionally you can draw to a longshot knowing you'll get paid off if you make it. You may get to see two cards for one raise. etc (see NL forums)
But you want them to fold and have to assess the chances of them folding accurately.
The greater the chance of making your hand the less you need him to fold. All the way to draws that are a favourite over his made hand (these can get tricky if you don't hit on the turn of course but NL forums <-----)

[scpi10]

SSH is a book for playing limit not NL. Because the bets are smaller proportional to the size of the pot sometimes it is correct to chase a backdoor draw or an inside SD.

[France]

Right, the book was limit, though a lot of feedback said most of the principles applied.

I guess it all comes back to what I guess is a basic leak of mine, which is my inability to bluff very well. I just don't seem to be able to sell them. I've seen a lot of people push all-in on a draw and get hosed for it, so it just seems like an excessively risky play. I suppose it's a move to be used carefully against the right opponents.

[uDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
I suppose it's a move to be used carefully against the right opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't use any tactic blindly. Semi-bluffing a calling station reduces the fold equity to zero. If he's also passive, it may well be best to play passively yourself when you have a draw since there's a good chance you'll get free cards.

[PantsOnFire]

These types of draws can turn a bluff into a semi-bluff where you have a few more outs. It's good to recognize that these draws also can be used in combination with other outs. For example, having second pair against top pair generally gives you 5 outs. However, if you have a gutshot, your outs go up to 9 which is pretty significant.

As well, there is the implied odds aspect of these draws. Most players don't give as much credit to a flush or straight that is hit runner-runner so the implied odds payoff is higher. Hitting an inside straight can also be very disguised and you will be paid off well by top pair and sometimes even second pair.

Finally, for borderline decsions, having a longshot draw can sometimes be the deciding factor after all else has been considered.

[Poker Clif]

[ QUOTE ]
These types of draws can turn a bluff into a semi-bluff where you have a few more outs. It's good to recognize that these draws also can be used in combination with other outs. For example, having second pair against top pair generally gives you 5 outs. However, if you have a gutshot, your outs go up to 9 which is pretty significant.

As well, there is the implied odds aspect of these draws. Most players don't give as much credit to a flush or straight that is hit runner-runner so the implied odds payoff is higher. Hitting an inside straight can also be very disguised and you will be paid off well by top pair and sometimes even second pair.

Finally, for borderline decsions, having a longshot draw can sometimes be the deciding factor after all else has been considered.

[/ QUOTE ]

One important area where the extra outs can matter is overcards.

If you raise with AsQs and the flop is 2h5d7c you only have 6 outs (3 aces and 3 queens). However, if the flop is 2h5s7s, you have 6 outs for the high cards, plus a backdoor flush draw, which is usually counted as another 1.5 outs.

Now you're up to 8.5 outs, and with the extra implied odds since the draw is to the NUT flush, you could reasonably count your hand as having 9 outs.

As stated above, 9 outs is significant. But keep in mind the reverse, that two overcards that completely miss the flop aren't much, no matter how big they are.

[gedanken]

[ QUOTE ]

I guess it all comes back to what I guess is a basic leak of mine, which is my inability to bluff very well.

[/ QUOTE ]

bluffing doesn't work very well at micro-stakes no-limit, if that's what you're playing. You wouldn't be very far off NEVER bluffing at or below .10/.25NL

I'm not including cbets; cbets are bread and butter.


Here's a hand I played yesterday showing how playing a drawy hand aggressively can get paid off well. I checked behind the turn because by then I had an actual draw I didn't want to be pushed off of. Preflop and flop, I'm hoping he folds.

Note that this low-suited-ace raise is not standard, but was situation/opponent specific.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (4 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

BB ($10.10)
UTG ($6.25)
Hero ($17.20)
SB ($11.75)

Preflop: Hero is Button with A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
UTG calls $0.10, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $0.5</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, UTG calls $0.40.

Flop: ($1.15) Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">UTG bets $0.5</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $1.5</font>, UTG calls $1.

Turn: ($4.15) 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
UTG checks, Hero checks.

River: ($4.15) 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">UTG bets $1</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $4</font>, UTG calls $3.

Final Pot: $12.15

[fracas]

[ QUOTE ]
Note that this low-suited-ace raise is not standard, but was situation/opponent specific.

...

BB ($10.10)
UTG ($6.25)
Hero ($17.20)
SB ($11.75)

[/ QUOTE ]

Not standard, maybe, but hardly unreasonable 4-handed, no?