(X-Post) Is it ok to check to a Flush Draw?

[The 13th 4postle]

I find myself facing possible flush draws with marginal hands. Is it ok after a significant flop bet which villain calls, to check on the turn in order to keep the pot small and reinforce my thinking that villain indeed has a flush?

Maybe it's good to do this with position but, not without it?

Here is an example and I don't want to be results oriented.


WYOCWBOY posts the small blind $0.10
Cyndi M posts the big blind $0.25
LGPIGSFULL posts the big blind $0.25

DEALING POCKETS
Villain calls $0.25
Hero calls $0.25
LGPIGSFULL checks
UR12 folds
Kraumm folds
kpnitgangsta73 folds
diablo0000 folds
WYOCWBOY calls $0.15
Cyndi M checks

DEALING FLOP (Kh,2c,2h)
WYOCWBOY checks
Cyndi M checks
Villain checks
Hero bets $0.75
LGPIGSFULL folds
WYOCWBOY folds
Cyndi M folds
Villain calls $0.75

DEALING TURN (7d)
Villain checks
Hero checks

DEALING RIVER (3d)
Villain checks
Hero bets $1.50
Villain folds
$1.50 is not called, return back to Hero
Hero mucks

Hand 947153185:
Hero wins($2.65)

[RapidEvolution]

Sometimes, it's better to check behind and keep the pot small than to build a pot in order to charge someone drawing to a flush. I'm more apt to do this when

a) I'm heads up.
b) I've got a good, but not great hand.
c) I'm also on the draw.

If there are a lot of people, or if I have a hand I'd like to build a big pot with, I'm betting the turn for value and to charge people. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

BTW I can understand not wanting to be results-oriented, but your cards play a big role in what the best line is. If you want to leave information out you can do something like this.

DEALING POCKETS (Hero is dealt 8h,8s)
Villain calls $0.25
Hero calls $0.25
LGPIGSFULL checks
UR12 folds
Kraumm folds
kpnitgangsta73 folds
diablo0000 folds
WYOCWBOY calls $0.15
Cyndi M checks

DEALING FLOP (Kh,2c,2h)
WYOCWBOY checks
Cyndi M checks
Villain checks
Hero bets $0.75
LGPIGSFULL folds
WYOCWBOY folds
Cyndi M folds
Villain calls $0.75

DEALING TURN (7d)
Villain checks
Hero?

This keeps the results out and leads to your question about what to do on the turn. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I hope this helped!!

[The 13th 4postle]

Appreciate it, I was thinking the same thing.

[Mike Kelley]

No, if you know it's a flush draw as your subject states.

If you think that a flush draw is just in his range though and there are other hands you could be way behind, checking is probably the best option...

[justscott]

What?

[ActionStan]

Without stacks sizes, it's very difficult to comment. If you have top pair and 1/2 the effective stacks are in, just put the money in. If you have a big stack, then there are times you need to balance protecting your hand with protecting your stack.

If you think you 100% of the time have the best hand and 100% of the time won't pay the villain off if he has a draw and a draw only, then you should set a price that the villain can't call profitably.

Rarely can you be that certain. Add to that the notion that your hand may have value and you don't want to give the villain the opportunity to make a big bluff on the turn or river that you can't call.

So, checking is fine if there is a flush draw on the board and you have a hand that has some showdown value. Checking is not fine if you have a hand that beats the 1 pair part of the villains range for the most part.

Whatever you're value betting there, you probably should have raised or not played. If you're sitting on KJ or some such thing you shouldn't have played it from that position. If you're sitting on 99 or TT, you should probably have raised pre-flop.

[Johnes Benjamin]

The reinforce my thinking part worries me. I'm not saying never check, but you can't put someone on a flushdraw every time there is one and his line could be construed as one.

You will find yourself folding the best hand far too often.

In general, betting will get you more information about their hand, as well as charge them to draw out on you.

[ActionStan]

Personally, I think the biggest thing to keep in mind is the size of the pot relative to the size of the stacks. With a weak 1 pair hand, you don't want to build a pot where 1/3-1/2 of your chips are going to be going in on the river. You're better off paying the guy off or folding in a smaller pot. Decisions are more important in big pots. If you don't have a big pot hand, don't build a big pot where a river decision is hard. If that means letting a guy draw cheap, ok. Be less inclined to pay him off for his original risk when the pot is small. You should be willing to give up on small pots more easily than large ones. I'm not saying you should let yourself get run over, but that you shouldn't go to war over 5BB.

[King Spew]

Stack size issue aside (we have to assume full 100BB when stacks are not given.) I would *WITH POSITION* put in another bet on the turn to just barely price out the FD, while not paying a Kx too much in the long run.

(BTW, I raise this PF just about 100%.... table dynamics being the deciding factor with a call behind.)

[King Spew]

[ QUOTE ]
If that means letting a guy draw cheap, ok. Be less inclined to pay him off for his original risk when the pot is small. You should be willing to give up on small pots more easily than large ones.

[/ QUOTE ]

While in theory this is good, I think some of this hand is "what range is villain on".

My "read" is either the FD or some random Kx... probably KQ, KJ.

I think a turn bet to price out the FD is a good thing here. Against the Kx, you are likely getting a check on the river from villain so you've gotten to SD semi-cheaply. Added bonus, if villain has a slowplayed two pair or set, you'll know "usually" by his turn response.