Why bet the pot?

[iagainsti]

I'm just starting to play NL and have been wondering about the tactic of "betting the pot" to supposedly punish drawing hands.

Wouldn't someone on a straight or flush draw be getting the right odds to call (2 to 1)

Enlighten this NL rookie

[smittymatt]

Betting the pot removes all immediate odds if your opponent is drawing to a straight or flush (but not a combo monster draw, obviously). To draw to either a straight or flush, you need ~4 to 1 on your money on BOTH the turn and river. As you said, betting the pot gives your opponent 2 to 1 on their call, thus they are making a big mistake if they call.

The only factor that can sometimes make it correct to call a pot sized bet only on a draw are implied odds, which you probably already know of. If your opponent is pretty positive that you will pay off enough when they hit their draw to make up for the lack of immediate odds, calling the bet is OK. This is where it all comes down to player skill and the ability to get away from a hand if it is apparent that your opponent just made a better one.

[_TKO_]

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't someone on a straight or flush draw be getting the right odds to call (2 to 1)?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are under the wrong impression with these numbers. Your opponent would be correct call if your bet either put them all-in, or if you did not bet the turn. The odds for drawing out on the next card are closer to 4.5:1 for straight/flush draws. Unless you are going all-in on the flop, only use the numbers for one card to come.

As for betting the pot, this is usually the easiest way to keep your bet proportioned to the size of the pot and provide protection for a made hand.

[iagainsti]

I see what you're saying, I was thinking of the odds of making the draw by the river, obviously. But yes, if my bet puts the person all-in (or very nearly so) then he may be correct to call

Thanks

[vypremik]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just starting to play NL and have been wondering about the tactic of "betting the pot" to supposedly punish drawing hands.

Wouldn't someone on a straight or flush draw be getting the right odds to call (2 to 1)

Enlighten this NL rookie

[/ QUOTE ]

2 to 1 odds means that they will hit their hand one out of three times. If they have the odds to do this, calling a pot size bet will be a break-even bet for them.

You do have to keep in mind that the true odds are changed by such factors as other people still in the hand and more betting rounds to come.

Bascially you use pot odds for two things here

1) You want a new player to make a call they are not supposed to make (based on pot odds) so that you can make money in the long term.

2) You want a pro to make the correct call based on their hand and therefore have a good idea of what they hold or what they are drawing to.

By the way, there is a lot more to pot odds than just betting the pot. But for starters, it is good to know that you are usually causing your opponent to make a mistake calling your pot sized bet if they are drawing to a straight or flush. (Or you are making a mistake by doing the same.)

[greenroom1]

This is a good post because this situation seems to come up every time I play. The problem is not betting the pot and getting called after the flop. The problem is if the Turn card fills a straight or flush. It is difficult to know if the player filled and played incorectly on the flop or if he is bluffing with scare cards. This is especially difficult when it is heads up. Against multiple players this is easier because the more people that play the more likely someone will have a good drawing hand.

I always ask myself in this situation if the post flop caller was good enough to fold a draw with improper odds, bad enough to not know the pot odds, or if was being deceptive and called incorrectly for greater implied odds on future streets.

I think it is difficult to know if the OPP leads into the pot on the Turn with a large bet. I have been on the opposite side of this as well and made some calls knowing it was a long shot to hit the turn but also knowing that I would be paid because of good implied odds against agro players. You have to play against a large stack to make this profitable.

So, I think there are two type of players who call pot size bets (in HU conditions) on drawing hands. Bad ones and good ones. I think a good player is more likely to make this call only if he has postion on the the post flop bettor.

This is really confusing and can be difficult to know the correct move if the scare card hits the turn. If the flush or straight card doesn't hit the turn then the chances of being called with a pure drawing hand are much smaller, and I don't think a river flush or straight card is a as scary.

[_TKO_]

[ QUOTE ]
So, I think there are two type of players who call pot size bets (in HU conditions) on drawing hands. Bad ones and good ones. I think a good player is more likely to make this call only if he has postion on the the post flop bettor.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Stack sizes matter.
2. You have the preflop round to help determine a likely holding for the villian.
3. You have a read built up from previous hands as to whether this is a good or bad player.

[greenroom1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, I think there are two type of players who call pot size bets (in HU conditions) on drawing hands. Bad ones and good ones. I think a good player is more likely to make this call only if he has postion on the the post flop bettor.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Stack sizes matter.
2. You have the preflop round to help determine a likely holding for the villian.
3. You have a read built up from previous hands as to whether this is a good or bad player.

[/ QUOTE ]


I agree completely.

But sometimes you don't have any reads on the villian, and It can be a difficult turn decision.

[J.A.K.]

Where am I going wrong?

Blinds 10/20
Folds to MP1 who makes it 60
Folds to Hero (button) who calls JsTs 60
Blinds fold: Pot $150

Flop: Kh, 8s, 2s

MP1 bets $150
Hero calls $150
Pot $450.00

Turn: 3c

MP1 bets $450
Hero calls $450
Pot: $1350

River: Qs

MP1 checks
Hero Bets $500 MP1 folds.

Hero put in 60+150+450=$660 to win a pot of $1350= 2.05-1

Doesn't the flop potsized bet guarantee us our odds as long as the turn bet is pot or less? I am now committed to anything other than a crazy oversized turn bet. I know this is wrong but can't get my mind around it!! I know you adjust odds for 1 card to come, but there will always be better than 2-1 odds OVERALL with 2 potsized bets. My head is about to explode.

[ChuckyB]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't the flop potsized bet guarantee us our odds as long as the turn bet is pot or less?

[/ QUOTE ]

1) You shouldn't pay the money that guarantees you correct odds to draw later. That's just throwing cash down a hole. The money must come from other players. If 4 players call a pot-sized bet, draw away.

If the potsized bet HU puts you all-in, the 2:1 odds are correct to draw for your flush (about 65:35). However in the example you still have to call another bet on the turn.

[ QUOTE ]
but there will always be better than 2-1 odds OVERALL with 2 potsized bets

[/ QUOTE ]

No. After the turn betting you've now put in 600 of yours to win 750 of the villain's...that's 1.25:1 and nowhere near correct odds (not even close to the 2:1). You're 37:9 against making your flush on the river.