A thought on the minirais and a strange scenario...

[zalkin]

The last couple of days I've been thinking about a scenarion including the minirais and a scenario that appears a bit strange.
I don't know if my thinking is obvious or wrong but here is my thoughts anyway.

Game: $1/$2 NL.
It is folded around to SB who rais $6, Hero calls on BB with A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Flop: A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], Pot: $12

SB checks and Hero bets 6$, SB calls.

Turn: 10[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], Pot: $24

Lets say that the SB has a flushdraw (20% to make his hand) and our Hero correctly puts him on this. This is where I'm getting interested and I have made two cases of the following action.


<font color="purple">Case 1</font> - SB checks and Hero bets $8, SB calls.

Here the SB has 5:1 on making his flush but the pot odds are 4:1 and thus he is making a mistake by calling, right?


<font color="purple">Case 2</font> - SB bets $4, Hero minirais to 8$ and the SB calls.

Here the SB still got 5:1 on making his flush but now got 9:1 on the potodds and made a correct call at the moment. But he still invested the same ammount as in Case 1 where he made a mistake and thus has to be making a mistake in this case too, right?

The Hero gave the opponent the right odds to call but the opponent made a mistake by calling the correct odds.
So you can give someone the right odds to call but he would still make a mistake by calling. I find this strange/interesting and would like someone elses opinion on this.

/Zalk

[chillout85]

As far as I can see, the only reason the call is correct in case 2 is purely because he has already invested $4 in the pot and his pot odds decision is whether or not to call an extra $4 into a pot of $36, which as you rightly say is correct since he's getting 9:1, whereas in case 1 he's getting 4:1 as you say. The odds change as soon as he gets minraised following making the $4 bet. I think this is right but can anyone confirm?

[zalkin]

By calling the minirais in Case2 the Opponent has made the same mistake as in Case1, seeing the big picture.
I guess calling the minirais has something to do with minimizing a mistake he has already made?

I bet you can count on this, but I dont have the will or strength to do that...anyone =)

[Albert Moulton]

[ QUOTE ]
Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponents' cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose. Conversely, every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have if they could see all your cards, you gain; and every time they play their hands the same way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

For the sake of argument, let's assume that you will either check or fold perfectly if a flush card comes on the river denying him any implied odds that might prompt him to "trade" a small mistake in calling a bet or raise in the hopes of you making a big mistake on the next card if the flush comes in.

Case 1: According to FTOP, you have correctly assessed SB's call as a mistake. Had he known that you had AK, and if he also had reason to believe that he had no implied odds if he caught his flush, then he would have folded to your bet because he didn't have the right pot odds to call. Since he would have folded if he'd seen your cards but called anyway, then he made a mistake.

Case 2: You actually made a "mistake" with your min-raise because if you had known that he was on a draw, then you would have needed to raise more than the minimum to give him incorrect odds to call the raise. His call of the min-raise was "correct" because he'd have been +EV to call that min-raise even if you'd turned your cards face up.

Once money is in the pot, it is no longer any one player's money. So, for you to avoid giving him correct pot odds to chase a 5:1 shot, you would need to raise to at least $13 in order to give him 4.55:1 pot odds to call chasing his 5:1 flush draw. Since you didn't raise the right amount, you made a "mistake" in Case 2 allowing SB to correctly call and see if he makes his flush on the river.

EDIT: From a strategy perspective, if you bet the turn at all, then bet at least 1/2 the pot. Even if it is mathematically "incorrect" for him to call 1/3 of the pot, if he's willing to call 1/3, then he'll probably call 1/2 or even 3/4. You have position. You suspect he's drawing. So bet more if you bet at all. You can always fold to a big river bet if the flush comes. And you will also have the option to check behind on the river if you get some kind of non-flush scare card that might give him a straight or 2-pair and he checks. Finally, I know HoH talks about a 1/3 pot bet in a situation like this, but that is for tournament play where survival is paramount because you can't "rebuy" if you bet more only to have villain catch his flush on the next street.

[Albert Moulton]

[ QUOTE ]
By calling the minirais in Case2 the Opponent has made the same mistake as in Case1, seeing the big picture.
I guess calling the minirais has something to do with minimizing a mistake he has already made?

I bet you can count on this, but I dont have the will or strength to do that...anyone =)

[/ QUOTE ]

The opponenet's call of the min-raise in Case 2 was not a mistake. It was "correct" because he would have been +EV to call (he gets 9:1 pot odds on his 5:1 flush draw) even if OP had turned his AK face up when he made his min-raise.

[zalkin]

I think I got this now...or some of it at least.

The opponent made a mistake by betting $4 in the first place and had a chance to make up to that mistake by calling the minirais. So at the moment he wasnt making a mistake, but seeing the whole picture he did make a mistake.

I mean since both cases end up with the exact same result and Case1 obviously is a mistake, so is Case2. If you play these exact hands a million times there is no way the opponent is going to make a profit out of this hand?

(Assmuming both players play perfect poker after the river)