U cant semi bluff call stations

Ive lost like 10 bones tonight semi bluffing to flush draws. u guessed it...they didnt hit . But lost money, checking from now on or maybe betting a smaller bet...

ah live and learn

as you stated, dont bluff a "CALLING STATION", my guess is they will call your semi-bluff. Against a call station try to play solid hands only and make sure you catch, back off the draws and play more top pair good kicker.

{This post has been removed}

Originally Posted by Ripptyde

betting into draws

BAD idea

let them come to you

call affordable bets or fold on big bets

let us pray

amen

I don't think that's the Ripptyde I know.

There are a lot of cases where betting a draw increases your odds due to the chance that you can fold the field. But you have to pick your spots.

{This post has been removed}

Seems silly to me. Why bother playing a hand like that at all then? The added bonus, to me, of flopping a flush draw is that you have multiple ways to win the hand.

Fight, fight, fight.

Originally Posted by TylerK

Seems silly to me. Why bother playing a hand like that at all then? The added bonus, to me, of flopping a flush draw is that you have multiple ways to win the hand.

Agree.

depends on the situation....sometimes you should semibluff, sometimes you shouldn't.

there's a time for both.

there you have it...i just said everything without saying anything.

I semi-bluff one out of every four or five flush draws with a confident bet that screams "I have top pair." Especially when no one else is betting, or if they're just min betting. It disguises the hand, confuses opponents, and gives you a shot to win money with a hand that might not ever become anything. It also makes the flush pay off bigger if you do hit it, because you can run a sequence like this:

FLOP (flush draw) bet
TURN (flush hits) check/call
RIVER bet/raise

or in late position

FLOP bet
TURN check or call behind
RIVER bet/raise

Basically you rep a made hand, check or call out of apparent fear of the flush, and let them bet into you. Aggressive opponents are always good for at least one bet close to the size of the pot on either the turn or river, which is often more than you'll get out of them if you bet yourself when the obvious flush card hits.

Semi bluffing a draw is a huge element of limit, less so in no limit. The difference is that the downside in limit is, well, limited. You'll be facing a raise or a reraise at best, and if there are at least two opponents, you're actually making money with any bets on the flop.

In no-limit, an observant opponent could force you all-in with a marginal hand like second pair or TPGK. Again, if there is at least one other person along for the ride, you might welcome this on the flop in a ring game, but in a tournament, you'd be be risking your chair on a 35% chance to complete your draw.

Position and number of opponents plays a huge role here too. If it's HU and your opponent shows weakness, it's often +EV to bet your draw. Having your opponent act first is a huge advantage. Also, if you are last to act, you may have the option of taking a free card on the turn. Against a large field (4 or more), odds are someone caught a part of the flop and isn't going anywhere.

Just my $0.02.

There is a probabalistic betting strategy called 'The Kelly Strategy' named after John Kelly, jr. It is a strategy decided to maximize return while minimizing risk. A ton of math is behind it that I could not even begin to remember, but it boils down to this:

W = chance of winning
R = payoff odds
p = percentage of bankroll to bet

p = W - (( 100 - W ) / R )

So, as your chance of winning increases and the payoff odds increase the percentage of your bankroll you should bet increases. This makes intuitive sense of course.

In poker, the theory is not heavily applied because there are other ways of winning besides having the better hand. As 'rila has demonstrated a million times, you can increase your chance of winning the hand by betting the proper amount and making your opponent fold. The Kelly Strategy was not designed for that sort of simulation, it was designed more for things like horse raises where the size of your bet does not affect the outcome of the competition.

But, your example is a case where it can be applied, because you are dealing with a calling station that is going to call your bet regardless. So, the game devolves into something like the horse race where the size of your bet does not influence the outcome of the competition.

Consider the case where you have flopped a draw to the nut flush. Consider that you have a perfect read on your opponent and know that he has you beat unless you hit your flush but has no chance of beating you if you do hit the flush. You have a (9/47=) 19.1% chance of winning the hand. How much do you bet?

Using the Kelly Strategy, we know the chance of winning (19.1%) but we do not know the payoff odds. The payoff odds actually depend on the amount of money already in the pot AND the amount of money you bet. That is different from a horse race, of course where the payoff odds are fixed and posted. But we can still compute the payoff odds against our calling station.

P = Amount of money already in the pot.
B = Amount of money that we bet.
R = Payoff odds

R = ((P+B)/B)

So, for example, if there are 200 dollars in the pot and we bet $50 which we know the calling station will call we are getting ((200+50)/50) = 5:1 payoff odds.

Define one more variable:

T = Total money in your stack

Plugging all this into Kelly's equation and we get:

(.191) - ((1 - .191)/((P + B)/B) = B/T

which, if anyone gives a damn, I will be happy to show the solution for. But considering that the solution is dull, I will skip to the end and tell you that it solves to:

B = SQRT((.191)*P*T+((.618*T+P)/2)^2) - ((.618T+P)/2)

Wow . . . so what? What the hell does that mean?

This is the equation that is telling you how much to risk on a solid win flush draw against a calling station that will call any bet you make, such that your bets maximize your profit while mionimizing your risk. It turns out that that given the known chance of winning (19.1%), the amount to bet is really just a function of the money already in the pot and the amount of money in your stack. Further, it turns out that we can think of the entire thing not in terms of absolute money amounts, but in terms of percentages of your total stack size. Solving the equation for a few standard values:

If the amount of money in the pot is 5% of your stack size, bet 1.4% of your stack.

If the amount of money in the pot is 10% of your stack size, bet 2.7% of your stack.

If the amount of money in the pot is 25% of your stack size, bet 5.2% of your stack.

If the amount of money in the pot is 50% of your stack size, bet 8% of your stack.

If the amount of money in the pot is 100% of your stack size, bet 11% of your stack.

This, again, makes some intuitive sense. Because as the pot size increases with respect to our stack size, we bet progressively larger percentages of our stack and still be getting better pot odds.

Please remember that all of these numbers are based on your example of a calling station that will call whatever bet you make. If you are up against any sort of reasonable poker opponent, the Kelly Strategy does not apply because things like betting them out of the pot, betting to conceal your draw, etc. all become very valid options.

Wow, that's a heck of a post Pyroxene. What is your math background? You seem like you know what you're talking about.

Just so I'm clear, I was definitely not suggesting that one should bet one's flush draws if there's a 100% chance of a call. That's clearly a -EV move.

hi

Originally Posted by TylerK

Wow, that's a heck of a post Pyroxene. What is your math background? You seem like you know what you're talking about.

PRICELESS

ripjohngotti, you're missing basic probability theory here. You have to count all unseen cards, as an unseen card is equally likely to be in the deck as in your opponent's hand. I don't know why you did all that (incorrect) math either. Not to be a dick.

Originally Posted by TylerK

ripjohngotti, you're missing basic probability theory here. You have to count all unseen cards, as an unseen card is equally likely to be in the deck as in your opponent's hand. I don't know why you did all that (incorrect) math either. Not to be a dick.

Yeah whatever u could do it that way also, but i like to make my odds better 8-)


Still... 13-5 = 8? am i right or did i miss something in kindergarden?

5 cards is the complete flush. 4 cards is the 4 flush if you're trying to figure out your odds of completing.

Originally Posted by TylerK

Wow, that's a heck of a post Pyroxene. What is your math background? You seem like you know what you're talking about.

My degree was in electrical engineering (a long time ago). EE involves scads of math. I found I enjoyed it, so it became a hobby. Honestly, solving Kelly's Strategy for that situation is just algebra. The trickiest part in solving for B is completing the square (same trick that is used to derive the quadradic equation.) So it looks complex but I think most people here could do it if they set their minds to it.

Originally Posted by Ripptyde

betting into draws

BAD idea

let them come to you

call affordable bets or fold on big bets

let us pray

amen

This is horrible advice, of course you should bet your draws. Do you feel like winning a small pot or a big one? your opponent is a calling station, he will call you down and pay you off when you hit, stop being such a pussy.

OHHHHHHH, SNAP!

22 you have to understand even with outside straight draws and flush draws the odds are in fact against you to hit them. If you can see a free card that is often times extremely wondeful, especially depending on the situation (ring? late tourney? short stacked? etc.).

I personally like to min. raise if I am in early position. I often times scare a few away and more often than not do not get re-raised.

Again, it's very situational.

Originally Posted by duece duece OE

Originally Posted by Ripptyde

betting into draws

BAD idea

let them come to you

call affordable bets or fold on big bets

let us pray

amen

This is horrible advice, of course you should bet your draws. Do you feel like winning a small pot or a big one? your opponent is a calling station, he will call you down and pay you off when you hit, stop being such a pussy.

That's silly. If you're value betting your draw, you're wasting your money.
Edit: In this particular situation vs. one calling station opponent.

ah, against one person I suppose you are right, against 2 or more opponents, its a horrible play.

Originally Posted by duece duece OE

ah, against one person I suppose you are right, against 2 or more opponents, its a horrible play.

Sure, if you have 2, and DEFINITELY more than 2 opponents, AND are fairly certain that your bet will be called, you can then bet your draw for value.