C-betting 3-flush flops

[Yabasa]

I started thinking about this after reading Manic's thread where he c-bet a 3-flush flop after completely missing it. You can see it here:

http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...rd-183190.html

I thought i would start a new thread for this discussion as it's kinda getting off the point of that particular thread.

drmcboy was the only one who suggested that c-betting in that spot was a good idea:

I agree river bet is bad, totally disagree we should check back flop, how is it likely this flop hit him? Is anyone posting in this thread peeling on the flop with Tx no heart? A free card helps us rarely and may cost us money.

Anyone else agree with this? This makes a lot of sense to me. We completely missed the flop, why not c-bet and try to salvage the hand. If we're called we can give up and still have an M = 11.

In TLR's excellent post about c-betting he doesn't cover 3-flush flops in the board texture section. I think it is an interesting spot as your opp will find it difficult to continue without a heart. TLR says that c-betting flops with 2 broadway cards is usually not a good idea and i agree but does that change when there is a 3-flush on board?

I would venture to say 2 things about this situation:

1. Our fold equity has risen on a 3-flush board as opposed to a 2-flush board (same card values, same situation). Like drmcboy said, are you going to peel the flop with middle pair no heart. Without a 3-flush on board you would.
2. On a 2-flush or rainbow board (same card values, same situation) this is not a good spot to c-bet due to us having very few to no outs and less fold equity as board is less scary.

So the question i am asking is:
Does our increased fold equity on this 3-flush board make a c-bet profitable when the same c-bet on a 2-flush or rainbow board (same card values, same situation) is not profitable?

I hope i made sense and if i didn't please tear my argument apart.

[Nakamura]

A lot about c-betting in these spots depends on how likely your opponent is to float you. Since we are usually only going to fire one barrel I'd generally avoid c-betting a whiffed 3-flush flop against opponents who are of the suspicious variety.

Against standard ABC-type players, these are probably good spots to c-bet because our range is going to be very polarised; either we'll be happy to stack off or it will be an easy fold.

[Yabasa]

Thanks for the reply Nakamura. I see what you mean about having to know your opponent more is this situation. I guess this play is more read dependent than a normal c-bet on a safe flop which is still read dependent (i.e. don't c-bet a calling station, ever) but it is to a lesser extent.

Against average opponents you will be c-betting a large percentage of flops where the flop texture, stack sizes etc.. will have more of an influence on your decision to c-bet than specific player reads.

It's interesting then that in order to c-bet a 3-flush flop your read requirements go up. You need to have a better understanding of that player. I never really thought about player reads like that before. Some plays may require no reads (i.e. raising JJ in MP preflop) and others such as bluff raising the river require very specific reads.

So when playing unknowns stay away from read dependent plays. I know that sounds really obvious (i'm just thinking out loud at this point) but if you can identify and categorise plays in this way it may help you stay out of tricky situations that you would have stumbled into by accident. Which has happened to me so many times. I'm going along just fine with TPTK and then all of a sudden my head is up my ass and i've no idea how it got there.

I don't think c-betting a 3-flush flop is something i would do very often but i thought it was interesting to speculate about it.