What is generally your move here?

[MushMouthMike]

I have been debating in my head what is the best move in a situation like this:

30/60 Level

I limp early with A 6

A raise to 180

Pot of 330 to me so I call 120. I am not debating this call. but the flop action.

Flop comes 5 7 8

I now have 15 outs to either make a nut flush or a straight. I now have a 54% chance to hit a very good hand. And who knows maybe the other 3 Aces are also winners. THis would give me a 62% chance. This is my question. In this situation do you check to the raiser and then come back over the top or do you bet out and try taking down the pot without actually having a hand yet, but ready to commit your chips?

[thejim]

I try to get the chips in.

My standard play is to check/raise, because right now people continuation bet way too much. It also, usually, increases your fold equity, as the pot is obviously bigger and it's more of a commitment from them to call.

But, if I'm playing against someone I know or someone I've seen check in position after a PF raise, I'll go ahead and bet out.

If I check and they check behind, I'll check/fold or bet out depending on the how the turn misses me. If it hits me, I'll usually bet out.

[chopz33]

push....no question

[BrAdA]

what is fold equity??

Could you teach me coach?

[MushMouthMike]

push....no question

Straight out push? As in you have the first option and push all in?

[chopz33]

well when he rasied i would have pushed

[MushMouthMike]

well when he rasied i would have pushed

Nah you misunderstood me. He raised pre-flop. I called his raise then on the flop I was asking what is your general move. Let's say pot is 400 or so and you both have around 1500

[BrAdA]

call station!!!

[chopz33]

oh well then i check and then push

[BrAdA]

unless its against me, then you know your role and fold.

[I Play God]

It just depends on if your comfortable going all in with a draw, essentially if the pot is 300, and he bets out 1/2 pot to pot, if you check raise your now pot commited to this hand. If you check call, and hit, unless he really overplays 1 pair (assuming he's in that range) the most you can get is a couple value bets. If it were me, and i think my A (or 6 if he just has a big ace) would be good if it hits i would check raise all in if he bets in the 250-400 range.

[pokerscribe]

Mike,

I think the reason you're puzzled here is that there's not really a wrong answer. I like Jim's response, where you try to determine the likelihood that he'll CB, and factor that into the answer.

The other question to ask is how much fold equity do you have really? If you're playing a $5 online SNG, then I'm not sure you have very much at the 30/60 level. I think a lot of guys with an overpair or a decent draw will just call an all-in bet there and if you hit, ho-hum, on to the next SNG. Whereas, if you were playing in an live tournament, the opposite is true, since nobody wants to go out in the second round.

For this reason, I would check-raise if I expected him to CB, bet out if I didn't, but I wouldn't go all-in with the raise. Put in a substantial raise that will make him think you have a made hand, and then see what happens on the turn. You still have two more chances to build a pot.

[BrAdA]

Mike,

I think the reason you're puzzled here is that there's not really a wrong answer. I like Jim's response, where you try to determine the likelihood that he'll CB, and factor that into the answer.

The other question to ask is how much fold equity do you have really? If you're playing a $5 online SNG, then I'm not sure you have very much at the 30/60 level. I think a lot of guys with a decent ace will just call an all-in bet there and if you hit, ho-hum, on to the next SNG. Whereas, if you were playing in an live tournament, the opposite is true, since nobody wants to go out in the second round.

For this reason, I would check-raise if I expected him to CB, bet out if I didn't, but I wouldn't go all-in with the raise. Put in a substantial raise that will make him think you have a made hand, and then see what happens on the turn. You still have two more chances to build a pot.

I must be the worst player in the world because I am still asking the question...........What the hell is fold equity?

[thejim]

Your pot equity is the amount of chips you "own" in the pot. If you're on a flush draw, all-in after the flop, with a pot of 100, your pot equity is around 35.

Fold equity is a concept where you can add some small percentage of the pot to your actual equity through aggression. It's a subjective thing that can become pretty exact based on the confidence of your assumptions.

Usually, fold equity is discussed when you're on a draw, like this, but you think there's a good chance you can force the person to fold a marginal to good-but-not-great made hand. It's like a mathematical way to justify playing loose aggressive like Doyle recommends in his SuperSystem chapter on NLHE.

[MushMouthMike]

Not puzzled at this I was just curious as to what people generally do, or what they most likely do in this situation, because as noted there really isn't a "right" answer. I was surprised that the majority would try to get them all in the middle and draw at it. I figured the question would divide the conservative versus the loose players. I figured the more conservative would bet out and try to take down a pot that would increase your stack 20%, and the looser players would want to get them all in the middle with the favorable odds of hitting and take their chances.

I just thought it was one of the more interesting scenarios that comes up in poker, because there isn't a right or wrong way to approach it.

Personally I approach it about 50/50 unless I have a good read on the person. I am committed to the hand on the flop both ways. About 1/2 of the time I will bet out a "bait" bet of about 1/2 of the pot, hoping he takes that for weakness and attacks. The other 1/2 of the time I will check and then use check/raise. I most likely will push ALL IN on the check raise as it gives me the best fold equity, but I do see the benefit of the min raise. My issue with the min check/raise is it is so tempting for him to stick around, and at the end of the day I am still just on a draw so if I can get the initial 400 and say his bet of 300 in the pot I am more than happy to take it down right there.

BTW this is one of my favorite situations in poker as there is so many ways to play the hand, and of course so many outs (especially if the Aces are outs).

[BrAdA]

Your pot equity is the amount of chips you "own" in the pot. If you're on a flush draw, all-in after the flop, with a pot of 100, your pot equity is around 35.

Fold equity is a concept where you can add some small percentage of the pot to your actual equity through aggression. It's a subjective thing that can become pretty exact based on the confidence of your assumptions.

Usually, fold equity is discussed when you're on a draw, like this, but you think there's a good chance you can force the person to fold a marginal to good-but-not-great made hand. It's like a mathematical way to justify playing loose aggressive like Doyle recommends in his SuperSystem chapter on NLHE.

wow, you guys think about this shit WAY more than I do.........

[Neko's Ohana]

Your pot equity is the amount of chips you "own" in the pot. If you're on a flush draw, all-in after the flop, with a pot of 100, your pot equity is around 35.

Fold equity is a concept where you can add some small percentage of the pot to your actual equity through aggression. It's a subjective thing that can become pretty exact based on the confidence of your assumptions.

Usually, fold equity is discussed when you're on a draw, like this, but you think there's a good chance you can force the person to fold a marginal to good-but-not-great made hand. It's like a mathematical way to justify playing loose aggressive like Doyle recommends in his SuperSystem chapter on NLHE.

wow, you guys think about this shit WAY more than I do.........

I think Jim in particular has put more thought into the game than most people will ever do.

As for fold equity, you know you have used it, just probably not put it in that way. You understand that even naked agression has a certain value to it, and have just never put a name to it.

Fold equity and implied odds fall under the same place for me, theoretics.

[EasyTiger]

I say....."FUCK YOU, I AM ON A DRAW......A FUCKING BIG DRAW! ALL-IN, BITCH!"

[thejim]

I most likely will push ALL IN on the check raise as it gives me the best fold equity

The vast majority of the time, this is correct. In general, I think people pot commit themselves too often WITHOUT going all-in. You want to put the maximum pressure on your opponent.

However, I recently re-read Lederer's chapter in the FTP tournament book, and he discusses leverage. At first, I pretty much skipped over it because there wasn't much new there, or even interesting. But, people who have read about M and understand the first-in vig and the maximum pressure applied by the all-in forget about the leverage of having chips back. For awhile, it was overused, but I don't see it much any more. That is, betting an amount that commits you while still having the threat of it costing your opponent more.

It's a very fine line to walk, but having both options in your arsenal and the feel to know when to correctly use each, is pretty powerful.

[I Play God]

For this reason, I would check-raise if I expected him to CB, bet out if I didn't, but I wouldn't go all-in with the raise. Put in a substantial raise that will make him think you have a made hand, and then see what happens on the turn. You still have two more chances to build a pot.

If he bets out 300, a substantial raise would be to 900, leaving you with 600 chips and a pot of 2,500. It's not like you could really fold if you blanked the turn. By check raising you've already signaled i'm made or have a big draw.