A while ago I posted a hand where I raised preflop with a suited hand, had a few callers, and the flop came giving me a flush draw. A few posters said I should have bet the flop, because I might not get paid out if I hit the flush.

Of course, it depends on the opponent and whether you think he'll pay you out or shut down if the flush hits, but anyway, I did some analysis on my blog (with a sample hand) about the topic. I'll save you the math, you can read the post if you want to see the details, but I basically came to the conclusion that betting about 50-60% of the pot seems good when on a flush draw.

Would like to know what do you think about the whole topic? Do you normally bet out on flush draws as a sort of semi-bluff (wouldn't mind taking the pot down on the flop, but still low enough that you lose the minimum if your draw doesn't hit)? If so, how much do you suggest betting?

It really depends on your position, number of players in the pot, board texture, how strong your flush draw is and how big the stack sizes are as well as previous history with the players. There is no one way to play a flush draw in every situation

Its not so much a matter of how much I bet, but rather, what my image is, what the board texture is, and who my opponent is.

Don't mean to give you the 'it depends' answer, but honestly, this seriously impacts what I do.

For instance, lets say i'm up against a calling station. Then I put in minimal bets that build the pot so that if I do hit, I can bet hard and get paid off.

If i'm up against an aggressive LAG, but I have a decent image, then I will bet more as a 'blocking bet' while at the same time repping a made hand so that if the flush hits, there is a good chance the LAG bets as if HE has the flush then I can tank, hollywood and raise him back

If i'm up against a very good TAG and the board is weak, 9 3 2, then I c/f since the TAG will not give me pot odds and blocking bets won't work.

If i'm up against an aggressive maniac LAG then I will try to c/c down (and or try a blocking bet) and hope for pot odds but fold if I don't get them

If I have a great image and up against a weaker player, then I will bet as if I have an over pair and rep that all the way to the river and if I hit, value bet river but if I miss, fire a big enough third barrel to push him off.

If i've been caught semibluffing recently, then i'm less likely to try to lead out...

So for me, it is very player, image, and villian dependant.

If your opponents aren't concentrating then you'll probably get away with betting the minimum you think they will fold for. Otherwise you'd be better off betting the same amount you would if you had TPTK or a set.

Another consideration is how often you should be doing this play, which again is villain and table dynamic dependent. Semi-bluff often if they fold a lot, never semi-bluff if they call everything.

It is a semi-bluff, so it's not for value. You want your opponent to fold, and if he doesn't, you have a better chance of getting more money in if you hit your draw.

I wouldn't call it betting for value.

LOL cross post, read my mind Robocop

What is that old saying I heard or read somehwhere about poker? Oh yeah,
IT DEPENDS

geez you got 2 overs and a flush draw BET THAT SHIZZLE!

Betting a flush draw at a station that calls pretty much every time means you are setting yourself up the odds. Keep in mind that you wont hit most of the time so if you know he wont fold on either street but will fold to a big overbet on the river think you are wasting money unless you know he wont fold when you try to get paid.