Quote:
Originally Posted by javi
You shouldnt think of it as "protecting" from a flush. If you bet $200 into a $60 pot you'd be thrilled that he called. You dont mind someone calling as long as theyre getting bad odds to do so. The question becomes just how badly are they willing to call? Then size your bet based upon that. Lets say villain turned his hand over and exposed a nut flush draw and swore on his wife and kids that he will not call anything more than $10 and you believed him, how much would you bet? Hopefully no more than $10, because while he's not making a mistake in calling, he's still "winning less" than you in the long run so you have to bet. It's never for protection, it's for value.
The only times you would consider a particular bet for "protection" is just because you know you will play the hand poorly if they call. For instance if everyone limps to you in the BB and you decide to minraise to $4 with AK. You stand a pretty decent chance of losing this hand vs 8 players out of position. In that case while you are raising for value, you really dont mind getting a bunch of folds because it's the only way for you to play effectively vs the field.
If he has the nut flush draw and you bet $10 you are giving him a gift man. You are literally losing money when you bet $10 and he calls, it's better than checking but it's still a losing play.
Of course it's for value. Any bet for protection is also a bet for value. I'm never concerned about myself "playing poorly on later streets" I'm concerned about likely having the best hand, but having it be very vulnerable.
When you bet pot you're giving him 2:1 (33% needed to call) but he only has around 20%. Based on implied odds he should consider calling. He gets 3:1 if someone calls ahead of him and he holds the nut flush draw, and he should definitely call then. The problem comes up at 1/2 with players viewing money as only being in its "dollar value" and don't know what pot odds are.