I have normally called with just about any flush draw on the flop, figuring that if I hit on the turn the implied odds would make up the difference even though i am almost never given sufficient direct odds.

However, I’ve been messing out with simulators and experimenting with being tighter with flush draws and it looks like maybe it was a real leak.

Garden variety example of what I’m talking about...

A player raises to 3BB in LP and I call in the BB with 98s. Flop comes K63 with two of my suit. I check and villain bets 4 BBs into a 7 BB pot.

In the past that’s an auto call for me, but I’m now thinking maybe the implied odds aren’t there. If villain has AQ or TT or something, he’s not going to pay me off when I hit. Plus, being OOP makes it tougher to maximize value.

Obviously, this is different if I have some other outs (overcards or a pair or straight possibilities) or if I’m in position.

But I am thinking I should be folding a lot more flush draws, and therefore not even calling preflop with as many suited hands in EP and MP.

Yes, I also realize this is somewhat dependent on the opponents and stack sizes.

In general though, what kind of direct odds are you guys looking for with flush draws (with no other outs)?

Playing heads up oop with your primary purpose being that you will hit a flush is generally a losing proposition.

You should have some other predefined plan to win (they over fold to check raises, they over fold on scary boards, they will pmay for stacks with any pair) or just fold.

Once you get to the flop, you should again have a back up or a read that they will pay you off a good portion of the time.

Without those, I'm probably looking for 4:1 or better direct odds. With those reads it can be as low as 2:1. Also depends on how much they have left behind of course.

I don't pay much to draw at FDs especially OOP. If you don't have a pair or something else to go with it, usually best to toss it.

1. You never hit.

2. It's the most obvious draw and it's really tough to get value from it when you do.

Thanks guys. Good stuff.

I am now wondering about preflop with suited hands. I had been pretty much limping with the suited aces in the first couple spots and then raising if it’s folded to me from the middle to the button. Maybe I should get rid of the limps and either raise (even UTG) or just dump em.

And I’m thinking the other suited connectors should only be played in late position, period.

Both pre and flop are 100% standard calls.

There are a lot of ways to turn equity besides hitting your flush.

Don't forget the check raise. Need to add that to your arsenal.

Certainly. But I think that’s a little more dependent on the opponent and to a lesser extent my hand (any other outs) and the stacks (how big of a CR do I need to have some FE).

i mean, the real key is not to play these suited connectors in the first place. but yeah, virtually everyone over plays draws.

I definitely don’t think the flop is a 100 percent call. The more I think about it, the more I think it depends on the opponent. How likely is he to pay me off if I hit? How likely is keep to barreling without less than TP? (Maybe my call slows him down enough to get me a free card.) How wide was his range PF?

The moral of the story for me is that it always has been an auto-call but now I should probably think about it a little more and make sure.

Agree. I am probably going to remove a lot of them from my range, especially when I’m gonna be OOP.

This stuff doesn’t really matter. If villain always denies your equity on a brick and never pays off a flush then he’s making big strategy mistakes that other parts of our range benefit from. But you don’t know that and you have to have a solid baseline strategy for when you don’t have lock reads. If you’re just folding anything remotely marginal until you have those lock reads you’re leaving heaps of money on the table.

We are not just calling to hit our flush here. Half the deck improves our hand and with the other half we still have a flush draw. It would be different if the flop were KQ3ss and villain were potting it but we just have too much equity to fold here for this price.

Additionally, this is rarely relevant because good players don’t really exist at live low stakes, but if you’re folding this you’re going to have a hard time defending your range against good players. This is one of your better flop calls so you’re getting run-over by c-bets and your range will have a pretty uneven equity distribution across turns if you are folding most of your draws, which will make cards that complete draws very hard to defend on as well.

Now you're talking.

Take everything into consideration.

Auto anything is never really a sure thing, just ask Tesla.

Something else to think about. Add them to you 3! strategy from OOP, especially against a likely steal raise from LP.

If you throw in hands like 98s as 3! and get a flop like this, its makes for a great c-bet spot. And if you do hit the flush, its much harder to put you on it, meaning you'll get paid off much more. That way you can win by either taking it down PF, on the flop with a c-bet, or by hitting the draw.

Imo these two things are way more important than the difference between a 3BB and 5BB bet, for example, into a 7BB pot.

Direct odds are rarely as useful as implied odds unless you tend to play short-stacked.

Bumping this thread as my hand is based on the same question. So in a live 5/5 game there is a UTG straddle to $10 and it folds to SB who completes. I have AQcc in the BB and I make it 55. Both players call.

Pot is about $160. Flop comes 9c8c7d

SB checks. I could have all the sets, straights and two pairs here (suited) but the board is also very wet against 2 players range. I elect to check. UTG bets $110. SB folds. Even though we are not quite getting the direct odds for the turn card I think this is an easy call given that I have 2 overs which might still be good.

Pot is $390 and turn is 5s.

Not a good card for me. I check and UTG now bets 220. Now I am getting about 26% pot odds. The player has been mostly passive. He calls a lot and likes seeing flops. I haven't seen much aggressive action from him in the past 2 hours that I have played. So I think he is strong here. 5 completes some of his semi bluffs. I block the flush draws he might have. And I don't think I would get paid if the flush hits. I don't think he is the kind of player who will pay off. Should I fold? Or is this too close that I should call? Do you guys agree with the flop call?

(Equity, Win, Tie)
Player 1: 23.8% 21.7% 4.13% [AcQc]
Player 2: 76.2% 74.2% 4.13% {99-66, A6s, KcJc-KcTc, JTs, T9s, Td9d, 98s, 86s+, 76s, 65s, JhTs, JcTs, JdTs, JdTh}

Board: [9c 8c 7d 5s ?]

Monte Carlo Simulation: 1000000 trials

If I give him hands like like KcJc , KcTc and T9s. I have about 24% equity.

This situation is pretty common. I think we should be betting flop with a sizing that gives us direct odds to improve, without inducing a raise from Vs. 35-45% of pot should do it, based on your live reads. V's stack sizes are important here.
Also depends how good they are. Are they just playing their cards or are they thinking about your range?

When we bet flop, we're uncapped in a deep game. Like you already said, we could have everything here, and it establishes an opportunity to bluff on later streets if we brick out. Is V himself a kind of player who has a fold button? Is he capable of folding 2p on a non-flush board?

Let go of our particular holding (AcQc) and think about our entire range. Action folds to the small blind, who completes. We raise to isolate from the middle blind, and both the big blind (i.e., the straddle) and the small blind call. The flop comes 9c8c7d.

The big blind -- especially if they are the typical live player who under-three-bets, is going to have all the sets, all the two pair, and all the straights in their range. Because we are (or should be) raising with a tight, linear range (because we are expecting a call from the small blind) we may have all the sets and the top straight, but we might not have even 98s for top two pair. God only knows what the small blind's range is -- it strictly speaking should be the empty set, but they limped, so we can assume that it is wide and capped. They, too, are going to have all the two pair and straights, although possibly they might only have one or two of the sets, because even the passive morons at Commerce know to open 88 from the small blind.

So we do not have nut advantage here, especially against two players, and should be betting small, if we are betting at all. I would lean towards checking range, but if we are betting, we should be betting something like a quarter to a third pot with our straights, our sets, our 98s, and possibly our overpairs, for value. I would have to count combos to be sure, but I would rather bet a hand like AcTc or QcJc (big combo draws) than AcQc. It is not clear, though, that we want to be bluffing much in this multiway pot with a wet board that connects well with a limper's and a defender's range.

But if we can't bluff often, we shouldn't bet often, and that, I think, is what makes this a range check.

^Thanks! Agree with your thoughts but I could have top 2 here as I am betting wide here to go HU.

What about the turn? Are you giving up here?