Betting with mid pair nut flush draw on the button. Good/bad?

Hand #3883169-1489 at San Mateo (No Limit Hold'em)
Powered by UltimateBet
Started at 06/Jan/05 13:10:24

skooterman is at seat 0 with $4.55.
Ptarmigan is at seat 1 with $8.15 (sitting out).
AliMacG is at seat 2 with $5.71.
HIDLMA is at seat 3 with $7.51 (sitting out).
Dimber Damber is at seat 4 with $3.20.
matcoach is at seat 5 with $7.30.
Marm is at seat 6 with $9.95.
DRADICATOR is at seat 7 with $4.15.
wicked_too is at seat 8 with $10.45.
arkadii is at seat 9 with $7.05 (sitting out).
The button is at seat 6.

DRADICATOR posts the small blind of $.05.
wicked_too posts the big blind of $.10.

skooterman: -- --
AliMacG: -- --
Dimber Damber: -- --
matcoach: -- --
Marm: 4h Ah
DRADICATOR: -- --
wicked_too: -- --

Pre-flop:

skooterman calls. AliMacG calls. Dimber Damber
calls. matcoach folds. Marm calls. DRADICATOR
calls. wicked_too checks.

Flop (board: Qh 4s 2h):

DRADICATOR checks. wicked_too checks. skooterman
checks. AliMacG checks. Dimber Damber checks.
Marm bets $.60. DRADICATOR folds. wicked_too folds.
skooterman folds. AliMacG folds. Dimber Damber
folds. Marm is returned $.60 (uncalled).



Hand #3883169-1489 Summary:

No rake is taken for this hand.
Marm wins $.60.

__________________

I like it, you're more likely to get some play if the flush card falls. If the table is too loose-passive, no one may bet on fourth even if you hit your flush.

__________________
“There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about.” - John von Neumann

77,175,722 games 1811.860 secs 42,594 games/sec

Board: Qh 2h 4s
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 50.0710 % [ 00.50 00.00 ] { Ah4h }
Hand 2: 09.9867 % [ 00.10 00.00 ] { random }
Hand 3: 09.9796 % [ 00.10 00.00 ] { random }
Hand 4: 09.9875 % [ 00.10 00.00 ] { random }
Hand 5: 09.9919 % [ 00.10 00.00 ] { random }
Hand 6: 09.9833 % [ 00.10 00.00 ] { random }

__________________

Yea you're error is you are assuming they ahve random hands.

__________________
“There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about.” - John von Neumann

If I get one caller and assume he has a Q, then this is not bad, but not good either.

1,308,310 games 2.078 secs 629,600 games/sec

Board: Qh 2h 4s
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 49.8313 % [ 00.50 00.00 ] { Ah4h }
Hand 2: 50.1687 % [ 00.50 00.00 ] { QQ, AQs, KQs, QJs-Q2s, AQo, KQo, QJo-Q2o }

But for each additional caller without a Q, it gets better.

120,685,950 games 58.937 secs 2,047,711 games/sec

Board: Qh 2h 4s
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 48.7206 % [ 00.49 00.00 ] { Ah4h }
Hand 2: 43.5694 % [ 00.43 00.00 ] { QQ, AQs, KQs, QJs-Q2s, AQo, KQo, QJo-Q2o }
Hand 3: 07.7100 % [ 00.07 00.00 ] { random }

All the way up to my original post.

__________________

Not really, since they limped, and they could all have anything at all.

__________________

Now put one on any PP JJ-44

__________________
“There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about.” - John von Neumann

It's not that bad, but then again PokerStove is hard to use accurately.
Board: Qh 2h 4s
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 48.4395 % [ 00.48 00.00 ] { Ah4h }
Hand 2: 12.4650 % [ 00.12 00.00 ] { AA-44, AKs-ATs, KQs-KTs, QJs-QTs, JTs, AKo-ATo, KQo-KTo, QJo-QTo, JTo }
Hand 3: 39.0955 % [ 00.39 00.00 ] { QQ, AQs, KQs, QJs-Q2s, AQo, KQo, QJo-Q2o }

__________________
“There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about.” - John von Neumann