I've been thinking about trying a play that I'll call a "phantom draw," and I wonder people think it's stupid or reasonably likely to succeed.

Here is the general scenario. Let's say you're in mid- to late position and you have a hand like 44 or small suited connectors. There are two callers before you, and you limp in. Then the BB raises to 3 bets, the other limpers call, and you decide to call as well. So 4 players see the flop with 12 bets in it.

Now the flop comes and it completely misses you. However, it does present a good draw, like a flush draw or a straight draw, but it's not a draw for you based on the cards your holding. For example sake, let's say the flop is A high, with two other suited cards not related in any way to yours.

The original raiser bets out, but he bets in a way that would make it correct to call IF YOU HAD THE DRAW PRESENTED. If that happens, and if the other players fold, my thought is to call the bet and then represent the draw, if it hits, by betting big. In other words, play the hand as if you had the draw and see if you can get the raiser to release his hand if the draw hits on the turn or the river.

Here are the conditions for trying the play:

1. Once the raiser bets, you must be sure that you can continue to play with the raiser heads up. In other words, you don't want to be competing for the pot with someone else who may actually have the draw.

2. You must have a pretty good idea of what the raiser's hand is by your observation of his play, making you fairly certain that he is not playing the draw or something that could beat the draw.

3. You're betting pattern must be consistent with playing a draw.

4. The draw must be obvious to the raiser (i.e., flushes are more obvious than gutshot straights).

5. You have the pot odds to try to hit the draw.

6. You think the raiser is capable of laying down a hand.


Well, what do you think? Too many conditions to try to run this bluff?

Is this NL or Limit? If Limit then forget it (I say that cause one more bet usually can't bluff someone out), NL you can actually bluff if the flush hits the board on the turn or river. The raiser might very well have hit top pair on the flop and with a pair of 4's (your head up like you said after he bet the flop) you could raise right then to find out it he does have top pair or not but I know this isn't about that. Actually this play will present itself when you have either top pair or second best or even a straight draw that never hits where your opponent is taking the lead and your just calling him down. Then a flush draw hits on the river and then you raise him good. Just as long as the flush draw started from the flop will it work. So you still have somekind of hand unless your were really on a straight draw.

Opps, must be NL.

If I were to bluff I would reraise his bet on the flop not call.

Why would you do that to help this bluff along?

By raising the flop, you're representing that you flopped a big A, a set, or two-pair. You're not representing that you have a drawing hand. My instinct is that by raising the flop, you're more likely to get called if the draw hits because the raiser is not likely to conclude that the draw was the hand that you are playing.

In addition, you are also giving the raiser a chance to re-raise you and take away the pot odds that would make it correct to play the draw.

Thus, it seems to me that a raise on the flop is a bluff calculated to take the pot down on the flop because you sensed weakness rather than to set up a bluff later in the hand if the draw presented hits.

definatley done something similar to this before. this goes along the lines of playing the player and not the cards. it can work and win you some pots, but it can also lose you some big ones. you have to know who you are doing it against.

Thats a strategy I often use in NL, but I doubt it could work on a regular basis in limit mode.

The guy will call and may check fold the river... may...

KJ

It's called drawing to bluff outs. If you figure he will fold everything less than a set or AK with the A(or K if A is on board) of the flush suit. It does sometimes become a profitable play. You must also remember you do still have 2 live outs. This is a play you can make against a better, but sometimes overly tight player.

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

I've used this strategy before with some success, but it's scary because...well, it's scary for the same reasons it's scary to bluff anytime.

The best time, I have found, to respresent a draw is in an MTT and only 1 or 2 more people need knocked out before the rest are guaranteed paid. Play really tightens up then, and so you can do this 2 or 3 times (don't get ridiculous though).

I think what you are saying is you don't think you will have the best hand, even after the turn and river and you are setting up a bluff. To me this is pretty advanced play. I just saw Daniel Negranau do it against Freddie Deeb. It was exactly as you describe it. Freddie had top pair with Kings but there were two hearts on board. When a heart hit on the river, Daniel raised and Freddie folded the winning hand.

I have done this manouver but usually I do it when I have a lot of chips and my opponent doesn't. It's really a bully move and a good way to play when you are the chip leader. And it's another good reason to really know how your opponents play.