Everybody has ran into the situation. Wondering if anybody has insight into the best way to approach the situation. It seems if no matter what if I push really hard, I will still get the call. I however hate checking, waiting to see if I'll get drawn out on. If my opponent doesn't make his flush, I get no action. If he does, I don't want action.

Here's an example:
Blinds at 50/100
Stack sizes are all comparable @ about 2200 chips
UTG I am dealt AK
I raise to 300
I inexplicably get called by 3 other players (I am fairly tight overall and extremely tight out of position/UTG)
1200 in the pot

FLOP: QJ10
SM. Blind Checks
BG. Blind Checks
MY TURN TO ACT- I decide with 4 players in the pot, it is time to take it down. There is for sure someone on the flush draw.
I bet 800 This is a fairly sizable bet compared to chip stacks. I do not typically make pot sized (or over) bets, just because most of the people I play against look at that bet as a steal. In my experience, the 3/4 bet typically protects my hands alot better.
The player to my left min raises to 1600
SM and BG blind Fold
It is 800 for me to call, but I only have 1100 left. I have the raiser covered by only about 100 chips
I push in
Player to my left calls and shows 35
Turn: 2
River: 6

I have tried to play this hand all sorts of different ways: ie, pushing all in post flop, waiting for turn to make sure the draw is priced out, checking all the way to the river if anybody lets me. This is just the most recent way it went down.

Please let me know if anybody has an effective method of playing hands like these. It is just possible this is a play-by-feel hand. But any comment would be appreciated!

Thanks for the response. Ignoring this specific instance (and I understand everything depends on the exact situation) is there any more effective ways to play these types of hands. It seems even if I price the flush draw out with a big bet, I get called.

My buddy had kind of a funny reaction: He told me to cross my nuts and hope for the best.

This is one of those situations where it is correct to overbet the flop . There are three high cards which means there is a good chance it hit someone . Another advantage in overbetting the pot is that it becomes incorrect for any player to play a flush draw which simplifies your decision on the turn . ( this may not apply to low limit players ) . You may also get a player with two pair to commit a lot of money to find out if his hand is the best .

The disadvantage in making a three quarter size bet is that an opponent with a flush draw may raise you to the point where he becomes pot committed which eliminates your fold equity .

You have the nuts on the flop so you're in fact putting your opponents in a tenious situation . More often than not , a player will fold a flush draw if he's good , and there is a decent chance you'll win a ton of money if a player with 2 pair pushes all in .

The overbet will always be profitable as you have the nuts on the flop and there are fewer than 14 outs on the flop for any one individual to be considered even money against you . The question is whether or not overbetting the pot is the most profitable play in the long run which I believe to be the case here . If someone is on a flush draw , then they 're making a huge mistake by calling your bet . However , since the board is coordinated with cards that are in the playing zone , it's very likely that someone hit two pair on the flop and may re-raise you which would be an excellent result for you win or lose .

Muchaka i'm sorry but you're mistaken .

This concept is also in supersystem , if you didn't know about this play , I suggest you read that section if you haven't already .

In fact this is a routine play for me . If Muchaka is right , then Doyle is wrong :) .

Ummmm, reread his post please. He clearly says he does want Villain to chase. He just doesn't think there's any necessity to bet so much that you cripple yourself on those occasions when he hits.

Since you're going to lose 35% of the time anyway, why make it hurt worse than it needs to when it does? ie. Why bet more than the minimum needed to make chasing mathematically incorrect?

He's right, there is no reason to do so. Overbetting the Flop just reduces your EV for this matchup presuming there is any bet you can make that Villain doesn't Raise.

Pushing yourself is clearly wrong here, because it might cause Villain to Fold, and we've already seen that Villain saves money by Folding.

The only way Villain's Folding would make us more money is if we'd bet bigger PreFlop. If Villain were already in for more than 315, then his Fold makes us more money per hand than his chasing does.

This hand presents something of a paradox and may illustrate an important difference between cash game play, and tournament play.

If playing a cash game, Hero makes the most money here by betting bigger Pre-flop and then getting Villain to do the correct thing and Fold on the Flop.

Let's say Hero bet 350 instead of 300 Pre. Now, Villain saves money by chasing since the very most he can lose is an average 315 per trial, whereas if he Folds, he loses 350.

On the other hand, in a tournament, we want Villain to do the incorrect thing and chase no matter how much we bet Pre. In a tournament, we want to win stacks not just chips, and this is a case where Villain will likely lose his whole stack 65% of the time.

So, in a cash game we want to bet bigger Pre-Flop and discourage a Call, whereas in a tournament we want to encourage the Call.

Your logic doesn't track.

First off, an oversized bet is more likely to make weak players Fold.

Second, a player who is experienced enough to see the overbet as a steal and Call is also too experienced to be chasing a Flush at bad odds. He'd just let you steal since he knows the Call is a long-term loser. That leaves only the lesser made hands who are really hurt by this play.

Now, you're down to the fish. They will chase their Flush no matter what odds are offered. They will also get there 35% of the time. By overbetting, you only hurt yourself when they do. An overbet on the Flop commits you to another big bet on the Turn if the Flush card doesn't show. Now you're in for a lot more money than necessary when that Flush card hits on the River.

Since a Flush has the best odds to hit, betting just enough to take away those odds is all that's required. Betting anything more just hurts your EV on the hand.

Well, Doyle would have bet more before the Flop, too.

Then, when he played that Nut Straight fast, he'd get the best of both worlds. If his opponent has a Drawing hand and correctly Folds, he realizes a greater EV on the hand than if the opponent had chased. If he gets Called, it's by a lesser made hand that is very unlikely to improve.

You've got to remember the quality of competition Doyle routinely faces. He isn't up against fish who routinely chase a Flush at highly marginal odds.

I don't know how to state it much more clearly.

When the stack/blind ratio is as low as it was here, overbetting does not help you when a chaser misses, but it does hurt you when a chaser hits. It's a reduced EV play.

That is another compelling reason phatcat , nice post .

I'm starting to feel that perhaps the overbet isn't a bad move here. It takes away my opponents option to raise and makes the price a little worse. Although I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that my opponent here would have called. It's just how this specific person plays.

Now, don't get too angry at me with this one: Is it at all acceptable to check after the flop? If he bets I clearly still need to at least call (if not go over the top here) if he checks, I can see the turn, if it doesn't pair the board or bring the third club, I still have the nuts.

It is a weak way to play it, but with only one card left you can almost definitely push the draw out. IF a club does come, i guess it still would be a mighty tough laydown for me, but whenever I am in these multi-way pots and two cards are suited on the flop, it seems somebody has a flush draw.

I think in the weak field/strong field scenario, the results are opposite of what you state. There is no way a strong player is going to think that anyone is going to steal on this flop. Its way too dangerous of a flop to try and steal as it likely hit more than one person. The weak player on the other hand just might see it that way and give you a call which you welcome. If this gives the flush draw his odds than so be it, you've got a huge pot built holding the current nuts and probable nuts in the end. If you take the pot down with your overbet that's fine too (im talking tourney strategy here, cash game maybe more of a mistake to scare off some weaker callers) as it minimizes risk of busting out to a draw or splitting the pot on such a scary flop.

Thanks to all for the valuable input! I guess I'll just continue to be happy when somebody calls all-in with a draw against the nuts...