Raising For Information
 

Hey all,

I'm the author of one of the articles in this month's internet magazine. The topic is "raising for information." There have been a number of recent posts that touch on the concept, so I thought that some people might be interested in my thoughts.

I know that this thread might technically belong in the "Magazine" forum, but given the minimal traffic/content over there, I think that it's reasonable to discuss the article here.

All comments greatly appreciated.

ML4L

Re: Raising For Information
 

I'm an idiot, where do I find it? maybe helpful to put on link since I'm retarded right now.

Re: Raising For Information
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm an idiot, where do I find it? maybe helpful to put on link since I'm retarded right now.

[/ QUOTE ]
Link

Re: Raising For Information
 

thanks man

p.s. I am a retard tonight, LOL

Re: Raising For Information
 

read the article, liked it, I recomend everyone read it.

Re: Raising For Information
 

It's entirely situational however.

If your stack is deep and so is the villain's, raising with a big but not huge hand for information while you can do so cheaply is entirely reasonable in the absence of other reliable tells.

I.e. board is 88J and you have AJ.

Re: Raising For Information
 

good article

Re: Raising For Information
 

I love making the min -raise.

It works for two reasons... it's as cheap as you can get as far as a min raise goes..

-AND-

people always relate min raises to a monster and/or value raise where you want a caller.

Case - and -point... I got lucky and had a good player laydown QQ post flop (ragged board) with a min raise... it solidified in his mind that I had AA or KK and wanted him to call.

P.S. I had JJ but would have done the same thing with a large array of hands including two big cards.

want to say a little bit more
 

Mike, I thought over your article in the shower. Here's what I think:

The main topic of the article can be translated into using position to garner more information; rather then a betting action, the sequence of streets to subsequent actions should tell you if you're "good" or not. Such as when I see a raise pf / auto bet flop / check turn, he can be moved off his hand, yet if it goes raise pf / auto bet flop / fire 2nd barrell, he has it, and I can fold.

This is all good, but the main critique I have for your article is the fact that you shared your hole cards (99 in this case) is irrelevant. The basic principle is not whether to raise for information, but raise to protect vs a possible 6 outer (An ace or king, we suppose) and "take the pot down," or take it away on the next street where we dont have to worry whether we are best or not.

The point of this is - If you show this hand down, having either raised the flop or put a bet in on the turn against said player, you will be shown a bigger pair. This leads me to...

*Related topic but not my focus* Why bother doing this with 99? This is a great board for a call to bluff! Once again if you plan on raising 99 for "info," you could do the same with JT (for example) which missed the flop completely. You outmanuever a hand which you have 6 outs against, and if he's the type to 3bet w/overpair (given 60bbs, I think is fine) you dont care folding a no pair no draw hand.

Which leads me to: I dont think this is an appropriate example of when raising for information - solely - is or is not a viable option. Would I ever raise for informatin alone? Probably not, I try to incorporate several other reasons into why I do something (either for an action I WILL take later in the hand or ending all actions NOW, such as folding) But...

When playing deeper stacked, lets say both players have 3000 rather then 300, (in example we will say we're at foxwoods) a raise here could pressure an overpair into shelling up; or, to put it mildly, may be smarter to see whether 99 is best on the flop rather then call the flop and make a guess on a turn when more money is at stake. I think the biggest problem with your article was your example utilized a case where the price of the information [125, or 25 bbs] was too great relative to stack sizes. [300, or 60 bbs]

In a deeper stacked game, you alluded to this, which I want to mention - By seizing control of the hand, your raise also accomplishes:
-Taking initiative, which for deeper stacked play, is so much more useful - when checked to on turn, you can make a big pot or small pot decision. Either decide you want to play a big pot and bet (lets say you turn a 9) small pot and check (and snap off a small bluff in a small pot) or big pot (lets say top pair pairs) to pressure TT+ into laying down.

-Hand protection; vs given player, you have limited his hand range substantially preflop. If you raise, and he calls, from that point on you have defended vs a 6outer, because you know ace king wont be in there on the turn. And if he did, then he called a half pot raise for a 6 out shot, which is forcing him to make a FTOP mistake. Goody.

The whole argument is: Is the information worth the price you paid? The easy answer, from your example and nicely demonstrated by your article, is no. However, deeper stacked, I think the answer is yes *Actually, the answer is "it depends," but for arguments sake, I'm sticking with 'yes'* and I'll show why.

An opponent like mentioned calling to evaluate the turn is better then raising the flop for information, only because the times he has a 6out draw is not worth protection your hand. Thats a given. Rather, a raise for information is useful when an opponent will NOT REVEAL THIS INFORMATION. This is someone capable of firing a 2nd barrell, or possibly 3rd, with an unimproved AK.

If you both have 3000, someone capable of firing 3 streets w/ ace high for example (and deeper stacked) by calling the flop the pot is 150. He potted the flop on a dry board, so if we assume he'll pot down with AK or JJ+, you now on the turn have to pay 150 + 450 = 600 to showdown your marginal overpair. Ignoring raising when we turn or river a set, or making a smart laydown when an ace or king turns, (*these will be considered, but for demonstrative purposes they will be done next)
<ul type="square">[*]He has AK and doesnt improve: 40% (% He has this hand) x 75% (% of time this will occur) x 600 (pot size from point "0," or flop on) = +180[*]He has AK and improves: 40% x 25% x 600 = -60[*]He has JJ,QQ,KK,AA and it holds up: 60% x 92% x 600 = -331.2[*]He has JJ,QQ,KK,AA and you hit a set: 60% x 8% x 600 = +28.8
[*]Net of -182.4$. Clearly then calling down pot bets with a marginal overpair and not making smart folds (when an ace or king appears on the board) or value raises (when you actually hit the set!) is a terrible idea.[/list]
Now, lets say we are able to fold when an ace or king turns, and we're able to ellicit some value from a turned or rivered 9. An ace or king appearing on the turn is approximately 13%, and 14% for the river. And if we hit a set, if we get paid off by raising the river for full pot (probably overly optimistic, but it is easy to factor in) the EV calculation becomes...
<ul type="square">[*]When he improves, he now only wins: 40% (times he has AK) x 13% (times he improves on the turn) x 0 (you fold to turn bet) + 14% x 150 (money put in on the turn) = -8.4$. So smart folds save us ~51 in real dollar equity.[*]When we improve, we now win: 60% (He has JJ,QQ,KK,AA) x 8% (you hit a set) x [ 1800 (full pot raise) + 600 (money in the pot already) ] = 115.2$ (So we make about 100$ more when we hit a set) [*] EV of not improving or Ace or King falling stay the same, so the net is still -44.4$. [/list]
Raising the flop, however; (from mike's article)[ QUOTE ]

Thus, the expected value of raising is:
40% × $100 + 60% × -$87.40 = -$12.44

[/ QUOTE ]

So the lesser of two evils is raising now!

Interestingly though, this means folding is the right case vs said player. (Who only has this hand range but is maddeningly aggressive post flop)

However, what about this same foxwoods game where original raiser has a WIDER range? This is when raising for INFORMATION can be a viable option! Because, when deepstacked, and not as narrowed hand range preflop, you can make many more mistakes for more money on future streets!!!

What do I mean by this?

Well, lets say solid / good slightly loose player in said foxwoods game opens for 20 in MP. You have button and contemplate popping it up with 99, but call anyway. At this point villain's hand range is NOT just "AK, AA, KK, QQ, JJ" but premium hands, maybe 88+, AK, AQ, and an occaisonal suited connector.

So same flop comes - 7 5 2r - and villain makes a pot bet. Is raising for information more viable now? The answer is yes. You have a vulnerable hand which rates to be good on this board, but also can be way behind (bigger overpair) and his occaisonal raise of a suited connector could give him an oesd, or a pair (and you dont know which cards hurt) or just overcards. In this example, if you call the flop, on the turn you need to basically only see a 9, or perhaps a T or J. Any other card could give him potentially the winning hand, if he doesnt have the best hand now.

Now, if he checks the turn, and you bet now, and he folds all worse hands, clearly you didnt need 99 to make the play. You could have JT (as referenced earlier) and be making a call to bluffHowever, on the flop, because his hand range was wide enough where you werent sure if he fired again if you had the best hand (vs ace high bluff, 88, 76, etc.) or drawing slim vs better hand (overpair) this is a case where getting the information (for 125, for example) rather then calling down 150 + 450 (pot bets on turn and river) is better.

ala, fold out a bunch of the hands which can move you off your hand or draw out. Interestingly, vs a slightly looser open raiser, raising the flop, and if called, putting them on bigger overpair or perhaps smaller underpair or top pair or oesd cause the hand to play much easier and more profitable for you. Now you can make the better turn play - often check for pot control - and now have a higer frequency of picking off a river bluff (as more cards could bluff, such as 56 or 34) or perhaps sliding a value bet from a call / check / check vs A7 or something.

Err... So anyway. very good article mike, I liked it, and although I wouldn't necessarily raise for information, when shallow stacked (such as your 60bb example) in a deeper stacked game vs a guy who doesnt limit his hand range before the flop so much it becomes an option.

***I guess I should put up EV calculations of raising "for information" in the deep stacked game (to prove that the raise would be more pos EV then calling turn) but this ran kinda long, so I'm just going to leave my hypothesis out there for someone else to defend. Which is, raising the flop now for information (and technically protection) is better then floating till the turn***

Edited to fix some typos

Re: want to say a little bit more
 

[ QUOTE ]

Mike, I thought over your article in the shower.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hate to tell you what I think about in the shower...jk. Nice post.

Re: want to say a little bit more
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Mike, I thought over your article in the shower.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hate to tell you what I think about in the shower...jk. Nice post.

[/ QUOTE ]

unfortunatly poker has taken over my brain, so i spend my shower time thinking over it. i used to think about more fun stuff.
;/

thanks tho

Good Addendum To My Article
 

Hey Bobbo,

Thanks for the response. At least one person cares... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Everything that you said is correct (at least, I think everything; that was a long post...). I think that it is a perfect addendum to my article.

Unfortunately, there are word count limitations on the magazine articles, so I wasn't able to go into depth about the things that you talked about in your post. Although, hopefully everyone saw that I did briefly address every point that you mentioned.

The real purpose of writing the article was to address the countless posts on this forum that advocate doing something to "find out where you're at" when it is not the optimal play. Many players use small raises, ill-timed blocking bets, and other feeble attempts at manipulation as crutches so that they never have to learn how to read hands or have to make difficult decisions. Most of these players also loathe the thought of ever folding the best hand, so they take actions that minimize that probability, rather than actions that maximize EV. So, I presented a reasonable scenario where the play of "raising for information" would actually cost a player money.

But, as you illustrated, there are scenarios where a "raise for information" is a good play. In fact, when I was discussing my draft with Matt Flynn, his first response was, "I raise for information all the time." But, I think that there are a number of factors that generally need to be present to make this sort of raise correct, including:

- deep stacks
- a non-straightforward (but not overly tough) opponent
- position
- other benefits to the raise aside from information
- a willingness to selectively apply more pressure when called

Another important consideration that you touched on is that, any time that this sort of raise is profitable with a marginal made hand, it would likely be at least as profitable (sometimes more profitable) with a weak draw or nothing. There is also the consideration that, with a weak draw or nothing, you have no showdown value to factor in, so you don't have to worry about a situation where raising is +EV, but not as +EV as calling down, as might be the case with a marginal made hand.

Thanks for the response.

Mike

Re: want to say a little bit more
 

good post bobo

[ QUOTE ]
Rather, a raise for information is useful when an opponent will NOT REVEAL THIS INFORMATION. This is someone capable of firing a 2nd barrell, or possibly 3rd, with an unimproved AK.

[/ QUOTE ]

this ist he key. as you mentioned, the deeper the stacks are, the more willing a guy will be to just keep firing. with online 100bb stacks, most players will define their hand on the turn, because another pot bet will put in substantial portion of their stack. as stacks get increasingly deeper, each bet could be somewhat thought of as a bet in a fixed limit game, where they have so much money behind that commmittment is the last thing on their mind.

the interesting thing is even though this seems like a case where you are raising for information because he will not reveal that info, in reality, YOU ALREADY HAVE YOUR INFORMATION. that is, you have the info that he is aggro with a deep stack, will raise loosely preflop, and will fire 2nd and 3rd barrels with no pair. i would say you are raising for VALUE vs a likely hand you beat!

Re: Raising For Information
 

Is there anyway to read the article now?

Re: Raising For Information
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is there anyway to read the article now?

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Raising For Information
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm an idiot, where do I find it? maybe helpful to put on link since I'm retarded right now.

[/ QUOTE ]
Link

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm link doesn't work, and I can't find the page. Anyone have it?

Also, good freaking post bobbo.

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

Is it possible to get a copy of this article?

Re: want to say a little bit more
 

Bobbo --

Nice post.

I'm also glad to see that you have been to the Original Super/System School of Manic Typesetting.

--Nate

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible to get a copy of this article?

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: want to say a little bit more
 

[ QUOTE ]
Bobbo --

Nice post.

I'm also glad to see that you have been to the Original Super/System School of Manic Typesetting.

--Nate

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks, ive found it really effective to bold and italicize random words

Re: Raising For Information
 

ML4L

The link doesn't work and I do not see the article when I go to the magazine section.

Have they pulled access until the next edition comes out?

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

[ QUOTE ]
Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't find the article and the link in this thread is not working for me. Also, i've never seen M.S. delete a thread in HSNL. I wonder what this could be about?

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

theres an agreement between 2p2 and the article authors that they get pulled after x number of months, at which point the rights of the article return to the authors. something like that.

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't find the article and the link in this thread is not working for me. Also, i've never seen M.S. delete a thread in HSNL. I wonder what this could be about?

[/ QUOTE ]

Zeebo posted a link to a copy of the article that he saved and rehosted. Copyright infringement, thus Mat deleted the link.

You'd have to get ahold of MLG or someone who saved the article as 2p2 no longer has rights to it.

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

Thanks to both ML4L and BobboFitos for their great articles/posts.

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible to get a copy of this article?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not ignoring this thread; just haven't figured out the best way to handle this yet... I've been getting PMs periodically for the past year asking for the article and usually end up forgetting to respond, so I might just go ahead and repost the entire article in this thread. But, first, I have to find a copy of the article, which I don't have offhand...

Anyway, I'll try to have a resolution to this by the end of the week.

ML4L

ML4L if you don\'t mind here it is - *DELETED*
 

Post deleted by fsuplayer

Re: ML4L if you don\'t mind here it is -
 

Beloved,

Thank you for the text to the article; I copied it and PMed it to myself so that I will have it handy...

Mods, please delete the text of Beloved's post. Again, I haven't yet decided whether I want to post the text of my article on the forum or whether I will just send the text to people via PM when they ask me for it specifically...

ML4L

Re: ML4L if you don\'t mind here it is -
 

mike-

sry if it was up for too long. i hadnt clicked on that thread since it was bumped.

hope all is well with u. send me a PM sometime.

Re: ML4L if you don\'t mind here it is -
 

bumped for awesomeness.

Re: ML4L if you don\'t mind here it is -
 

ML4L's inbox is full and I'd realllly like a copy of this article.

Re: ML4L if you don\'t mind here it is -
 

I sent you the link.

There are copyright issues so I don't think they want it posted on here.

Re: ML4L if you don\'t mind here it is -
 

I suggest using http://www.archive.org
I don't know if it's alright to suggest it though [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible to get a copy of this article?

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible to get a copy of this article?

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

CMI pls

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

this is kind of an absurdly old thread to bump but i had some questions with bobbo's post.

firstly, i think it is a good post and you make a lot of good points bobbo...but for the most part i disagree with raising 99 on that flop vs. most players. for the sake of argument let's say the villain is a good tricky lag/tag. in that case i think raising 99 purely for information is pretty bad because he will(probably) quickly catch on you are raising these types of hands and maybe 3-ball you with air or call and c/r the turn or call and lead the turn etc. etc. and there are probably other lines he can take which will make your raise for 'information' not so informative.

i do think raising this flop with 99 as stacks get deeper is valuable but for a different reason which you alluded to but didn't really pin point. i think if you are raising this flop with air fairly often or even often enough that u think he is catching on(re: jt example) and u feel he might be getting fed up with you putting so much pressure on him. then merging your range from only {monsters, air} and maybe a semi-bluff from time to time and adding in marginal made hands as well will make it tough for him to be so sure you always have a monster or air, which admittedly will usually be air more often than not and he will have to be a bit more cautious when you raise this flop as you don't always have to fold the 99 when he 3-balls you now. unfortunately still he will not know if you are raising for information or raising the merge your range, and as long as he knows these hands are in your range he can open up his flop 3-betting range and it will be tough on us either way. but i think as long as our mindset behind the raise is to do it to merge our range it can be profitable.

in general though i think calling is usually best because it is more profitable to keep him in the pot with his bluffs if you think he will continue with a 2nd or even 3rd barrel so you can pick those bluffs off, rather than raise and having him fold these hands with 6 outs UNLESS you think a flop raise will result in him having a higher bluffing frequency than a flat call. not sure if any of this is very coherent and these are just my thoughts on the matter, but i thought it was an interesting thread.

Re: Raising For Information *DELETED*
 

[ QUOTE ]
this is kind of an absurdly old thread to bump but i had some questions with bobbo's post.

[/ QUOTE ]

had to reread that post again to see what i was saying =) Ill try to answer your qs.

[ QUOTE ]


firstly, i think it is a good post and you make a lot of good points bobbo...but for the most part i disagree with raising 99 on that flop vs. most players.

[/ QUOTE ]

one stipulation, I made the case for raising there while deep stacked (3k in a 5-5 game) whereas mike's article hero played a very short stack (60bb I think?). that was a huge sticking point to me.
[ QUOTE ]

for the sake of argument let's say the villain is a good tricky lag/tag. in that case i think raising 99 purely for information is pretty bad because he will(probably) quickly catch on you are raising these types of hands and maybe 3-ball you with air or call and c/r the turn or call and lead the turn etc. etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmm, first, i think this metagame can be ignored bc if we raise w/ 99, villain wont see it, so he prolly will think we had a set or bluff or whatever; point is, he can draw his own conclusions. secondly, i recommended the line (vs that type) to check the turn if you raise the flop, which puts the same amount of money in as call flop bet turn... but your line is bluffier (which now induces a bluff on end, which is great) since you now have a good bluff catcher. (or, a nice solid value bet vs a lag)
[ QUOTE ]

and there are probably other lines he can take which will make your raise for 'information' not so informative.


[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, im not even sure if i argued a flop raise in that case was primarily for info, really it's for value where you get information along with it. i think the term in essence (raising "SOLELY" for information) is a little silly but other things that go along with it (ala seizing initiative) has value.

[ QUOTE ]

i do think raising this flop with 99 as stacks get deeper is valuable but for a different reason which you alluded to but didn't really pin point. i think if you are raising this flop with air fairly often or even often enough that u think he is catching on(re: jt example) and u feel he might be getting fed up with you putting so much pressure on him. then merging your range from only {monsters, air} and maybe a semi-bluff from time to time and adding in marginal made hands as well will make it tough for him to be so sure you always have a monster or air, which admittedly will usually be air more often than not and he will have to be a bit more cautious when you raise this flop as you don't always have to fold the 99 when he 3-balls you now.

[/ QUOTE ]
yeah, true. although i am pretty aggro on the flop, my range is strassa esque in terms of a ton of middling hands (its not nuts or air).
[ QUOTE ]

unfortunately still he will not know if you are raising for information or raising the merge your range, and as long as he knows these hands are in your range he can open up his flop 3-betting range and it will be tough on us either way. but i think as long as our mindset behind the raise is to do it to merge our range it can be profitable.


[/ QUOTE ]
yeah.. i am not really worried about being 3bet bluffed.
[ QUOTE ]

in general though i think calling is usually best because it is more profitable to keep him in the pot with his bluffs if you think he will continue with a 2nd or even 3rd barrel so you can pick those bluffs off, rather than raise and having him fold these hands with 6 outs UNLESS you think a flop raise will result in him having a higher bluffing frequency than a flat call. not sure if any of this is very coherent and these are just my thoughts on the matter, but i thought it was an interesting thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, interesting point, and funny enough (vs a tag) I think the best answer was neither call nor raise but actually fold (vs someone who has a tight raising range but is very aggro w/ AK and overpairs, which isnt really universially the truth) it was only when villains flop range (so its very very difficult to call down "correctly") was wider then raising became valuable.