[drzen]

[ QUOTE ]
the reason its better to reraise than to call is because this particular opponent can fold a made hand postflop, has a wide range that may need to connect to continue, and if we both catch we can win a huge pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I didn't really understand any of those reasons.

Why does reraising make him any more likely to fold a made hand? He actually had a made hand here and folded because the flop sucked for him, not because we reraised.

Yes, he has a wide range, but why does that mean that it's a good idea to reraise. We are not beating his range and we too must hit the flop to continue!

And yes, we can win a big pot when we both catch (but he catches less, I guess you mean) but that is the worst reason for reraising I can think of. You'd raise every hand you were dealt if that was a good way to think. It totally ignores that you lose more when you do not catch. You also ignore the chance that he has something like Ax and you both catch.

I don't see anything in that that is actually a benefit of raising. The first, okay, I see what you're saying. You're hoping that you might have some benefit to deceiving a made hand into thinking your stronger and folding because of it. Well, good luck. You've inflated the pot, so many players actually will not fold because you've made the reward for hanging in there with a weak made hand a bit better. The second and third are results-oriented. Yes, I want to have raised when I win! I want to have capped every street. But I don't want to have raised when I lose.

[ QUOTE ]
this type of move can be more dangerous vs an opponent who is willing to make moves on you after showing preflop strength, but I honestly don't think that this was the case here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how it becomes any more or less dangerous because I don't see much benefit in the reraise in the first place.