[ QUOTE ]
<ul type="square">[*]As a semibluff to attempt to take down the blinds[*]To set up additional semibluffs when no one hits the flop.[*]To provide cover so that opponents can't assume you only raise with hands with good showdown value.[*]Possibly to build up a pot for when you hit. Note, however, that SCs play much differently than pocket pairs because you rarely flop a made monster, so it might be
you instead of your opponents who gets roped in by the pot size![/list]
Now against that, you have the decreased expressed and implied odds -- expressed because you've limited the field and are getting fewer calls, implied because more is going in relative to future expectations of called bets (whether limit or big-bet, for different reasons).
So it's not a clear play. It's a better play when you're either winning a lot of pots through your flop continuation bets or at a table so tight that you routinely get no action on your premium hands. (That's not a very good table to be at, but you may as well steal with a hand that could flop big if you get called; you're not hoping to be called, however.)
Against players who get stubborn and defend against a CB with something like 44, you should raise with SCs less. In limit you should certainly bet your draws for value, because you expect to get called several ways. In NL you should just hope to get some free cards and make a big hand.
[/ QUOTE ]
The above. I'd like to add that you need to win around 14 times the bet preflop if you only win by making your straight/flush. So you really need to have value from the semi bluffs to make it more profitable than limping.