TT: dont want to build a big pot, dont want to give a free card

[SilentNoise]

why does raising suck? i usually call in spots like these but ive been reevaluating that play recently.

if he has overs like AK at the moment he likely isn't putting any more money in the pot unless he improves to a hand that beats you on the turn.

Now if if an A/K comes on the turn, and he fires again, you have no idea if hes double barrelling as he probably would on prime scare cards, even if he has a hand like QJ, which forces you to fold your hands like TT. So calling on the flop effectively gives him 12 outs if he had QJ, 6 for the Q/J and 6 for A/K bluffing outs.

If you raise to like 35 or something and he calls...dont put any more money into the pot, and if he folds, then thats fine imo. if he pushes its an easy fold.

I would like to hear your thoughts on why raising is so bad.

[wdead]

raising is bad because it effectively turns your hand into a bluff. there is nothing wrong with calling flop, and calling the turn as well. if villain is the type to fire lots of barrels, I have no problem calling two streets unless an ace rolls off.

Raising is just silly, he wont fold a better hand, and now you have bloated the pot, still with no idea if you are ahead or not. He could have the flush draw, in which case checking the turn and giving up would be bad, or he could have an overpair, in which case betting the turn would be terrible.

I have recently noticed a strong sentiment in SSNL of using sub-optimal plays in order to make decisions easier. This is really bad and will wind up costing you lots of money in the long run. THe best players are the ones that make the best decisions in the toughest spots, not the ones who never give their opponents chances to make mistakes.

Let me give you an example of how a good player will own this type of small raise and give up thinking.

I raise OTB with 46s, sb calls. HU to the flop
flop is 233 two tone. I cbet, villain insta check minraises.
Obviously, this guy has like 44, and doesnt want to call down. So in spots like this, I often put in a small 3bet, and take the pot down with 6 high. IF my opponent had just called the flop, I would have less of an idea of what he had, and would probably have just given up on the turn. However, when opponents make these small nonsensical raises they define their hand as "testing the waters" and good players are just gonna own them hard.

[SilentNoise]

wdead that is why i usually used to call. but i think there are pros/cons to both approaches. i think raising on the flop, even though it turns your hand into a bluff, it eliminates more difficult decisions later on in the hand, and as a result may cost you more to find out whether or not you are behind.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=2&vc=1

and

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=2&vc=1

more clearly explain my point.

I do understand your point of view, which is why i used that system for the vast majority of my hands. Though sometimes i find raising and turning your hand into a bluff is sometimes a better option.

[jii]

[ QUOTE ]
jii- i noticed you only quoted part of my post. do you think calling is bad? would you seriously c/f this flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I would call. Also 3betting pre-flop is standard.

[Unknown Soldier]

wdead you make a good point (as usual), but i like raising for this reason:

it's not turning our hand into a bluff, obv better hands aren't folding. But worse are calling. i.e smaller pps.

O.k. lets break down what he could have:


monster - 44/55/5x JJ+ I'm not suggesting we minraise here I'm suggesting we put in a sizeable raise to 35, if he pushes we can fold. We can play the rest of the hand very cautiously ip. So we won't lose too much to these.


draw - not many 67 is one, and obv is correst to raise if he has a draw

pp <TT: raising will get value out of these he won't fold 66-99 on this flop, however the turn could bring scare cards to slow the action down and we would make less money. I doubt we will get 2 streets of value of of small pps anyway. The value comes from the flop.


overcards: don't want him drawing to 6 outs.

raising also takes control of the hand ip and stops us getting bluffed out if an overcard hits.


What do you think to that?

[orange]

only raise if he'll call with worse.

or if you have a [censored] image and you'll raise this flop alot with whatever hand (ie. you and villan have alot of history). raising the flop may induce a shove or something from villan with alot less.

but in general, vs. an unknown, i'm a bit more inclined to call the flop and see a turn with position.

i would also 3-bet pf alot.

[wdead]

Soldier, I dont mind villain drawing to 6 outs. In fact, you make money by putting in bets when you are ahead against 6 outers. I am not c/f a J or Q turn, maybe a king, but I am usually c/f an ace. Sometimes I lose medium pots to overcards that spike, sometimes I win medium pots to overcards that fail to spike, sometimes I sppike a ten on the turn and win a gigantic pot.

The point is, one of the biggest leaks of SSNL players is lack of river aggression. If you are willing to bite the bullet and call two streets, you will often get to showdown, and you would be surprised how often 1010 is good in this spot.

[wdead]

Orange, I used to 3bet this like always, but SSNL is so nitty nowadays they just always fold preflop. I find myself calling here more and more and playing poker in position post flop.

[Grunch]

[ QUOTE ]
raises to 21.00 to tell MP his ace high is no good.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're trying to get the worse hand to fold? Who would you want to call, a third 5?

[Unknown Soldier]

so it's to induce a bluff from air on the turn wdead, and you think that a pp might fire again on turn anyway?

I still don't think raising is terrible, but you are probably right that calling is a bit better.