Razz 4th street question

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, you are not required to bet if things go wrong on 5th/6th, nor are you required to bluff the river.

[/ QUOTE ]
You aren't required to do anything. Hooray for free will.

[T. Chance]

You all seem to consider that villain would call a bet here. I wouldn't make that call if I was him, but seeing you agreeing on the fact he will, I was wondering, would this be a good call ?
I think the chances that villain will become a favorite on fifth are very thin, and the pot odds are not that great.
Besides the times where villain will have to keep chasing on fifth will very likely cost more than what an occasionnal marginally favorite hand will bring him.
Am I wrong ?

[*TT*]

Sklansky on Poker, page #121. Bet. Get your money in there.

If however you caught something like a K and the villain paired then you should check because you will likely be first to act on future streets.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
You all seem to consider that villain would call a bet here.

[/ QUOTE ]More people call bricks at micro stakes, but I think he'd fold, because I would unless my downcards were A2, maybe.

[RustyBrooks]

If both you and your opponent brick, you should call if he bets. This is an extreme case because your brick is not so bad and his is awful, but by no means do I think folding is the right thing to do in a pot this size for the villain.

Let's examine the options, and see if we can give the opponent a chance to make a mistake:

* We bet
- he calls - is this a mistake? I don't think so (it's close) - a bet is ALWAYS correct if he will call 5th no matter what comes, because there's an extra bet on 5th.
- he folds - is this a mistake? Maybe a little (it's close th ough)

* We check
- he bets - is this a mistake - YES
* he checks - is this a mistake - NO but it might lead to him making a mistake on 5th

As far as I can see, checking is a small mistake on our part, but it's almost the only way we can get him to make a mistake now or on 5th. I'd probably bet much of the time and check the rest of the time, betting maybe 2/3 of the time.

[Andy B]

With the action on third street, presumably the other guy started with a real hand. He's also getting very high current pot odds, and he's not that far behind. Folding would be insane on his part.

[betgo]

Both hands are pretty much face up already based on 3rd street action. Villain probably has a 3-card 6, and OP raised into a bunch of low cards, so he is expected to have about what he has.

OP has a slight edge on 4th, but is OOP. As someone said, Sklansky says bet. You don't lose much by checking, but you really don't gain much deception.

[SGspecial]

[ QUOTE ]
Both hands are pretty much face up already based on 3rd street action. Villain probably has a 3-card 6, and OP raised into a bunch of low cards, so he is expected to have about what he has.

OP has a slight edge on 4th, but is OOP. As someone said, Sklansky says bet. You don't lose much by checking, but you really don't gain much deception.

[/ QUOTE ]
This spot isn't so much about deception (which I agree you have very little of either way) as it is about 5th st play. If you're inclined to make bad folds on 5th st, you should check since betting 4th only gains you 0.2 bet units (or SB) on average but betting out and then folding on 5th loses you a whole bet unit. If you're inclined to make bad calls on 5th, then betting will pump the pot size up to where your bad calls no longer look so bad (in addition to the small immediate EV).

[RustyBrooks]

The deception I speak of comes only from players who will decide your hand sucked on 3rd if you check 4th. Maybe this is a stakes difference, I know off the top of my head dozens of players who will either bet 4th if I check, or will bet 5th if I check 4th. I purposefully play with those guys a lot.

Since betting 4th on average makes you .1bb, you only need to be able to trick your opponent into putting an extra bb into the pot 10% of the time.

I don't always check, but I don't always bet, either. It really depends on what my opponent is like. I'm more inclined to check if he's bad, and bet if he's not.

[specialfrank]

ok, i think this is marginal. With two bets going in on 3rd, i think i would bet out even if i was 100% sure to get called. it makes for some tough decisions on 5th, but with two bets going in on 3rd i dont really want to brick - fold on 5th. this way i am forced to go to 6th even with a 10 draw vs a 6 draw and make a decison about whether the villain has paired or made a hand then. this approach will lead to big swings but hey this is razz right?

if you dont want such big swings take the approach endorsed by Tom McEvoy and others - give the free card on 4th to allow a fold if you dont like how its looking on 5th. The point of the check is to make it easier to release the hand rather than gain deception. I agree with this approach if there wasnt much money in on 3rd st.

The totally classy approach imho would be to bet on 4th then fold on 5th if you think you have slipped behind to a smooth draw. This however takes more discipline than i can usually muster, generally i'm like - 'i'm not drawing dead, ill take another card'.