bet or check-raise?

[aas]

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (10 handed)

Typical Pary table. MP2 is laggish. MP3 sees almost every flop but only continues if he hits.

Preflop: Hero is SB with K/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif. CO posts a blind of $2.
UTG folds, UTG+1 folds, UTG+2 folds, MP1 folds, MP2 calls, MP3 calls, CO (poster) checks, Button calls, Hero completes, BB checks.

Flop: (6 SB) 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 4/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="blue">(6 players)</font>
Hero?

[sthief09]

check-raise

and I'm not voting in that poll because I think polls like this are stupid. would you rather me write "check-raise" or explain why? obviously you'd rather me explain why, so why set up a poll?

you have some LAGs in LP. it's almost definitely not going to get checked through. they're all going to call with overcards. I'd much rather check-raise and make them call 2 cold if they want to see the turn. if there's a bet and a couple of calls to me I'll abort mission and just call, and see what happens on the turn. if there's a bet and a raise to me, I'll 3-bet.

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
check-raise

and I'm not voting in that poll because I think polls like this are stupid. would you rather me write "check-raise" or explain why? obviously you'd rather me explain why, so why set up a poll?

you have some LAGs in LP. it's almost definitely not going to get checked through. they're all going to call with overcards. I'd much rather check-raise and make them call 2 cold if they want to see the turn. if there's a bet and a couple of calls to me I'll abort mission and just call, and see what happens on the turn. if there's a bet and a raise to me, I'll 3-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, I only see one player who is supposedly a LAG and he is described as "laggish". Secondly, the "laggish" player only called pre-flop. Finally, even if you can count on the supposed LAG to bet, you won't be making anyone except the big blind call two cold because the LAG acts before everyone except you and the big blind. All you are going to do with a check-raise is build an enormous pot that no one will want to lay down in. If MP2 really is loose-aggressive, I would much rather bet out and let him raise me and force the majority of the field to call two cold instead of check-raising and possibly only forcing one person to call two bets cold. A check-raise here is going to build a pot, not thin the field. I don't want to build a pot with nothing but a vulnerable top pair and a runner-runner flush draw. The situation would be a lot different if you had reason to suspect that the bet would come from immediately to your right but nothing in this hand indicates that that would be likely.

SpaceAce

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]


First of all, I only see one player who is supposedly a LAG and he is described as "laggish". Secondly, the "laggish" player only called pre-flop. Finally, even if you can count on the supposed LAG to bet, you won't be making anyone except the big blind call two cold because the LAG acts before everyone except you and the big blind. All you are going to do with a check-raise is build an enormous pot that no one will want to lay down in. If MP2 really is loose-aggressive, I would much rather bet out and let him raise me and force the majority of the field to call two cold instead of check-raising and possibly only forcing one person to call two bets cold. A check-raise here is going to build a pot, not thin the field. I don't want to build a pot with nothing but a vulnerable top pair and a runner-runner flush draw. The situation would be a lot different if you had reason to suspect that the bet would come from immediately to your right but nothing in this hand indicates that that would be likely.

SpaceAce

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, what he said

[sthief09]

I never suggested "building a pot." as a matter of fact, I said to only call if there's a bet and a few calls. betting at 2/4 is just going to get you called. there's about a 0% chance of this flop getting checked through at 2/4. I played 2k hands at 2/4 the last 2 days clearing my Empire500 bonus, and they are fuckin morons. I hate all of them so much. I hope I never have to play a hand of 2/4 ever again in my life. they are like little gnats that just piss you off.

if 4 people limp in, then there's a good chance they're going to call 1 bet when the flop comes ragged.

[aas]

[ QUOTE ]
I think polls like this are stupid. would you rather me write "check-raise" or explain why? obviously you'd rather me explain why, so why set up a poll?

[/ QUOTE ]

Very rational. Thanks for your straightforward response. I forgot to add "Please elaborate" at the end, but regardless, you're right. The reason I set up a poll is that I want to see if this is as close a decision as I think it to be.

Check-raising this type of flop has been my default play. But I think I should reconsider this.

The problem is that when a laggih guy doesn't feel like raising his crap preflop, he often doesn't raise the flop either if he doesn't hit. What makes it more difficult, is that he seldom folds too. So this builds a big pot (as SpaceAce has stated) and people chase.

By betting you build a smaller pot, and you might pick up the pot with a turn bet or at least get it heads up with the lag.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
I never suggested "building a pot." as a matter of fact, I said to only call if there's a bet and a few calls. betting at 2/4 is just going to get you called. there's about a 0% chance of this flop getting checked through at 2/4. I played 2k hands at 2/4 the last 2 days clearing my Empire500 bonus, and they are fuckin morons. I hate all of them so much. I hope I never have to play a hand of 2/4 ever again in my life. they are like little gnats that just piss you off.

if 4 people limp in, then there's a good chance they're going to call 1 bet when the flop comes ragged.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, what he said /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[sthief09]

betting the flop will get you called in at least 3-4 spots here. if you check, you have the option to force possibly 3 or 4 people to call 2 bets. if you check, and there's a bet and a few calls, what difference is that from you just betting the flop? there's no difference.

if they call 2 bets cold with overcards here they're making a mistake. fine by me.

the whole point is I DON'T want a big pot. hence the check-raise. if there were 3 others in, I'd bet. but there are 5 others.

[sthief09]

agreeing with 2 different sides. very diplomatic /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[aas]

[ QUOTE ]
I played 2k hands at 2/4 the last 2 days clearing my Empire500 bonus, and they are fuckin morons. I hate all of them so much. I hope I never have to play a hand of 2/4 ever again in my life. they are like little gnats that just piss you off.


[/ QUOTE ]

LOL!!

I love party 2/4. I don't know if I'll ever move up to 3/6.

I know, they do call, but there are other players that the lag involved. If you bet, you might get it heads up or three ways. But if you check and let the lag bet, no one respects his bet. They all call. It does make a much bigger pot.

[sthief09]

well, I didn't realize the LAG was on your direct left. I assumed MP2 would be somewhere in the middle. what are the chances he's going to raise you here? and what are the chances he'll bet if checked to him? basically, how much of a LAG is he? if there's no chance he'll check if checked to, or if there's a big chance he'll raise if you bet, then betting is good. if he's slightly LAG, then I'd rather just c/r, hoping a LP player bets.

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
I never suggested "building a pot."

if 4 people limp in, then there's a good chance they're going to call 1 bet when the flop comes ragged.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and because they are all going to call one, they are all going to call one more when you check-raise and that is going to build a pot whether you intended it or not. I saw what you said about "if there is a bet and a couple of calls" but that's almost 100% sure to be what happens. Your only real chance of thinning the field is to hope the LAG raises you or that you get to check-raise a bet from your immediate right (but with the supposed LAG just a little off to your left, I wouldn't count on that).

You're correct that with all those limpers, you are not likely to knock many people out with a bet. The hope is that someoene will raise you early enough to force many players to call two cold. With the laggish player two to your left, I think your best chance to knock people out is to bet out and hope to get raised. If you bet out and get called all the way around, you are no worse off than if you check-call and all those same people come along and you are better off (in my opinion) than if you check-raise and get a zillion bets into the pot allowing people to get in for one bet at a time. Also, you increase your chances of forcing people to call two cold by betting into the LAG.

SpaceAce

[aas]

[ QUOTE ]
well, I didn't realize the LAG was on your direct left. I assumed MP2 would be somewhere in the middle. what are the chances he's going to raise you here? and what are the chances he'll bet if checked to him? basically, how much of a LAG is he? if there's no chance he'll check if checked to, or if there's a big chance he'll raise if you bet, then betting is good. if he's slightly LAG, then I'd rather just c/r, hoping a LP player bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

In that hand on my left I had the BB and then the laggish. By laggish I meant somewhat of a lag.

Ok. I think this makes more sense to me. It would depend on how much of a lag he is. If he WILL raise me, it's easy: I bet to get raised. If it's unsure, just check and then... oh wait, are you sure you want to check-raise 4 opponents? How about check-calling to be able to manipulate the turn if you like it?

I do need help on this. I'm glad you did't just click on "check-raise". /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
oh wait, are you sure you want to check-raise 4 opponents?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would not check-raise four opponents here and I think sthief said the same thing. If you look at his first post, he says, "if it's a bet and a couple of calls..." he would just call.

SpaceAce

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
oh wait, are you sure you want to check-raise 4 opponents?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would not check-raise four opponents here and I think sthief said the same thing. If you look at his first post, he says, "if it's a bet and a couple of calls..." he would just call.

SpaceAce

[/ QUOTE ]


he was just following my logic I think /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Jdanz]

i think this is definetely a bet. it getting checked through really is a disater and i don't think you're significantly more likely to get the feild to call two cold with a check raise.

With no specific reason to believe a check raise will limit the feild the decision leans HEAVILY towards betting.

-JDanz

[StellarWind]

I would probably just bet here.

First off, when the flop is 743r you cannot thin the field very effectively no matter what you do. Sorry, that's just the way it is. No matter what they have it's either overcards or fits the board.

Second, if someone is looking for a reason to fold, betting ensures that he will get his chance. A check through is a serious risk here. It is likely that no one has a really convincing hand and the field is too big for the button to bet overcards.

Third, people don't appreciate the mathematical bias against checkraising a marginal made hand. The times you miss the checkraise are the exact times when your opponents are weak and it is vital to bet to build the pot and force people out. But you always put two bets in when someone has a really good hand and you can't win.

Really this situation is not so different from having a good hand preflop against five limpers. Right now you probably have the best hand and quite possibly the best draw too, but you get absolutely no guarentees about the future. All you can do is try to get in as much money as you can while you have the best of it and let the turn and river take care of themselves.

The best way to do that could be to bet and 3-bet if possible or to checkraise. Since I am not confident that anyone will bet for me I voted to bet. If I could name any player that I expected to bet I would checkraise. I don't care very much where he sits. I just want to get my money in and things will sort themselves out. The pot is small and it could well be in my best interest to have people call two bets one at a time. Considering my king and the possibility of overlapping outs, many of my opponents may only have two or three real outs anyway. They may not have odds to call even one bet.

[aas]

Yes, he did. Thanks SpaceAce.

[aas]

Got it. Is much clearer now. Thanks Sthief.

[aas]

[ QUOTE ]
The best way to do that could be to bet and 3-bet if possible or to checkraise. Since I am not confident that anyone will bet for me I voted to bet. If I could name any player that I expected to bet I would checkraise. I don't care very much where he sits. I just want to get my money in and things will sort themselves out. The pot is small and it could well be in my best interest to have people call two bets one at a time. Considering my king and the possibility of overlapping outs, many of my opponents may only have two or three real outs anyway. They may not have odds to call even one bet.


[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for taking the time.
You're right. I free card is out of the question.

To me, it is important to know where the bet comes from. I agree that I probably have the best hand right now, but against 5 party poker opponents, it is a very vulnarable hand.

My thinking has changed a bit since I posted this. If there is a reasonable chance that someone will raise me on my left, I bet and hope he will raise me. If the raiser in on my right (or two to my right) I think a check-raise is the right option to drive one or two players out.

If I check with the intention of raising, but a player to me left bets and, say, everyone calls, I will just call and see what the turn brings. This will keep more options open to me. I don't want to be stuck and be bound to go to the river no matter what.