Calling the flop checkraise - very common situation

[karlson]

Party 15-30.

I raise first in from the button with K/images/graemlins/heart.gif8/images/graemlins/heart.gif. BB calls.

Flop A /images/graemlins/spade.gif 9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 3 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

He checks, I bet, he checkraises and I call.

I want to claim that even though I am planning to fold the turn unless I catch a K, calling the flop checkraise is correct, only to force the opponent to put in an extra bet when he's bluffing. This doesn't allow him to steal the pot cheaply when I miss. Of course, if I were to never play another hand against this player, I would fold. However, people that fold in this spot are exploitable because it's so cheap to try to steal the pot from them.

That brings me to a more general point that I posted on the poker theory forum, but I'd like to hear comments on this. To me, this seems pretty obvious, but I've heard dissent.

[citanul]

I'd like to see your thoughts on 2 things:

1) How often do you just check behind on the flop? Is the answer 0%?

2) When he's bluffing, and bluffs out there on the turn and you miss, are you folding anyway?

3) When he actually has an ace, and you hit your king, how much are you going to lose on average?

Personally, this pot is TINY, I don't know how I'd play it, but I stink at limit. In terms of exploitable strategies, wouldn't "Always bets when checked to and has raised preflop" be one of the more silly ones? If you miss, and he checks the turn, what is your action?

Just some thoughts,

citanul

[mmcd]

It's not a bad play but you have to make some thinner value raises on the turn in addition to your A/Paint value raises, and make a few resteal bluff raises too.

[karlson]

>>How often do you just check behind on the flop? Is the answer 0%?

No, it's not zero. I will check behind occasionally. Yes, always betting is probably exploitable.
However, the further away I am from the button, and the looser he is in defending preflop, the closer the answer gets to zero. The reason for this is that I will have the best hand so often, that surely I should go ahead and bet every time or almost every time.

>>When he's bluffing, and bluffs out there on the turn and you miss, are you folding anyway?

Of course I can't call. The whole idea is that if I force him to invest two big bets to run this bluff, he won't be able to do it as often. So the claim is that this is worth the extra small bet that I'm putting in on the hopeless flop.

>> When he actually has an ace, and you hit your king, how much are you going to lose on average?

Eh. I don't know. Probably a little over 1BB more on average. I don't think that it's all that important. I could have no outs against a 9, and I could still make the same argument.

V.

[andyfox]

If he wanted to steal the pot cheaply, wouldn't he just bet the flop?

Anybody who always folds to a raise or check-raise is exploitable. Anybody who always calls a raise or check-raise is exploitable too.

[kidpoker22]

I think occasionaly calling a check/raise on the flop is correct because it serves as advertising. If you always dump a marginal hand on the flop if you're cr'ed your opponents will play back at you just to see what you do. I wouldn't always call, but in that spot with the board containing a four-flush I would probably call just to see if the opponent checks his semi-steal on the turn and try and steal the river if the flush doesn't make it.

KP22