Raising for a 'free card' ?

[bicyclekick]

I remember back when I thought I knew how to play poker how I thought I was the best player in the world cause I knew about the 'free card' play. I would always try for it. Since then I've pretty much forgot about it. Maybe everyonce in awhile I'd do it with overcards but it's more of an exception than a rule. Same with flush draws...it just doesn't come up that often. maybe a couple times per month? I dunno, maybe it's just second nature and I'm not conciously doing it...but rather doing it subconciously and not thinking about it.

I was just curious how often mid-limit players make these flop raises and check behind on the turn? It seems like a lot of players will bet into you again, too...which is nice when you have a big made hand. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[A_C_Slater]

I don't play the same limits as you do, but I almost always bet the turn now after making the "free card" play. The size of the pots usually justify it.

[rory]

I don't do it either bicyclekick, at least online. I got tired of paying a lot of money for my free card.

[James282]

In online poker, the free card play is corny. It is a good play only against the most predictable and passive opponents. In live play, I think it works much more because of the generally more passive nature of live play.
-James

[gonores]

The free card play only works with regularity in unraised pots, but I do use it maybe 2-3 times a day.

[Barry]

There is no point in raising for a free card when you are just going to get 3-bet on the flop and bet into on the turn. That happens quite a bit nowadays on-line.

On the other hand given that, that makes even more reason for raising the flops with monsters which is something that I've started to do much more of recently.

[fsuplayer]

yeah, the play simply does not work in a raised pot in the 15 games.

[SA125]

[ QUOTE ]
It is a good play only against the most predictable and passive opponents. In live play, I think it works much more because of the generally more passive nature of live play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very, very true.

[Leaky Eye]

I use that play when attempting to get to a showdown for 2 big bets when I don't improve. My turn check often invites a river bet with a hand I can beat.

I don't really check behind a semibluff, unless I get a read that it is futile to continue.

[weevil]

I call this the free showdown move.. and I think it's stupid. You're raising on the turn (in position right?) hoping it's checked to you and on through the river. But think about it. You're probably only getting called on the turn (and by probably I mean more often than not) by a hand that can beat a highcard, and hence probably your hand. If you check/call the turn and river, you risk the same amount, and a fair amount of the time induce players to bluff you with worse hands. If you want to see a showdown for 2 BB, go for the check/call. And make sure you're not letting your opponent get a cheap card on the turn either, or missing a good bluff opportunity against a weak opponent.

I like betting the turn however when it's checked to you and you want to see a showdown, but figure the other player will autobet into you on the river if you check through on the turn. Here you protect against the freecard, and if you hit a hand on the river, you can bet and he'll probably still call, or you check through. But if it's checked through the turn, and he bets, you don't know where you stand. So in the former case, you stand to make 2 BBs max, and 1 in the latter (assuming there isn't some unaccounted for aggression.. player dependant read)

[jetsonsdogcanfly]

the main situation i use this is in a game where many people will call the flop then fold the turn. In late position, with callers in front, a raise on the flop here is a great way to get value out of draws. Here it is a value bet, not a semibluff.

[legend42]

[ QUOTE ]
I call this the free showdown move.. and I think it's stupid. You're raising on the turn (in position right?) hoping it's checked to you and on through the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. The free card play is raising with position on the flop with a draw and then checking behind on the turn (if your draw doesn't hit) in order to get a "free" (actually half-price) river card.

[elysium]

hi bike

the free-card play is often misunderstood. as i am inferring from many of the posts, the free-card play is a raise made by the button, most often on the flop, when the button is on a flush or straight draw.

is that what you think it is bike?

this issue is a complex one that requires a lot of detailed analysis that formidably challenges the above notion. the main problem with the conventional free-card play is that oftentimes, when we are checked to on the turn, and in position to accept a free-card, rather than checking it down, we should often be betting. however, we shouldn't always be betting in that spot. there are times that we do want the free-card. here's the problem; if we have a non-nut draw weaker than second nut or so, we should not be raising. the raise on the flop will only cut down our actual odds, and will assist our implied odds little if any. the flop raise will stop the first-in bettor from betting out when you do complete on the turn, as often as it will disguise your holding when you complete on the turn, and betout. you would rather not alarm the first-in on the flop, by raising the flop when you don't mind a decent multi-way with the bets being driven around to you.

that is not a good thing to do, raise the flop with your puny flush or straight draw. true, if the turn doesn't complete your puny draw, you would then like that free-card. there's another problem, however. the action to you that gives you an opportunity to check it down also hurts your implied odds. in other words, the action in the hand is so lackluster that you are not getting correct odds to make a fancy play to win the pot. what's that? if the action is lackluster then perhaps our bet will foldout the entire field? right bike, i'm listening.....but if we bet when checked to on the turn, we aren't taking our free-card. that's right bike. so why did we raise for a free-card? exactly right.

when everyone checks to you on the turn, and you have last position, if you had completed the small flush or straight draw, you would quickly realize that you won't be dragging a big pot considering the risk you took to complete, making it very wise to play at minimal expense on the flop and pre-flop. if the checks come to you without you having completed, chances are that you won't complete and again, it will have been correct to play at minimal expense. yes, it is then often correct to check it down, but that doesn't mean that your flop raise was correct. it can't be. you're going to lose 80%+. well, what's the difference between that and just betting out on the turn to take the pot down right then and there? infinite odds. what infinite odds? you payed 1 small bet, risked driving opponents out whose bets you'll need on the later rounds if you complete, risked getting raised, and if the field is so lackluster that 1 small bet is going to get them all to check to you, 1 big bet should fold them.

checking down the turn will not allow you to bluff on the river from the best position to do so. true, you often will not see any possibility of a bluff attempt working, and should correctly rely soley on your outs at the point of the turn, however, the conflicts involved with non-nut draws make raising flop counter-productive. if it is correct to raise the flop, the benefits of betting out on the turn are no wise less correct to accept. if, as it turns out, the situation deteriorates into a check-down on the turn, that does not mean that raising the flop is better than calling it at minimal expense. when you are checked to in last position, your opponents are more likely to fold to a betout, not more likely to call. if you raise the flop and complete on the turn, you will not likely have more opponents calling your bet, you will have fewer.

a stronger argument can be made for raising to get a free-card when you have a small straight draw, but you encounter some of these same problems, and besides, thinking in terms that eliminate the possibility of taking the pot down without showing down, removes much of your betting arsenal and does so when you are in the best position to deploy it, as well as allowing your hand to improve at minimal expense. the flop raise only guarantees you that in this hand, you will not be paying the minimum.

that doesn't mean that what is mistakenly called a free-card raise, doesn't also have its applications. it does. can it sometimes actually assist in lowering your cost to improve? yes. in some spots, it can. this doesn't mean though, that the free-card raise, as it is called, will rescue your small draw from imminant danger. it doesn't need the assist. it does better when left alone.

is the flop raise ever worth it? yes. sometimes, raising stategically will improve upon your ev. when the strategic raise doesn't remove important weapons in your arsenal, provides you with more options to respond with as you see fit, not fewer, and doesn't upset the balance of the odds that favor your hand. strategic raising, at the right time and for the right reasons, should instead enhance those odds, and if there is significant doubt about whether or not a raise may actually cut down your odds and make them lower, you need very compelling reasons before challenging the well established arithmetic we rely upon when avoiding excessive risks.

usually, strategic raising is variance based when the raise will not take down the pot. that is what i think is presently being called a free-card raise. more accurately, it should be called a strategic variance raise. the misapplication of terminology we presently find is encroaching onto the domain of a bona-fide free-card raise which actually is an emergency proceedure when your hand is in danger. the bona-fide free-card raise always improves your odds, and is a must tactic, in specific situations, that improves your odds and enables you to win; but is never used in other situations, including all draws that don't require runner-runner to complete.

free-card raises are never made when the next card coming off can complete your draw; this includes inside draws, and almost every hand posted in which the poster claims to have made a free-card raise.

so far we have only discussed, in terms of utter disqualification, items like the smaller non-nut draws we've stricken from the list of hands in which any benefit can be deriven by raising in this round and failing to bet in that. all those who agree that it is sheer and utter non-sense, say 'aye'. very good. so which hands, then, do qualify and encourage us to raise authentically for the free-card?

anyone?

free-card raises are only made with hands like troubled overs against hands like suspected draws, the outs with which the holder is suspected of betting out to get the fold, and overs with backdoor nut flush potential with a three-card straight. A7h on a board of 862 with 1 heart qualifies. A7h on a board of 652 with 1 heart is slightly better. 98h on a 732 with the seven on board as a heart, qualifies. A4h on a K52 with 1 heart is also a hand that qualifies; the same hand without the 1 heart on board, does not. the closer the 3 card straight is to broadway, the less it is qualified. you make the free-card raise when the turn can produce an open-end one card draw and take you one step forward in an effort toward runner-runner. you must have both of these avenues working, however, and must have the A over-card. if you improve, a turn bet may be worth it if you think that your A over is against another A with a better kicker. then, you are trying to foldout that other A. usually, however, it is better to rely upon your improved number of outs. with 2 overs and a three-straight consecutive suited, this is especially true when the turn improves 98h 7hXX overs into 8+ outs.

the free-card raise shouldn't be made in large multi-ways, but can be reraised if no more than 2 other players are in the pot. while hands like A7h on a board of 652 with 1 heart can always be free-card raised or reraised on the flop against the right opponent type and short-handed, on a board of J56 with 1 heart it usually cannot. the nice thing about the authentic free-card raise is that its default play on the turn is never wrong, and if you aren't sure about whether to bet or accept the free-card, accepting the free-card is never wrong.

some may be thinking that several of the bona-fide free-card hands can become powerful draws with many outs on the turn, and that it would always be wrong not to bet. they will have to remember though that the raise is not made on the turn, it is made on the flop against an opponent or opponents who like to betout when strong and back down to a raise, or who give up control when they are raised. against passives who aren't likely to bet the turn anyway, you should never raise for the free-card, but instead you should usually fold. another strong argument for the raise is that when the runner-runner nut flush gets there, its implied value rises considerably.

the free-card raise is primarily, though, an emergency application for a troubled hand, in short-handed situations with no more than 2 opponents. the type of opponents who are best for the free-card raise are likely to want to get strategically tricky unless raised, and who have good hand-reading skills. the free-card raise is not a classic strategically based raised, so much as it is a useful tactic to at once quell both strategical aggression on the turn that a flop call would otherwise incite and the confidence your opponent has in the accuracy of his read, if he is effective with it.

to a large extent, the free-card raise is a raise used to increase the action after it's showndown, but reduce the action in the hand in which you make it. it's not raise in this round of betting, fail to bet in that; it's quell in this hand, more action in that. it's an image enhancement tool. when showndown people go 'wow!'. there is always value to be gained by it, and if used at the right time and conditions, always represents +ev.

i'm tired now. i think i'll go to sleep.

[steveyz]

Online I'd rarely raise the flop with the intention of checking through the turn. With draws, I'll raise the flop for value, and if it just happens that I'm last to act and everyone checks to me on the turn and I don't hit my draw, I will often check through but will often bet as well, with my decision based on many factors.

[Peter_rus]

Raise for free card is good in some cases, though the most cases when it's good you're raising your 4flush for value:-)

When you raise 'for free card' 2 or 3-way you should quite often bet turn as well to get maximum ev. (3-way there are some exceptions)

[weevil]

hey guy, way to read the post I was responding to! we weren't talking about a freecard in the same sense. but good eye, really

[ActionBob]

I think many of the times you are making this "free card" play, you are simply making value raises and viewing them as such.

-ActionBob

[Sully]

This is the type of post that makes all of my lurking worthwhile....thanks elysium.

[DrGutshot]

see, the amusing part is that you actually misunderstood the post you were originally responding to. Oh the hilarity!

The post you were responding to was not talking about raising the turn and checking the river, he was saying he pays 2 bets to see a showdown by raising the flop (2SB=1BB), checking the turn, and calling a bluff bet on the river (1BB).

-DrG

[TStoneMBD]

i usually dont use the free card play anymore, especially when heads up. i advocated the free card play in one of hiatus' posts, but that is a rare circumstance when i think it is the correct approach. in general, i play my flush draws aggressively, by raising the flop and betting the turn. you are investing an extra .5BB for the opportunity to take the pot down without connecting to your draw. in many situations it is correct to do so. i play in live games, where the games are very passive. checking on the turn is usually the incorrect approach because it is unlikely that you will be raised. online however, you will be raised on the turn a very frequent amount of times, making you pay extra for your draw. the equity you gain by taking down the pot with your aggression is often cancelled out, or turned into negative equity by the aggression of opposing players. therefore, online, i recommend taking the free card play more often than in live games.

you need to be able to approximate how often you will take down the pot by raising the flop and betting the turn. calculate your semibluffing equity. then calculate the equity you gain by raising the flop and checking the turn. see which is greater by your approximations against certain opponents. most people will not take the time to make such calculations, but i highly recommend you take the time to do it. these exercises will allow you to distinguish which play is the correct line to take without having to ask what the general consensus is in these forums. i dont mean to condescend the replies by the posters here, but many posts offer their opinions through their experience and intuition on a subject. mathematical evidence is much more accurate and powerful. i advise that you learn how to harness it.

i assume you know how to do these exercises as you are a longterm poster in these forums, but alot of people here dont seem to understand how to do them. if you dont know how to perform the exercise that i advised, let me know and ill show you how to do it. its quite easy, and the more you do these exercises the easier they will become, and the better you will be.

[TStoneMBD]

a poster here messaged me asking for me to show him how to do the exercise, so i figured if i was going to do it i might as well do the exercise in this thread:

lets assume that the pot is a limped pot, and that there are 4 players. on the flop, a player bets and you raise.

if you raise the flop, against a pair with 2 undercards to a flush draw, you are a 1:2 underdog. you are investing .5BB, in which your equity of that investment is .166BB. Therefore at a 15/30 level, you are investing .333BB, or $10.

The player just calls your flop raise. There is now 8SB in the pot, or 4BB. You miss your draw on the turn, and the villain checks to you. You now have the option to semi-bluff or take the free card. Your equity on the turn is .18% (the times you till connect your draw on the river), but for ease's sake lets assume 20%, or 1/5.

If you were to merely call a bet on the flop, and then call the bet on the turn, you would have invested 1.5BB to chase your draw. If you raise the flop and check the turn, you save yourself .5BB. Your equity of that .5BB is 33% (the times you connect your flush draw), so that means that you are saving yourself $20 by taking the free card play.

Now, you have the option of betting the turn instead of checking. There is 4BB in the pot. If you bet, you need to be able to take down the pot uncontested 1/4 times in order to break even. In order to surpass the equity of the free card play, you need to take the pot down 1/3 times.

Therefore, in this situation, in order to show profit from a semibluffing opportunity versus a free card play, you need to be able to take down the pot 33% of the time on the turn.

There are other variables that you can add to the mix of this equation, of which I will not go into tonight. There are a couple of things I would like to specify however. Firstly, you need to calculate how often you will be raised on the turn. Facing a raise on the turn in this situation is a total catastrophe, as you are paying 2BB to see your draw, opposed to 0BB. You may also want to factor in your bluffing equity if you choose to follow through with a bet on the river. In many situations however, you will merely be spewing chips on the river by following through with a bluff, as it will show -EV over the course of the long haul.

You may also want to consider metagame considerations, which are very prevalent. Showing your propensity of aggression may force your opponents into raising you on the turn to protect against a flush, when in fact they run into a set. They will also be less inclined to respect your turn value bets as they have to consider the possibility of you semi-bluffing them. However, in an exercise such as this, metagame considerations should not be factored in. We are merely trying to distinguish a positive EV play versus a negative EV play for the hand in question.

Creating a complex exercise with all of the variables mentioned, along with unmentioned variables, will prove difficult and will become quite lengthy. Also, many variables can only be calculated by approximation, as we cannot be mathematically certain about what a player is capable of without extensive statistical analysis, causing a skew in the results of the equation. However, with ample Poker Tracker statistics, these variables will be much more accurate, and therefore an extensive exercise can be performed, which will be a fantastic utility in distinguishing which play will actually show a greater EV over a million hands. I doubt that many players would be interesting in statistical analysis of this magnitude, but being able to understand an EV of a play with mathematical evidence is much more accurate than understanding EV by intuition. I would be highly intrigued if someone would be interested in writing an application in solving equations such as this with Poker Tracker data.

I apologize in advance for any mathematical flaws in my post. It's late and I didn't want to take the time to review everything I've said.

[MrFeelNothin]

Good eye DrG. I love seeing sarcastic aholes get their comeuppance. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[fearme]

all the time

[DeeJ]

Definitely!

btw how are you running in January Peter? There's a lot of unhappy posters in another thread...

[Peter_rus]

Actually January as well as December im running not as great as two months earlier. Of course i made money but not as much as i expected. I suspect it's something like a bit 'burned' effect which i encountered at all limits i used to play after a couple of months. Some of changes that usually occured when i'm play one limit for too long:

1. I start making stupid big folds, cause situations that i begin to think im obviously behind are growing with every bad beat.

2. I start play too passive postflop.

3. I start play too standart and not creative postflop and discard any mixing.

4. Actually i go to tight-passive side a bit.