Checking behind after getting more outs?

[QTip]

I've seen a couple of you talk about this, but I really don't understand the purpose.

If you're in a hand and last to act and pick up more outs on the turn (perhaps a four flush or OESD), I see you talking about checking behind with more outs.

What's this all about?

[Eihli]

By picking up outs you increase your draw equity to a number greater than the your bluff equity.

[QTip]

Wow...that really sounds cool. Does anyone have a hand that they could post (or make one up) where it's a great example of this.

Is this one?

I have A /images/graemlins/spade.gifK /images/graemlins/spade.gif on the button.

UTG+1 limps, MP2 limps, I raise, blinds fold and two limpers call.

Flop: J /images/graemlins/diamond.gif7 /images/graemlins/spade.gif2 /images/graemlins/heart.gif

checked to me, I bet, UTG+1 folds, MP2 calls

Turn: 4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

MP2 checks, I check

Is this a correct application? Does the size of the field make a difference with this concept? Do I always have to be last to act to make a correct application?

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this a correct application?

[/ QUOTE ]
I think HU your hand has too much of a chance to be ahead here to check. Checking this will induce a bluff on the river that is hard to call if you haven't improved. This leads to folding the best hand on the river when you would've won the pot with another bet on the turn.


[ QUOTE ]
Does the size of the field make a difference with this concept?

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe this concept applies more in mutli-way pots.


[ QUOTE ]
Do I always have to be last to act to make a correct application?

[/ QUOTE ]
Not sure. I think it's easier if you're last. But it could certainly be correct if the player(s) behind you were passive enough to check through a large % of the time.

[QTip]

I'm trying to also determine the differences between this concept and the free-card play.

Do you have a hand that you feel you properly applied the "check behind with more outs" play?

[meep_42]

There's some good stuff in a reply here. (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=smallholdem&Number=1933927 &Forum=All_Forums&Words=-Re%3A&Searchpage=0&Limit=25&Main=1933927&Search=tr ue&where=bodysub&Name=13404&daterange=1&newerval=1 &newertype=m&olderval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post19 33927)

-d

[chief444]

If you think you're likely behind but your hand is worth a showdown then it's often best to bet the turn without the draw since you can fold to a check/raise or river bet and would call a river bet anyway if you checked the turn. So it's basically a win more/lose the same situation. But if you pick up a draw and have to call the extra bet on the turn if raised then it's sometimes better to check. Against a passive opponent I usually bet anyway because they rarely will check/raise.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
Against a passive opponent I usually bet anyway because they rarely will check/raise

[/ QUOTE ]

I like that thought.

[QTip]

Thanks meep. To think...I was actually a part of that post and forgot. Sometimes things fly over your head because you're not ready to hear them yet.

[chief444]

Also, the looser the opponent the more likely I am to bet because obviously the more likely my hand is good still. The more draw-heavy the board the more likely I am to bet. Shillx's response was good in the thread meep linked I thought. As he said on a JJ2 rainbow flop you should seriously consider checking if you pick up a strong draw.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
The more draw-heavy the board the more likely I am to bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm assuming you're talking about the board being draw-heavy to your opponent...because they have more reason to stay in.

So, JJ2r is not a draw board, so why throw yourself into a c/r situation.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
But it could certainly be correct if the player(s) behind you were passive enough to check through a large % of the time.


[/ QUOTE ]

Seems to be a difference here in what you're saying and what the chief was just saying about betting into passive players.

[chief444]

Yep. And really a draw heavy board is a draw heavy board...whether you have a draw or not. On the JJ2 example the opponent will have A-high beat much more often because...he's calling with something and it's not a draw.

[chief444]

[ QUOTE ]
Seems to be a difference here in what you're saying and what the chief was just saying about betting into passive players.


[/ QUOTE ]
Yes and no. I was thinking more in position. He's talking about out of position. I'd still be more likely to check against aggressive opponents if I'm OOP as well because you'll be raised more often. It really applies more to being in position though for what I was thinking because you'll often get to showdown for no more bets after the turn. OOP it's tougher because after you check you'll often be bet into.