most common situation SH,

[Noodles]

i find is raising pf with overcards say against 2-3 other s in the pot, then missing the flop totally,you bet they (usually 100% of the time) call,you miss the flop,is there much point betting now.

i find i rarely win the pot just with overcards against 2-3 one at least seems to hit something or have a small PP anyway and no way in hell will they fold it.

even against just 2 i find i t futile betting overcrads on the flop as you cant take the pot there and then,unless you are going to hit something on the turnmit will be hard taking that too.

I know this is real vague, ill get a few more examples up tomorrow,

like this one
PP 2/4$
im in MP with K /images/graemlins/spade.gifT /images/graemlins/spade.gif
UTG folds, i raise, fold,button calls and bb calls

FLOP: 4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif J /images/graemlins/heart.gif

BB checks,i bet,button calls,BB calls....

i hate these hands and always fell like checking,but most on here say to bet on the flop at least,
is there any value in just checking when you miss?

[RunDownHouse]

There are a couple reasons for leading anyways:

Buying the button. Position is huge, huge, huge, and if he's floating you, he's most likely doing it with a hand that is only a slight dog at best and a favorite at worst (a pair or something like AT, maybe), so you don't mind check/folding the turn if he calls. But buy that button.

If you had AA, or AJ, or 55 here, you'd lead out. You need to lead out when you miss so its not completely obvious that you bet with a hand and check with nothing.

If you're not best, you may improve on the turn, and you'll probably be best then. Check/folding that hand on that board after your pf play is just not good, imo.

[Dov]

There is a huge difference between one overcard or two as well as the texture of the flop.

Usually, if you raise PF and you have 2 overcards to a raggy board, betting the flop will give you more information about where you are at.

If you check-call, and then only bet when you have a hand, you will be too easy to read.

As a general rule, (ncorporate reads whenever possible, obviously) I will check overcards when dont have any other backdoor draws or the flop is dangerous.

If I have a backdoor str8 or flush draw, I don't mind getting raised so much.

I find that playing this way tends to make you look like an action player and makes you harder to read, especially when the backdoor draw turns into a real draw on the turn, and you catch your overcard pair on the river to win it.

Many players cannot figure out why you would call 2 more bets there and they will be paying your value bets for the rest of the session.

You must take the pot sze into consieration, of course, but you will extract many extra bets when they misread your hand and try to punish you.

The main point is that you need 2 overcards and a backdoor draw. With only 1 overcard, there is too much danger that you are drawing to only 3 outs and making a big mistake.

[___1___]

[ QUOTE ]
like this one
PP 2/4$
im in MP with K T
UTG folds, i raise, fold,button calls and bb calls

FLOP: 4 5 J

BB checks,i bet,button calls,BB calls....

i hate these hands and always fell like checking,but most on here say to bet on the flop at least,
is there any value in just checking when you miss?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahh..this feels like deja vu from last night. The first question is what % of the time do you feel all your opponents will fold. In this example it's probably about 15% (at 2-4) I'd guess. The next question is how many outs do you have? With only a backdoor straight, an overcard, and distant shot at a "T" being good, we'll say 4.

I'm not much of a calculations person, but I'd guess if you did the math a bet on the flop wouldn't quite be +EV, but fairly close. Basically, depends how loose these opponents are (i.e. how much fold equity you have by betting the flop).

When a bet is as close as I believe this is, the tiebreaker is meta-game considerations. Have I only been showing down winners? Have shown any bluffs lately? Have I been betting any flop after being the preflop raiser?

FWIW, I think you EV is a hair negative by betting in this situation, but close to neutral. If there is a spade on the flop I probably bet 90% of the time. If I check here I won't be checking the next time I miss, though.

[Dov]

By the way, when you bet the flop in your example, you are basically continuing a dialogue that started PF.

You are essentially saying that you have a J or better by betting the flop b/c you raised PF.

If he calls, he is saying that he knows you are saying that you have a J, but he still wants to play.

If you don't bet, you haven't said anything and you let him draw his own conclusions. Better to tell him what to think and let him decide whether or not to believe it.

[kapw7]

[ QUOTE ]
There is a huge difference between one overcard or two as well as the texture of the flop.

Usually, if you raise PF and you have 2 overcards to a raggy board, betting the flop will give you more information about where you are at.


[/ QUOTE ]

Let me add that you bet 2 overcards to a raggy flop primarily b/c you have a strong hand and then for info

[Dov]

Actually, I do it more for future hands. My hand is not a disaster, but I'm not thrilled with it either.

I like to own scare cards on the turn and river though, and playing this way often allows me to steal pots with 2nd pair when an overcard to the flop hits the turn or river.

I guess it's kind of like a semibluff for a different future hand.

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

I almost always play the 5/10 and have never played the 2/4 so these comments are simply speculative.

[ QUOTE ]
i find is raising pf with overcards say against 2-3 other s in the pot, then missing the flop totally,you bet they (usually 100% of the time) call,you miss the flop,is there much point betting now.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think that if your are so sure that you will be called, I wouldn't be so interested in raising w/ marginal hands, and KTs is marginal. One of the main reasons for high aggression in short handed is fold equity, and if players at that level are not folding (is this true?) when they miss the flop, than you need to play hands that rate to hit top pair more often than KT.

Another reason for the high aggression in SHort handed poker is because the blinds come so fast and you need to battle for them. The pots tend to be smaller so you need to win more of them to compensate for posting 1/3 of the time rather than 1/5. If they don't let you have them your fair portion, they are giving something up. And that is too much action w/ poor holdings. If they are paying you off so much your patience will be rewarded and you do not have too worry so much about the price of the blinds.

It's better this way, but when they do start to give you less action you can then start to get involved w/ less and take the blind and preflop money w/ steal bets.

So the question is not so much, IMO, whether you should bet the flop, but whether to get involved in the first place. Against 2 players, I think it should be rare that you don't bet the flop if you raised PF. The lead is very important in SH and you want it well over 50% unless you are trapping. Only against select opponents w/ I check a 3-way pot that I raised.

PT

[StellarWind]

In your example you should checkfold the flop against normal opponents. Betting as a pure bluff in this situation is seriously -EV because the odds that both will fold are about 10% and you will often be raised. Betting requires another source of EV to cover the deficit. That second source can be either a reasonable chance of having the best hand or a decent draw.

With KQ you would have a reasonable supply of outs. With AT you would have a chance to be best plus a few outs. With KT you have a sad hand and you should accept it.

Remember that if you check you will sometimes get a free card. Checkfolding has a substantial +EV. It isn't enough for betting to be +EV; it must be more +EV than checking.

Someone mentioned the metagame issues. The metagame issue is that your opponents know your follow up bets on the flop are as certain as death and taxes. That actually isn't a good thing. It means you always go first and they checkraise whenever they like. There is no harm in them worrying that you might check once in a while. It balances your game a little bit.

[Noodles]

[ QUOTE ]
The metagame issue is that your opponents know your follow up bets on the flop are as certain as death and taxes. That actually isn't a good thing. It means you always go first and they checkraise whenever they like. There is no harm in them worrying that you might check once in a while. It balances your game a little bit.


[/ QUOTE ]

yea interesting,another poster says that check/folding with this hand is wrong,im inclined to agree with you though,
another poster says that when i bet a pplayer will think i have a J but he wants to play anyway??? um no i would not agree with that,they will be thinking if have missed.

interesting that most say to bet here,as you say auto betting on the flop if you were the pfr will mean nothing to other players after a while

[RunDownHouse]

There are certainly situations in which you would not follow up a pf raise with a flop bet. I just don't think the flop presented is one of them.

[Noodles]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that if your are so sure that you will be called, I wouldn't be so interested in raising w/ marginal hands, and KTs is marginal. One of the main reasons for high aggression in short handed is fold equity, and if players at that level are not folding (is this true?) when they miss the flop, than you need to play hands that rate to hit top pair more often than KT.


[/ QUOTE ]

are you saying i shouldnt be playing KTs????????? /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[donger]

[ QUOTE ]

Another reason for the high aggression in SHort handed poker is because the blinds come so fast and you need to battle for them. The pots tend to be smaller so you need to win more of them to compensate for posting 1/3 of the time rather than 1/5. If they don't let you have them your fair portion, they are giving something up. And that is too much action w/ poor holdings. If they are paying you off so much your patience will be rewarded and you do not have too worry so much about the price of the blinds.


[/ QUOTE ]

Ed Miller wrote a good article refuting this:
http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/issue4/miller0405.html

[Dov]

[ QUOTE ]
another poster says that when i bet a pplayer will think i have a J but he wants to play anyway??? um no i would not agree with that,they will be thinking if have missed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was the poster making this comment. Are you saying that if I bet the flop in your example you will assume I missed after being the PFR?

What will you think I have if I check it?

The real question is what did he call the raise with? The flop is equally likely to have missed both of you, so unless he started with a better hand, you are more likely to still be ahead. If you are behind, you have outs, unless you are dominated.

Do you really want to see an A come on the turn after you check? If you bet the flop with good hands too, then this won't be a problem.

Just make sure that you don't only bet your missed hands and then try to only c/r your good hands.

I am not having a big problem keeping people guessing whether or not I started with a big pair. It seems to me that in general, when I meet resistance, I am not looking at bluffs. (It happens occasionally, but not often.)

I think this is because I like to try and define my hand on the flop. I try not to have to show down hands that I played like this, especially if I hit the turn. I will play the hand very hard on the turn and river to avoid showing down my flop bluff, but if I'm called, I modify my flop betting for a while.

I hope that made some sense.

[bobbyi]

It isn't so relevant in this KT hand, but in general one think you need to seriously consider is the chance that you may have the best hand. Even though you often don't, the chance is still significant.

If you are the pfr with A/images/graemlins/spade.gifJ/images/graemlins/spade.gif against two opponents and the flop comes T/images/graemlins/club.gif3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif2/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, you may be against guys with hands like 7/images/graemlins/club.gif8/images/graemlins/club.gif. If you bet, they (usually) won't be able to call you, but if you give them a free card, the turn may pair them or give them a flush draw or straight draw that goes on to beat you. When your hand is best here, it is very fragile and badly needs protection, and you can often protect it against the sorts of hands you are against (like the 78 here), because for all they know you have 99, AT or whatever leaving them drawing to runner-runner, so it is hard for them to continue. And when your hand isn't best (suppose a guy has 77 instead of 78s), you normally have a bunch of outs anyway, so it's worth investing the one small bet in a pot that already has a bunch of bets in it in case you are best and can protect your hand.

The other problem with checking is that it fairly gives your hand away. If you raise preflop and check the flop, most people will assume that you have overcards, and they will be correct. If you would check-raise the flop as the pfr with top pair/ overpair and you would slowplay with top set and they know this, that would mitigate it somewhat, but you probably don't do that and if you do, they probably don't know it anyway.

[RunDownHouse]

Here's a raise pf, followed by flop check. Good?

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (6 max, 5 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is BB with A/images/graemlins/spade.gif, K/images/graemlins/club.gif.
UTG calls, MP calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, SB completes, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, UTG calls, MP calls, SB calls.

Flop: (8 SB) 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks, UTG checks, MP checks.

Turn: (4 BB) 4/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, MP folds, SB calls, Hero folds.

River: (6 BB) 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
SB checks, UTG checks.

Final Pot: 6 BB

[Dov]

When you have so many players behind you, you generally have to check fold when you miss, unless you have good reads and good control of the table.

Here, however, you will be getting at least 9-1 on the flop if someone bets, so you have to raise because this is a big pot and you have a reasonable chance to win it.

If there were only 2 callers, I would bet this first in, bet if checked to, and raise if bet into.

I want to play this hand HU, as much as possible, and I still have a reasonable chance to have the best hand. As the number of callers increases, so does the probability that your hand isn't best anymore.

[Noodles]

[ QUOTE ]
Here, however, you will be getting at least 9-1 on the flop if someone bets, so you have to raise because this is a big pot and you have a reasonable chance to win it.


[/ QUOTE ]
yea good point you may knock out overcards behind you and reverse dom hands,
but why do i hate raising here? if one of my cards was a heart i might raise,
i like the check better

[Nikla]

Checkfolding this flop is weak and timid poker, had the pot been 4-way to the flop you have a much better case for checkfolding. The real question in this 3-way hand is what you do if you get called in 1 spot and turn bricks. In this scenario you should be more inclined to bet if the coldcaller called on flop as opposed to if BB called your flop bet. If both call flop you're generally done with the hand.

[Transference]

I think people are underestimating how many people auto call the flop after a preflop raise.

Id also like to throw out a reason for betting a whif that I think has not been mentioned. You often deprive your opponents of the opportunity to bet their draws and thus of their fold equity. A turn semi bluff bet becomes a much better proposition for those drawing when the preflop raiser checks the turn, essentially a signal of resignation. What may have been in incorrect call may be a correct semi bluff.

Of course you can temper this with the occasional turn c/r but my experince is that I miss to much value if I fail to lead out the turn in say 1/2 or 2/4 to make getting opponents to notice this worth while.

[Silverback]

flop is easy bet,
In these situations its what you do on the turn that matters most.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
Checkfolding this flop is weak and timid poker

[/ QUOTE ]
I give a detailed argument and this is your refutation?

Can you give an actual reason why betting is better than checking? Then I might learn something.

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

[ QUOTE ]
are you saying i shouldnt be playing KTs?????????

[/ QUOTE ]

No. I think I'm saying 2 things here.

I am saying that in a game where you feel as though you need the flop to hit you to continue, KTs is not such a swell hand when there are 2 players to act after you. When a jack flops and it is checked to you, you do not feel so great about betting when there is a player behind you yet to act who you think will call or raise no matter what the board contains.

What are your PT stats for KTs UTG+1? I'm curious.

I'm also saying that playing a hand that is mediocre out of position (can we agree on that?) is risky in a game where there isn't much fold equity. I don't know that game and am assuming that profits come from when flop hits your hand and they call your bets to the river. If this is the case, perhaps KTs is still profitable out of position since it does have descent strength, but must be check folded if it is split by a J or Q or if an Ace hits since even if these flops do not hit your multiple opponents, the turn card rates to hit someone's hand. That puts you in a bad position unless you get enough action when you do hit your hand to compensate for all the times when it doesn't.

In a game where you can often pick up the pot w/ a flop bet when everyone misses, this compensates for the times when you are called and then some. But in those games you do not rate to always get several bets when the flop hits you since those players are more likely to fold to flop and turn bets.

Perhaps KTs is more profitable in a game full of callers rather than folders. I don't know. But for it to be so, I would imagine that it must be folded on the flop often. That seems strange to constantly check when you PFR, but it looks to be right.

[StellarWind]

PokerStove says KTs has 30% pot equity versus four random hands.

That's overwhelming. Position or no position, if you can't make money 5-handed with such a powerful starting hand then you must be vastly overmatched by your opponents.

Since open-limping 5-handed with high cards looks ridiculous, that only leaves raising.

[raisins]

[ QUOTE ]
The real question in this 3-way hand is what you do if you get called in 1 spot and turn bricks. In this scenario you should be more inclined to bet if the coldcaller called on flop as opposed to if BB called your flop bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you elaborate on this a little?

After thinking it over the reasons I see are that the button probably does not have a medium stregth hand like top pair medium kicker as he would have raised to protect his hand against possible overcards from the BB. So, if he calls he either has a weak hand that he will likely fold on the turn or he has a strong hand that he is trapping with. So you fold to a raise on the turn and check fold on the river unless you improve to top pair.

What about the BB? If the button folds then the BB could easily be calling with top pair and planning a check raise on the turn. If you check behind on the turn and then he checks on the river you are almost certainly getting the odds to bet and try and take it. BB will likely put you on a medium PP or an Ace or improvement on the river and any of those are likely good more often than 1 in 5.

If you, or anyone else, see this from another angle I'm interested.

regards,

raisins