"Defining ones hand"

[damaniac]

I see this thrown around a fair bit, "you should raise to define your hand", or something like it. What exactly does this mean, and does it make any sense? I have a notion of it, and to me it seems suspiciously similar to "raising for information."

[SmileyEH]

I think its pointless. I don't want my opponent to know what I have.

-SmileyEH

[damaniac]

Precisely what I thought. Am I missing something?

[toss]

I don't remember reading about "defining your hand" in ToP so I don't think much of it.

[sweetjazz]

See my response to "What's my plan on this flop?" for a situation where you might want to "define your hand."

I advocate considering a check-raise there, in part (though this is not the main reason) because it defines your hand. Of course, it does not really define your hand, as it is meant to be deceptive in representing a stronger hand than you have. But allows you to slow down quickly if you continue to face aggression (and possibly allows you to fold on the river UI), increases your chances of taking down the pot before the river is dealt, and disguises your true hand in case you do hit it.

In some sense, I would say that my best achieves the goal of defining my hand. It doesn't accurately define my hand, but it does define a range of hands that I would like to see how my opponent reacts to.

[damaniac]

Ok, so misdefining one's hand I can understand. I also get the concept of seeing how an opponent will react so you can lay it down easier. However, I usually recall seeing this idea mentioned when we are not misrepresenting our hand but playing it straight up, which is dumb because while it's all well and good when we can get away from our hand, we're basically giving our opponent a chance to do the same with his hand.

[PokerSparky]

I've seen this phrase as well, and I always throught it was a bit vague. I think of it the same as protecting your hand. In other words, you raise on the flop to "define your hand" in order to protect a hand you think is best now, but is vulnerable. I could be way off here and it may be something totally different.

Side Note: I'm a 1998 graduate of UM.

[sweetjazz]

There's nothing wrong with defining our hand for someone who is too oblivious to notice. Or for someone who expects us to be tricky and so assumes that we are not playing our hand straight up.

And there might be reasons why it is more useful for us to define our hand and gauge our opponents reaction than it can be useful for them, but I tend to be wary of that possibility unless I have a lot of evidence for it.

I don't think it is good poker to spend much time thinking in terms of the concept of "defining our hand." However, taking into consideration how opponents will react to the different possible lines we might take is definitely good poker (as you were saying).

[paperboyNC]

The idea is to define your hands relation to your opponents. Let's say the SB bets out and you find TPTK. When you raise, you want to see if SB 3-bets, calls or folds.

If you simply call, you don't give the SB the chance to give you any further information.

[SmileyEH]

[ QUOTE ]
The idea is to define your hands relation to your opponents. Let's say the SB bets out and you find TPTK. When you raise, you want to see if SB 3-bets, calls or folds.

If you simply call, you don't give the SB the chance to give you any further information.

[/ QUOTE ]

How are you going to use that information? Are you going to fold TPTK? Is it going to save you bets later on? Is your opponenet going to keep putting in more bets while behind?

-SmileyEH