Checking the flop after a preflop raise

[Nate tha' Great]

I almost never make this play - checking the flop with a good hand after a preflop raise - but it's something I'm trying to add to my repertoire and I had a good opportunity to try it here. At least I think I did.

Party $1/$2, 6-max. I'm in the BB and dealt Q /images/graemlins/heart.gif Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif. Five limpers (e.g. the entire table) to me and I raise, everyone calls.

Flop comes T /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4 /images/graemlins/club.gif. I give that flop about a B+. I'm pretty sure I'm best, but I'd really like to cut down the field. So I check ... and ... watch ... nervously ... as it's checked around to the Button, who bets. SB calls, now I raise. Folded to the Button who just calls, SB now mucks.

Turn is 8 /images/graemlins/heart.gif. I bet, Button calls.

River is 4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif. I bet, he mucks.

Two-part question:

1) What do you think of the play here?

2) Do you think the same play would work at a higher limit? I mostly play $5/$10 (also 6-max), and I have been reluctant to try this play there for a couple reasons:

i) Players at $5/$10 generally remember your preflop actions, and so checking a non-scary flop from EP after a preflop raise looks suspicious. That is, it's less likely that someone is going to provide an opportunity for your check-raise, unless they have quite a strong hand themselves. There are also generally fewer players to see the flop at $5/$10.
ii) It is generally easier to take down pots without a showdown at $5/$10 and so betting out after a preflop raise is close(r) to being an automatic play. That is, I'd rarely be checking flops after a preflop raise unless I had the intention of check-raising, so the play doesn't buy me anything in terms of deception equity. On the turn, where I'll check with strong and weak hands alike, it's a different story.

[NoChance]

Just my thoughts...

I am trying to learn to do the same thing. However, in the sample above there are two diamonds on the flop. In this case I bet because you don't want to give anyone a free card who may be trying for the diamond flush. I would only do this sort of thing when the flop is a rainbow and not "scary".

[MaxPower]

Good play. Perfect time to check-raise.

I think it would work at 5/10 if you ever found yourself in this situation (5 opponents). If most of the pots are 2 or 3-way you won't have to check-raise as much.

Still, if you are always betting the flop after raising with overcards, you should check raise occasionaly when you hit your hand (It sounds like you already do this).

[Nate tha' Great]

Believe me, I didn't expect four flushes and open-enders to fold until the river, because they won't. However, I didn't mind charging them double, while knocking out gutshots, overcard, and two pair draws.

[NoChance]

Yeah, after seeing the other response, I think I read it wrong.

[MaxPower]

I think the presence of the two flush makes it more likely that someone will bet. However, if the bet comes from early position your check-raise will not eliminate anyone. Still, I think it is worth taking the chance of a free card in this situation.

[Joe Tall]

I like the this check-raise w/a family of limpers and it's a nice way to shut out the field.

Nice play,
Joe Talll

[lil']

I think you made the best play under the circumstances. Nice hand.

[Sarge85]

[ QUOTE ]

Good play. Perfect time to check-raise.


[/ QUOTE ]

How is giving the diamond draw a free card a good play? If this get's checked around and the diamond falls, I'd spend the next hour rapping my head against the wall.

I know there are two schools of thought here. One - If there is a flush draw, they are probably not laying it down to one bet, so you go for the check-raise and charge them two.

The other school of thought is, you have the best hand, don't risk giving the free card and bet out.

What makes this situation better to use option one? Lee Jones address this similar situation, and I have a hard time getting my arms around it.

[MaxPower]

The flush and straight draws are not going to fold, nor should they.

If you bet out on the flop, the size of the pot makes it correct for your opponents to call with almost any draw (gutshots, middlepair w/overcard kicker, backdoor flushes, etc.)

By check-raising you are cutting down their drawing odds and allowing your opponents to make a mistake. You don't really mind whether they play correctly and fold, or play incorrectly and call.

You risk giving a free card, so you should only checkraise when you are very sure a late position player will bet.

You are not going to eliminate the flush draws, but your check raise may eliminate the other draws or at least force them to play incorrectly.

[MaxPower]

I realize that my post explained the reason you want to check raise but not the situations where you should try it.

The factors you should take into account are the strength/vunerability of your hand, the board type, the size of the pot, the number of players, and the aggressiveness of the players. Also the position of the likely bettor.

I will often try to check-raise when the pot is large and multiway, my hand is good but has little chance of improving, and the late position player will often bet when checked to.

You should try to check-raise early in a session. It will make your opponents hesitant to bet into you they will give you free cards.

Obviously there is a big disadvantage to being in early position. Check-raising is the best weapon you have against this. I don't think the game of Texas Holdem could exist without check-raising. The player in last position would just have too much of an advantage. If there were no check-raising I would probably play every hand on the Button.

[J.R.]

6-max games tend to be more aggressive than full games because aggresssion, while valuable in full games, is even more valuable in shorthanded games. (This is due to a few reasons, perhaps most notably that there are fewer players between you and the pot than in a full game).

As a result, 6-max games tend to attract more aggressive players and dictate that normally passive types increase their level of aggression. So draws, overcards, and second pair get bet frequently in 6-max games.

While the hand Nate played has a lot of players in on the flop, these players are by and large more likely to be aggressive than a similar number of limpers in a full game might be, and given the large pot size and medium two-suited connected flop, its likely one of the limpers has a hand that fits well with this "limperific" flop and will bet.

So while you don't want to give a free card, its more likely that someone will bet here than in a full game, so a check-raise opportunity is more likely in this situation than it might be in a similar situation in a full game with more pasive players.

[Sarge85]

Ok I see, and if I'm in MP - I'd be raising an EP bet to try and charge the players acting after me twice.

Is the plan a backfire if 1)it gets checked around, or 2)The BB bets out.

[MaxPower]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok I see, and if I'm in MP - I'd be raising an EP bet to try and charge the players acting after me twice.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. You could also acheive this goal if there were a maniac on your left. You could bet into him, hoping he will raise. You can do the same thing if the pre-flop raiser is to your direct left.

[ QUOTE ]
Is the plan a backfire if 1)it gets checked around, or 2)The BB bets out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but that is the risk you take. The thing to do is use your judgment. Don't try for a check-raise if you think it is likely to be checked around.

[NoChance]

[ QUOTE ]
By check-raising you are cutting down their drawing odds and allowing your opponents to make a mistake. You don't really mind whether they play correctly and fold, or play incorrectly and call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Out of curiosity, which do you prefer to happen?

[MaxPower]

I prefer that they fold. This may be one of those times where Morton's Theorem does apply and you do better when they fold correctly.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
1) What do you think of the play here?

[/ QUOTE ]
I like it. I like betting out fine too. I'm more inclined to bet out if I have Qd.

[ QUOTE ]
2) Do you think the same play would work at a higher limit?

[/ QUOTE ]
Works well at 10/20 and 15/30 6-max.

[ QUOTE ]
i) Players at $5/$10 generally remember your preflop actions, and so checking a non-scary flop from EP after a preflop raise looks suspicious.

[/ QUOTE ]
If anyone has a pair they'll put you on AK and bet. I don't think it's too suspicious on a ragged flop.

[ QUOTE ]
ii) It is generally easier to take down pots without a showdown at $5/$10 and so betting out after a preflop raise is close(r) to being an automatic play.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's much less true in situations like this, though, when it was raised and multi-way preflop.