Fold rather than check?

[Phil Van Sexton]

Here's the scenario....NL sit-n-go, 3 players left, all 3 have similiar stacks ~T2500.

Blinds are 200/400. All three players call, then check on flop and turn.

After the river, I have absolutely nothing (54o, no pairs). I am the first to act, and have no interest in bluffing here.

My question is....would it make sense to just fold rather than check?

Since I won't win the hand, I want to encourage the other 2 to go to war and ideally have 1 of them get knocked out. If I check, they might be less likely to bet/bluff for fear of a check-raise from me. If I fold, they might be more likely to bluff each other to win the pot.

Of course, I only thought of this after I checked. Does this seem like a valid strategy?

[La Brujita]

The strategy has some merit but I just want to point out it is considered unethical to fold when you are first to act because you are giving an unfair advantage to the second to act. The advantage is he is given free information that he won't be raced with a check raise.

Regards

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
The strategy has some merit but I just want to point out it is considered unethical to fold when you are first to act because you are giving an unfair advantage to the second to act. The advantage is he is given free information that he won't be raced with a check raise.

Regards

[/ QUOTE ]

True... but when you think about it, you're giving the same information to the other player(s). Shouldn't that de-unethicalize it? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[bob2007]

Wow, that's a great theory, never thought of it that way. Although, I may have seen this done before but not noticed it.

As to the ethics part, I think it's alright. Some people think it's unethical to check raise.

[MrFroggyX]

This i have to try and see if it might actually work.. /images/graemlins/smile.gif
In theory it sounds great! But you never know in real life...

[La Brujita]

I read it was unethical in one of the key poker books. I think TOP but I am not sure. You have an interesting point about a fold in first position three handed being "de-unethicalized".

It is more obvious why it is unfair four handed because now only the first to act after you knows for sure he will not get checkraised.

I am not trying to tell you what to do necesarily, I just wanted to give you (what I think is) the accepted view on folding out of turn.

Regards

[Phil Van Sexton]

I actually had someone do this in a sit-n-go last night, except there were 4 players and he was 2nd to act.

I didn't really have a problem with this. I guess it might considered unethical in a ring game (though I see it on occasion anyway). In a ring game, this move has no benefit to you, so there is no reason to do it (other than to help another player).

In a tournament, it might benefit other players, but it is a benefit to yourself and therefore no worse than many things that are done during tournaments (ie big stacks softplaying each other while waiting for a small stack to bust).

It is also not "folding out of turn". On my turn, I choose to Fold.

As an aside, I actually sat next to a guy at the 4/8 at Mandalay who would fold after any flop that totally missed him. He proudly explained to the table that "he didnt want to hit bottom pair on the turn and get sucked into losing more money." I love this game.