Strange checkraise / reality check.

[Maxwell]

15-30 online. My shorthanded game has just blossomed into a full table. I have KQs on the button.

Two middle position players limp, the cutoff limps, I also limp, and the bb comes along. 5 of us see a flop of

A 6 3 rainbow, none of my suit.

It is checked around to me, and I bet. All fold to the cutoff, who hesitates just a tiny bit, and then raises?! The cutoff is an unfamiliar player who just joined the game.

This play makes no sense to me. This player has no particular reason to believe that I would bet, so he must have been comfortable with the chance that the flop would be checked around. Almost any ace would have bet out in his spot, as would most pairs. So what kind of decision is he making? He knows that it's easy for me to bet with nothing here, so this has to me the feeling of a resteal attempt that suddenly occured to him after everyone else folded. Or a slight possibility of a monster that he's trying to figure out how to maximize his profits with. Or an ace.

I call. The turn is an offsuit T.

The cutoff bets, and now I have 4 clean outs plus some part of six outs, plus considerable equity from total bluffs. I call.

The river is another T for a board of A 6 3 T T.

This changes nothing. He bets, and getting pot odds of 7.5-1, I call. Results follow.

Did I go way too far on the strength of this weird action read?

I can't think of a single hand I would normally play on the flop like he did. Should I add this second-to-last position checkraise play to my repertoire? In what cases would it make sense?

[Maxwell]

He had K9o and I won. Go figure.

That's why I want to know if I need a reality check.

[Jimbo]

You make the following assumption that I disagree with, you said "Almost any ace would have bet out in his spot, as would most pairs." In my experience in 15/30 online, at party Poker, many people still limp with Ax. You also said "This player has no particular reason to believe that I would bet, so he must have been comfortable with the chance that the flop would be checked around." It would have been a perfect time for him to expect the button to bet (which you did) to try a first round steal attempt. He got the perfect response when it was folded to him so checkraise. With no information on this player you make a poor call, if you knew he had this propensity then your play makes sense.

Next you justify your call with this logic "The cutoff bets, and now I have 4 clean outs plus some part of six outs, plus considerable equity from total bluffs. I call." Again a preflop call in the cutoff with AT or JT are all resonable hands for him to make this play with giving you no outs and those 4 "clean outs can cost you 4 BB's.

All I can say is you ended up with a fine result but I cannot agree with your logic used for making the calls. One question, if you are going to play the hand this way why not reraise his checkraise? This regains your positional advantage and either puts him on the defensive if he is bluffing or allows you to safely fold if the heat continues. Very few players can bluff after that and this information is to your advantage.


Jimbo

[Ginogino]

Jimbo:
I agree completely, and I particularly like the idea of reraising the checkraise. It would take a substantial amount of betting on turn or river to find out as well as this bet does whether your opponent's bet is bogus.

In the essay section of this forum Sudhir Padmanabhan in his "reading hands" essay speaks to this play in Read 1 (there are 8 reads or situations he discusses). In this instance a flop that is checked around, bet by a late player and then check-raised usually means that the check-raising player does not have a hand but is rather on a draw.

The reason is that if the player had any kind of a hand he would not risk the hand being checked around. Checkraising also generates an opportunity for a free card on the turn.

In your Case the board [A63] rainbow has only one hand, [45], that makes a noteworthy draw. So it was less likely that your opponent was on a draw for this reason.

"Sudhir" says the response to such a play is to re-raise, this eliminates additional players (not applicable in your case since they had all folded)and asserts control over the hand. In addition you have the strong advantage of position

I hope some of this helps. Reading the essay explains it better than I have here.

Yvonne

[Maxwell]

Hi, thanks for the response.

Yes, many people do limp in with Ax, and of course that's the hand for both of us to represent. Here are some reasons why I think he would have bet out on the flop if he had it.

With 5 players, a button steal is hardly a given. (possible exception: if he had been watching our shorthanded game, he may have considered us all loose agressive nuts.)

If he has a hand, he can take on the role of late position steal himself, get a better position, and still get action from weaker hands.

Checking in hopes of a button bet makes more sense if he needs to see what the players in front of him do before deciding on his action.

Players new to me are usually either somewhat weak-tight or excessively tricky, and I think this play makes the latter category more likely.

Of course, it may still be the case that what I lose when I'm wrong is too much. I probably would have folded on the turn if nothing changed. A closer look at the prior probabilities is in order. How sure would I have to be to continue?

In retrospect, reraising on the flop does seem better than calling.

Thanks for the feedback.

p.s. The four jacks that give me the nut straight are clean outs. [img]/forums/images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

[Maxwell]

Thanks for the pointer to the article.

That's exactly the question I had. It looks and quacks like some kind of draw, but there aren't enough available to make a clear case for it. What else could it be?

I like the suggestion of reraising.

[skp]

Interesting hand.

I agree that the checkraiser probably does not have much. If he had a hand, he would bet the flop. If he had a monster hand which he was slowplaying by checking, he would probably just call on the flop given that no one else called your flop bet and given that with an Ace high flop, you would likely bet the turn no matter what card came off. He is on a draw. But the problem is that this board is bereft of draws. He may also be on a wild bluff but that wild bluff gives him at least 6 outs (assuming no King or queen in his hand) as you ain't got doo dooo either.

So, how do you play forward?

Folding on the flop is out of the question given our read. Even folding on the turn or river is highly questionable as you have nut no pair. I would probably call the flop checkraise. If I hit a pair on the turn, I just call again. If I miss, I would raise. That's a slightly different take than what I suggest in my reading hands essay that Yvonne referred to where I suggest reraising on the flop. But in that situation, a reraise is the preferred play because it whittles the rest of the field. Here, you are heads-up and the best way to make the guy fold is to raise on the turn rather than reraise on the flop.

[skp]

"In the essay section of this forum Sudhir Padmanabhan in his "reading hands" essay speaks to this play in Read 1 (there are 8 reads or situations he discusses). In this instance a flop that is checked around, bet by a late player and then check-raised usually means that the check-raising player does not have a hand but is rather on a draw."

The exception of course is where the would be checkraiser has a preflop raiser to his left. For example, if our original poster had raised preflop on the button and bet the flop, then the cut-off's subsequent checkraise could signify either a big hand or a big draw. And given that no one called the button's bet on the flop and given that the board offers only one draw (an unlikey one at that), he probaly would have a huge hand i.e. two pairs or a set.