Re: Keeping opponents in when they are drawing thin - how bad?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Since UTG+1 is shortstacked, calling is obviously correct when he flops such a huge hand. Raising would be terrible. Even on the turn I don't like UTG+1's raise all-in. I think calling would be better, although I'm open to persuasion on that point.

[/ QUOTE ]How would your answer change if he weren't short-stacked? And why?

[/ QUOTE ]

On the flop, my answer wouldn't change: I think UTG+1 should smoothcall whether shortstacked or not, although the decision is much closer if UTG+1 has lots of chips.

On the turn, I think it's a raise if UTG+1 has lots of chips, but a call if UTG+1 is shortstacked.

Why? UTG+1 likely has the best hand. The question is how to profit most from it. One of the players behind could well be drawing dead with a hand like A9 or 77, and would call one bet but not two. With lots of chips, you can put in a raise on the turn and even if the players behind you fold, you'll likely get paid off by the original bettor on the turn and the river. So if the players behind you fold, you're still gaining two additional bets. And if a player behind you calls with a flush draw (but let's say folds on the river), you're gaining four additional bets. Smoothcalling, when you have lots of chips, is probably going to get three or four additional bets (two on the turn, one or two on the river), but loses equity because someone may draw out. However, when UTG+1 is shortstacked, then raising will gain one additional bet if the players behind fold, and three additional bets bets if one player behind calls. (And of course no further bets on the river.) Smoothcalling, when shortstacked, will generally gain three additional bets: two on the turn and one on the river.