Is this flop right for a checkraise?

[jrz1972]

[ QUOTE ]
Bet out. Three callers. Turn is an overcard. Lose hand and 1/2BB.

Checked around. Turn is an overcard. Lose hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

You seem to be assuming that an overcard costs you the hand with the same frequency against a few callers as it does against many callers.

One advantage of betting out (as opposed to allowing the hand to be checked through) is to thin the field so that an overcard doesn't have as many opponents to hit.

[Marquis]

I don't mean to beat this to death, but I want to try to make my case one more time.

If you bet out and get a few callers, that stinks because your hand is so vulnerable. If you bet out and get only one caller, it's almost the same as check-raising but now your turn bet doesn't have as much fold equity because you haven't scared the bejeesus out of him with your awesome display of power. If you bet out and get raised, that stinks too. If you bet out and everyone folds, well, that just doesn't happen here.

If I check and get an EP bet, it's essentially the same as betting out unless it comes back raised, in which case you dump and move on. If I check and get a bet and no callers in between, that's the best thing that could happen (we agree on that). It's especially good if I get a button bet because there's a good chance he's just trying to take the pot down. If I check and it gets checked around, I missed a chance to win what was a small pot in the first place. And I STILL might win it.

I forget which 2+2 book it is (HPFAP?) that advocates tending to check from EP when you hit the flop. I might be making that up tho.

[Marquis]

Perhaps what we disagree on is that you think there's a decent chance it can get checked around, while I think there's almost no chance that happens.

[btspider]

[ QUOTE ]
I forget which 2+2 book it is (HPFAP?) that advocates tending to check from EP when you hit the flop. I might be making that up tho.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think its HPFAP. that book certainly doesn't address a table full of loose-passives. a flop check-through is very possible here.

both plays are close in this hand and have merits. i tend to bet here without a read. checking isn't wrong. also note, the rainbow flop may reduce the number of callers you get when you bet out.

[TwoShedsJackson]

Thanks for the argument guys, it's nice to see both sides [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Anyway as to the results: Button turns over 55 for possibly the most poorly played set ever and MHING.

[DMBFan23]

HPFAP says that checking a lot of good hands on the flop will let you get free cards when you miss a flop, and will also let you protect your hand in a better way against hands like bottom pair when you do get to checkraise. however, for that to hold true, you typically need

1) opponents who are observant enough to remember you checkraising
2) aggressive opponents who will (more often than not) bet to try to steal the pot if checked to in LP.

I'm not sure "table is loose passive" qualifies as that kind of read.

I mix up betting and checkraising in this situation, but I like to have a read that LP will bet before I favor checkraising as the default play.

EDIT: damn you btspider for posting while I was typing [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Redd]

I'm with jrz on this one.

[ QUOTE ]
Table was pretty passive indeed

[/ QUOTE ]
On a draw heavy board full of passive players that have shown no strength whatsoever, its just too likely that getting tricky will get this checked around. C/Ring seems like results-oriented thinking because the move does look great when LP happens to bet out, but I think that this will be checked through often enough to warrant betting it.

Additionally, getting this flop checked through is awful. Hero has a made, but very vulnerable hand that must be protected. This play would look less brilliant if it was checked through and a 7, 8, or overcard came on the turn.

Finally, what hands does Hero protect against with a c/r that he doesn't when betting out? The most likely hands out there are either:
A gutshot (4 outs, ~10.5:1)
Overcards (3 to 6 outs, ~15:1 to 7:1)
A lower pair (5 outs, ~8:1)
Betting out gives 6:1 to the first player, then each subsequent player gets better with the number of callers. And most of them (likely all of them because some will fold) still won't get proper odds to call.

But that's just my two SBs. Totally open for dissection.

EDIT: Damn you btspider and DMBFan for posting while I was typing slowly [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Redd

[cold_cash]

I'm also betting this flop.

You're talking about the downside to betting out, (having that bet called in a few spots), but the same thing could happen if you go for a check-raise and the bet comes from your immediate left. Now you're in the exact same boat you would be in had you bet, except you risked giving a freee card.

The pot is small, I don't know who, if anybody, is betting the flop, I don't want to risk giving a free card, and people will call incorrectly if I bet.

[Dick in Phoenix]

...for the worst played hand of the month ?

Button on this hand should be given this award for January.

Given 3 chances, he never raised, do I have that right?

Dick

[TwoShedsJackson]

[ QUOTE ]

Given 3 chances, he never raised, do I have that right?


[/ QUOTE ]

Quite so, and I am grateful for it [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]