Rereading HEPFAP-- on check-raising

[NoOuts12]

I have decided to switch from primarily no-limit to limit play (all smaller stakes), and when rereading the book today I had a question on the check-raise section.

It advocates going for a check-raise with a flopped top pair in a large multiway pot in order to thin the field. However, what is your action when you check, the player to your left bets, and everyone calls? A raise here isn't forcing many draws out, and might make the pot large enough that any draw will refuse to be pushed out on the turn? call or raise with TPTK here?

[Lash]

[ QUOTE ]
What is your action when you check, the player to your left bets, and everyone calls? A raise here isn't forcing many draws out, and might make the pot large enough that any draw will refuse to be pushed out on the turn? call or raise with TPTK here?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is often correct to just call in this situation (when your check raise will not accomplish what you want it to) and then lead out on the turn if the board remains semi-favorable.

One side note:
You could check raise less in the situation you described and lead out on the flop more often. If you lead out and an early position player raises (who would have bet had you checked)...You put most of the field to a 2 bet decision. If you get raised by a late position player after 2 or 3 other opponents have called a single bet, you have the option of 3 betting.

Sometimes this is not as effective as a check raise of a late position bettor, but still a viable option if you want to thin the field and have no idea who (if anyone) will lead bet at the pot for you.

[schroedy]

The check-raising section has to be taken hand in hand with considerations of pot odds, etc.

The reason you check raise is not so much to drive out draws as to give them the WRONG ODDS to chase.

However, even when they are getting the correct odds to chase, it is always better to get more money in the pot (unless you feel that by keeping the pot small on this round, you can provoke a bigger "chasing" error on a subsequent round (per Mason and David, I think I have a thoeretical/philosophical problem with this concept but I haven't sat down and worked it out -- also, whenever I take on Mason on theory, I usually just end up feeling quite stupid so . . .).

Let's say that you are approximately a 4-1 favorite over each of 4 opponents individually (TPTK vs. typical sorts of draws, flush draws, etc.). Even though everyone is getting the right price to chase you are going to win 4 more bets something like 40% of the time (your return is 160% of investment). So you still want to raise to pot build, even though if your opponents knew what you held, they would be correct to call. If they fold to your raise, you do even better.

But bottom line, it is almost always correct to pot build when you are ahead unless you have the option of field thinning/giving them an opportunity to make a tremendously bad call. Some exceptions exist when you are ahead but up against hands like straight flush double overcard draws that are actually favorites to win although currently behind.

One more thing, you assume that TPTK is ahead, but seems unlikely. I know we are not supposed to "see monsters" but a bet, then the whole field calls and I start thinking that its 50% or so that there is a set out there. And one last thing . . . you can raise from late position and maybe the original bettor makes it 3 so you present the chasers with the double bet dilemma anyway.

[Stork]

If you expect the player on your left to bet, you should bet instead and hope that player raises which faces the field with two cold and will eliminate players just as your check-raise was meant to do. If you're check-raise is to eliminate players, as it would be in this situation, do so if you expect the bet to come from your right.

[schroedy]

That wasn't the question.

So many times at the poker table we make a plan, but then some other player disrupts it.

The original post here devised a plan. It was a good plan (theoretically . . . possibly worth discussing). Then a player at the table took unexpected action. This happens all the time . . . we expect one thing (at the table or in life) and get another.

His question is valid, it is the right question, I wanted to do x but y happened and now I can't. No use going over the should haves, could haves. WHAT DO I DO NOW?

I say raise anyway and pot build if you think you are ahead.

[Lash]

[ QUOTE ]
I say raise anyway and pot build if you think you are ahead.

[/ QUOTE ]

As always "it depends". It depends on all sorts of information that we don't have... board texture, type of opponents, their possible perception of you etc. etc. etc.

However, if "when everyone calls" means 3 or more opponents calling between the original bettor and you, and you are closing out the betting on the flop with a call... I think you should lean towards just calling and lead betting the turn.

The more opponents that have already called a single bet, the more you should tend to just call, and abort your origianl plan for a check raise. You shouldn't rule it out, but we are talking about a general guideline here, without specific details.

Board texture should also be a factor. The more hairy the board is, the more you should consider aborting the check raise if 3 or more opponents have already called a single bet from an early position bettor and you are in EP yourself (the small blind for example).

[cpk]

Check-raising anyway has several things to recommend it.

1. Build the pot--this has been discussed.
2. Information. You know a lot more about bettor's hand if he three bets after you check raise than if you simply call. Especially if he smooth calls you than raises you up on the turn. Very few players do this last without a very strong hand.
3. If bettor reraises, you may accomplish your original objective anyway, but with added money in the pot that you never would've gotten had you simply bet.

[Stork]

[ QUOTE ]
That wasn't the question.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm aware. The question had already been answered by a couple posters before me so I thought I'd bring up a point on the topic.

[AAeyes]

All things being equal I'll usually still pop it here. If my hand is currently good I'm increasing my pot equity edge... discussed more in depth in SSHE. If the original bettor 3-bets (likely considering he bet into a large field) the field still has to call two cold so you still might get some dead money in there and he also lets you know that you are very likely chasing. Of course at this point the pot is so big it's likely to be worth chasing. The only way I'll normally flat call is if I feel this player is aggressive enough that he would be a hand I likely have beat into the field and aggressive enough to raise my turn bet to protect my hand for me. Otherwise I revert to Plan A - checkraise... Plan B - still checkraise.

Best Wishes

AAeyes

[Yerma]

[ QUOTE ]
It advocates going for a check-raise with a flopped top pair in a large multiway pot in order to thin the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds good to me so far...

[ QUOTE ]
However, what is your action when you check, the player to your left bets, and everyone calls?
....
call or raise with TPTK here?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that if you don't like the action, don't get too involved in the hand. I think you can call and reevaluate on the turn. Check there and try to check raise again, but only if the action is "favorable". If the same player bets again and you suspect him of being sane, then you are likely beaten since most players won't semi-bluff flop + turn into a multi-way pot. So the "favorable" action you are looking for is now a bet on your right with one or zero callers.