This play...

[Saddlepoint]

[Please don't flame me for my ignorance. I have no illusions about the concepts below being either original or unexplored, but this sincerely has been bumping around in my head lately.]

Okay so, let's say you flop a draw in a raised pot, and you are in position. Your opponent makes a moderate lead. Traditionally, as I understand nlh, you'd either a) fold, or b) make a pot-size semibluff. (We're assuming pot odds don't permit a call.)

I've been thinking about making a smaller raise in this spot - somewhere between the minimum raise and 1/2-pot-size. Does anybody include this play as part of their routine? My logic is as follows:

1) Since a smallish raise has no apparent fold equity, the more observant (but not necessarily creative) players at the higher small stakes levels might get suspicious, and therefore be more likely to shut down facing a smaller than usual raise. Thus, arguably, the smaller raise better accomplishes the crucial goal of getting you to the river for free.

2) The smaller raise is cheaper. Should you run into a monster (or an opponent who plays his tptk/overpair like a monster), you lose less to a "screw you" reraise.

3) In reality, you lose negligable fold equity. Top pair and overpairs are not folding to pot size raises anyway, so the issue becomes, what's the minimum you have to bet to fold out blank overcards? A minimum raise might not do it against most opponents, but can it really take much more? As an example: if you raise pre-flop with AK and the flop is T74r with a pot of $10, and you bet $10, and your opponent makes it $24, is it cheap enough for you to "take one off"?

Let me add as a closer that this is, in my mind, strictly a small stakes question. I've never played higher than $100 NL, but I suspect that at higher stakes, weaker-looking raises get looked up more often by tougher opponents.

If there's a flaw in my logic I'd be delighted to hear it; any feedback appreciated.