the "min" raise - please teach the newbie

[Jason Strasser]

The min raise is not a horrible play all the time. I just think that most often in a tourny, there is almost always a better solution to the minimum raise. You can't say that it is always the bad play, and there is no one reason why it is always not the preferred choice. However there are general reasons why it is not good.

1) If you do it preflop, the blinds will often come along increasing variance.

2) In basketball, if you make a pass that is stolen easily, you probably telegraphed it. A min raise is similar to this, I see something like this: EP raises to 100 (blinds 15/30), MP cold calls, Buttom min raises. This is a telegraph. It is obvious what the button has (usually), and I laugh when I see stuff like this (and am very happy with my implied odds if I had decided to tag along with a mid pocket pair).

3) The min raise also tells me when people are drawing. Bad players lead out in EP with min raises when they are drawing. I see it all the time. They figure your average passive player will just call and pay them off if they hit.


This list can go on. I just think that the min raise is generally not a creative play, and it generally allows more people than you'd like to continue on in the hand, and potentially outdraw. In a ring game, the min raise has more of a purpose because variance is not that big of a concern. The tournament player can lose a lot of money attempting to increase pot volume with small edges.

I'm not one of those people who instantly jumps to criticize a min raise when I see one... However there is almost always a better choice.

[ZeeJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
Bad players lead out in EP with min raises when they are drawing. I see it all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

What hands aren't drawin hands preflop? Only AA, and KK right? Are you saying that a minraise makes it clear the raisor doesn't have AA or KK? If you are saying that, you are clealy wrong.

I'm assuming you aren't talking about postflop play since you can't "lead out" with a raise postflop.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
The min raise is not a horrible play all the time. I just think that most often in a tourny, there is almost always a better solution to the minimum raise. You can't say that it is always the bad play, and there is no one reason why it is always not the preferred choice. However there are general reasons why it is not good.

[/ QUOTE ]

I basically agree with this, though i can't think of an occassion when i've seen this as a good play.

[ QUOTE ]
2) In basketball, if you make a pass that is stolen easily, you probably telegraphed it. A min raise is similar to this, I see something like this: EP raises to 100 (blinds 15/30), MP cold calls, Buttom min raises. This is a telegraph. It is obvious what the button has (usually), and I laugh when I see stuff like this (and am very happy with my implied odds if I had decided to tag along with a mid pocket pair).

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what i'm talking about you so know it's KK or AA that it's not true.

e.g 1st hand of Party 10+1 UTG raises to 30, I'm in 3rd position with KK, I raise to 200, everyone folds to min raiser who goes all in, I wish I could say I folded, I was pretty certain he had AA but I called it anyway, needless to say he did. I have dozens of similar examples, some where I called and some where I folded, some where they gave me odds to beat them and I flopped a set and took thier stack. My basic point was there seems little or no deception can be achieved by this play as you can more or less pin them down to 2 or 3 hands when they do it.

[ QUOTE ]
This list can go on. I just think that the min raise is generally not a creative play, and it generally allows more people than you'd like to continue on in the hand, and potentially outdraw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen to that.

Regards ML

[Jason Strasser]

I'm talking postflop. IE dumb player in EP flops flush draw, bets out 15 into the 5 players to act behind him.

Edit: Why can't you lead out postflop? If that is incorrect (verbally), then I meant open the betting postflop.

[sprmario]

I'm very new to poker but I am catching on quickly and I have a long history of playing "games" of many different types. It seems to me that any tool has it's uses. If you are playing vs. people who have a strong belief that min raises are indications of a monster hand then you can use this as a deception when you want to see a flop w/ a drawing hand or when you totally miss your flop. If you are playing vs. people who will fold to min raises, then why make a bigger raise? Why risk a larger portion of your stack than neccessary?

The fact that a lot of players here give totally opposite opinions on why people might min raise gives you an idea that it is not as obvious as some people might lead you to believe. Is someone betting out w/ a min bet drawing? or do they have a monster? Both have been suggested here by good players.

[La Brujita]

stripsqeez,

I thought you were joking because you called yourself a newbie with (i) a huge post count and (ii) experience playing huge games.

I have mixed feelings about the miniraise for a few reasons.

1. I think a lot of it has to do with deepness of money. The shallower the money the more you want to just take down the pot if you can. This is especially true when the blinds get big in a sit and go and one or two blind steals may make the difference between a win and a loss. If the money is deep I think with a hand like AK you want to get rid of some of the garbage hands that have correct odds to outdraw you but might not stand for a bigger raise. Due to the implied odds wiht deep stacks you might well call a mini raise with a suited connector early. I think this pricing is the converse of the 5/10 rule.

2. I guess on the internet especially it is sometimes harder to outplay playes postflop since you may or may not be familiar with them and since you can't see them. Of course a mini raise brings in more players so post flop play is more crucial. The shallower the stacks the less important post flop play becomes as compared to pre flop, and sit and gos get pretty shallow.

3. I don't know that miniraise play is less creative per se as Jason suggests because he is talking about its application I believe rather than the actual raise itself. However I do agree with him that when you weigh all factors there often is a better play. I have to disagree with him on one other thing. Perhaps a miniraise is a telegraph but I play big games as well and I mini raise with AA (like in the hand I posted) and I people seem to fall into the trap pretty regularly. I think good players often ascribe higher levels of observation to bad players than the bad players deserve.

Regards

[RoyalSampler]

I was talking post flop. I strongly disagree that it reaks of "monster". I'd say 80% of what I see (UB 10-25c), it's just newbies trying to keep momentum after a preflop raise and a flop that didn't hit. But... I've also used this as a bluff and it seems to scare people, using it essentially the same as a check raise.

[slogger]

Although I disagree with a couple of your comments regarding ring games, I think you hit the nail on the head when you talk about playing small pots in tournaments, particularly SnGs. Playing and winning many small pots wins SnG tournaments.

And winning small pots does not mean betting/raising small. It means making bets that put pressure on your opponents. Bets that force your opponents to make mistakes. Bets that force your opponents to provide you with as much information as possible about their hands.

In all but a few SnG situations (such as certain spots in the very late stages and on the later streets), I find the mini-bet/mini-raise to be completely worthless. Pre-flop, these bets have practically zero fold equity. It allows opponents (like me) to see flops with 87s, A3s, etc. and if I'm in the big blind, with almost any two cards (hands that will bust QQ, KK and even AA a lot more often than the other way around because they will fold to any significant flop action).

The pre-flop mini-raise may win you a few extra chips when you're able to take the pot down on the flop. But when you let 4 or 5 players see a flop and 1 or 2 of them follow you to the turn, you're in big trouble and when you now fold, you've lost 10-15 units instead of winning the 3-5 units that you could have taken without a fight.

[Beavis68]

Sorry if I am being redundant:

Pre-flop with AA specifically, you don't want to build a pot, you want to thin the field. The only time I would min raise with AA is from the button or the SB is it was folded to me, or from UTG where I thought an aggressive opponent might re-raise me.

Post flop, it is a fundamental threory of poker arguemenet. Anytime your opponent is correct in calling a bet, you lose, anytime they are incorrect, you win, regardless of the outcome of the hand. If you are giving your opponenent the odds to call and draw out, you are paying them to beat you. You need to bet enough to make it a mistake for your oppnenet to call you.

Say I had KK and I knew you had AA. There is $25 in the pot. Flop is all rags. I check, you bet $1. Even knowing you have AA is it correct for me to call. Over the long run, calling here will make me money, and lose you money.

[MWC]

[ QUOTE ]
Edit: Why can't you lead out postflop? If that is incorrect (verbally), then I meant open the betting postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps it was the "with min raises" that ZeeJustin objected to? You can lead out from EP, but it's a bet, not a raise.