CRing the flop vs leading

[kurosh]

What sort of hands do you CR the flop with instead of leading? I'm used to nearly always CRing in limit.

[AZK]

What sort of hands do you 3bet in limit vs smooth call and go for a turn raise?

Come on, you know better than this. It's completely a function of image, pot size, stack size, position, raised vs unraised pot, yada yada yada...you can check-raise looking to committ, check raise looking to bluff, check-raise to trap money etc, etc...post hands and people will let you know whether they prefer a lead, a cr, etc...

[xorbie]

This is really, really, really a depends type thing. Against people who aren't very creative and continuation bet too often I like to checkraise draws which can't make showdownable hands without hitting (i.e. I don't like to checkraise big flush draws too often).

[xorbie]

That said, I remember playing Dcfr (I think) back in the 2+2 games and he would checkraise every time he flopped a draw in a raised pot. That was a bit easy to read after a while. If people catch you doing it, definitely throw in some sets/two pair because they will be 3-betting you more often (basicacally apply some common sense).

[tpir90036]

[ QUOTE ]
I like to checkraise draws which can't make showdownable hands without hitting

[/ QUOTE ]
vs.
[ QUOTE ]
(i.e. I don't like to checkraise big flush draws too often).

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you saying you would rather checkraise a non-nut flush draw? I think Ciaffone talks about something similar in his book. Something to the effect of "gunning it out on the flop" so that you don't outguess yourself later as to whether or not your flush is good if it hits.

Does that sound right?

[kurosh]

[ QUOTE ]
What sort of hands do you 3bet in limit vs smooth call and go for a turn raise?

Come on, you know better than this. It's completely a function of image, pot size, stack size, position, raised vs unraised pot, yada yada yada...you can check-raise looking to committ, check raise looking to bluff, check-raise to trap money etc, etc...post hands and people will let you know whether they prefer a lead, a cr, etc...

[/ QUOTE ]I do know better. I didn't mean to look for one line answers. I wanted to create discussion about the concept.

Well, I've found I heavily prefer leading the flop to CRing. I take it down more often and when I'm beat, I don't have to commit as much. When I have a monster, I can also get a large amount into the pot quickly. Also, I don't have to worry about it being checked behind.

In a HU raised pot, I feel I'm making myself too easily read by not CRing very often. I do it, but not too much, usually when I want the money in and the stack sizes dictate it. Mostly, I think it should be done when you are pretty sure the hand will end right there, or you have a monster and are pretty sure it will continue. I also do it when the guy continuation bets 100%. The thing is, I'm rarely very sure the guy will give it up. I think it takes a good read or a strong hand to CR, not something that should be done on unknowns very often.

How are my thoughts?

Check raising the flop is something I do not do very often in a no limit game. The reason I do not like to do it is that it represents a much bigger hand per dollar you put into the pot than betting - three betting does. This is good when you are bluff, true, but here is my problem with that. I rarely play my big hands with a check raise, so I fear that playing my bluffs as a check raise is just telling everyone what I have.

Now, there are definite situations where I do it, especially preflop (not strictly a check raise of course, but I feel a limp-re-raise is a similiar concept). An example would be when there is a maniac on my left who plays most hands and plays them for a small raise. I am comfortable limping in the CO with a hand like AQ, 88-AA if I feel there is a 35% or more chance he will raise, and especially if he is doing something with his chips. This lets me get 18-24 big blinds in essentially dead money, plus the chance someone will call me with AJ / 44, and given the large multiway nature of the pot it is unusual you are dominated.

The same principle is true post flop. Some players will always lead the flop if they raised preflop, even with 4 or 5 callers, and that can prove to be especially profitable in terms of getting value out of your flopped set while giving it ample protecting from draws.

Mostly though, I like to lead. I'll lead draws, overpairs, sets, two pairs and most anything I want to play. It keeps the other guy guessing and reacting to me, and I like that.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]

Are you saying you would rather checkraise a non-nut flush draw?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I actually like check/raising NFD unless villain is willing to call with AK/AQ UI (which is pretty rare) because I'm willing to get it all in if an A comes off. It's more of an issue if say I have JQ[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] on an all undercard flop... I like my J or Q but I'm not necessarily looking to get all in if they hit. I think check/calling in these situations can let me manuever more if I do hit one of those 6 outs, I can just check/call it down UI.

[ QUOTE ]
I think Ciaffone talks about something similar in his book. Something to the effect of "gunning it out on the flop" so that you don't outguess yourself later as to whether or not your flush is good if it hits.

Does that sound right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, certainly another reason.

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
That said, I remember playing Dcfr (I think) back in the 2+2 games and he would checkraise every time he flopped a draw in a raised pot. That was a bit easy to read after a while. If people catch you doing it, definitely throw in some sets/two pair because they will be 3-betting you more often (basicacally apply some common sense).

[/ QUOTE ]

You're implying that this strategy is easy to read... I assure you it's not and it's very powerful in limit holdem. He is very likely check-raising the flop with most of his made hands including middle and bottom pairs(assuming he's HU OOP against an aggressive MP or LP open).

There is a superlative thread on this subject in the Mid Hi Limit Archives, but unfortunately the 2+2 archiveserver was neutered.

[Percula]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying you would rather checkraise a non-nut flush draw? I think Ciaffone talks about something similar in his book. Something to the effect of "gunning it out on the flop" so that you don't outguess yourself later as to whether or not your flush is good if it hits.

Does that sound right?

[/ QUOTE ]

More along the line of limping Ax suited from a LP and have four of the suit on the flop, but feel that A with a suited rag kicker is not going to be a showdown hand.