how bad is it to ALWAYS bet first when last to act?

[Sooga]

So I was playing on party recently, and this is something I've always noticed, but never put much thought into. There are players (many, actually), who will ALWAYS bet the flop when it's checked to them. Like not most of the time, ALWAYS. Capped preflop and a A K x flop, and it's checked to them? They'll bet it. And it's not because they have a piece of it, they bet because, I don't know, maybe they think they'll take it down there.

And that got me thinking.. how bad is this play, really? I mean obviously it's a bad play, made worse the more players are in, but if your default play is to ALWAYS bet when you're last to act and it's checked to you, exactly HOW bad is it?

[benthehen]

It is about this bad:

Good <------------------------------------------------- (right here) --------> Bad

[magiluke]

That about sums it up in one nice little ascii graphical representation. Although this tactic can work against worse players (something I sometimes find profitable in the right situations, actually), but against better players, I'd say that it's down near the bad end of that graph.

[Louie Landale]

If you are playing far too many hands and the good players are on your right, its this bad:

Jay Walking ----- Running in the street---Crossing Freeway----Standing on Freeway ---<Right Here>--

If you are playing tight and they fear you, its this bad:

Winning the WSOP--------Winning local Tourney-------High Roller stakes you in 100/200 and offers 50/50 split ------- <Right Here>.

- Louie

[Michael Davis]

This is a big leak on Party, I think, and probably a big leak in general. There are certain flop textures that make it almost impossible to get good odds on running a bluff even if everyone checked to you.

Checkraise from the blinds with one pair more often on Party than in live games. Check-and-decide a lot. You can often checkraise with bottom pair and the like.

-Michael

[dogmeat]

Betting to win the pot instantly is NOT the only reason to made a bet. If you have a reasonable hand preflop, and a draw or overcards on the flop and nobody has called yet, which do you think is going to be better in the long run:

Checking and seeing if you catch something OR Betting and narrowing down the field? That's right, it depends.

However, if you can consistently knock out "most" of the other players, there is merit to betting. Think about it.

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[PokrLikeItsProse]

There exist situations where it is probably a good play 9if not optimal), such as when you are at a table full of passive players who never slowplay a hand of top pair or better and fold easily to any bet on the flop.

Of course such situations are rare, but I have run into it a couple of times at a low no-limit table.

[Sooga]

Absolutely, but I wasn't asking if you should ever bet on the flop. Of course you should. But ALL the time? That's not a good play.

[ACW]

Not as bad as those players who bet every flop except those they hit, which they slowplay.

[Yawkey]

It's a sound play until someone catches on and calls your bets, then check raises on the river when they hit a monster. This is a very strong play if you are playing tight agressive poker, especially on-line. This is because if you are playing tight most players will not see you play more than 10 hands on-line, and those that do know that you are holding face cards or pocket pairs. If you are playing agressive hopefully you narrowed the field down with a raise pre-flop, everyone should be cautious of you.

Now lets say, there is a new guy coming into a game of sharks, and he plays anything and everything. The sharks are going to let him just buy those hands and wait for monsters to call with and clean him out. The best part is he leaves with a false sense of victory because of all those hands he won.