Raising PF to get a "free" look at the turn

[crunchy1]

It has been discussed before that sometimes raising PF can buy you a "free" turn card when everyone checks to you on the flop allowing you to check behind. It's also been discussed that this "free" turn card really isn't free because you've put 2SBs in PF which would've been the equivilant of calling 1SB PF and then 1SB on the flop - in effect seeing the turn card for the same price. I've recently had some thoughts on this and am curious what the board thinks...

(1) Is equity related to the size on the bet we're currently faced with or about to make? An example would be a small pocket pair (say 33) in late position (similiar to jason_t's "Post in the CO" thread). We're quite likely to have the best hand PF. So does a PF raise with an equity advantage have more value than putting in 1SB PF with an equity advantage and 1SB on the flop with a smaller equity advantage (or possible equity disadvantage) or does it not matter.

(2) If #1 is true then wouldn't it ring true that in effect our check behind on the flop actually is seeing the turn for "cheap"? It's obviously not "free" but given that 1SB PF + 1SB on the flop is less valuable than raising PF wouldn't this be the case?

Maybe this is lame semantics, hogwash or possibly has some value. I'm curious what you guys think.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
It has been discussed before that sometimes raising PF can buy you a "free" turn card when everyone checks to you on the flop allowing you to check behind. It's also been discussed that this "free" turn card really isn't free because you've put 2SBs in PF which would've been the equivilant of calling 1SB PF and then 1SB on the flop - in effect seeing the turn card for the same price. I've recently had some thoughts on this and am curious what the board thinks...

(1) Is equity related to the size on the bet we're currently faced with or about to make? An example would be a small pocket pair (say 33) in late position (similiar to jason_t's "Post in the CO" thread). We're quite likely to have the best hand PF. So does a PF raise with an equity advantage have more value than putting in 1SB PF with an equity advantage and 1SB on the flop with a smaller equity advantage (or possible equity disadvantage) or does it not matter.

(2) If #1 is true then wouldn't it ring true that in effect our check behind on the flop actually is seeing the turn for "cheap"? It's obviously not "free" but given that 1SB PF + 1SB on the flop is less valuable than raising PF wouldn't this be the case?

Maybe this is lame semantics, hogwash or possibly has some value. I'm curious what you guys think.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you're saying, but I think the problem here is that many times in a large field (and this is where people are talking about raising a small pp), the flop will not be checked to you anyway. Now you just threw a way a sb.

[Paxosmotic]

I really do not see any reason to EVER do this. Let's look at the different situations it's going to come up in.

First, the free card play will only be used on a drawing hand. The more people that are in the hand, the more marginal the hand you play can be. After the flop, one of three results will occur:

1. You will have a strong draw or a made hand which can profitably call bets on all streets. By using the free card play, you will lose value on your strong draws unless you put the money in yourself. By doing this you've raised preflop and bet on the flop. Anyone on a weak draw is heading for the hills at that sign of strength.

2. You will have a weak draw which you would not have called for a single bet on the flop. You may get a favorable turn card to give you a stronger draw, but the play will have been unprofitable.

3. You will whiff entirely and have to fold on the turn regardless.

So to me, you lose value with the first result and you spew with options two and three. Further, WeakDraw * MultipleOpponents = VulnerableToBets. Someone may bet the flop anyway when they flop top pair or a strong draw.

I simply don't see any use for this play.

[LImitPlayer]

I'm not a big fan of raising preflop for the purpose of gaining a free look at the turn which in reality isn't free.

Someone in MP raises you 3 bet pf in hopes to get a free look at the turn, the flop comes and MP bets the flop, wheres your free card?

Same hand except MP limps, you raise to get a free look at the turn, and one of the blinds 3 bets you, wheres your free card?

Same hand, MP limps you raise to get a free card and soemone limp-reraises you, wheres your free card?

This play is way overrated in my opinion, useless

Raise PF for value or to Isolate not for a free card.

[baronzeus]

There is a secondary reason to do this, which is to build a big pot preflop with enough equity so that drawing out becomes profitable. You may be paying "the same" to see the turn but in reality you're getting more out of it.

[crunchy1]

Let's say that the hand in question here could be 89s, JTs, KTs or 77-TT after multiple limpers.

[thejameser]

does this include 910s and QJs(mainly 910s)? one thing about this play, if a PFR checks on the flop, it shows weakness and can destroy any sort of chance a bluff may have at winning a pot. how often do you see a PFR on party or any other site(even live, for that matter)check on the flop, usually a bet is made to at least thin the field, especially with several limpers and the blinds(if they are still in). i have been thinking about this play too, and it seems to me the "free card" aspect of it may be over-rated because it is actually under-utilized by many players that use it as a reason to raise because of the attempt to apply alternate strategy after the flop to maximize their chance to win. i may be way off base, but this is just an observation in regard to this "free card" play.