Raising to drive out opponents in TD

[MarkGritter]

Often the action at a loose TD table will be 3- or 4- handed. Especially when OOP, you would like to get the action heads up.

Suppose it's four handed, an opponent to my right has drawn one and the other player or player(s) to my left have drawn two.. If the player to my right bets, and I've improved, I will raise to attempt to get the other players to fold. (Unimproved, you must sometimes fold here because one of your opponents may raise and trap you for extra bets--- a concept I'm still trying to put into practice in my own play.) In a 9-10 SB pot, investing an extra SB to pick up even 10% equity is worthwhile.

But, I also try to induce a raise by betting into an opponent on my left who has drawn one. This almost never succeeds; it's usually just called all around. Evidently my bets are interpreted as strength (while if I was really strong I'd check/raise.)

Is the latter play worth doing, or am I just spewing chips by betting to try to induce a raise?

[randomstumbl]

From my experience, the problem with betting to induce a raise is that it doesn't make sense from a third party perspective. Many opponents are going to miscalculate the range of hands you'd bet out with when you've drawn two and the player to your right has drawn one. When they're confused they call when they don't improve and raise when they're pat which gives you the worst outcome.


I think it's mutually beneficial for the first player to bet and second player to raise whenever the first player improves in this situation, but it's not a common play to see. I wouldn't be surprised for this to become more common as TDL becomes a better understood game (although I almost guarantee many people will misinterpert this play as illegal collusion).

[dibbs]

In .25/.50 and .50/1 this actually works a decent amount of the time, as of late anyone who is one card ahead will get in as many bets possible regardless of the situation, I dunno if its cuz they skimmed SS2 or what. I recall you saying once you had a tight image, which maybe most of the small TD community is aware at this level. Interested to see what random/tim/TT etc. who play in your games more often think about it.

[timprov]

[ QUOTE ]
Interested to see what random/tim/TT etc. who play in your games more often think about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't typically work for me either. Then again in this specific situation I'm checkraising most of the time anyway.

[somapopper]

[ QUOTE ]
From my experience, the problem with betting to induce a raise is that it doesn't make sense from a third party perspective. Many opponents are going to miscalculate the range of hands you'd bet out with when you've drawn two and the player to your right has drawn one. When they're confused they call when they don't improve and raise when they're pat which gives you the worst outcome.


I think it's mutually beneficial for the first player to bet and second player to raise whenever the first player improves in this situation, but it's not a common play to see. I wouldn't be surprised for this to become more common as TDL becomes a better understood game (although I almost guarantee many people will misinterpert this play as illegal collusion).

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting idea, I've never really thought of players cooperating as in h/l. However, if the player who's ahead is fairly strong, what's to say it's profitable for him to lose the third player?