HOH QUESTION FOR ED MILLER OR OTHER EXPERT!

[hbgolfpro]

Hi Ed....I definitely trust your knowledge and opinions and I would like to ask a question that applies to NLH. I will give an example of my question from HOH vol. 1. Page 272....hand #5. The basic question is.... when we call a preflop raise in position with say a medium pair...8s, 9s, 10s etc.....and the flop comes with three undercards, we are almost positive the raiser will bet into us. That is understood. So....wouldnt it be correct virtually most every time to raise that flop bet? Doing that allows us to define our hand. We find out where we stand. It may give us a free card. We may win it right there. Or....better yet....we may get reraised and find out we are beat quickly and with minimum expense. I cant understand why we would simply call with 99 on a ragged flop of undercards or even one that contains a smaller pair such as 8 8 6??? The only time we should flat call is if we are against a HABITUAL bluffer who desperately wants to give his chips away...correct? We all know that aggressive poker is winning poker...and raising is the epitome of aggression. I posted in the small stakes section about a hand a friend of mine played last nite where he called a preflop raise with TT. He then called a pot sized flop bet that contained three raggedy undercards...and proceeded to call an all in bet on 4th street and was shown QQ. Wouldnt it have been better to raise that flop bet and define the hand right then and there? If there is a time to flat call a flop bet into a ragged board when we hold a medium pair that happens to be an overpair...when would it be? Or am I correct that raising in that spot would be virtually always correct? I just dont like getting into a situation where I call a preflop raise.....have to call a flop bet....knowing that if the turn is a blank too that I might have to call a huge 4th street bet. So.....what is the correct way to handle this situation in cash games most of the time? Thank you for your input.

[Ed Miller]

[ QUOTE ]
So....wouldnt it be correct virtually most every time to raise that flop bet? Doing that allows us to define our hand. We find out where we stand. It may give us a free card. We may win it right there. Or....better yet....we may get reraised and find out we are beat quickly and with minimum expense.

[/ QUOTE ]

The quick answer is, no, it's not right that you should virtually always raise.

It depends on how your opponent would react to your raise. Against an opponent who would always fold two overcards and always reraise with a big pair, then yes, raising will usually be best. But against an opponent who will bluff reraise sometimes, calling may indeed be better. (Not to mention what to do against someone who will sometimes call your raise with a bigger pair and also sometimes call with a draw or other weaker hand, aiming to take the pot away from you later.)

And furthermore, calling may be better even if your opponent will react predictably to your raise. This would be true against a tight raiser (i.e., one who is more likely than the average player to hold a big pocket pair) who will react just as predictably to your flop call.

After you call on the flop, many players will routinely check the turn with overcards and bet again with a big pair. If your opponent plays that way, then calling is a "cheaper" way to get information than raising is. And if the raiser is very tight, then you may be an underdog to have the best hand on the flop, and "cheap" info might be just what you want.

Limit features a fair number of "automatic" plays. No limit has additional variables, and that leads to relatively few "automatic" plays.