The bluff check raise

[pilchard]

Hand I played earlier today 15/30 party (I know nothing about the Cutoff):

MP limps, CO limps, SB folds and I check AhTd in the BB.

Flop is Qs Ts 3h (3.5 small bets).

I bet, the MP calls and the CO calls.

Turn is 4s (3.25 big bets).

I bet the MP folds and CO calls.

River is the 5s (Great - 5.25 big bets)
I check, the CO thinks about it and bets.

I'm getting 6.25-1 on a call. I raise. (When will I ever learn!!!!) The CO thinks about if for an eternity and finally calls. He shows Th9s and his 9s is good.

Should it have been:
1) a bet and fold to a raise
2) a check fold,
3) a check call because of the pot odds; or
4) do you think that my check raise could have worked and folded a better hand the three times out of 4 I needed for it to be profitable?

Further in regard to point 3, is it relevant that my opponent has the 9s? ie would it make any difference to you if before the river you knew he had the 2s2h?

[pilchard]

Note: 4 should read

"do you think that my check raise could have worked and folded a better hand the 1 time out of 4 I needed for it to be profitable?"

ie. it can be unsuccessful 3 out of 4 and I still make a profit.

[mchilger]

Pilchard, I think this is a great play against an opponent you know really well. I think it might also work well in a live game. However, I think most weak to average opponents will call you down here on the Internet. Once the pot gets so big, it takes a very strong opponent to fold on the river. Given the fact that you didn't know anything about this opponent, I don't think this play would work enough to be profitable.

I would have bet and folded to a raise.

Matthew

[jimi]

I don't see the logic of playing the hand that far in the 1st place. Like you, I will bet 2nd pair w/an a A overcard on the flop, but mostly for information. When I get 2 or more callers, I figure a flush draw or a pair of 10's w/a lousy kicker are definite possibilities, along w/a straight draw. Also a pair of Q's w/ bad kicker might just call, while an AQ might wait for the big bets to raise. With no help on the turn I'd get off it against 2 guys, but maybe bet out against one hoping he did not have spades. In my mind you gave away 3 big bets here to gain what? Very little in the pot & alot of it was yours in the 1st place. Once he hits the flush, well most guys think, "I can't fold a flush," and call, even against a check raise...it is afterall, only one more bet at that point.

[pilchard]

I disagree Jimi in regard to the play of the turn. Backing off on the turn here against two opponents is weak play.

Preflop they have both limped, that usually indicates average type hands. After the flop I have 2nd pair top kicker against two opponents who have shown no strength preflop. The odds are that nobody has a Q. I bet and they both call. Now it is even less likely (at 15/30 in particular) that anybody has a Q. They probably have some type of a draw or 2nd/3rd pair type hands.

The turn brings 4s. Now this card is unlikely to have helped anybody unless they were on a flush draw. However, it does give anyone with a single spade a draw to a flush. (Note: if the CO had a flush draw he may have raised the flop anyway). Against 2 opponents you have to bet. You do not want to give a free card to someone who could beat you. Your opponents may put you on a flush and fold. They may fold straight draws where they do not have a spade. If they raise you, there is nothing wrong with folding. Checking here against 2 opponents is asking for the pot to be taken off you.

I agree that my river play was a mistake. Mat says bet and fold to a raise. This could be a first but I disagree with Mat. I cannot see betting folding any spade. You could argue that betting might get a Q to fold if your opponent does not have a spade but how likely is it that he has a Q? Checking may induce a bluff from a busted straight draw which you could call.

As for my hypothetical quesion about whether it matters if your opponent has the 2s, I agree with Jimi and any flush is going to call my check raise. I reckon I need far greater odds and a particular opponent to merit this type of attempt.

As an aside, a few hands later I had JsJh and raised from EP. Only the BB called.

Flop was Qh 5s 2s.
Check, I bet and was called.
Turn 8s
Check, I bet and was called
River Ts
Check, I bet my J high flush thinking he would have been worried about me checking it down if I did not have a flush so my J should be good. The BB raised. I called straight away and he showed Ac5h and I took the pot.

[mchilger]

Pilchard, I'm not really betting thinking I will get a better hand to fold. I would bet because I am going to check and call this hand anyhow. Therefore, I would go ahead and bet so that my opponents don't check it down with a hand like JT. I'm not sure inducing a bluff would work in this situation as I doubt someone might think they could get you to fold just because the board is 4-suited. Against most opponents, if they raise on the end I can safely fold.

I think it comes down to how often your opponents will call on the river with this type of board vs. how often they might try a bluff if you check vs. the probability that someone would try a bluff raise (very unlikely).

I'm glad we finally can disagree on a hand though, .

MCH

[legaleagle97]

Matthew, why would you have folded to a raise or re-raise on the river? The pot odds on calling that raise are more than 10:1. Against someone you don't know who could very well be bluffing, you only need to catch them 1 time in 11 to break even.

Is it because if someone calls a raise 1) you know they'll call any subsequent re-raises and 2) people who call a raise on the river or make a raise on the river have at least a good hand?

[mchilger]

My experience is that bluff raises on the river are very, very rare. I can't count the number of times I have called on the river to keep a player honest just to find out that I am against an honest player, . Most players are just not aggressive enough (or good enough) to try bluff raises on the river. I fold because I think I am almost always beat even with the good pot odds.

Think about it, how many players will fold to a raise on the river? Almost noone, so bluff raising is generally not profitable and most players realize this.

There are only two types of players who try bluff raises on the river: 1/ wild maniacs who try to win every pot or 2/ Very strong players against other very strong players. For a bluff raise to work, it needs to be against a strong player who is capable of folding on the river, i.e.someone like me, . If I was against some regular opponents, I might tend to call because I don't want them running over me.

My experience comes mostly from middle limit games like $15-$30. There may be more players at the low limits who want to try some really tricky plays.

Matthew

[pilchard]

Mat,

The problem with a lot of these examples is that you get a feel for things at the table which you cannot really put accross on paper. The speed that the CO called the turn bet puts something in your head which you cannot describe in an example. As we know nothing about the CO, we are assuming the average player.

Would most players with middle pair and a kicker that isn't a spade call the turn in a smallish pot? My first reaction was to check fold (before the rush of blood to my head) and then to check call. We are all agreed that my check raise was a waste of money.

If you think that it is highly unlikely that your opponent will bluff a 4 flush board then you can check fold (you are only getting 6-1) but if he is capable of bluffing you'd like to check call. You say by betting you might prevent JT(no spade) from checking behind you but a) would JT no spade be there and b) would he call your river bet anyway?

A bet on the river is only worthwhile IF a worse hand will call OR a better hand will fold. As you say a better hand is not folding if you bet but are any worse hands calling?

By betting you leave yourself open to the (admittedly small) chance of a bluff raise but checking has another advantage against some passive players because for some reason they smell a trap and may just check down a small spade. That saves you a bet as they would have called with any spade.

As you state:

"I think it comes down to how often your opponents will call on the river with this type of board vs. how often they might try a bluff if you check vs. the probability that someone would try a bluff raise (very unlikely)".

We agree after all .

[mchilger]

Pilchard, I can't argue against your reasoning. A lot depends on the type of opponent making that call on the turn. So I guess we agree on the thought process involved, just not the likelihood for each scenario.

I will say that I probably tend to bet out more on the river than most players. I think this is a major leak of many players including advanced players...slacking off on the river afraid of a bigger hand. I hate losing bets on the river and so I probably tend to overcompensate just slightly. I agree that the fact that I leave myself open to a bluff raise makes my play questionable. It's close, .

[jimi]

Sometimes I feel like I'm from another planet because I find myself disagreeing w/ the pros (you & Matthew). To me it's not about being right, but about continuing to disagree until I am clear about why I'm wrong. Generally I find that when I'm disagreeing, it's because my play is not agressive enough. Perhaps w/limited experience a person does not have enough hand samples to truly be able to judge the advisability of a certain play. And of course this is why us beginners just sometimes take the word of the pros, but sometimes I can't unless I actually see the wisdom of it. All I know is that in my 3-4 months of playing holdem I have "learned" from my own experience NOT to play the hand the way you did on the turn.

There are a ton of hands these guys could have limped in on & many of them could include at least one spade, if not two like J10. Once that 3rd s hits on the turn, I would assume that I am up at least against a flush draw & possibly even already dead. Against 2 guys in 1st position I could not bring myself bet here. In last position or against only one guy, it's a whole different story (like in your other hand). The only logic I can possibly see to betting out here is that the long term probabilites are that neither will have or make a flush so that by making them pay for the draw, you will show a profit (tho I would think it can't be much).

[quote="pilchard"]I disagree Jimi in regard to the play of the turn. Backing off on the turn here against two opponents is weak play.

[mchilger]

Jimi, I remember when I first started out that I thought some of the examples in Sklansky's Advanced Holdem book were crazy plays. It was only until I had a lot of experience that I realized the wisdom in the plays he discussed.

A lot has been about in poker literature about "tight aggressive" play and how passive play is a recipe for disaster. Two big problems with passive play...you don't gain information and sometimes you allow your opponents to take pots where you had the best hand or give them free cards to improve to the best hand.

Against one or two opponents, you can't assume that one of them is on a flush draw, especially with two high cards on the board. There are a lot of straight draws out there with a QT flop. Pilchard bet out the flop and no one raised. You have to assume you have the best hand at this point.

When the 3rd suit falls. You have three choices. Check and fold - this is very weak and you'll be giving up the best hand a lot. Check and call then check and call the river - you'll lose two big bets if your opponent has the flush and you might end up giving your opponents a free card to improve them to the best hand.

By betting, you force your opponents to fold their weaker hands like gut shot draws, overcards, or even a weak flush draw. If raised, you can also consider folding and only lose 1 big bet vs. the flush against two big bets by checking and calling.

Remember, that by the turn, you don't even have to be the favorite to win the hand to consider betting. There is so much money in the pot that you have to protect your hand on the chance that you do have the best hand. For example, with a 40% chance of winning, you need to bet to protect that 40%. If raised, you can consider folding.

Sounds like you are doing all the right things though. Think for yourself and challenge even the experts and eventually you will continue to improve your game through study and experience.

Matthew

[jimi]

I am fascinated by this issue of aggression. I find myself limited by concepts I've brought w/me from my many years of playing non holdem poker in home games in which I was very sucessful employing a non-aggressive, "predatory" style (thus my fondness for the check raise). That being said, my most feared opponent & the biggest money winner was an aggressive player, though I originally labeled him (negatively) as "loose" until I saw how successful he was year after year.

I think he, and a lot of the best aggressive players, are more aware of the math than I am & therefore have more confidence that they will win in the long run. I hate to lose even one hand, so I tend to worry too much about losing any particular hand instead of being grounded in the numbers. In other words I'm often afraid someone's got me beat, so that I back off instead of betting where you would bet. I fear the short term loss while you have confidence in the long term gain. Clearly any attitude that is positive is superior to a negative one. Confidence will serve one better than fear.... for sure. So I think this may be one of the most important things you've taught me so far....quit assuming the worst everytime I don't have the nuts.

In order to get my bonus @ Multipoker faster, I recently dropped down from playing $5-10 @Pacific to playing two $1-2 tables @ Multi. Interestingly enough I didn't have time to get too clever & employ my usual predatory style. I played pretty solid starting hands & bet the crap out of them whenever I thought I had any advantage. I didn't have time to fear I was beat. I won a little over $300 in about 15 hours. The players were not even as loose as Pacific $5-10 even @ that low limit.
Maybe I just need to play $1-2 until that aggressive style of play becomes a habit.

Anyway, thanks once again Matthew, both for the book & the forum. Playing basketball & racing motorcycles are no longer possible for me due to some physical problems, so poker is bascially my only hobby. Having this forum to share it w/others means a lot to me.

[pilchard]

Jimi,

Questioning what you read rather than accepting it is how you improve. The first book I read was Carson's and I just read through it the first couple of times, tried to memorise the principles and apply them in my game. I picked the book up the other day again the other day for the first time in about 5 months and I realised that I actually disagree with some of the advice he gives.

The way you describe playing the hand is exactly the same way I would have played the hand some months ago. It is also the way my brother (who has been playing for a couple of months) played a hand the other day. He was playing a 2/4 game the other day and I was watching from my pc while playing at another table. He was in the SB. A MP limped, the CO raised, he called as did the BB and MP.

The flop was Qh 8h 3s. It was checked to the CO who bet, my brother check raises. The MP cold called and the CO calls.

The turn was 7h.
My brother CHECKED. MP checked and the CO checked.

The river was 4s
My brother bet and was called by just the CO. My brother had AQ and won the pot.

I immediately telephoned him and asked why he did not bet the turn. He was worried about the MP having a flush when he called two cold. I asked him what he would have done if the MP bet and he said called the turn and river (if no four flush came along).

The first thing you realise after a while is that most players are rubbish and will call flop bets with anything. The second thing you realise is that most players are honest on the turn. A raise usually denotes two pair or better. Given this knowledge you should always stay aggressive (especially against less than 3 opps). If raised, against most opponents you can fold. It is cheaper than check calling the turn and river.

[nyanks98]

I've been enjoying your debate, but I play No Limit and I wonder how the strategies change? It must be significant, since betting into a flush can cost you much more than 1 or 2 bets. And I assume the last post doesn't apply (players are honest on the turn), since you can bet whatever you want on the flop, turn or river.

Josh