Check-Raise example

Trying to understand the play in this one...

Why the decision to go with a check-raise instead of just betting into him again? If he raised you for a "free card" chasing a draw you gave up value here. Why not re-raise the flop with so many draws out?

Why only a minimum raise? Could you try to get more money from him?

What drove the decision for a $5 value bet on the river? Why not a bigger bet?

If you think you have the best hand, why not swing for the fences and try to take down his entire stack?

Granted a lot of this probably depends on the information you have on your opponent...

All depends on who I'm up against really. For example, I went to a table with a maniac who had around $100 at the $25 NL table. About six players including me, I have J9 suited and know this guy plays crap cards and raises with them. I take a chance and call his $2 raise and catch a flush on the flop with 3 hearts coming up.

I check to him, knowing he will bet his hand, which he does for $6, I then raise him to $12, then he raised me allin. I take him down with the flush, he has a pair of 5's. Very Happy

Once he committed enough money to the pot, the maniac wasn't giving it up regardless.

Here are my thoughts on this guy, he didn't play many hands, he didn't make big bets or call bets, he was a quiet, patient, conservative, but passive player.

I came out betting small on the flop, hoping for a raise, which I got. Re-raising this player here would have given my hand away too soon. Or so I thought at the time, I didn't think his hand was actually as strong as it was. If I re-raised large, I thought he would fold, he only raised me back $1.

In retrospect, he was probably thinking the same thing, that if he raised too much, I would fold. My play is pretty quiet, patient, and conservative as well.

On the turn, I still thought I'd go for a check-raise, hoping he wasn't holding KQ, which is one hand I thought was a possibility. He bet $4, I check-raised another $4 - my hand is either the best hand (70%), or I scare him with the straight showing (10%), or he re-raises me and I know I'm beat (20%).

So, I figured the min check-raise of $4 (which was a pretty big bet from this guy from my observance) would grow the pot, probably get called, and I'm probably winning. If I would have come out and bet $8, I thought for sure he'd fold. I also had not seen him make any kind of play such as a raise on a draw or bluff, he played very conservatively (like limpin in with AK).

Since he just called my raise, I figured I had him beat, and now I just want him to call a little more, still thinking he may fold to any REAL sign of strength. He's committed to calling a $5 value bet, I'll take it.

You know, it's weird, some players you just try to squeeze out some extra bets out of, others you know will call big bets on second best and drawing hands. This guy was in that first category. But now knowing he had Big Slick, there's no doubt I could've gotten more out of him...

Much clearer explaination.

Thanks.

I find it interesting how many players will call a raise on the flop, then fold to a bet on the turn. Even since I've started raising mostly to 3x the size of the original bet. Quite often the correct move is to fold or re-raise. It's just human instinct after betting a medium strong hand and getting raised is "how dare he, I call!"

Poker Forum

Poker Forum Index

NL Hold'em Strategies

Check-Raise example

Poker Forum Index

NL Hold'em Strategies

Check-Raise example