Checking top pair.

I've thought some about this topic, and I think that in many flop situations where you've opened the pot preflop, it may make sense to check top pair, particularly when you have position on your opponents (preferably without draws on the board). The reasoning is that many opponents will have called before the flop with speculative hands such as small pocket pairs, and are only interested in either folding or trapping, so there is often little value in leading out (aside from the obvious notion of maintaining value against draws). This will also defuse an attempted check-raise on the flop, which will probably end up saving you money.

I don't think that this is quite the same thing as slow-playing, because you are primarily checking for information. The idea here is that it is very common for an opponent to trap by checking a flop, but very uncommon for an opponent to trap by checking both the flop and the turn, so if it is checked to you twice, you can be very confident you have the best hand and take the pot right there.

Another aspect is that your check on the flop will look like weakness, and will in many cases induce a bluff on the turn by one of your opponents, so many bets on the turn won't be legitimate, and you can raise and take a larger pot than if you'd lead out on the flop, or possibly fold if you are reraised.

Just some ideas.

So when your opponent bets on the turn, how do you know if they are just bluffing because everyone checked around, or legitimately betting because their flop check/raise failed? It doesn't seem like you've gained any information.

I didn't say you gain information when they check the flop, then bet the turn. You gain information when they check both the flop and turn. When they bet the turn, you raise and if they're bluffing they fold. Pretty simple.

I did not say you *necessarily* gain information by checking, you allow for the possibility of gaining information before putting additional money into the pot.

I sometimes check in LP to avoid a check-raise against identified good players.

I sometimes check in EP to induce a bluff against my Top Pair, especially later in a tournament.

In a raised pot, it's unwise to check because of the chances my opponent has a PP that missed the flop. I don't wanna give free cards.

Against bad players, there's a better chance they'll call your flop bet with something that you can beat, unlike tight players. Checking doesn't make you any money.

Checking in late position with good hand means you lose the pot 20% of the time to someone drawing into something better, I'd only do it to trap with TPTK like AK or AQ.

Nope, only fools will slowplay a pair.

-'rilla

How is someone a "fool" if he/she checks top pair? You aren't exactly making an argument here. And besides, it isn't a slowplay.

If you have TPGK, the majority of the time you'll be ahead on the flop. Checking gives a free card to anyone who flopped a straight or flush draw. Plus it gives them one LESS chance to make an incorrect call, which in the end means it gives you that much less profit.

That said, nothing in poker is an always situation. It's good to mix things up to keep people guessing and your reads on the way a specific person plays is can definitely alter what type of play is correct.

- Jeffrey

Originally Posted by dsaxton

How is someone a "fool" if he/she checks top pair? You aren't exactly making an argument here. And besides, it isn't a slowplay.

Because top pair is the biggest money loser if played improperly and this is playing it improperly. Your reasoning is that people on the flop are either going to fold or raise, which is exactly what they are going to do on the turn, after you have given them an advantage. A pocket pair isn't connecting with three cards, its now connecting with four. Not to mention you open up runner runner potential for even more "speculative" hands like small suited connectors AXs etc. And you allow those people more cards cheaper to complete their flush or straight, they are looking at four cards for the price of three.

Winning the pot on the flop is a good thing, not a bad thing. Your reasoning is that by giving them an extra card you will earn more money out of it beacuse their hands may improve, but any improvement made to the hands you outlined will BEAT your hand. It makes no sense.

Yes, you're stating the obvious fact that you run a minor risk of opponents outdrawing you, but you can argue pretty effectively that the information you potentially gain, as well as the increased likelihood your opponents will bluff at the pot can make checking more profitable than betting. This really isn't a very controversial idea, and it does make quite a bit of sense.

Where did I say it makes the hand more profitable because you're giving your opponents a chance to improve?

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Yes, you're stating the obvious fact that you run a minor risk of opponents outdrawing you, but you can argue pretty effectively that the information you potentially gain, as well as the increased likelihood your opponents will bluff at the pot can make checking more profitable than betting.

Its really not rocket science:

1. You lose out on a chance to bet, since most players will bet a percentage of the pot this is an exponential loss.

2. You give a PP, straight draws, flush draws the chance to line up a monster or if nothing more open up runner runner opportunity. And you let them do this for free. Any given hand hasa 33% increase in the odds they might connect with something. Again, they're looking at four cards for the price of three. You state this is obvious, apparently, its not obvious enough.

This really isn't a very controversial idea, and it does make quite a bit of sense.

Not a single person in the whole thread said they would check top pair in a raised pot. It makes no sense.

Where did I say it makes the hand more profitable because you're giving your opponents a chance to improve?

If its not making your hand more profitable then why on earth are you doing it?

If I picked up on this read I would gladly join any table you are sitting at. If nothing more you should throw out at 25% to 33% bet to try and sell a post oak bluff, see if a re-raise is coming and determine if an opponeit is on draw; not to mention actually make some form of profit

Like everything, it all depends.

I would never check top pair post flop if I brought it in for a raise. Are you then going to bet when you raise and miss the flop? Agressive play is more profitable. Players are more likely to call on the flop with a hand that you can beat than on the turn. If you get raised from late position, that is information. A bet from late position could be top pair with a worse kicker, a smaller pocket pair, 2nd or third pair, or a stone bluff. So then what do you know? Either you are beat or you aren't, and you are almost forced to call.

Slow playing a pair, sounds like a good way to lose money.

If you have the best hand on the flop, but it's vulnerable in the way any single pair is, you should bet. You're both protecting the hand from speculative draws, and getting more money in from players with worse hands (if they insist on calling you). Both of these is better than simply giving a free card away. I really don't understand this notion of checking for information - what information could you possibly gain here that you couldn't gain from betting the flop? And at what point are you going to actually grow a pair and bet, if they keep checking to you?

With a vulnerable hand like a single pair, you should WANT to take down the pot immediately, if they'll give it to you. If they insist on calling, fine - you're getting your money in with the best of it. If you do get check-raised, don't think of it as losing that bet; think of it as finding out their true strength and saving a lot of money you would have wasted by betting into them on subsequent streets. If they just fold, so what? They called your pre-flop raise, put some money in, and now they're giving the pot up. Victory is yours.

Sklansky says you gain in poker when your opponents make mistakes. Calling with bad pot odds is one of the most critical and common mistakes people make playing hold 'em. If you are ahead of them, assuming you don't have a true monster, you should always be giving them bad pot odds to draw, and hoping they call. The occasional check-raise does not nearly offset the gain of constantly taking pots on the flop, and/or having opponents call your flop bets with speculative hands, which they end up folding later anyway.

You can bet 1xBB and get better results without much loss of money. I had unmade hands yesterday and threw out 1xBB to see who was serious and half the time everyone (1-4 people) folded and just gave me the pot that I wasn't even expecting to win. If I got reraised high enough I just folded. This was a fairly tight table but you get the idea - I got the information I needed with little risk and folded out chasers.

If you have top pair, I think you should bet 1/2 to 1 times the pot. Then you will really know who's for real.

Originally Posted by r8ed

You can bet 1xBB and get better results without much loss of money. I had unmade hands yesterday and threw out 1xBB to see who was serious and half the time everyone (1-4 people) folded and just gave me the pot that I wasn't even expecting to win. If I got reraised high enough I just folded. This was a fairly tight table but you get the idea - I got the information I needed with little risk and folded out chasers.

If you have top pair, I think you should bet 1/2 to 1 times the pot. Then you will really know who's for real.

This can be a real problem though. If I sat with you and thought you were min-betting just for information, but betting more any time you had anything real, I'd raise your min-bets every single time.

Correct. Mix it up, especially after somebody reraises you once. One guy did catch on at my table and I trapped him eventually. He took my .50 raise and reraised to $3 3 times. The next time I had a hand, I did the .50, he did his thing and I reraised him to $6. He called and folded on the turn. I"m special.

if i smooth called a raise, and caught TPTK, if i was in early position, i'd consider the check/trap, but not in the case where i thought a free card would come out...if i thought they'd check, i'd bet it....chances are the lead better will bet the unraised flop......

if i smooth called a raise, and caught TPTK, if i was in early position, i'd consider the check/trap, but not in the case where i thought a free card would come out...if i thought they'd check, i'd bet it....chances are the lead better will bet the unraised flop......

As a general rule, never check top pair against a full table or w/ more than 3 opponents in the hand. Just bet out and make them pay to catch you or find out that your top pair is no good.

You can check/raise top pair on flop or turn under the right conditions.
1. you are heads up
2. Preflop action was fairly passive but opponents are generally fairly aggressive.
3. You have TPTK. For example, you have AK and flop is a K rainbow and unconnected. You are up against 2 opponents and are in early position. I will check/raise in that position or wait for the Turn to make my big bet.

Check top pair and you potentially gain information and may induce a bluff on the turn. This really is not such a wildly ridiculous idea as everyone seems to think it is, even though it isn't mentioned in poker books.

Originally Posted by Hubris1

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Yes, you're stating the obvious fact that you run a minor risk of opponents outdrawing you, but you can argue pretty effectively that the information you potentially gain, as well as the increased likelihood your opponents will bluff at the pot can make checking more profitable than betting.

Its really not rocket science:

1. You lose out on a chance to bet, since most players will bet a percentage of the pot this is an exponential loss.

2. You give a PP, straight draws, flush draws the chance to line up a monster or if nothing more open up runner runner opportunity. And you let them do this for free. Any given hand hasa 33% increase in the odds they might connect with something. Again, they're looking at four cards for the price of three. You state this is obvious, apparently, its not obvious enough.

This really isn't a very controversial idea, and it does make quite a bit of sense.

Not a single person in the whole thread said they would check top pair in a raised pot. It makes no sense.

Where did I say it makes the hand more profitable because you're giving your opponents a chance to improve?

If its not making your hand more profitable then why on earth are you doing it?

If I picked up on this read I would gladly join any table you are sitting at. If nothing more you should throw out at 25% to 33% bet to try and sell a post oak bluff, see if a re-raise is coming and determine if an opponeit is on draw; not to mention actually make some form of profit

I'm pretty sure I explicitly said you shouldn't try this when there are straight or flush draws on the flop. It does not make the hand more profitable because you give your opponents a chance to improve, it can make the hand more profitable because it gives you more information about whether or not you have the best hand, and also is likely to induce a bluff. You are taking a minor risk in letting your opponents improve. This was also quite clear. I don't see why this is considered such an outrageous idea, it makes some sense if you allow yourself to think outside of poker literature for a few moments.

So you're not doing it when fl/str draws are present on the flop. Are you hoping then that the best thing they can improve to is a fl/str draw? You still suffer from problems when a pocket pair gets a free card to make a set, a random pair on the flop gets a free card to make two pair, an overcard comes to create a higher pair, the board pairs to give a random pair from the flop a set, and probably a few other situations I'm forgetting. I'm too tired to do the math (and I'd probably do it wrong anyway), but I expect that the times that one of the above happens far outweigh the times that people will call on the turn AGAINST the odds. Even if they are close, if the opponent folds, you make money from the times any hand would improve to beat you after the flop bet. If they don't fold, they are calling against the odds, and you make money from the times they don't improve on that.

As hammered in a lot above, you lose money if you give them a free card and they improve to any hand that beats you. You also lose money if you give them a free card and they fold the turn when they would have called the flop (a likely scenario). You also lose money if you give them a free card and they call the turn when they would have called the flop (also a likely scenario). The only time this play makes you any money is when they'd have folded the flop but they call the turn and they still lose. That's probably more unlikely than any single event of the other possibilities; definitely more unlikely than any one of the set.

- Jeffrey

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Check top pair and you potentially gain information and may induce a bluff on the turn. This really is not such a wildly ridiculous idea as everyone seems to think it is, even though it isn't mentioned in poker books.

- A lot of us get our theories about poker from playing endless hours online.

- A lot of those books are written by people who play endless hours also, and get their theories from similar experience.

I know you want to think you've discovered the best poker tactic since the check-raise, but like a bad hand in an active pot, it's time to let this one go. Even if you think it's helping you out, no one here is going to adopt it except under the most unusual circumstances. I don't think it really gets you any information that you wouldn't get faster and more reliably by betting the flop. And for every time you trigger a bluff (or bet from a lower pair) on the turn, you're also going to give someone the card they need to make two pair, a set, a straight, etc. And then your raise is going to go very, very badly.

i haven't read a poker book in my life.

you can't give them the free card. it is not a winning move. if i had it my way there would be no flopturnriver, it would be "me with aa raises $100, UTG reraises $100000000 all-in. I call. UTG shows K6 soooooted. I win $200000000". I think you will learn this as you play more.

You can argue that the extra money won from the people with weak hands bluffing the turn would make this a good move in the end, but i doubt it. probably the majority of people who would bluff at the turn would call a flop bet, and for whatever small % that you did trap, your raise would get reraised or called and bet on the river by a monster or someone who you allowed to draw into a good hand enough to totally kill that benefit.

Originally Posted by dalecooper

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Check top pair and you potentially gain information and may induce a bluff on the turn. This really is not such a wildly ridiculous idea as everyone seems to think it is, even though it isn't mentioned in poker books.

- A lot of us get our theories about poker from playing endless hours online.

- A lot of those books are written by people who play endless hours also, and get their theories from similar experience.

I know you want to think you've discovered the best poker tactic since the check-raise, but like a bad hand in an active pot, it's time to let this one go. Even if you think it's helping you out, no one here is going to adopt it except under the most unusual circumstances. I don't think it really gets you any information that you wouldn't get faster and more reliably by betting the flop. And for every time you trigger a bluff (or bet from a lower pair) on the turn, you're also going to give someone the card they need to make two pair, a set, a straight, etc. And then your raise is going to go very, very badly.

in a heads up situation i could see this being used.....i checked top pair to the river in a heads up MTT situation, by the river it became quad j's so it isn't the same situation, i was first to play, he could have checked and lost his blind...instead he bet pot, I ame over him 7x all in, and the retard called me with (what must have been) a low boat against quad j's......

{This post has been removed}

I will say, I don't mind occasionally checking top pair in heads up play, especially against a known aggressive opponent who loves to bluff. I would never take it farther than the turn though. If you haven't induced a bet by then, you need to take the pot down quickly. In any pot with multiple players, or basically any pot in a full ring game - regardless of how many saw the flop, be it two or ten - I'm betting that top pair.

I simply gave an idea about how you might play top pair under specific circumstances. I never suggested you even do this with any degree of frequency. I'm amazed this thread is actually still alive.

I do it from time to time. Tonight I had AK in the BB (maybe SB, not sure), MP minraises, I immediately put him on ace-weak. Flat call, flop an ace. Check to opponent, he bets the pot, I minraise him, he pushes, I call, he flips AJ, MHIG and I win a big pot. May never have happened if I came out betting. This is also an ok way to play a set or a little 2-pair if you're pretty sure your opponent flopped top pair. As always, disclaimer of "it depends."

Originally Posted by Greedo017

i haven't read a poker book in my life.

you can't give them the free card. it is not a winning move. if i had it my way there would be no flopturnriver, it would be "me with aa raises $100, UTG reraises $100000000 all-in. I call. UTG shows K6 soooooted. I win $200000000". I think you will learn this as you play more.

You can argue that the extra money won from the people with weak hands bluffing the turn would make this a good move in the end, but i doubt it. probably the majority of people who would bluff at the turn would call a flop bet, and for whatever small % that you did trap, your raise would get reraised or called and bet on the river by a monster or someone who you allowed to draw into a good hand enough to totally kill that benefit.

You should try reading a poker book.

Dsaxton's idea has merit taken by itself, disregarding metagame concerns.
I will often check TPGK if I was the BB preflop, or on the river when you can get a bet from a missed draw that would fold to a bet.
There are even more situations where it is correct to check top pair. Regardless you should be betting the majority of the time.