Check calling has its place
When I was first learning NL hold-em, the mantra that I continuously read was "if your hand is good enough for a call, it is good enough for a raise". Which is true, very true. And if you were playing only one hand against someone for the rest of your life, that would be the optimal play for sure. Check-calling is the play of the weak.
But after many experiments, I feel that check-calling has a lot of merit that is missed by the "raise or fold" methodology - mostly against aggressive players.
It goes without saying that slow playing very strong hands is an effective play against aggressive player, but what about hands like top or mid pair? Can they be "slow played"? Typically no; but against the right opponent yes. If you are heads up with an aggressive player, and you've hit something like top pair or 2nd pair on a relatively non threatening flop (ie. you have JT and flop is KT5 rainbow) it may be profitable to "slow play" that pair of tens. What I did for a long time is bet those pair of tens, to make him pay for a possible draw or overcard, but the problem with that is that he will fold when he has nothing, and call / raise when you are beat. By check-calling, you will loose the ability to know exactly what he has by not defining your hand, but you may induce a bluff. If you feel that your check will induce a bluff more often then not based on your experience against this opponent, then it becomes profitable. Many mid-stakes aggressive players will take one stab at a pot but check the turn when called, rarely will they take a 2nd stab unless they are very aggressive. If they take that 2nd stab at the pot, you can then reassess the hand, and perhaps he does have the king he is representing. Alternatively, some very aggressive players read check-calls as so weak that they will fire a 2nd shell at the pot as a bluff, and you can end up taking down massive pots (with non massive hands) just by inducing bluffs – you can usually tell because the bets on each street become so large and unusual it just screams like they are buying the pot. I’m not saying this play is optimal, but it has its place, and is a good way to mix up your game to those who are attentive. Clearly top pair is a better candidate for this move, but against the right opponent, 2nd pair can work, depending on what the top card is. For instance, if there is an ace on board and you have 2nd pair, and Mr. Aggression didn’t raise preflop, it is may be likely that he is bluffing, since most really aggressive players (the type that will bet any time they are checked to) raise with an ace preflop, especially with position. I have to be careful with this play though, as check-calling is non-optimal. If the board is slightly threatening, you don’t want to give Mr. Any-Two-Will-Do a free card to draw out on you, make sure to check-raise in that instance to make them pay for a draw.
But after many experiments, I feel that check-calling has a lot of merit that is missed by the "raise or fold" methodology - mostly against aggressive players.
It goes without saying that slow playing very strong hands is an effective play against aggressive player, but what about hands like top or mid pair? Can they be "slow played"? Typically no; but against the right opponent yes. If you are heads up with an aggressive player, and you've hit something like top pair or 2nd pair on a relatively non threatening flop (ie. you have JT and flop is KT5 rainbow) it may be profitable to "slow play" that pair of tens. What I did for a long time is bet those pair of tens, to make him pay for a possible draw or overcard, but the problem with that is that he will fold when he has nothing, and call / raise when you are beat. By check-calling, you will loose the ability to know exactly what he has by not defining your hand, but you may induce a bluff. If you feel that your check will induce a bluff more often then not based on your experience against this opponent, then it becomes profitable. Many mid-stakes aggressive players will take one stab at a pot but check the turn when called, rarely will they take a 2nd stab unless they are very aggressive. If they take that 2nd stab at the pot, you can then reassess the hand, and perhaps he does have the king he is representing. Alternatively, some very aggressive players read check-calls as so weak that they will fire a 2nd shell at the pot as a bluff, and you can end up taking down massive pots (with non massive hands) just by inducing bluffs – you can usually tell because the bets on each street become so large and unusual it just screams like they are buying the pot. I’m not saying this play is optimal, but it has its place, and is a good way to mix up your game to those who are attentive. Clearly top pair is a better candidate for this move, but against the right opponent, 2nd pair can work, depending on what the top card is. For instance, if there is an ace on board and you have 2nd pair, and Mr. Aggression didn’t raise preflop, it is may be likely that he is bluffing, since most really aggressive players (the type that will bet any time they are checked to) raise with an ace preflop, especially with position. I have to be careful with this play though, as check-calling is non-optimal. If the board is slightly threatening, you don’t want to give Mr. Any-Two-Will-Do a free card to draw out on you, make sure to check-raise in that instance to make them pay for a draw.
posted by RikkiDee at 9:28 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home