The Move

[BlibbityBlabbity]

ONLY against a certain type of player. A tight player WILL NOT bet without a flush in that spot. Against them you need to bet out.

I have seen a lot more of the opposite "move" where you overbet when a big hand becomes possible. Amazing how many times (given, this is in chump change ranks) people call with anything when someone goes all in when the board pairs aces on the river. You can almost hear them through the computer saying "He CAN'T have AA or he would never bet that much! I call with my two pair! "

All depends on the type of player you are in the hand with.

[Gordogg]

I agree. But the beauty of the move is they will foldon the flop when you don't have shit yet. Or they will call your move, and when you do hit it on the turn they are more apt to call your raise because it threw them off. If they fold on the turn then oh well. But I think you give y ourself a good shot at winning some chips in that situation by employing the move.

[junYUN]

you think someone is more apt to call a check-raise?

you're making my head hurt

[Gordogg]

Depends on what they have of course, but for the most part yeah. They will be willing to call when they have an inferior hand alot of times.

[Talking Poker]

Sorry, but I'm with junYUN here... Yes, a check raise may be more likely to get them to put SOME chips in the pot than if you had lead out (they may have folded), but no way is it more likely to get them to put ALL their chips in the pot.

When you check raise, you are basically saying, "I have a monster and I just tricked you into putting some of your chips in the pot," and most players will fold inferior hands most of the time here. If they are a good enough player to think you are a good enough player to be capable of check raise bluffing all in, they might call, but I fear I am way ahead of myself even entioning that logic in this thread. Most of the time, any non-horrible player is going to fold an inferior hand here... They certainly are not going to be MORE likely to call.