Min Raising..

[DrawingDeadInDM 0]

Dear NLHE Strat Forum, While there are certainly times to invoke use of the min-raise, from the 100 or so threads I just thumbed through, it's become painfully obvious that this is somehow, an accepted practice. There are certain metagame purposes and times to use min-raising--but it's almost never preflop, it's almost never on the flop, it's occasionally on the turn, but usually the river.Do not simply reply to a hand where it's been used ineffectively and say, "Yah, looks good. Extracted the most value possible..."--that is very rarely true and using it habitually creates a good deal of problems when people take note and begin coming over the top with regularity. I say this not to be an ass, but as someone who hopes that we can all improve--and I'm not just singling out Breaking Liberty (happen to like the guy and respect him) --I'm pointing the figure at a lot of you who let it slip by.Come on guys. We're better than that.:icon_suit_heart:,Erik

[AlphaOmega 0]

While we're at it, I don't think betting or raising "to see where I'm at" is that good either, and that is also very common in this section of the forum.

[Jordan 1]

min. raising makes me puke a little in my mouth when I see it.Although I do love in when playing headsup, i raise 56s and get min raised...call and flop two pair and then bust an overpair...that's always fun...but I still hate min raising.with a passion.- Jordan

[jjgoldy5 0]

While we're at it, I don't think betting or raising "to see where I'm at" is that good either, and that is also very common in this section of the forum.

You don't think informational raises are good plays?

[CobaltBlue 662]

I was thinking about another good time to make an exception for the min-raise...When you're three-handed and holding a powerful hand against a short-stacked opponent and another decently stacked opponent, you can min-raise the short-stack so that he'll re-open the betting when he goes all-in. This can put added pressure on the other stack and might win you a decent bit more if he just calls and you get to go even bigger.

[AlphaOmega 0]

You don't think informational raises are good plays?

Not when it's our primary reason for betting or raising, generally.In terms of hand analysis, when I see someone say, "I'd double his bet to see what happens..." or "I'd raise to see where I'm at..." it also indicates that they don't have a concept of the dynamics of the game.

[AlphaOmega 0]

I was thinking about another good time to make an exception for the min-raise...

I sometimes use a mini-raise for metagame purposes if I'm perceived as an unknown at the table, provided that I'm playing with what I assume to be competant players. Being listed as a donk yields more action.A mini-raise can be effective as well in a semi-big pot on an early street because the thoughts of AA pop into the minds of most opponents.

[bcook823 0]

The min raise play also makes me sick. One reason is that I was teaching some friends to play, and I kept seeing them do this, they didn't understand or care about the logic so I just gave them a blanket statement "you should never do this, ever. the online sites have it as an option to encourage you to screw up." It worked for the most part. I will admit in SNG's when you have an opponenet who isn't proficient at calculating odds, and they don't defend their blinds, this play may be the safest way for you to steal. For the "highjacked" portion of the threadWhen people say "i placed a bet to see where I was at" I always think that is the worst way to find out. You bet to find out then someone raised you and you folded, seems like if you would have checked you would have gotten the same information.

[HurricaneKyle 0]

The min raise is unacceptable before the flop or on the flop. People who do that are fish sandwhiches. Sometimes its ok to mini raise with the nut flush on the turn if there are several players who are likley to call that bet, but that is about the only time to do it.

[CobaltBlue 662]

When people say "i placed a bet to see where I was at" I always think that is the worst way to find out. You bet to find out then someone raised you and you folded, seems like if you would have checked you would have gotten the same information.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Betting and getting raised is way more information than checking and being bet at. I'm not advocating that we should always bet/fold over check/call, but there are certain situations where one applies better than the other.When we bet and get raised, the raiser is saying, "I recognize your aggression, but I have a better hand." Granted, they don't always have the better hand, but that's what they're conveying. That's much stronger than the second scenario.When we check and get bet at, the bettor is saying, "Take your weak ass check and get out of the pot" or "I'm betting for value."

[KowboyKoop 0]

Min-raising: Always stupidBetting for info: I don't see too much wrong with doing this, as long as it isn't overdone. Better to put a feeler bet out there than to just check and fold to a bet...

[nomad_monad 0]

Min-raising: Always stupidBetting for info: I don't see too much wrong with doing this, as long as it isn't overdone. Better to put a feeler bet out there than to just check and fold to a bet...

When you lead out with a feeler bet on the flop, how much do you put out if:1) there is no draw on the board2) there is a draw on the boardor does it even matter to you?

[KowboyKoop 0]

When you lead out with a feeler bet on the flop, how much do you put out if:1) there is no draw on the board2) there is a draw on the boardor does it even matter to you?

Well....there are a ton of other factors....like how much of the flop did I hit and such....reads...but yeah, whether or not there is a draw on the board definitely matters...if the pot is multiway, I'm not gonna put out a small feeler bet out there b/c it just gives draws the right price to call....or people with middle pair might call..and I won't really know either way.

[lostless 0]

Nothing makes me more upset then when it is limped around then button min raises, then some idiot decides to 3 bet like its a limit game. Now we all go calling around. Your AA is no good against 10 other hands. Then don't bitch saying how it never holds up after I crack you're aces with a set of ducks. Grow some balls and rebuy please.

[crazyplaya6 0]

ummm...clearly the min raise is a donk play. period. if you min raise with aces, quit poker. now. either selectively limp in the ep if you think youll get action later down the table and raise it up nicely anywhere else. I agree with the others that min raising is only good on the river, and thats under certain conditions against a donk who you know was just trying a steal and youre trying to extract. btw, min raises are not feeler bets, no matter how much you want them to be.

[DrawingDeadInDM 0]

I don't know what it means to 'bet for information'.All bets, checks, and raises should be gathering information.

[bcook823 0]

I don't know what it means to 'bet for information'.All bets, checks, and raises should be gathering information.

Has anyone noticed that the min raise has evolved over time? I would have told you a year ago that it usually meant someone is begging for a call, I wouldn't say the same today. I think people started seeing people do this with ultra-made hands and realized they could make this bet with nothing and get the same result. I just don't think it means strength any longer. Same with the all in overbet. A year ago if someone just quickly shoved in without conveying strength any other time throughout the hand, it meant they were weak. I see the all in overbet meaning something really different today. People started seeing the overbet as weakness, and now people do this with made hands. I don't see the all in overbet meaning weakness like I did say a year ago.My time frames may be off base, it may not have been a year ago, but more like 2 years, or maybe just 9 months. I feel like time flies by so fast that I have no real concept of it when it comes to poker.

[DonkSlayer 1]

Not that DrawingDead would necessarily disagree with this, but I think a minraise is also valuable in two particular situations that may not have been mentioned yet:1) if you have a medium/small pocket pair and you come in late preflop with several limpers before you, at a loose table. This also may apply if you're playing suited connectors, but not with TOO many hands before you in that case.2) Late in a tournament when the blinds are very, very high. You can bust yourself a lot easier in an online tournament if the blinds are huge and there are still a few stacks in, and you insist on raising 3-4x the bb. If you minraise it is still a significant amount, and if you get reraised and dont' have good holdings you can get away from it (don't tell me "pot invested" or "pot odds", b/c if you know you're beat, fold the damn cards).

[bcook823 0]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Betting and getting raised is way more information than checking and being bet at. I'm not advocating that we should always bet/fold over check/call, but there are certain situations where one applies better than the other.When we bet and get raised, the raiser is saying, "I recognize your aggression, but I have a better hand." Granted, they don't always have the better hand, but that's what they're conveying. That's much stronger than the second scenario.When we check and get bet at, the bettor is saying, "Take your weak ass check and get out of the pot" or "I'm betting for value."

While betting and getting raised gives you more information, it doesn't really change anything in my minds eye. When people are just betting for information, like your suggesting, I feel they are ignoring all of the other information that is available to them. I just feel like the player and their patterns, provide all the information you may need without putting more money into a pot. I think using the information that you have on a player, like what hands they would call raises with, open with, ect are more useful than putting money into the pot. If that type of information is not available to you, then I think betting is even more wreckless.

Not that DrawingDead would necessarily disagree with this, but I think a minraise is also valuable in two particular situations that may not have been mentioned yet:1) if you have a medium/small pocket pair and you come in late preflop with several limpers before you, at a loose table. This also may apply if you're playing suited connectors, but not with TOO many hands before you in that case.2) Late in a tournament when the blinds are very, very high. You can bust yourself a lot easier in an online tournament if the blinds are huge and there are still a few stacks in, and you insist on raising 3-4x the bb.

If you minraise it is still a significant amount, and if you get reraised and dont' have good holdings you can get away from it (don't tell me "pot invested" or "pot odds", b/c if you know you're beat, fold the damn cards).

Making a min raise gives a person, in the blinds especially, the right odds to call with any two cards. You say fold the damn cards if you know you are beat, and this could be some of the worst advice I have ever read. If it is preflop and you "know" your beat, that can and will change after the flop, turn, ect. The river is the only spot where your advice will hold true, there are not odds to consider for all the cards have been dealt. On the river, if you were to min raise me say T10,000, and there is a 100k in the pot, I only need to be right 1 out of 10 times to make this play profitable. I won't ignore these principals at anytime.

[CobaltBlue 662]

While betting and getting raised gives you more information, it doesn't really change anything in my minds eye. When people are just betting for information, like your suggesting, I feel they are ignoring all of the other information that is available to them. I just feel like the player and their patterns, provide all the information you may need without putting more money into a pot. I think using the information that you have on a player, like what hands they would call raises with, open with, ect are more useful than putting money into the pot. If that type of information is not available to you, then I think betting is even more wreckless.

Okay...there seems to be a misunderstanding. We're not just "betting for information". We're betting because it gives us multiple ways to win the pot. Check/calling doesn't do this. One of the nice, major byproducts of this is that the information that we get back is often more reliable and valuable than the information that we'd get by check/calling.

[nomad_monad 0]

Has anyone noticed that the min raise has evolved over time? I would have told you a year ago that it usually meant someone is begging for a call, I wouldn't say the same today. I think people started seeing people do this with ultra-made hands and realized they could make this bet with nothing and get the same result. I just don't think it means strength any longer. Same with the all in overbet. A year ago if someone just quickly shoved in without conveying strength any other time throughout the hand, it meant they were weak. I see the all in overbet meaning something really different today. People started seeing the overbet as weakness, and now people do this with made hands. I don't see the all in overbet meaning weakness like I did say a year ago.

I've seen it both ways with both types of bets, although more so with the all-in overbet (overbet=strenght, not weakness). Which kind of leads me to another question. If so many people view the minraise as a donk play indicating weakness, then isn't there a basis for occasionally using it to add a little texture to your game? If one of the most important things in poker is defying your opponent's expectations, and the min-raise is conventionally viewed poorly, then isn't this something that you could exploit? It seems like bcook823's observation that the nature of overbets and min raises are changing bears that out. People realized that one type of bet was conventionally understood to mean one thing, so they started doing the opposite.(obviously, minraising and pricing in a hand that could improve to beat you is terrible)Thoughts?

[David_Nicoson 1]

Not that DrawingDead would necessarily disagree with this, but I think a minraise is also valuable in two particular situations that may not have been mentioned yet:1) if you have a medium/small pocket pair and you come in late preflop with several limpers before you, at a loose table. This also may apply if you're playing suited connectors, but not with TOO many hands before you in that case.

I have to disagree. If I'm going to re-open the betting, I want to achieve something more than doubling the stakes. When I'm facing several limpers, I'm going to have to get a good flop and probably show down the best hand. I can't just rely on my status as the preflop raiser to make a continuation bet a success.Maybe part of your definition of a passive table is that people don't limp-raise preflop. If that's the case, then a min raise is fine.

[bcook823 0]

yes, it gives you more than one way to win the pot, I agree.

People realized that one type of bet was conventionally understood to mean one thing, so they started doing the opposite.

I think that is exactly what changed the "perception". Good players started to use what most consider a bad play, because they could try and portray an image that was misleading. As I think about it, the post oak bluff is in the same category as the all in overbet. Some people see making a very small bet into a very large pot as being weak, if someone knows thats how you react, then they use that play when very strong. Thoughts?

[cu in 4years Dan 1]

i love playing low limit online where u see NL games get min raised preflop all the time, it goes min bet, min raise then min raise again... aaaarrrg....

[DrawingDeadInDM 0]

Some of you misunderstand.There is literally no reason to min-raise preflop. Literally none. Not for metagame purposes, not for building a pot, not for gathering information on a villain's hand, not for getting rid of player's preflop--NONE.