When to "Check and Call"
All respected ufa theorists recommend a tight-aggressive style. "Tight-aggressive" means two things: First, you are selective about the hands you play (in other words, play "tight"). Second, when you play a hand -- be aggressive. In poker, aggression is manifested in betting and raising, not only when you actually do hold a strong hand, but even when you might not have the best hand at the moment.
Tight-aggressive poker is based on the premise that since you
play few hands, most (observant) opponents will give you credit for having a
strong hand when you bet or raise, and may throw their hand away. Occasionally,
they might even throw away a superior hand. The tight-aggressive style can be
summarized by the following guidance -- either raise or fold. Almost never
call. If you can justify calling a bet, you might as well put in a raise. Most
winning players fit into the tight-aggressive category (although there are
"loose-aggressive" players who are successful because they practice
good game selection).
The opposite of playing tight-aggressive is the
"loose-passive" approach. Loose-passive players are no match for
tight-aggressive-players. The action most commonly associated with
loose-passive play is checking and calling. For this reason, loose-passive
players are also known as "calling stations." Checking and calling is
generally not a strategy associated with winning poker. In fact, checking and
calling contradicts the instincts within all good players to seize control of
the table and put their opponents on the defensive. However, if executed
selectively - checking and calling can be a winning poker strategy.
So, when is it advisable to check and call? It varies by game.
Omaha high-low, for instance, is a game where checking and calling is fairly
routine. Since all winning Omaha players are strict about their starting-hand
requirements and post-flop play is always dictated by pot odds, the
overly-aggressive style of play normally associated with strong hold'em players
rarely produces any tangible benefit in an Omaha game. On the contrary,
checking and calling is a common practice - even amongst the best players.
Likewise, in seven-card stud, checking and calling is occasionally the optimal
strategy -- particularly when up against what appears to be a strong hand, as
well as on sixth and seventh streets, when pot odds almost always warrant a
call. The question then becomes -- when is it advisable to check an call in a
(limit) hold'em game? Since so much depends on your table image and the quality
of your opponents, conditions will vary. But, here are some general guidelines
which assume you are the first to act:
When to Check and Call
Against overly-aggressive players - When checked to,
overly-aggressive players and maniacs tend to bet indiscriminately. They
usually bluff their money away. Why bet into a maniac when your opponent will
do the betting for you? If you bet out, the maniac may give you credit for a
hand and fold (which costs you money on later rounds, if you have a hand).
On a draw with sufficient pot-odds in a multi-way pot - This
commonly occurs when you are in early position with either a straight or flush
draw. If there are three or more players still to act behind you, a bet is
unlikely to win the pot. You might even get raised. You want to see the next
card (or two) as cheaply as possible, although if you can get down to a single
opponent, you may have an opportunity to semi-bluff on the turn, or bluff on
the river (if the flush fails). However, if three or more players remain in the
pot, checking and calling is usually the best strategy.
On a draw with sufficient implied odds - This means the amount of
money does not justify a call at the present time, but you are reasonably sure
you will make enough money on later betting rounds if you successfully make
your hand.
Playing against an opponent you've either dominated or
intimidated in the past - There are times when you can be reasonably certain an
opponent will fold assuming he/she can be persuaded you have a superior hand.
This is particularly true when you have a hand of modest strength and are out of
position. A check and call on the flop is likely get a free card on turn, since
your call might make the player reluctant to bet out again a second time. You
not only occasionally get to see cards for free, but your opponent's fear might
provide a bluffing opportunity if a scare card comes on board.
Slowplaying a big hand - If you flop a monster hand, you probably
want as many players and as much money in the pot as possible. You certainly
don't want to tip-off the strength of your hand to your opponents. Most players
that flop a set, the nut flush, or a straight will wait until the turn to
check-raise. However, there is a strong counter-argument for betting out with a
strong hand and hoping to get raised and so as to trap multiple players in the
pot for additional bets. The debate continues about the wisdom of slowplaying
big hands.
In low-limit games - It's usually advisable to check and call if
you have a hand of uncertainty (and are up against a very poor player who might
be capable of holding anything). An example would be a hand like A-Q and the
flop comes K-Q 2. First to act in a head-up situation, it's usually best to
just check and call. Folding with second-pair might be too tight a play and
check-raising is far too risky, since the player might have a better hand.
Since the preponderance of "ram and jam" hold'em games
might have antiquated many of the precepts of tight-aggressive play, these
guidelines just begin to scratch the surface. Indeed, there are a multitude of
situations in hold'em when checking and calling is a profitable strategy.
Knowing precisely which circumstances warrant a check and call -- instead of a
bet or raise -- is one of the fundamentals of winning poker.
Comments
Post a Comment