Checking down a dry side pot......

[Des]

yeh it shouldnt be checked down 100% of the time... people who think that do not understand the concept

if you have a full house... you might as well try and get some added value from it

if you have ace high, you might as well check it down to see if you can improve.. if you hit your ace on the turn, and theres no flush or str8 draws... then bet too

isnt this just playing poker? what you have described here is a situation that would occur regardless of whether there is a bystander already all in.

similarly, firing a bluff into the mix is also ok - as long as your prepared to turn them over at showdown.

a semibluff with AK post flop - whats wrong with that?

i understand what you are saying though - two lots of crap cards have more opportunity to take out the short stack than one.

but this means that you are potentially giving chips to the other guy that is not all in for free. this could be dangerous - i dont like giving anything away for free

nothing wrong with a semibluff with AK - if everyone is live and you can get them to fold

the bluff doesnt work though, as there is someone all-in and thus cant fold... so even if he has 72... they will see the river and have a chance to win

the whole idea of a bluff is to make everyone fold... thus take down a pot without showdown

if there is someone all in... then regardless if the other people calls or not, you are going to go to showdown

[bennymacca]

yeah, but if you have something like AK over the board, its in your interests to get rid of someone playing bottom pair.

even though you might eventually lose to the person all in already, at least theres a chance that he has missed the board and AK is good.

if you check it down, there is no chance for this to happen - its giving up.

i suppose this is the age old tight player vs agressive player argument - a bit the same as the flight cards as well.

i am relatively agressive, and so i will take my chances of getting more chips and definitely making points than trying to knock the other guy out and scrape into the points.

tighter players would probably take 5 15ths in a row, but i would rather have 4 bubbles and a win - this probably gets me less average points, but hey thats my problem.

Edit: i am trying to play a lot tighter these days, because its a lot harder to push people off. but still..

[Des]

i dont wanna get into another arguement about this guys, im just putting forward a point of view on why its a good thing... not just to be different

it has nothing to do with aggressive vs tight player, just some people dont understand the concept

look at the other side of the coin

you are short stack, on tilt and push all in with 72.

3 callers... board J 9 2 rainbow

what would you prefer... the 3 players to check it down? hell no

you'd rather the guy/girl holding AK to bet out everyone else

this is my final post on the matter, ive put forward my opinions on it, people can take on board whatever they feel like

[bennymacca]

yeah i understand the concept, and i understand why someone would want to do it, but i am not one of those people.

assuming we all understand the concept, whether you would do it or not is absolutely a tight player/agressive player argument.

its a less chips for him vs more chips for me sort of thing.

but fair enough, as long as we understand the concept, then its up to the individual player/s if they want to do it - definitely strategy and not etiquitte

[Des]

the thing it.. it isnt more chips for you if its a dry side pot

if you bet out on a bluff or semibluff and lose to the all in player... you havent gained a chip

different argument if there is a live side pot, which you might be able to pick up

anyway, i got work to do, anyone wanna drive a semi to melbourne to pick up some board for me?

[bennymacca]

if you bet out on a bluff or semibluff and lose to the all in player... you havent gained a chip

yeah but my point is that your semi-bluff only has to hold against 1 person, not 2, so you have a bigger chance of getting the pot for yourself.

if you stay in however, then there is more chance that the all in person will lose.

[DILLIGAF]

im just explaining why its done, im just the messenger

Shoot the messenger.

Im with you all the way Desmond, your back on the home game list!

P.s. Nice topic PACman.

[Des]

[AceLosesKing]

so does anyone know where the whole 'it's etiquette' thing regarding this comes from?

I'm happy with the pros and cons of betting/bluffing/not betting in this situation. I want to know why some ppl think you should check it 'because it's the right thing to do'.

I've never seen it as etiquette/never heard anyone claim it to be. Sure, if I'm chasing a straight/flush or something and I want to check it down but my opponent bets, because he has a hand, or wants to knock me out of the hand... it'll annoy me (and cause me to either call of fold) but you should never have to check.

[Garth Kay]

How about you all play in a tournament and are on the points bubble. Player A moves all in and Player B and C call. Both player B and C will almost always check it down even if the flop is the nuts for one player.
Because there is no use betting out another player when you definitely want player A to lose and then everybody is in the points.

Sorry had to edit my own post to remove mention of gambling.

Betting into a dry side pot is wrong, nothing annoys me more than someone betting out another player when they are on some sort of draw. What's the point? No chips to be gained and you still have to go heads up with another player who might more than likely have you beat.
But if you do have the nuts or a strong hand bet away, value bet though don't move all in another common mistake I see in NPL.
Mind you every situation is different, there are many reasons (most of them always correct or right) to play a hand a certain way.