Why players raise when they are BB?

[pendulabgd]

So I'll never understand the play:
Someone raise strongly with half of his stack and it's obvious that he's going to pay if anyone pulls allin action and player at the BB goes allin, he's obviously last in game and only two of them are in play no matter what. Why go allin when you can call and see the flop instead and then decide.
I'll never understand that.
Maybe someone else does and can explain, maybe I'm wrong?

 

[PINOY]

So I'll never understand the play:
Someone raise strongly with half of his stack and it's obvious that he's going to pay if anyone pulls allin action and player at the BB goes allin, he's obviously last in game and only two of them are in play no matter what. Why go allin when you can call and see the flop instead and then decide.
I'll never understand that.
Maybe someone else does and can explain, maybe I'm wrong?

Logic about it is you go all-in, you have 2 ways to win - everyone fold and you got the best hand but you do it by having a made hand or big Acrs, it also allows you to see all street card not like calling and you fold before or on river.

 

[CallmeFloppy]

I have come to learn that what is obvious to one player is not necessarily obvious to another. It's like common sense, its not all that common.

As far as the move, even with what you said, I can think of three possible reasons:

1. They thought they had the best hand and wanted to get it all in there. They may have felt they would more likely get paid off preflop than have a bad flop come for the opponent and lose the chance to get paid off.

2. The obvious wasn't obvious and they wanted to try to push the raiser off his/her hand.

3. They were sick of playing and decided to gun it and run it. See what happens.

That is a specific answer to your specific situation.

Otherwise I like to raise in certain situations with the BB. If I am against a player who loves to steal the blinds and antes, I may raise them on the BB to prevent them from trying to do so, I can also use my preflop aggression to continuation bet after the flop and gain control of the action. True, this doesn't work if you are all in, but its an otherwise reason to raise from the BB.

 

[MattRyder]

Raising from the BB (with half your stack) means you are committing yourself to this hand. You have to call a shove pre-flop or go all-in on the flop. So you should only be doing it with a big pair (ideally AA). You're hoping to get lucky, pure and simple, which does happen often enough in Hold'em but rarely in Omaha with just a pair of Aces.

 

[roger perkins]

I have come to learn that what is obvious to one player is not necessarily obvious to another. It's like common sense, its not all that common.

As far as the move, even with what you said, I can think of three possible reasons:

1. They thought they had the best hand and wanted to get it all in there. They may have felt they would more likely get paid off preflop than have a bad flop come for the opponent and lose the chance to get paid off.

2. The obvious wasn't obvious and they wanted to try to push the raiser off his/her hand.

3. They were sick of playing and decided to gun it and run it. See what happens.

That is a specific answer to your specific situation.

Otherwise I like to raise in certain situations with the BB. If I am against a player who loves to steal the blinds and antes, I may raise them on the BB to prevent them from trying to do so, I can also use my preflop aggression to continuation bet after the flop and gain control of the action. True, this doesn't work if you are all in, but its an otherwise reason to raise from the BB.

a 4th reason is maybe they dont want to get in a situation where they have to make a tough call. Example you have JJ and the flop comes K 7 8 now if the other players shoves you have to figure out if he has a king and you are dead or if he is pushing with a flush or str8 draw. Once you shove preflop there is no decision left to make.

 

[pendulabgd]

Sorry but I didn't said what they had. The person who raised half of the stack had QQ and the guy who was on the BB had 66.
And QQ wins the pot.

 

[CallmeFloppy]

Sorry but I didn't said what they had. The person who raised half of the stack had QQ and the guy who was on the BB had 66.
And QQ wins the pot.

Still need more info. What were the stack sizes, point in the tournament ( or was is it a cash game) raiser's tendencies, etc. I can certainly think of times I would go all in from the BB with 66.

66 is not likely to improve on the flop. Most of the time you can expect to be in a race situation. Better to go all in and give the opponent the opportunity to fold, (not that they would with QQ but you wouldn't know that) than try to see a flop. Most often if you call, you will see at least 2 overs and not know where you are in the hand. Depending on the stack sizes, that may have been a shove or fold situation.

 

[StealTheButton]

Yes you are putting others to a decision and there is advantage in that. However, I do not do this often unless I really need the chips and I think I'm likely to have the best hand or dominating others. Much too often I get a call with JQ or 33 and get knocked out. There is a lot of advantage to being first in the pot- and if there are limpers you are not first in.

I can outplay most on the flop- I'd rather check or make a moderate raise and thin the field- also representing a stronger hand. I think a lot of people that do this are scared of post flop play.

 

[Datdude1]

Raising when you are the BB sometimes helps you to weed out some weaker hands. This is a good strategy because it will not allow a weak hand to luck up and become strong, however it can backfire on you if you are just bluffing, be careful.

 

[Phoenix Wright]

Raising from the BB (with half your stack) means you are committing yourself to this hand. You have to call a shove pre-flop or go all-in on the flop. So you should only be doing it with a big pair (ideally AA). You're hoping to get lucky, pure and simple, which does happen often enough in Hold'em but rarely in Omaha with just a pair of Aces.

True, but even with AA I think this play is too weird. There is simply too great of a chance everyone will fold and we don't get value from AA, much better to just 3-bet like normal or value bet later with AA. For players who commit half their stack early on (with any holdings) just makes me think "they've got a bit too much 'gamble' in them" and I look for future spots to value bet these players with the realization that they are more likely to call and pay me off.

I think committing half your stack (even with AA) doesn't make much sense in most cases, but especially from the big blind. Maybe they are just taking the adage "protect your blinds" a bit too far?

https://www.cardschat.com/forum/learning-poker-57/why-defend-your-blinds-456860/

 

[ph_il]

i can't speak for everyone else but, depending on effective stacks, i might jam in the btn spot for 2 main reasons: a) i want to guarantee myself max value my hand holds and b) i want to avoid weird spots where i might have to fold after making a call.

this is more common when stacks are a bit more shallow. depending on my hand and opponent's range, this might be around 40 bbs or fewer that i might jam it in. in some situations, maybe even more.

 

[bempassado]

a 4th reason is maybe they dont want to get in a situation where they have to make a tough call. Example you have JJ and the flop comes K 7 8 now if the other players shoves you have to figure out if he has a king and you are dead or if he is pushing with a flush or str8 draw. Once you shove preflop there is no decision left to make.

I agree.

 

[ChickenArise]

True, but even with AA I think this play is too weird. There is simply too great of a chance everyone will fold and we don't get value from AA, much better to just 3-bet like normal or value bet later with AA. For players who commit half their stack early on (with any holdings) just makes me think "they've got a bit too much 'gamble' in them" and I look for future spots to value bet these players with the realization that they are more likely to call and pay me off.

I think committing half your stack (even with AA) doesn't make much sense in most cases, but especially from the big blind. Maybe they are just taking the adage "protect your blinds" a bit too far?

https://www.cardschat.com/forum/learning-poker-57/why-defend-your-blinds-456860/

I tend to agree with you. I think people defend their blinds a bit too far. Even with some of the stronger hands it could be advantageous to call and play post flop, unless it means you may go multi way in which case it would likely pay to isolate. It is always going to be player dependent.

Although if you think the person is stealing to wide or you have a slightly weaker holding or one that may not flop too well or risk being dominated post flop, a raise might be the better choice.

I dont feel the need to play as others do, but I do know the importance of understanding how population is likely to play and attempt to exploit these ranges wherever possible.

 

[1nsomn1a]

Large non-standard raises show either a very strong hand, or a complete bluff, so apparently the player on BB reasoned, with his own move all in, he can portray a very strong hand, which will make the raiser think and perhaps think about fold.

 

[Matt_Burns88]

Sorry but I didn't said what they had. The person who raised half of the stack had QQ and the guy who was on the BB had 66.
And QQ wins the pot.

In this situation and assuming reasonable effective stack of 30-40BB, I agree with you; raising is a very strange play. The open raiser is showing a lot of strength by putting in half his stack pre-flop; he clearly intends to get it all-in on the flop. With 66 I am almost always just folding here. Of course, tournament situation and player histories can have a big impact on how you react to certain situations. If the open raiser had been loose and aggressive a lot, I might consider looking him up with 66.

I would say don't worry what this type of player is thinking, just be glad he's at your table.

The other thing I would strongly suggest is making notes on the BB. There is nothing better than facing a 3-bet shove checking the players notes and seeing that he'll do this with 66 and you're looking down at JJ.

 

[TeUnit]

They probably feel like they have some sort of fold equity, and often they do.

 

[Edgerik]

If you are looking to increase your chips with hands like AA and KK in BB, the logical thing is that you raise in that position.

 

[fundiver199]

Why go allin when you can call and see the flop instead and then decide.

Because if you fold on the flop, when you are getting 3:1 on a jam, that is almost always going to be a mistake. You are committed to the pot, and in that situation the easiest and often also most profitable line of action is to just get it in right away and be done.

 

[pendulabgd]

Still need more info. What were the stack sizes, point in the tournament ( or was is it a cash game) raiser's tendencies, etc. I can certainly think of times I would go all in from the BB with 66.

66 is not likely to improve on the flop. Most of the time you can expect to be in a race situation. Better to go all in and give the opponent the opportunity to fold, (not that they would with QQ but you wouldn't know that) than try to see a flop. Most often if you call, you will see at least 2 overs and not know where you are in the hand. Depending on the stack sizes, that may have been a shove or fold situation.

Stack sizes was almost identical around 40BB. Middle of the tournament, already exited a lot of players but prizes was 1h away.

 

[pendulabgd]

Because if you fold on the flop, when you are getting 3:1 on a jam, that is almost always going to be a mistake. You are committed to the pot, and in that situation the easiest and often also most profitable line of action is to just get it in right away and be done.

I'm speaking about the move before the flop, why going allin when you can call simply or better fold, not to commit. Because it was obvious that person who made a bet had a strong hand, he wasn't loose player... He played almost always only premium hands and he's not going to be pushed away for sure if that was a goal. I'm seeing that more than often, the same move. I wouldn't play like that for sure, but as someone said that's why we are here is to learn how other think, and what's logical for me it doesn't mean it's logical for someone else and that's our main goal here! To talk about the game and the thinking process behind the plays because my personal goal is to learn about the game and to try to create my own strategy for the future

 

[Mauriliro]

If you are looking to increase your chips.
obvious that person who made a bet had a strong hand and want to icrease chips.
and if everybody fold you get The pot

 

[fundiver199]

I'm speaking about the move before the flop, why going allin when you can call simply or better fold, not to commit.

The point is, that if big blind call, he is already committed, because he will be getting 3:1 on a flop jam, and its rare, he dont have 25% equity on the flop against his opponents entire range. So calling for half the opponents stack and then folding later is the worst possible line of action to take.

The player in big blind should of course fold though, if his hand is not strong enough to play all-in preflop for the opponents entire stack. But this is also the case, if the opponent had open shoved instead of betting half his stack. In that case its a bad shove by the big blind player but it would also be equally bad to call for half the opponents stack.

 

[Fernet]

BB game

Hola, depende de la lectura del jugador, el que abre la mano puede abrir muy flojo o es muy sospechoso, entonces hay mucho dinero muerto en la mesa, y con una mano decente puedes ganar ese movimiento, en el mejor caso el dinero muerto, como los otros se retiran, y en el caso de que uno llame, queda una mano decente con equidad

 

[vittopio]

The half-stack raise size tells me the player is very inexperienced! And with premium hands, I don't want to miss out on his chips! If he makes a raise like that, he can fully fold (with his play it is completely logical).