Check Raising Twice in a Row

[Poker_Mike]

If you watch a player check-raise twice in a row are you more likely to call when that player does it to you?

Or, is the sample size not big enough?

And, continue with your regular game ignoring that player's recent behavior?

Your thoughts?

 

[pentazepam]

Some think it's sexy. Maybe he has a fetish?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1506388129413943296

Obviously, you don't have enough info after two hands in a row.

If the player has called in the BB is a pretty common move.

 

[Aballinamion]

If you watch a player check-raise twice in a row are you more likely to call when that player does it to you?

Or, is the sample size not big enough?

And, continue with your regular game ignoring that player's recent behavior?

Your thoughts?

At the micros check-raise often means we are dominated. Hard to say more having only this information.

 

[Funtast]

If you watch a player check-raise twice in a row are you more likely to call when that player does it to you?

Or, is the sample size not big enough?

And, continue with your regular game ignoring that player's recent behavior?

Your thoughts?

Case 1: We have exacly two hands where he each checkraised (on flop?).
I would exspect him to have TPTK or better and according to that I would continue.
Case 2: We have more hands and it happened that he checkraised us twice in the last 2 hands (on flop?).
If he was splashy before I wouldn´t exspect him to have TPTK or better and according to that I would continue.
If he was straight forward I would exspect him to have TPTK or better and according to that I would continue.

 

[Manf1]

In high limits you often loose the hand

 

[puzzlefish]

Someone can have a good hand twice in a row or at least feel that they have a better hand than you and want to build the pot. It's going to be situational and two hands is probably not a good sample size to get a solid read from it, especially if you did not see the showdown in those hands.

 

[Poker_Mike]

Someone can have a good hand twice in a row or at least feel that they have a better hand than you and want to build the pot. It's going to be situational and two hands is probably not a good sample size to get a solid read from it, especially if you did not see the showdown in those hands.

I agree with you.

But some players abuse position and I notice they will raise two hands in a row - several times!

I'm always looking out for it.

 

[MK_]

I don't think that's a big enough sample size to indicate anything,
what if they limp twice or check?, twice tells me nothing at all

 

[PHX]

If you watch a player check-raise twice in a row are you more likely to call when that player does it to you?

Or, is the sample size not big enough?

And, continue with your regular game ignoring that player's recent behavior?

Your thoughts?

This is usually polarizing. Either nuts or air. So depending on your hand you play it accordingly.

There is a third option that player have no clue what they are doing.

 

[Poker_Mike]

I don't think that's a big enough sample size to indicate anything,
what if they limp twice or check?, twice tells me nothing at all

I agree with you.

What if you noticed they do it every orbit?

But even without a large enough sample size - is it exploitable?

 

[MK_]

I agree with you.

What if you noticed they do it every orbit?

But even without a large enough sample size - is it exploitable?

..... now you got something if they do it every orbit that's worth paying attention to👍

 

[fundiver199]

If you watch a player check-raise twice in a row are you more likely to call when that player does it to you?

Or, is the sample size not big enough?

And, continue with your regular game ignoring that player's recent behavior?

Your thoughts?

Someone taking a standard action like check-raising the flop or 3-betting preflop two hands in a row means absolutely nothing. Maybe we can say, that they have those plays in their repertoire, so we dont want to overfold, but thats about it. This is the whole reason, why I strongly recommend using a tracker / HUD on sites, where they are allowed.

The tracker remember everything, a player did before, and therefore we can eventually draw reliable conclusions, that someone is being overly aggressive. Many people think, manual reads are more valuable. But its the exact opposite, since manual reads almost always suffer from severe sample size issues, which can lead to overadjusting based on faulty assumptions. Yeah they 3-bet two hands in a row, but maybe they just picked up AK and QQ, and both were standard 3-bets for value. We simply dont know.

Manual reads are only valuable, when people take non-standard actions like moving all-in preflop for way to many blinds. Then it will definitely matter to my decision, if I have seen the same player do it even just a single time before during the last orbit or two. In that case I will assume, he is someone, who wants to gamble it up, and I will not put him on a range of only aces or kings, when he ships in his 72BB (again).

 

[Poker_Mike]

Someone taking a standard action like check-raising the flop or 3-betting preflop two hands in a row means absolutely nothing. Maybe we can say, that they have those plays in their repertoire, so we dont want to overfold, but thats about it. This is the whole reason, why I strongly recommend using a tracker / HUD on sites, where they are allowed.

The tracker remember everything, a player did before, and therefore we can eventually draw reliable conclusions, that someone is being overly aggressive. Many people think, manual reads are more valuable. But its the exact opposite, since manual reads almost always suffer from severe sample size issues, which can lead to overadjusting based on faulty assumptions. Yeah they 3-bet two hands in a row, but maybe they just picked up AK and QQ, and both were standard 3-bets for value. We simply dont know.

Manual reads are only valuable, when people take non-standard actions like moving all-in preflop for way to many blinds. Then it will definitely matter to my decision, if I have seen the same player do it even just a single time before during the last orbit or two. In that case I will assume, he is someone, who wants to gamble it up, and I will not put him on a range of only aces or kings, when he ships in his 72BB (again).

Thank you for this well thought response.

I don't use a HUD. So, yes all my observations are manual.

And yes it is possible AK and then QQ. And I have gritted my teeth to find this out the hard way!

But often I have found repetitive check raising behavior is aimed at trying to get their opponent to fold and not for additional value.

Also, I have tilted players by calling their repetitive check raise that I win. They're wondering how I can do that profitably.

After all - this is a game of limited information! Even with a HUD.

..... now you got something if they do it every orbit that's worth paying attention to👍

Uhm - let me re-phrase....not every orbit - but several orbits in a row.

They seem satisfied in motivating their opponent(s) to fold.