Is Check-Raising Costing You Money?

In a recent session of a $30-$60 hold'em game, I held pocket queens in the big blind. After three players called the blind and the small blind just called, I checked. This play gave me an easy laydown if an ace or king flopped, and provided me a lot of strategic scope (as well as some deception) if I flopped a set or an overpair.

We saw a flop of 9 7 4. The small blind checked, and I bet out. I was called in two places, one player folded, and the small blind check-raised. She was a solid player, but there was no clear meaning to her action. She could have my queens beat, a hand like A-9, or a straight draw, wanting to build a large multiway pot. I three-bet to try to get rid of the other players, and was successful. The small blind called, and we were heads up.

The turn was the 8. She checked, and I bet. She check-raised again! What should I have done? I had shown considerable strength in leading into a large field and three-betting a check-raise. I was the big blind and easily could have had an overpair, two pair, or even a set. But in spite of that, here she was trapping me by check-raising. Given that she was a very solid player, in my experience against her, my play was easy. I tossed the queens into the muck and waited for a better chance. Sure, I was sad about giving up the pot, and about losing with queens, but it was obvious I was beat, and probably had few, if any, outs.

What did the check-raise do? My opponent had made a huge hand (actually, she held 6-5 and turned a straight), had me drawing dead, and managed to collect one big bet. The check-raise on the turn, rather than make her an extra bet, cost her at least one more bet and possibly more. It simply alerted me to the situation and allowed me to release a hand that I otherwise would have believed was way ahead.

I am not talking here about check-raises in general. They have lots of applications and are frequently very useful. What I am discussing now is a specific situation:

• The players are heads up on the turn.

• The out-of-position player has made a huge hand.

• The other player has either shown strength or has possibly made a very good second-best hand.

• This player is capable of reading a situation and releasing a hand.

• The check-raiser is a solid player (not a likely or frequent bluffer).

Typically, players with the last two qualities are found at the middle and higher limits. If you recognize these circumstances, I suggest you do not try the check-raise. Betting out is far more likely to get the money. To understand why, let's look at another hand.

Another example: Here is a $20-$40 hand that was played by one of my students (we will call him "Ron"). He held the A 4 and called before the flop from late position. There were two other callers, and the blinds played, as well. Ron liked the flop of 9 8 3. The blinds checked, a middle-position player bet, and Ron called to keep a reasonable number of players in the hand. The big blind check-raised, and just the bettor and Ron called.

The turn was the 9, making Ron's flush but pairing the board. Both players checked to Ron, who bet. Now, the big blind check-raised and the other person folded. What was going on? The big blind had check-raised the flop, and then checked when the board paired and a flush card hit. In spite of the very scary board, this player had check-raised again. Could he have made, say, three nines and check-raised, thinking it was good? That was unlikely, because he would have been worried about giving a free card to someone with a single spade. Could he have made a flush? If so, why would he check when the board paired? It was more likely he would bet, hoping to get action from someone who had made trips while not giving a free card to players with two pair.

No, the check-raise here showed a total lack of concern for offering free cards. The only conclusion was that this player had already filled up, and was trying to get extra money from anyone who had made a flush (or might make one on the river).

Ron understood all of this, but still fell from grace and reluctantly called the turn and the river, so he got to see the full house that he was almost certain he was up against. Hopefully, next time he will be able to release the hand when he is certain he is beat.

Perhaps you are thinking the check-raise worked here – and it did, to some extent. Ron paid three big bets to see the river. But consider what would have happened if the big blind had just bet out when the 9 came. Certainly, Ron would have raised with the nut flush, not expecting that the big blind had a full house. The big blind then could have three-bet at that point, or even check-raised on the river. Given that Ron was inclined to pay off the bets, this would have made four big bets for the big blind instead of the three he got by check-raising.

A hand played correctly. Here is a hand played in an $80-$160 game. In this case, a player in late position raised as the first player in, and only the big blind (let's name him "Jesse") called. Jesse held the A 2, and considered the flop of 4 3 3. He checked and called when the preflop raiser bet, believing that the ace and 5 were possible outs, and there was a reasonable chance that ace high was good at this point. In addition, this particular opponent might check the hand down if he could not beat ace high, increasing the number of reasons for the call.

The turn brought the 5, making the wheel for Jesse. How should he have played the hand? I know many people would try for a check-raise here, hoping to pick up the extra bet. They would think, "I have made a surprise hand, and what one does with surprise hands is check-raise."

Let's consider the options, though. If Jesse checked, his opponent might have checked with a hand as good as A-Q. If Jesse bet, however, an opponent holding A-Q would probably call with his gutshot-straight draw and two overcards. In fact, the opponent might have thought the A-Q was the best hand (perhaps he would think Jesse might have been semibluffing with a hand like K-6). Of course, we know that a player with A-Q would be drawing nearly dead to Jesse's actual holding, so Jesse would pick up a bet he might never get if he simply checked on the turn.

In the actual hand, Jesse bet out on the turn. Luckily for him, his opponent held a big pocket pair and raised. Jesse got to three-bet, and still picked up a bet on the river. While it did not have to work out that well, the four bets Jesse earned simply could not have been gotten with a check-raise.

Conclusion: Check-raising is an important part of the game. Usually, the reason to check-raise is to eliminate opponents or to get more money in the pot. However, in some cases I think players check-raise to feel smart or clever. After all, anyone can bet a hand, but a very clever player can check-raise. I really believe that when people make a monster hand on the turn, their instincts scream at them to check-raise, even though we have seen that it often costs them money, especially in the situations we discussed in this column.

An old poker adage states that betting out makes you one bet or three, while check-raising makes you zero or two. In fact, in our first example hand, in which I held two queens, the check-raiser got only one bet with her check-raise, while she would have gotten at least two and possibly more if she had simply bet.

It is easy to outsmart yourself and go for the "advanced" play. But take a look at your game, and see if the check-raise is costing you money.