Fewer of their bets, obviously. I can't tell if you are telling at this point or really don't understand what I'm saying.

If I checkraise someone to my left (trapping opponents in the middle) I'm building a pot to be as large as possible. If I bet into them, expecting them to raise, I'm trying to knock people out. If I am successful the pot will have fewer bets, but I will have a better chance of winning it. That's obvious, right? So I need to choose between a smaller pot that I have a better chance of winning or a larger pot that I have a lower chance of winning. And the one I want to choose is, as always, the choice with the higher expectation.


In this case, I see little value in protecting your hand. It has no real showdown value, and knocking people out is unlikely to pick up outs for your hand. I could be wrong about this though.

My basic point is that it doesn't much matter what your do when your have neutral equity for that particular hand (by definition of "neutral") so it's reasonable to do something that you think might bring you value in future hands. I want to win a pot that people are still talking about 5 minutes later. I have a reputation as someone who builds big pots (people have told me this). That's a profitable image IMO.

Love the PF raise. Juice up the pot with two suited broadways. Can easily check and fold if you miss. Like doing this with small pairs too with that many limpers.

I like ramming and jamming the flop. OESD, BDFD and the key is only ONE player showing strength and everyone else just calling. Low limit that could be a set, J9, pair + flush draw, probably not naked nut flush draw, AJ (people LOVE limping AJ for some reason and then playing TPTK like a royal).

River I'm check/calling one bet and am prepared to lose to 85 of clubs.

Do we play in the same game???

It is a distinct possibility.