Does flat calling a raise really rep more strength than re-raising?

I've heard/read this in more than one place, including Harrington on Cash Games v1 Hand 3-12.

Just not sure I believe it. Please help me understand the thought process here.

If you're looking for good books to read, I would recommend anything by Ed Miller. "How to read hands at no limit hold em", or "playing the player". He recently released a book which he didn't write but he edited for one of his student called "poker plays you can use" which I've heard is good also.

I am nearly finished with Cash Games v1 and personally believe it is a good beginner's poker book because it introduces many ideas but if you are looking to expand upon those ideas Ed Miller's books are the way to go.

it depends

here is a generic situation where flatting is stronger than raising

Hero 300bb
V1 150bb
V2 300bb

V1 raises 4bb, H & V2 call, blinds fold

Pot (15bb)
Flop J 5 2 cc
V1 bet 9 bb, H flats 9bb, V2 raises to 36 BB, V1 raises to 90 BB, H flats, V2...

what do you expect hero to show up with, what is his range?

Flatting says you have a hand so strong you are not worried about opponents drawing out, which implies a hand even stronger then a raise. Obviously this doesn't apply when the caller can be the one drawing, so calling a small bet when in position doesn't mean nearly as much strength while calling a large bet OOP with possible action after suggests a monster. It applies less at low stakes where so many stationary fish will call down with weak hands.

Still, this is generally true for a second caller on a post flop bet. If the second caller is a decent player and because of board/stacks can't be drawing, you should suspect a pretty strong hand. This is often a good two pair or set hoping that somebody else will come along or raise for them.

to miami:

Ok, I get that, thank you. But what about a much simpler scenario?

In a 1/2 game MP raises to 10, LP calls.
In a 1/2 game MP raises to 10, LP re-raises to 23.

Which represents more strength, and why?

To tight MUBsy regulars that slowplay frequently and view you as "competent?" Sometimes.

To the other 98% of the LLSNL player pool? No.

Need at least boards

In the Harrington example, it is pre-flop. Hero in BB with AJo, MP raises to 4 BB's, button calls 4 BB's. He says "the raise in indicative of some strength, the call of more strength."

Ok, so I may have misread that a little. I was thinking he was saying that the button call indicated more strength than a button raise would indicate, and now I realize that isn't quite what he is saying.

I would assume a button raise there is stronger than a button call. Yes?

for most llsnl players, raising is stronger than calling in most situations

Preflop, stack sizes, exact position and villains in the hand matter a lot. In general the whole idea is weak preflop except to say that in general the LP player needs a stronger range to call or raise then the original raiser did to make the first bet. If stacks are deep or the LP player is looser then the original raiser then even that is often not true. If stacks are deep the LP player may call with all sorts of fairly weak drawing hands hoping for a good flop. If the LP player is looser then the original better then his range may be wider.

In fact, a lot of the profitability of low stakes games for tight players comes from loose opponents calling raises with dominated hands. That blows this principle out of the water, but it's because the fish are playing bad, not because the idea is wrong.

If you're talking about strictly pre-flop situations, I would strongly disagree that flatting typically represents more strength than re-raising, especially at the lower limits. Most 3-bets (90%+) are JJ+ in my game where flats can basically be anything (except for the nutted hands we just discussed of course, because they 3bet those).

Situations on the flop or turn become a bit different. When a player checks, and there's a bet and a re-raise behind him before he flats, then yes... alarm bells should begin to go off. It's not an absolute however - some players will play the NFD or combo draws in similar ways. It depends on board texture, % of stack that the 3bet represents, etc.

Harrington is referencing David Skalansky's " Gap Theory" that sumply states that it takes a stronger hand to call a raise than it does to raise. When a player opens a pot he/she is implying strength therefore it would take a stronger hand to call because the ranges have been narrowed somewhat so the player calling should have a hand that plays well against a range that is weighted towards strong hands. As always it depends of course if a maniac is opening every pot than it doesnt apply. Its just game theory. In the real world everytime someone calls in llsnl it doesnt really apply. If it were a table full of competent players then it would.

Harrington is talking about in games with good players, mostly likely medium to high stakes


not llsnl

keep 3betting buddy and bluff raising post flop vs these idiots

While dependent on the player's style and experience, a LP 3bet usually signals strength at these limits from what I've seen.

Branching off from that, how does one evaluate post 3bet action preflop? Some scenarios:
- lp open, sb/bb 3bet, folds around. All else being standard, which implies more strength here. Flat or 4 bet.
- e/mp open. LP call. Sb/bb 3bet. Stronger line, an e/mp flat or 4 bet?

-e/mp open, late pos 3bet, folds around. Stronger line, flat or 4bet?
-lp open, co/button raise. Same question.

Then finally flatting a 4bet vs 5bet gii. Obviously dependent on stack sizes and villain tendencies, but both lines are very strong. Though I haven't seen too many 5bets at low stakes, I must say.

Just some things to think about. I'm sure a few of those blend together, are marginally different from one another. Flatting OOP seems like a stronger play to me, in general

You might be reading it incorrectly. I've heard the same theory and I've been thinking of it differently. We are not comparing one person either raising or calling; we are comparing two different players in the same hand.

Example: CO raises, button calls. The button's range is stronger (in theory). Next hand: CO raises, button 3-bets, CO calls. Now the HJ's range is stronger.

Theory applied: if it's folded to me in the CO, I will raise QJo. If someone raises ahead of me I will fold QJo. My range for calling a raise is stronger and would not include hands like QJ, KJ, or even usually KQo in that range.

Different players, different spots, different ranges.

The theory is that since a raise can win the pot there and then, it has added value (fold equity) and therefore can have lower pot equity (worse cards) and still be profitable. A call can never win the pot without seeing another card or showdown, so the cards themselves must of course contain all the value.

This is just to explain how an overall range for calling should be stronger than the full range for raising (in theory, but in reality many players call almost everything and raise almost nothing). Of course, the very strongest holdings will appear more often in any player's raising range.

Flatting as a semibluff probably the strongest move in no limit poker.

What do you mean?

At low stakes? I wouldn't think so. Please elaborate.

Thanks to the several of you who mentioned the gap principle. I am very familiar with that but have almost exclusively applied it to my own cards, not to interpreting my opponent's actions. Maybe I don't give them enough credit, but it is worth considering and is certainly part of the answer to my original question.

Lol, nice level Lapidator.

Op, this discussion might get more traction in the Poker Theory forum.