The other night, I was playing in a pretty loose 1/2 NL game. There was a lot of money on the table, with at least 5 of the 9 players having effective stacks over $300. On the hand in question, I had over $400 behind.

I called five limpers OTB with JTs. The SB completed and the BB checked. Eight of us saw a flop with $16 in the pot.

I flopped top two-pair, but the board was pretty wet: J T 8, with two diamonds. The BB led into the field for $16, and he was called in two or three spots (I forget exactly), before the action got to me.

Despite the relative strength of my hand, I wasn't ready to commit my stack just yet with so much action on a wet board. As a result, I elected to call.

The turn brought a blank, and then the first three betters went crazy: the BB bet the pot, the UTG player went over the top all in, and then the UTG+1 player went over the top all in, too. I folded. The UTG player eventually showed down 97 for the straight.

After the hand, some players started talking about strategy. One suggested that, with a deep stack, he might use a min-raise on the flop as a possible approach to avoid getting pot committed (and eventually stacked) with a strong, but non-nut hand on a wet board. He said that, if the min-raise triggers a huge 3-bet, then you could confidently fold. Essentially, he was advocating using a min-raise to get information about where he stood in order to avoid losing a big chunk of a deep stack.

I've never been a fan of "raising for information." However, is this a spot where that makes sense? How does position post-flop influence how you would play a hand like mine on that flop?

Thanks for any thoughts.

*Grunch
Minraise is bad here IMO.

I think its dumb because you price flushdraws and big combo draws in.

Most people dont consider it a weak play in 1/2, so it is indeed good for information. However too many times on that flop 8 handed you are simply pricing draws in. I don't like it overall. I think it has more merit with less people in the hand, but I rarely do it.

Min-raising for info Is uber gross in this spot... raising for info is yuck period.

I'll tell you when its appropriate...when you can get a person to spazz out...I'll give you a quick example.

I play in a local nitty casino 1/3 where certain prop players CANT fold an overpair. They think its the nuts and the 'hand plays itself.' He raises from MP to 12 I call with 88 on the button. He's got 500 I cover.

Flop comes down Qs8s8d. He over bets 50 into a $28 pot and I think about it ...If he's got AQ kk or AA here...all action will be slayed if another spade comes...because he's THAT guy... so I min raise.

He insta jams and I insta call.

To make a long story short: I min raise against players that will spazz out against me.

Min-raise is obviously a horrible move for one simple reason, it re-opens another betting round.

In the above scenario, surely you want to see a turn card and have a chance to boat-up. Last thing you want to do is allow villain to 3-bet with all the dead money and force you out of the pot.

There are some spots to exercise min-raise, but the described usage in this spot is just plain bad.

Your friend is dumb and should be listening to you give advice on how to play a hand. You played it perfectly.

This is a bad spot to raise whether it's min or not. The only thing it achieves is not allowing you to see the turn. The only information you will get is that you ar behind. Raising for information is overvalued in the live fish pond. Just raise for value or to bluff.

you played the hand well. i think raising for value on this board would not be criminal, but calling IP and evaluating turn is fine too. minraising on the flop and then folding though is terrible.

Thanks for the replies. What if you're in EP with top two on this flop in a multiway pot? Let's say its the same scenario, but you are second to act. If one player bets the pot into you, and there are six players behind you yet to act, should you raise then?

I'm inclined to say yes, despite the wet board. In those circumstances, I think I'd raise to $45-$60 total. I'd be raising for value, to isolate the player who led into the field, and to price out any draws behind me.

Does that make sense?

I don't think the "Grunch" is necessary when you're the first person to respond...

Yeah it makes sense but typically I would only do that if stack sizes would be awkward on the turn if I 3x it. Plus it may induce a overvaluing/ or a semibluffing ship by the villain

Example, You hold AQ flop comes out AQ7 2 spades

POT: 60$ and villain bets $35 and you have 220 back. Making it 70 or 75 may induce villain to shove. He may think you have just TP and can have room to fold. also makes it so if he calls the pot is perfect for a 2/3 pot sized turn shove

Yeah dont talk strategy with idiotic players. A min raise should only be used for a 3bet or 4bet postflop. Pre, minraising a 3bet is ok as well. Raising on that flop with a connected and wet board is criminal. Your friend is just giving bad advice.

Guy says you should minraise to see if they go allin. Instead you called, and then they went allin. So why are you listening to this guy again?

*Grunch*

I think this hand was played perfectly. This is not a spot for a min-raise in my opinion. The problem is that if you raise on the flop, anyone who flopped a good combo draw (or even a worse 2 pair) might be tempted to shove on you right now, meaning that folding to the 3bet may not be correct on the flop. So this is a spot where raising opens up the door for you to make a mistake.

I think the idea of waiting for the turn to raise is not bad in this spot, and then we can fold now that we've seen all the action in front of us when the turn comes.

Minraises can be useful, pretty much like in the exact scenario Sac_PacMan described. IMO you played this hand perfectly and were right not to raise the flop. You got all the information you needed OTT without wasting any more money OTF.