Poker term question

[gnome]

Is there a name for the betting strategy where you have a strong hand and you draw out bets in rounds, instead of betting high and risking everyone folding?

[Anaxagoras]

If you google poker betting strategy you can find some information about how much to bet but I don't know if there's a word you're looking for. Basically it's not betting too high or too low.

http://www.firsttimepokerplayer.com/how ... ing-guide/

[Abdul Alhazred]

Oh yes.

Bluffing Waukegan style. Of course.

[WildCat]

Is there a name for the betting strategy where you have a strong hand and you draw out bets in rounds, instead of betting high and risking everyone folding?

Sandbagging.

[ed]

Teabagging

[Abdul Alhazred]

Not invented by Jack Benny, though he popularized both the strategy and the term for it.

[Anaxagoras]

Is there a name for the betting strategy where you have a strong hand and you draw out bets in rounds, instead of betting high and risking everyone folding?

Sandbagging.

Ah, yes. That's the word. AKA "slow play" or "trapping".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_play_(poker)

And this is why the strategy can backfire if it's too predictable:

Relationship between slow playing and bluffing

Against observant opponents, the frequency of bluffing affects the effectiveness of slow playing, and vice versa. If a player's table image is that of an aggressive bluffer, slow playing is less important because his opponents will be more willing to call his usual bets and raises. Similarly, if a player is perceived as a "trappy" player (uses frequent slow plays), his bluffs are less likely to be respected (i.e., more likely to be called) because his opponents expect him to slow play his strong hands.[2]

If an opponent can figure out your tendencies it could clue them in on how strong your hand is.

[gnome]

I needed the term for a metaphor, so not to worry

[Rob Lister]

Is there a name for the betting strategy where you have a strong hand and you draw out bets in rounds, instead of betting high and risking everyone folding?

Sandbagging.

Ah, yes. That's the word. AKA "slow play" or "trapping".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_play_(poker)

And this is why the strategy can backfire if it's too predictable:

Relationship between slow playing and bluffing

Against observant opponents, the frequency of bluffing affects the effectiveness of slow playing, and vice versa. If a player's table image is that of an aggressive bluffer, slow playing is less important because his opponents will be more willing to call his usual bets and raises. Similarly, if a player is perceived as a "trappy" player (uses frequent slow plays), his bluffs are less likely to be respected (i.e., more likely to be called) because his opponents expect him to slow play his strong hands.[2]

If an opponent can figure out your tendencies it could clue them in on how strong your hand is.

Another way it can backfire is if you check the nuts. At the pro table that can get you penalized and/or fined the pot.

PIck-up at 1:25. Popel gets a nut flush on the river. Jouhk checks and Popel checks behind him. I don't think he realized he had a flush, much less the nut flush. He gets a one-orbit penalty.

[gnome]

What is "checking the nuts" and why is it a penalized move?

[Abdul Alhazred]

What is "checking the nuts" and why is it a penalized move?

Same reason as in boxing.

[Rob Lister]

Nuts means the hand can't lose. Popel's hole cards were Ace and 9 of hearts. He drew a flush on the river, giving him Ace-high flush. Given the cards showing, there was no possible hand that could beat that. He must bet the hand. And had the other guy bet, Popel would have to raise him if he wasn't all in with a call.

The rule is in place to prevent collusion between players. I personally think it is a dumb rule.

[gnome]

I'm with you that it sounds dumb--how does it enable collusion?

[Abdul Alhazred]

I needed the term for a metaphor, so not to worry

Talking to that guy was playing poker with Jack Benny.

[Rob Lister]

This explains in fewer words than I'd use, and probably even correctly!

Player A and Player C are working in tandem.
The turn comes and gives player C (acting last) the nut flush, obviously unbeknownst to his/her partner.
Players A, B and C remain in the round.
Player A lays down a relatively large bet with two-pair and Player B folds.
Player C calls.
The river comes, Player A checks followed by a check from Player C.

Player A and Player C have no reason to bet against each other on the final round because neither wants to kick the other out of the tournament. There can be many scenarios where if people have arranged beforehand to work together, that checking or flat-calling a nut hand would work to their benefit.

https://www.australiangambling.lv/onlin ... -the-nuts/

[gnome]

I think I get it. But couldn't you do that just as well with a very strong hand that wasn't necessarily a "nut hand"? Cutting off one rarified instance wouldn't seem to really stop it.

[Abdul Alhazred]

I think I get it. But couldn't you do that just as well with a very strong hand that wasn't necessarily a "nut hand"? Cutting off one rarified instance wouldn't seem to really stop it.

That's pretty much what Jack said to Fred Allen.

[Rob Lister]

I think I get it. But couldn't you do that just as well with a very strong hand that wasn't necessarily a "nut hand"? Cutting off one rarified instance wouldn't seem to really stop it.

I agree. It's dumb.