Players folding on free checks

[OopsDidItAgain]

Playing poker without betting money makes no sense; it's like playing the card game "War"

[wrldtrvllr]

Playing poker without betting money makes no sense; it's like playing the card game "War"

Your opinion has nothing to do with this thread.

[wrldtrvllr]

I continue to encounter this phenomenon in most games. Last night I encountered a player who raised by 10 pre-flop, then folded when first to act after the flop. Again I wonder - are there any other games on BGA where so many players do something so obviously absurd, or is it only in this one game? If the latter, why should that be?

[dominicwa]

Not sure if it’s already been said here but I sometimes fold on free checks (not so much on BGA but on another poker app I play now cos this one here is so broken)… when I know the chances of winning the hand are tiny to zero… and I don’t want the players to see the hand I was playing. In fact, sometimes I’ll fold it if the stakes are low / insignificant, even if I might win… again because I don’t want the other players to see patterns and start to work out any telling behaviours.

Really hasn’t mattered much on BGA because something is very off here with how it plays (could be the rankings or the snail pace or some wonky not-so-rnd() function). But elsewhere… you really can start to feel / familiarise with styles of play and scanning the other cards if they stay in to the end to see what they played (and then play the hand back from the start in your head to see what they led with on what hand out the door…).

[wrldtrvllr]

That's insane. The cost of throwing away hands when you don't need to far outweighs the cost of other players seeing what you had. If you are that worried about other people seeing what you were playing with, you should have folded pre-flop.

[dominicwa]

Disagree. If you think it's absurd maybe you're limiting the scope of decision making to the hand being played and not the wider context of the table you're playing at and the players you're up against over the course of an
entire session?

Think about a scenario... if you're making plays for big wins via straights and flushes but unwilling to risk on final draws... and you don't want that known... simply don't check and be forced to show that. It gives less away. It keeps yor more of a mystery, a wildcard. Whether that works depends on other factors that you can play to... I'm just saying... it's not absurd and I've found it effective against some tables. Especially on higher stakes where you win far (far) less on pairs and two pairs... or at least... you can't draw them in for substantial gains cos they're too experienced.

Another angle... if I've got $50,000 to play and the pot is for $80 and we're fresh out the gate... I don't give a shit about
the $80 on a missed straight vs showing any readable behavior traits.

[Jol_]

Folding to a free check gives away lots of information and is highly exploitable.

If you fold your trash hands, your checking range would be stronger than usual, at least with some showdown value. When you hit strong hands at later streets, your opponents will be more cautious and you are far less likely to get paid (coz you never bluff with your trash hands).

Also when you check your opponents also less likely to bluff against you, removing potential values of your bluff catcher hands.

You've basically removed all possible ways you can profit in poker by open folding - your value hands not getting sufficiently paid, and your bluff-catching hands become worthless.

If you fold more than trash hands (like those with straight/flush draws before river), your opponents are more than happy to directly win the pot with their 9-high.

[wrldtrvllr]

If you folded on a check in a casino, you'd be laughed off the table. Some poker games don't even allow it. So I do find it very funny that some people really apparently think they are playing some wily game by doing it. Jol_'s summary of why not to do it is very good.