Stop-and-Go

[slapdash]

I've been rereading the Full Tilt poker book. In the chapter on "Pot-Limit Hold 'Em" there's a section on the "Stop-and-Go" (though I can't see why anything they say about it applies only to pot-limit and not to no-limit). They give the following example: You're in the BB with 88, and you have 10 big blinds left after posting the blind. A mid-position player with 20 big blinds raises the pot (i.e., to 3.5xBB) and everybody folds to you. So you have little enough left that you could reraise all-in (reraising the pot would cost another 10.5xBB). If you shove, then the raiser will pretty much be committed to call. So the advice is that you stop-and-go (i.e., just call, and then shove whatever comes on the flop). If your opponent has something like KJ and misses the flop, then he's not getting the odds to call, so you likely win the hand without going to showdown. The last paragraph says: "The really powerful part of the stop-and-go play is that it is no less effective even if your opponent knows what you are doing and can see your cards the whole time!" This seems to me to be nonsense. If your opponent just adopts the strategy of blindly calling you post-flop, then the outcome is exactly the same as if you shoved preflop and he called. So if he can sometimes correctly fold post-flop, then he's doing better than that. What you lose by "stop-and-going" is that if you are well ahead after the flop and your opponent folds, then you lose some value. Am I missing something?

[AJ]

Re: Stop-and-Go I don't like this move, if he's hit the flop hard and checks to induce a steal, you're screwed. Don't get me wrong it's got it's place but you need some knowledge of the guy you're playing