5-handed 1-2 nl live, 3:45am

[Book 0]

Howdy--Long-time lurker, first-time poster here; I just didn't want to miss out on the bonus money for DN's new site...5-handed 1-2 nl live. Deep stacks, loose preflop (and raises commonly $20 and above). Very aggressive postflop as well--and large overbets are common.HERO (about $600) is in SB w 8 5 . "UTG ($350)" straddles for $5, UTG+1 calls, BUTTON folds, HERO calls, BB ($1300) calls, UTG checks.HERO checks in the dark...Flop: 9 T 7 BB bets $20, UTG calls, UTG+1 folds, HERO raises to $100...BB raises all-in, UTG folds, HERO mutters to himself...What hand range would you put BB on?Is it worth ccnsidering calling?and feel free to flame such hits as:Checking in the dark.Raising to $100.I've got some thoughts, but some of the more salient ones I didn't have at the time, so I'll withhold for now.Thanks in advance for y'all's help.

[InsanityCubed 0]

I don't care how loose the table is, calling a raise out of position with such a weak hand (especially with one to act behind you) is a bad play. Then you hit a nice flop and raise far too much. If any of your opponents has an overpair, they're reraising you here, and your raise pretty much forced them to push against you. A smaller raise might have been good, but I'd much prefer calling here . You've already got the UTG in the pot in addition to the post-flop aggressor, why not wait until you hit your hand to put your money in? You certainly can't call this raise, since a hand like As-10s has you drawing near-dead, and there are many other holdings your opponents could have that beat you. This is a definite call in my mind, but if you're going to raise, don't overbet the pot, since you probably won't win it there, and you still need to make a hand to win.

[joeltebbutt 0]

I think insanity pretty much nailed it. Why check in the dark and what is the point in a raise that big when a smaller raise would achieve the same thing.

[Book 0]

Thanks for your responses. Your logic definitely seems sound and like the better way to play it.In answer to why I acted as I did (with somewhat faultier logic):Preflop callI had been by far the tightest preflop, especially out of position. I figured I'd have a decently disguised hand if I hit, and could potentially get credit for something I didn't have. And I was trying to not seem to only play hands from the button. Also, this was probably the first straddle of the night not raised from position. So I thought for a little and called. With all that said, yeah, it's a bad call.Check in the darkEvery hand usually had a pot- or over- bettor and caller on the flop. There wasn't really any situation where I'd want to lead a bet. I wanted to fit into their suspicions that I might have a better hand than my mere call indicated. Does anybody have a good argument for checking in the dark in certain situations? If it is definitely a bad play in general, feel free to convince me.Raise to $100I hoped to take the pot right there. In this and other sessions I had played with these guys, they would have given me credit for a set (or at the very least an overpair) because I was fairly passive in pots I hadn't raised, especially OOP. Actually, less or more than $100 probably would've seemed fishy.I put BB on a bluff and was more concerned with UTG. I didn't want to give a higher flush draw odds to call. And that same thought kept me wary of calling and drawing to a lower flush (as well pretty strongly defining my hand). So I thought it was a relatively good spot for a semi-bluff. So that's how I reasoned my way into a not-so-optimal decision. What I will tell myself next time is to wait for a bigger edge. But y'all tell me if there's other stuff I should be telling myself too.

[Rocketwadster 0]

I personally LIKE the check-in-the-dark play (especially on TV), as it confuses many an opponent IMO. Marcel Luske is the master at that...I am confused by people saying your raise to $100 is too high...is there not about $48 in the pot already, with one person who had already bet more than the size of the pot, AND one caller to THAT raise? You indicated your raise was "to $100", not another $100. Seems fine to me.Looks like a perfect time for a squeeze play IMO, which may very well win you the pot uncontested... 8)