Ive seen this happen twice now and I think its has some merit.

We've all heard about guys colluding and trapping someone in the middle.

Player "A" bets, player "B" calls, the player "C" who is colluding with "A" raises even though he has junk and plans to fold later witout anyone seeing his cards. This traps "B" into calling extra bets.

The play Im talking about has nothing to do with colluding but has the same effect of trapping a guy.

"A" has a full $200 stack. "B" has a full $200 stack" "C" has only $45.
The flop comes and "A" has a monster (lets say a set).
"A" bet $10. "B" and "C" both call making the pot around $40.

The turn comes and "A" knows hes ahead but instead of betting full pot of $40 or betting $35 putting "C" all in, he bets $34 ("C" has $35 left.) Why does he do that?

Because "B" calls the $34, now "C" raises all in for an extra $1. Now "A" gets to reraise and either make "B" put more money in or make him fold with his $34 in dead money already in the pot.

Some sites dont allow a reraise if the all in wasnt a full raise, but this can be a good play at the ones that do allow it.

I frequently use this at Prima, and watch out for it. Even if I really want to see a flop, Yahoo A makes it $2 to go, I smooth call with 99, jackal C pumps it up to 2/3 of Yahoo A's short stack, Yahoo A pushes, then i'm reluctant to call to see a flop as Jackal C is going to pump it up again.

Thats similar I guess, but I was talking about post flop. Ive seen a guy bet exactly $1 less than the short stack had, knowing that after one guy called, the short stack would either fold or go all in since its only one more dollar, allowing him to reraise.

I saw one guy bet .01 less than what the short stack had.

I do this all the time, especially preflop, and I tend to look out for other people doing it (intentionally or not). I don't do it quite as obvious as the stack -0.01 though.

And I will definitely use this strategy. I was aware it's dangerous to call with people still in the hand because they might raise and the original raiser gets to act again, but I wasn't really thinking of inducing a raise as a weapon in my arsenal. Thanks for bringing this up ice! Now I finaly have a use for those pesky small stacks I remember reading somewhere about a good player using this as a bluff.

I guess this should be made a rule of thumb for playing the nuts in a multiway pot: Bet slightly less than the shortest stack, so there is a good chance you get another chance to bet. I'm not sure this should be done all the time though, if could turn against you if the third person in the hand has you beat.

This is something prima needs to change. This rule is unfair.