Auto-Bet Pot

[JoeTable]

On Party, at the 6 max $100 NL cash games, I've noticed a lot of people using the bet pot feature when it's checked to them. How reliable is this as a tell? Any thoughts?

[swolfe]

i use it a lot just because i'm playing multiple tables and it's what i want to bet. it makes a good standard raise PF too...2.5BB plus 1 per limper.

actually, i play a lot of pot limit and most of the time the max is the most appropriate bet.

[JoeTable]

[ QUOTE ]
i use it a lot just because i'm playing multiple tables and it's what i want to bet. it makes a good standard raise PF too...2.5BB plus 1 per limper.

actually, i play a lot of pot limit and most of the time the max is the most appropriate bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

What I'm asking though, and perhaps you're not the right person to answer it since you do it, is how reliable a tell is it in terms of measuring the strength of the bettors hand.

[fimbulwinter]

this is currently a portion of a chapter in the works. I'd enjoy feedback from other SSNL'ers if you've experienced the same.

fim


from the "ten easy tells for online poker" chapter


Auto-action buttons:
• Aggressive players and players who routinely use auto action buttons, such as bet pot or raise any, rarely hold hands as strong as the ones they are representing. This normalization of their agression relieves them of the threat of having one of their bets, which are frequently without adequate merit, interpreted as weakness and therefore called.
• Meek players, or those who are normally not users of auto action buttons, often hold very strong hands and do not want you to fold. Such players do not often bet strongly or raise; the ability to relegate such an action to an external mechanism, in their mind, decreases the likelyhood that such a bet is interpreted as the strong hand it is, thus folding out the field.

[TheWorstPlayer]

I'm going to stop using the auto-bet button and see if it improves the strength of my hands. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[mgsimpleton]

I don't think you can use it as a tell at all - it's actually the sign, often, of someone who is thinking ahead. For me, I will use auto bet pot with TPTK if i raised preflop or if i have absolutely nothing on a semi-raggy board that's limped w/ only a few in. It won't auto-bet the pot unless it's checked around, so it's not like you're betting regardless... so I will often click auto-bet as sort of an auto-bluff if it's checked around and/or a very strong hand I want to pot bet. That help?

[swolfe]

i think the autocheck is a more reliable tell than the autobetting.

[Pil Sung Do]

I think it is a reliable tell from the standpoint of if player X always auto bets, he will consistently have the same type of hand (ie always a strong hand or always a weak hand). But I don't think you can use it as a tell in general, since each player uses the auto action buttons differently.

And I agree with the other poster, autocheck is much more reliable (but autocheck and then a checkraise indicates a BIG HAND).

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you can use it as a tell at all - it's actually the sign, often, of someone who is thinking ahead. For me, I will use auto bet pot with TPTK if i raised preflop or if i have absolutely nothing on a semi-raggy board that's limped w/ only a few in. It won't auto-bet the pot unless it's checked around, so it's not like you're betting regardless... so I will often click auto-bet as sort of an auto-bluff if it's checked around and/or a very strong hand I want to pot bet. That help?

[/ QUOTE ]

So if I call your PF raise and flop a set, I'm gauranteed that you will be betting so long as I check?

[swolfe]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is a reliable tell from the standpoint of if player X always auto bets, he will consistently have the same type of hand (ie always a strong hand or always a weak hand). But I don't think you can use it as a tell in general, since each player uses the auto action buttons differently.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think this is close...maybe change the wording from "consistently have the same type of hand" to "a hand within the same range as other hands that have been autobet". the way you wrote it implied that it would always be weak or strong or the nuts, but it really could be all of those if the autobet is consistently used for them all. lately, i've been experimenting with 1/2 or 2/3 pot bets, so i haven't been using the autobet as much, but previously i tried to use the with EVERY hand i wanted to bet with whether it was a made hand, a bluff, or a draw.

the wider range of hands that it could be, the more worthless this is as a tell.

[fathertime]

-----
This normalization of their agression relieves them of the threat of having one of their bets, which are frequently without adequate merit, interpreted as weakness and therefore called.
-------

Are you saying that because they frequently bet and bet aggressively, they routinely use the auto-buttons because they are not concerned with how players interpret their use of the auto-bet buttons? Auto-bet for them is used equally with strong and marginal holdings?

--------
Such players do not often bet strongly or raise; the ability to relegate such an action to an external mechanism, in their mind, decreases the likelyhood that such a bet is interpreted as the strong hand it is, thus folding out the field.
-------

And so meek players with a strong hand do not use auto-bet because they think it will be interpreted as strength and fold the field?

Meek players with the nuts--I'd agree with. But meek players often do not want to get called at all.

Minor point: likelihood is mispelled.