HoH1: Flop = 333. Harrington recommends 1/3 pot bet instead of 1/2???

[AA suited]

P. 321

blinds= 100/200
hero is mp1, has 12.5k chips, and has A /images/graemlins/heart.gif Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif.
Folded to hero, who raises to 600. mp3 and co calls. reads: mp3 + co are solid players.

Flop (pot=2350): 333

Throughout the book, Harrington usually recommends a continuation bet of 1/2 pot when you raise preflop and you are the first to bet.

However, he argues a 1/3pot bet here instead because it's likely at least one of the players has a pocket pair.

But wouldn't a 1/3 pot just encourage someone with ak or a small pocket pair to stay in since your bet is read as weak? Whereas a 1/2 pot bet will have better chances of getting ak and small pp to fold? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[bluefeet]

i think the smaller bet accomplishes a couple things - 1) gets you a cheaper turn card, and 2) gets you off the hand cheaper if you get reraised. there's nothing about this flop that you can represent - short of an overpair yourself. assuming a bluff-bet closer to pot size only gets called (if not raised) by an also overpair holder, why not get to the turn as cheap as possible?

-- vs. an easier represented flop like KT6 (rainbow) where an underpair/non-K holder will laydown a larger lead.

[pearljam]

Of all the glaring errors in the book you bitch about a 1/3 pot sized bet instead of 1/2? sheesh

[USCSigma1097]

what glaring errors?