do you vary your bet size?

[elmitchbo]

i was reading the responses to the 'theory of top set' post. some very interesting comments there. one that stuck out was "first, try and do whatever is consistent with what you would do with a lesser hand." that is, don't give away the strength of your hand by doing something unusual.

that got me thinking about another topic that has troubled me lately. after reading HOH i tried to start varying my bet size for awhile, but it didn't seem right to me. i've always been inclined to make the same size bets in most stituations because i think it's harder to read, and i think the comment from the other post(made by Tilt) supports my thinking.

if you always make a half pot size bet on the flop how can your opponent ever know if your leading out with top set or making a continuation bet with nothing? further more, if you make the same play as a semi-bluff with a strong draw it makes it even mroe difficult for opponenets to put you on a hand.

on the other hand, if i vary my bets i feel that i can't make them random enough to not give away info. that might be paranoia on my part but i always think "he knows i'm trapping because i bet less,' or 'he knows i hit my TPTK and i'm trying to defend it by betting more.'

what do you guys think? do you stick with a standard bet or do you try to mix it up?

last, is this a read dependent thing(most things are)? do you bump your bets up or down based on what you think your opponenet will or will not call? if you do that don't you give away info to players that aren't in the hand?

[evil_twin]

Full pot on a drawing board, half pot on a dry board.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
if you always make a half pot size bet on the flop how can your opponent ever know if your leading out with top set or making a continuation bet with nothing?

[/ QUOTE ]
If you always limp in, how can your opponents ever know if you have AA or 72o? They can't, but you will lose with that strategy. My goal is not to be completely unreadable. My goal is to win money. It's worth giving up a small amount of information to

/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Get more money into the pot while you are ahead.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Protect your hand.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Push people off mediocre hands.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Get better information about your opponents' hands.

[EWillers]

There are factors that are specific to the hand, and then there is the idea of varying one's bet for the sake of "mixing it up".

I first take all the factors specific to the hand into account. These are (collectively) far more important than varying the bet. These factors include: pot size, depth of the money, strength of my hand, position, # of players, what I know about my oppenent(s), etc.

This makes the bet size far more varied than simply 1/2 the pot on an uncoordinated board and full pot on a cooridinated board. Usually, this will provide enough of a betting mixture so as to be dificult to read.

Sure, all these factors are based on rationale, even rationale concievably known to your opponent (save the strength of your own hand).

However, 1) most oppenents are not considering all these things when responding to your bet (if they are you're playing in far tougher games than I) and 2) even if they do take all these factors into account, their assessment of them will necessarily vary enough from mine with the result that making any type of definitive judgement as to the strength of my hand will be rather dificult.

After all these factors are taken into acount I decide whether a splash of artificial "varying" is in order. Usually it's not. But that's just me.

[benkahuna]

I'd recommend Phil Gordon's Little Green Book. He lays out a general strategy for varying bet size based context, but on a number of factors making your bets hard to read. I can't explain it better than he explains it in his book. Drop by a book store, page 72.

[elmitchbo]

limping with AA or 72o isn't an appropriate analogy. a limp is a call. betting out after the flop is different.

more to the point, i do always make the exact same raise preflop. i vary that amount from game to game based on what it takes to get others to fold. but once i get an amount, like 4x the BB, i always raise that same amount with every hand from every position. i think the same logic for keeping your bets the same after the flop applies to rasises before the flop.

i agree that making money is the ultimate point. i would also agree that it is potentially worth giving up info to accomplish the things you listed on any individual hand. but over the long haul i think withholding info is more profitable.

but i maybe wrong. i suck at poker.

Two different issues here...

Preflop and post flop

Preflop I always try to raise the same whether I'm playing 8-7 suited or AA (exception being I have AA or KK and there is already a raise infront of me)

However, post-flop betting should be based on the texture of the board and what you want to accomplish.

Side-note... I have a friend that always raise 5x the blind and or 3x the raise infront of him when he is on the button NO MATTER WHAT (with few exceptions)... and he makes a killing.

I'm not ballsy enough to play this way but it works for him.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
limping with AA or 72o isn't an appropriate analogy. a limp is a call.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are making an irrelevant distinction to avoid recognizing the point. You seem to be greatly overvaluing deception, but you already make plays that reveal the strength of your hand, e.g., by raising with AA instead of limping. The extra value of increasing the size of the pot can be worth a lot more than the deception.

[ QUOTE ]
over the long haul i think withholding info is more profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, you disagree with Harrington on Hold'em (see the extensive discussion of sizes of open-raises preflop). I think HOH is clearly right. I'm not sure why you are restating your disagreement with no additional logic or evidence.

[paulish]

[ QUOTE ]
Side-note... I have a friend that always raise 5x the blind and or 3x the raise infront of him when he is on the button NO MATTER WHAT (with few exceptions)... and he makes a killing.


[/ QUOTE ]

and he uses this with a fat bet on the flop no matter what as well? what limit does he play?

When i first sit down at a table my bets never change, when ive sat long enough for peope to have reads on me or vise versa i begin to allow my reads to dictate my betting patterns

[ QUOTE ]
i was reading the responses to the 'theory of top set' post. some very interesting comments there. one that stuck out was "first, try and do whatever is consistent with what you would do with a lesser hand." that is, don't give away the strength of your hand by doing something unusual.

that got me thinking about another topic that has troubled me lately. after reading HOH i tried to start varying my bet size for awhile, but it didn't seem right to me. i've always been inclined to make the same size bets in most stituations because i think it's harder to read, and i think the comment from the other post(made by Tilt) supports my thinking.

if you always make a half pot size bet on the flop how can your opponent ever know if your leading out with top set or making a continuation bet with nothing? further more, if you make the same play as a semi-bluff with a strong draw it makes it even mroe difficult for opponenets to put you on a hand.

on the other hand, if i vary my bets i feel that i can't make them random enough to not give away info. that might be paranoia on my part but i always think "he knows i'm trapping because i bet less,' or 'he knows i hit my TPTK and i'm trying to defend it by betting more.'

what do you guys think? do you stick with a standard bet or do you try to mix it up?

last, is this a read dependent thing(most things are)? do you bump your bets up or down based on what you think your opponenet will or will not call? if you do that don't you give away info to players that aren't in the hand?

[/ QUOTE ]



To me it depends on who I am playing. Normally I like to mix up my bet! /images/graemlins/grin.gif


http://www.darkwars.org/index.php?a=click&id=89707

[mudbuddha]

why do you put that crap on the bottom of your post
whats wrong with you ??

I find that 3-5x BB is my typical preflop raise and I will always do it, unless there are limpers, in which case I will typically raise more. Comments?

[Abbaddabba]

As was already said, if you're playing in games where the competition is so tough that you fear the way you randomize your bet size may be interpreted by players, find another game.

Don't be so concerned about being read. Be more concerned about interpreting what they do. The amount of information that they get from you betting half the pot as opposed to 3/4 of the pot is negligable. If you're varying the bets effectively, they're more likely to misinterpret it than they are to correctly interpret it. Deception isn't the key though. Value is much more important. Don't be scared to bet big when you have a big hand because you think they'll be able to read you like a book. You'd be suprised at how often people use the rationale "if they wanted me to call, why would they bet so much?" as an excuse to call huge bets with marginal hands.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
i was reading the responses to the 'theory of top set' post. some very interesting comments there. one that stuck out was "first, try and do whatever is consistent with what you would do with a lesser hand." that is, don't give away the strength of your hand by doing something unusual.

that got me thinking about another topic that has troubled me lately. after reading HOH i tried to start varying my bet size for awhile, but it didn't seem right to me. i've always been inclined to make the same size bets in most stituations because i think it's harder to read, and i think the comment from the other post(made by Tilt) supports my thinking.

if you always make a half pot size bet on the flop how can your opponent ever know if your leading out with top set or making a continuation bet with nothing? further more, if you make the same play as a semi-bluff with a strong draw it makes it even mroe difficult for opponenets to put you on a hand.

on the other hand, if i vary my bets i feel that i can't make them random enough to not give away info. that might be paranoia on my part but i always think "he knows i'm trapping because i bet less,' or 'he knows i hit my TPTK and i'm trying to defend it by betting more.'

what do you guys think? do you stick with a standard bet or do you try to mix it up?

last, is this a read dependent thing(most things are)? do you bump your bets up or down based on what you think your opponenet will or will not call? if you do that don't you give away info to players that aren't in the hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

I like to keep my preflop raises very similar, but even these vary depending on my position, whether I'm opening, how many people have come in already, whether there's a raise in front, the size of the stacks I'm playing against, the size of my stack, the size of the blinds compared to the average stack, and how close we are to the money and how my opponents have been reacting to my raises(Some of these apply only or mostly to tourney play).

Post flop there are even more factors that can affect my bet size and I don't make nearly as much effort to keep my bet sizes the same as I do pre-flop.

--Zetack

[Ricardido]

I try to think i do, but for an experienced player i probably am like an open book in terms of readability

i do if i'm playing well. no, if i'm tired and everybody sucks.