The art of min betting

[rocflight]

My experience with this has mainly come from playing the Rounders series at Royal Vegas, don't know if this is prevalent at other sites.

Anyhow, I've noticed that people have been using min bets and min raises quite liberally.

But my question mainly concerns post flop play when a player either leads out betting the absolute minimum or does so after people have checked to them, even when the pot is quite large. When a player does this, the alarm bell always goes off in my head because I guess I've been trained to think that weakness means strength. I'm not really sure how to proceed here. I've seen players call such bets and then have to face a pot sized bet on the turn. I've also seen players raise more appropriate to the bet size (say 3x the min bet) and have it called. Another possibility is that other players raise something close to the size of the pot, at which point the initial bettor will either raise big (trapping) or fold.

However, I haven't really found a pattern in terms of what kind of hands from which types of players warrant such plays. Does anyone have a good grasp of the inner workings of this play?

The reason I'm asking is that a lot of times, this seems like a very clever play especially when the skill level around the table is not solid all around. I think many players get confused (including myself) when faced with this play and have a hard time knowing how exactly to handle it. On the other hand, the player employing this play almost always benefits in that he/she may get to see a few cheap extra cards (if called down), or win the pot outright (I've seen it happen quite a bit, believe it or not), or lose the minimum if someone does have a hand.

If someone could explain how to employ this play as well as play against it, that would be greatly helpful.

[tdomeski]

I lose all respect for people who min bet/min raise. If I raise PF and they min bet into me I will nearly always raise. And guess what, they nearly always fold. If it's a big multi way pot and it's checked to them and they min bet, I min check/raise just to mess with them. Then when he calls I pot the turn. And guess what, they nearly always fold. Min bets/raises are stupid, if it's a mindfuck then I guess they win but I'd imagine being a perpetual min bet/raiser costs you a ton of chips in the long run b/c 1) you get raised off a lot of hands 2) you lose so much value on your real hands when you actually bet a significant amount relative to the pot.

[illegit]

Treat a min bet like a check. i.e. It might be a trapping huge hand, but usually it's someone who's weak and is betting just to bet. Cause they feel they should.

I've watched a buddy of mine (this really old dude) play online over his shoulder and the spots where he minbets as a.. bluff, I guess (a bluff with no chance of working) are absolutely mindboggling.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
If I raise PF and they min bet into me I will nearly always raise. And guess what, they nearly always fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

i wouldn't go so far as "nearly always" but it's also been my experience that they usually do.

a more interesting question is whether they fold more after a min bet (after calling a raise PF) than they do after a check. i personally think that a min-bettor is slightly more likely to play with you than a checker.

[runout_mick]

[/ QUOTE ] If someone could explain how to employ this play as well as play against it, that would be greatly helpful.

[/ QUOTE ]

A minbet into a small pot (unraised preflop, 2 players to see the flop) can be correct and often is.

A minbet into a large pot or with multiple players to see the flop almost NEVER is.

Even if a player has "it" when he minbets into a postflop pot, he's giving anyone with even the remotest of outs the odds to draw to a better hand. If you have 7 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] on a [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img][img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] flop that has a pot of 1450, and minbet for 200, you are not "juicing the pot", you are just giving your opponents with a single higher [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] or full house draw GREAT odds to take all of your chips. A check (hoping to checkraise) or thought out bet is INFINITELY better than a minbet here.

The bet you make should have a purpose, you should have weighed all your information (put your opponents on ranges of hands, decide what outs they may be looking at in relation to the flop, decide what bet amount "overcharges" them to chase their draws, and add an amount to cover the implied odds your opponent will have if he DOES hit his draw).

The bet I make in any situation will likely be exactly the same as it was the last time this situation came up. Too predictable you say? Odds are that this situation (or a very similar one) has not come up more than once or twice vs the players I am currently playing. If they are smart enough to reverse engineer my hand based on (seemingly) random betting patterns, they deserve my chips.

NEVER bet on "feel", and ALWAYS have a reason (right or wrong) for EVERY bet you make. You'll learn from the times you're wrong (bet too much, too little, read opponent wrong, etc.), and you'll be extracting maximum value from the times you're right.

Sorry for rambling:

long story short: DON'T MINBET INTO A LARGE POT....

hope this helps, gl on the tourney road

Edit: ESPECIALLY use these guidelines when continuation betting, or betting with air (and usually add chips to increase your fold equity).

[TheBlueMonster]

[ QUOTE ]
When a player does this, the alarm bell always goes off in my head because I guess I've been trained to think that weakness means strength.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think they are full of crap and are just betting at the pot.

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
Treat a min bet like a check.

[/ QUOTE ]

[nuclear500]

Unlike a lot of the other posters, I view minbets from different players different ways.

I've come to employ min check-raises more and more when I hold a strong hand (trips or better in a short handed pot, raised or unraised) and I almost always will get a check/call to the river if I value bet correctly.

Like a lot of poker, minbets and minraises depend on quality of players that are doing it and the quality of player that it is being done to.

Better players can fold to bluffs when they know its just not worth it unless they truly have something. But that calling station? He's decided he's going to the river.

[Dave D]

A min bet (at least on the major sites) is the most consistent tell of a good hand, until maybe the last two or three tables, then it gets wierd. Preflop, postflop, a min bet, or a min raise means he has a good hand, like a set or better usually.

That's how you play against it.

[DarrenX]

[ QUOTE ]
Unlike a lot of the other posters, I view minbets from different players different ways.

I've come to employ min check-raises more and more when I hold a strong hand (trips or better in a short handed pot, raised or unraised) and I almost always will get a check/call to the river if I value bet correctly.

Like a lot of poker, minbets and minraises depend on quality of players that are doing it and the quality of player that it is being done to.

Better players can fold to bluffs when they know its just not worth it unless they truly have something. But that calling station? He's decided he's going to the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

I could be wrong, but I think you're talking about something other than what the OP was talking about. A min-raise of a reasonable original bet (i.e. half-pot or more) indeed has it's place. However, if the original bet is 15 (i.e., the smallest bet possible at that level) into a 200 pot, it's another siutuation altogether, one which I believe many posters have already covered.