Harrington On Hold'Em: Continuation & Probe bets in SNGs

[Michael C.]

I think you have to make continuation bets a lot of the time. Lets say you raise with AK, and the flop is J 10 8 rainbow, or even suited. The flop missed the other player more often than not, and while you are committing 1/2 to 2/3 of the pot (or even the pot with lower antes), he's committing most of his stack. So it's a winning play. Also, if you make a bet and lose or check/fold, you'll get a lot more action when you really do hit your hand. I think the key is that your bets are the same amounts if you hit or miss. Of course sometimes you know your opponent has something and you check/fold. I also sometimes bet the turn when I think the opponent is on a draw. That's worked for me more often than not, but I've also had times where I've blown off most of my chips without hitting anything, which makes you feel about as stupid as can be...

One thing that I don't think works at all is to make mini bets or 1/4 of the pot or stuff like that. It's too easy for people to then raise you off, and if you bet the same way when you do have a hand, you're giving people odds to draw at you.

[AA suited]

you would raise to 160 if he bets out 1st with 1/2pot? now you've just committed 30% of your stack on this hand.

you're now down to 560 chips (assuming you start off w/800 chips.)

i would have cut my loses, folded, and have 720 chips to fight another battle. why gamble so early in the tourny?

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
I definitely think there is a place however for the probe bet.
Similar example:
You raise to 80 from the button with AQs, BB completes for 50 more. Flop is K Q 4 rainbow. You got some of it, but maybe not enough.

1:BB bets out for 80, you raise to 160, or
2:BB checks, you bet 80,

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think Harrington would call either of these a probe bet. The first is a raise, and the 2nd is a continuation bet (since you raised pre-flop).

He usually talks about probe bets when you call pre-flop. On the flop or turn, nobody else seems to be showing much strength, so you fire out a 1/3 pot sized bet to see what's up. You commit very little to the hand, but your opponent will need to put in a decent sized bet if he wants to raise you. This puts your opponent in an tough spot since your small bet could also indicate a trap.

Most of Harrington's SnG examples have bigger stacks (ie 1500) than we get at party. I think his advice is fantastic (who am I to argue), but be careful when applying it to shorter stacked games. One of his best themes is to always take into account all the stack sizes, so don't forget to do that when looking at the examples.

[Lloyd]

[ QUOTE ]
It totally depends on the circumstances.

I think in general it's a bad idea to bet a small amount to see if your opponent will fold. People do this all the time against me and I raise them off their hands constantly. You're better off making a decision about whether to bet a normal amount or just check.

[/ QUOTE ]

A continuation bet is a "normal amount" bet. You should bet exactly the same as if you hit the flop with something like TPTK. The point is that those times you bet and get called/raise and have to resort to check-fold, are made up by those times when you get called or raise and have the goods.

[DrPhysic]

I agree. I thought about not using the raise example at all as it is not completely representative of what I had in mind.

The second example is however. The BB has shown either weakness or is slowplaying top pair (or any big hand) probably waiting to bet on the turn. You need to know which. Therefore the probe bet.

From Phil's post: [ QUOTE ]
On the flop or turn, nobody else seems to be showing much strength, so you fire out a 1/3 pot sized bet to see what's up. You commit very little to the hand, but your opponent will need to put in a decent sized bet if he wants to raise you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understood the continuation bet as being a bet on the flop after you had bet preflop, but in a circumstance where you have basically missed the flop and you are making the continuation bet as a bluff to see if you can steal the hand.

More significantly, I understood the probe bet to be one where you need information. You have flopped a decent hand but a long way from the nuts, (regardless of who bet before the flop), and you need inexpensive information to find out if your hand is probably good or completely dominated.

I will go back and re-read the entire section of the book, but please educate me if I am mis-understanding the intent of the two bets.

Doc

[stillnotking]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It totally depends on the circumstances.

I think in general it's a bad idea to bet a small amount to see if your opponent will fold. People do this all the time against me and I raise them off their hands constantly. You're better off making a decision about whether to bet a normal amount or just check.

[/ QUOTE ]

A continuation bet is a "normal amount" bet. You should bet exactly the same as if you hit the flop with something like TPTK. The point is that those times you bet and get called/raise and have to resort to check-fold, are made up by those times when you get called or raise and have the goods.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo! The key is to bet the same amount whether you hit the flop or not. It is generally very easy to spot players who bet the pot when they hit and 1/2 pot when they miss, and play accordingly. If you are watching for it, it is often very obvious when someone is making one of those "I don't like my hand so please do me a favor and fold" bets. I believe Doyle Brunson calls them post-oak bets.

[Pulplife]

I understood the continuation bet as being a bet on the flop after you had bet preflop, but in a circumstance where you have basically missed the flop and you are making the continuation bet as a bluff to see if you can steal the hand.

More significantly, I understood the probe bet to be one where you need information. You have flopped a decent hand but a long way from the nuts, (regardless of who bet before the flop), and you need inexpensive information to find out if your hand is probably good or completely dominated.

I will go back and re-read the entire section of the book, but please educate me if I am mis-understanding the intent of the two bets.

Doc

[/ QUOTE ]

According to Harrington, the only difference between a probe bet and a continuation bet are two things:
1) A continuation bet takes place on the flop after a pf raise vs. a probe bet takes place on the flop after a pf call.
2) A continuation bet is about 1/2 the pot vs. a probe is a bit less (closer to 1/4 the pot).

In both cases, you have either missed the flop or have a piece of it but not the nuts.

Hope this helps clear up Harrington's definition of the bets.

Pulp [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[pastabatman]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are watching for it, it is often very obvious when someone is making one of those "I don't like my hand so please do me a favor and fold" bets.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, before reading HOH, my general understanding was that you should always bet the same amount, so you don't give information. But, if you're sometimes betting half the pot with something better, isn't that a good way to mix up your game?

BTW, great discussion! Thanks for the reponse.

Pasta

[TakeMeToTheRiver]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A continuation bet is a "normal amount" bet. You should bet exactly the same as if you hit the flop with something like TPTK. The point is that those times you bet and get called/raise and have to resort to check-fold, are made up by those times when you get called or raise and have the goods.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo! The key is to bet the same amount whether you hit the flop or not. It is generally very easy to spot players who bet the pot when they hit and 1/2 pot when they miss, and play accordingly. If you are watching for it, it is often very obvious when someone is making one of those "I don't like my hand so please do me a favor and fold" bets. I believe Doyle Brunson calls them post-oak bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Harrington does not advocate pot-size bets (which are the mantra on the 2+2 boards) -- he likes 1/2-pot bets a good portion of the time when you hit the flop... yes, I know that you may be giving people correct odds to call, etc. But if your usual bet is in the 1/2-pot range, then the probe/continuation is a normal size bet.

Also -- if you bet 1/2-pot, you only need to be "right," i.e., induce a fold one out of three times to break even... any more and you are in the money.

Note that Harrington also distinguishes online games from live games. He finds that online players don't respect bets that appear small (although they may be correct compared to the pot) and therefore you may need to bet more...

One last Harrington point in response to someone else -- his book DOES apply to S&Gs -- he uses many satellite/S&G examples in his book.

That's it for now...

[Pulplife]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I definitely think there is a place however for the probe bet.
Similar example:
You raise to 80 from the button with AQs, BB completes for 50 more. Flop is K Q 4 rainbow. You got some of it, but maybe not enough.

1:BB bets out for 80, you raise to 160, or
2:BB checks, you bet 80,

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think Harrington would call either of these a probe bet. The first is a raise, and the 2nd is a continuation bet (since you raised pre-flop).

He usually talks about probe bets when you call pre-flop. On the flop or turn, nobody else seems to be showing much strength, so you fire out a 1/3 pot sized bet to see what's up. You commit very little to the hand, but your opponent will need to put in a decent sized bet if he wants to raise you. This puts your opponent in an tough spot since your small bet could also indicate a trap.

Most of Harrington's SnG examples have bigger stacks (ie 1500) than we get at party. I think his advice is fantastic (who am I to argue), but be careful when applying it to shorter stacked games. One of his best themes is to always take into account all the stack sizes, so don't forget to do that when looking at the examples.

[/ QUOTE ]

This brings up a very important point, which applies to the thread discussing raising pocket tens after five players have limped in. I play at Poker Stars where your starting chip count is 1500. This allows you to play a stronger, less passive style. I'm not saying you turn into a LAG, but you are able to play your hands with strength...such as making a continuation bets without worrying about committing too much of your stack.

I like hate having to play defense right out of the gate because every bet or raise could cripple me. I think this naturally breeds tight/weak play (because you have to protect what little you have).

Pulp [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]