do you vary your bet size?

[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.

[ 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! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]


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 ??

[Ricardido]

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

[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

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