Continuation bet - how far?

[Phlebas]

As a rule of thumb I suggest:
- always bet vs 1 opponent
- bet vs 2 opponents if:
-- last to act (but you're only really betting for the free card & fold equity so check the turn UI)
-- AK or AJ on a Qxx board (*)
-- if you have a backdoor nuts flush draw
- check vs 3 or more opponents

* - Qxx boards seem the most likely for people to fold in my experience, probably because they are only likely to have 1 overcard at most, it is plausible that it hit you and not many will cold call with Qx. If you're betting with less than AK then Axx or Kxx boards are bad news and Jxx or lower isn't that plausible that it hit you.

Of course, individual circumstances and reads on your opponents should mean at least as much as any general rules.

[GrunchCan]

I really think that trying to apply general rules to this situation is a mistake. I don't like general rules in poker overall, but I especially don't like them here. You have less margain for error.

Drop that Kool-Aid!

[Phlebas]

Oh certainly, hence my last comment. A "rule of thumb" should only apply if you have absolutely no other information on your opponent(s).

[ QUOTE ]
Drop that Kool-Aid!

[/ QUOTE ]
Had to Google to get that reference - we don't have Kool-Aid in the UK [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Nfinity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I still think failed continuation bets are the one read that even weak players notice.

[/ QUOTE ]

That could be true. It might be becasue continuation bets -- +EV ones and -EV ones -- are one of the most common moves on the flop in low-limit HE. Your opponents have seen a million of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Regarding the way we play Low-Limit Hold' Em this probably accounts for a big percentage of our profitability.

Think about it. When you Raise Pre-Flop and actually have a made hand after the Flop, can you think of anything that you wouldn't bet if checked to? Few times if any are correct. What about when you flop a big draw and it's checked to you?

Toss in a few continuation bets and our observant opponent is wasting his time. This bet becomes one of the most effective ways to disguise our current hand and hands to come.

Not only that, but when we are just as likely to be betting AA as an OESD, how do our passive opponents feel about raising TPGK? If they could somehow find a raise against another player, they still might not against you. Few people realize how much profit they earn by lulling their opponents into this passive standard.

[Nfinity]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh certainly, hence my last comment. A "rule of thumb" should only apply if you have absolutely no other information on your opponent(s).

[ QUOTE ]
Drop that Kool-Aid!

[/ QUOTE ]
Had to Google to get that reference - we don't have Kool-Aid in the UK [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Where do your nations children get all their precious vitamins and nutrients?

[Phlebas]

[ QUOTE ]
Where do your nations children get all their precious vitamins and nutrients?

[/ QUOTE ]

McDonalds, just like the rest of the world! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Kumubou]

In hand 1, you really should have checked the turn. You are betting into a fairly large field; the odds that someone has something is fairly good, and most of those hands are going to be pair+ hands, since this board is as dry as they come.

Given the way you played it, check the river. The odds of you being best now are slim, but the odds of either both players folding or calling with a worse hand are abysmal.

Hand 2 unless you have a read of BB auto-betting flops like that you need to either peel and fold the turn UI or just fold now with the field to act. Chasing overs with no backdoor draws is bad news.

Hand 3 is worth a bet, as you actually have a hand with some showdown value.

If I bet, this is my plan for the river:

If both fold, next hand plz.
If one player folds I am betting any river card not an ace.
If both players call I am checking behind if they check to me.
If both players call and the BB bets the river, I am calling if MP folds and probably folding if MP calls.
If both players call and MP donks, I am either raising (as I do not want the BB overcalling) or folding (if I think MP is making this play only with a better hand).

If you get checkraised on the turn... play some poker. >_< Against loose/passives you would have to at least think about folding, as you have no draws to speak of.

-K

[GrunchCan]

Funny. I never really considered the international implications of the semantics behind my avatar.

Heh. I probably won't start now. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Bankuri]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Understand that the bet you are talking about (when you missed the flop completely) is a bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is quite true. These boards are very unlikely to have hit anyone. Betting with AQ on a K72 board is very often a value bet with the best hand and also hand protection (we'd love to fold A2/Q2/33/etc).

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, time to show my ignorance. I don't see how we have the best hand if there is an A2/Q2/33 out there against us. Perhaps you meant or hand protection? It's still a bluff in the sense that you have a very weak draw without the best hand.

And, another thing I'm working on is distinguishing the statistics (how likely something is to happen) from the actual instance (when something happens). Now, as you say these flops are unlikely to have hit anyone, but occasionally they do! My experience playing with poor players in the micros is that one of these players betting into one of these flops means they hit part of it.

A small anecdote. Feynman was giving a talk at Cal Tech and he started his talk by saying as he was walking to the lecture hall from the parking lot he saw a car with the license plate (2FB 755). He then asked, what were the odds of that happening?

Well, of course, it's extremely unlikely that he would see that precise license plate that night, but it isn't at all unlikely that he would see at least one license plate. Asking what the odds were of seeing the license plate he saw is asking the wrong question. I often wonder if that's what people are doing in these forums when they talk about flops being unlikely to have hit anyone.

Am I just being ignorant here?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I still think failed continuation bets are the one read that even weak players notice.

[/ QUOTE ]

That could be true. It might be becasue continuation bets -- +EV ones and -EV ones -- are one of the most common moves on the flop in low-limit HE. Your opponents have seen a million of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Think about it. When you Raise Pre-Flop and actually have a made hand after the Flop, can you think of anything that you wouldn't bet if checked to? Few times if any are correct. What about when you flop a big draw and it's checked to you?


[/ QUOTE ]

You could be exposing yourself to a c/r. This depends on villain, but if they know you bet with big cards+draw, and figure this is more likely than big pair, then they may be check-raising. I don't like betting into 3-4 players after the flop misses, especially if I don't have any draw (short of runner, runner & pairing overcards). I'm talking about a LAGgy table here, not a bunch of LPPs.