Defence Against The Continuation Bet

[BZ_Zorro]

Continuation bet:

Your opponent raised preflop, then bets the flop, and you're pretty sure he missed, and your pair is good. How do you play it? That's what OP was asking. Let's not complicate it.

[-Skeme-]

[ QUOTE ]
you're pretty sure he missed

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, but none of us know if missed equals no improvement or if missed means no pair or above.

OP, it depends on who the opponent is. If he's a super tight player and I've called with a PP that doesn't set, I usually check-fold to a decent bet. If he's fishy, and loose, I might check-call. If he's tight and aggressive, I might lead out or I might check-raise. Player dependent. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[MikeL05]

[ QUOTE ]
OOP, usually check-call and lead the turn for 2/3 pot if I'm sure it's a continuation bet. Depends on opponent though. With 6 outs to an over I'm not too concerned.

In position, raise it up, min + 50%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you letting someone with overcards see a turn without putting more money in? If you're going to do that, you may as well turn your flop play into a check-raise by raising the additional 2/3 pot you would have bet on the turn.

[primate]

[ QUOTE ]
Continuation bet:

Your opponent raised preflop, then bets the flop, and you're pretty sure he missed, and your pair is good. How do you play it? That's what OP was asking. Let's not complicate it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct. This is what my thoughts of the definition were. Preflop raiser has say A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] flop comes 4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]10 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], you are sitting with 7 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]7 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].

Preflop raiser bets 1/2 to 2/3rds the pot. Standard strong play if up against 1 or 2 opponents. He mixes it up so you never know if he has PP or AK KQs etc. Hell he might even have hit a set because he bets out at the pot everytime he raises preflop. So how do you defend it?

[chumsferd]

Amoeba's advice is pretty good. Against an unknown, I'd definitely take a line similar to their recommendations.

Since you asked about check-raising... I just wanted to add that I'd be very careful about check-raising in these kinds of spots, generally. If the player is known to you, and you have a reasonable idea of their preflop and flop play, you will get yourself into tricky spots check-raising. I think you can get away with it only if you know:

1) That your opponent is moderately liberal with their preflop raises, and
2) That your opponent plays well / straightforward (perhaps erring towards weak-tight) postflop.

Basically, if you check-raise in these kinds of spots, you are looking to win the pot right there. There are far too many scare cards that can come later and turn your hand to dirt. For example, consider the following four scenarios (assuming each opponent continuation bets 100% of the time):

1a) Your opponent is conservative with their preflop raises, only raising 3% of the time. They play well / straightforward postflop.

If you choose to check raise here, you'd be taking the worst of it. Your opponent is probably only raising with AA-QQ and AK. By check-raising a pot sized amount you would be laying 2/1 that they have AK, when actually it's (roughly) an even money proposition.

1b) Your opponent is conservative with their preflop raises, only raising 3% of the time. They play badly postflop.

By check-raising here you are still on the wrong end of an even money proposition for 2/1 stakes. Now, though, your opponent might make a play with AK that will make it difficult for you. What if they call? They could just be trying to trap with their overpair, so can you really bet the turn? And if you check the turn, they may bet into you even if they still only have Ace High. You're just going to get yourself into a tricky situation, and if they play badly postflop, you'll find a better opportunity to take their money (although it might take a while).

2a) Your opponent is liberal with their preflop raises, coming in for a raise on 9-10% of their hands. They play badly postflop.

Check-raising here is a better proposition than in 1b & 1b, since only about 20% of your (typical) opponent’s hands are likely to have you in trouble. If a pot-sized raise would put you all in (or close to all in), then it would probably be the smart move. If the stacks are deep though, you are going to get into a tricky spot on later streets. Particularly since your c/r has made the pot large, you are OOP and there are probably many scary cards that could come on the turn and river.

There are some cases where you could make a good argument for check-raising here. But, generally, I just wouldn't bother in the small stakes games, it'll just get you into trouble.

2b) Your opponent is liberal with their preflop raises, coming in for a raise on 9-10% of their hands. They play well / straightforward postflop (again, perhaps, erring towards weak-tight).

This is a reasonable spot to check-raise. Your are ahead of a large % of your opponents hand distribution, and there is a good possibility that you can win the pot right there. If they come back at you, or even call, then you are probably done with the hand.

HTH

[Delphin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you're pretty sure he missed

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, but none of us know if missed equals no improvement or if missed means no pair or above.

[/ QUOTE ]

The OP should have said suspected continuation bet. A good continuation bet will be about the same size as a bet for value so that they cannot be distinguished. Your opponent could have TT against your 99 on a 7 high flop or he could have AQ against your 99.

In this situation, I think you have to consider the preflop action and the number of likely hands that your opponent could have to determine whether you feel the bet is a continuation bet or a bet for value with a hand that has you beaten. If you feel you are more likely to be ahead, reraise somewhere between the minimum raise and 3x.

[primate]

So generally speaking check raising is going to get you into all sorts of bother. What about just calling the flop. The preflop raiser then has to fire a second barrell which takes some balls if all he's drawing to are 2 overcards such as AK. If he checks the turn then perhaps you know for sure he aint got a piece of the board?

Do we then say that the continuation better has the best of it against his opponents?

[-Skeme-]

I know, that's not what we're wondering. We're specifically wondering about the teriminology used in the rules. It's unimportant, forgot I mentioned it.

[amoeba]

check raise only gets you in to trouble if they are loose enough to call your check raise or repop you with just overs.

[chumsferd]

The continuation bet obviously gets the better of a lot of opponents, that's why you and I do it too, right?

You could extend my first reply as deep as you like, inventing more and more scenarios - some of which it's going to be a good idea to check-raise some of which it isn't. In general you are going to get into trouble against loose or tricky opponents. This is a small stakes forum, and the games you play are probably full of loose players, and probably also players who try to be tricky. Therefore, it's probably not a wise move to be making too many check-raises in the particular kind of hands you mention in your original post.

That's not to say there is nothing you can do against opponents who are always continuation betting. Check-calling and bet-folding will also be good lines, against the right opponents. It's not feasible to go into every possible scenario... you'll get the most benefit if you work through a bunch of scenarios yourself... what if the player is tight / loose preflop? passive / aggressive? straightforward / tricky? and the flop comes ABC, DEF,... ...XYZ? but if you want to post specific hands / scenarios where you have good stats (or reads) on opponents then I, and I'm sure others, would be happy to go over the merits of different plays...

But if you are looking for a universally correct way to deal continuation bets, I don't think there is one. Amoeba's first post is the best suggested here, IMO.