Follow up bets

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree that the higher the buy in the more difference it makes.

Are higher limit players more likely to fold to a follow up bet? Or are you more likely to get called?

[/ QUOTE ]

Higher limit players are generally much easier to bluff. Low limit players tend to be tougher and recognize a continuation bet for what it is.

[Colombo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree that the higher the buy in the more difference it makes.

Are higher limit players more likely to fold to a follow up bet? Or are you more likely to get called?

[/ QUOTE ]

Higher limit players are generally much easier to bluff. Low limit players tend to be tougher and recognize a continuation bet for what it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're kidding me right? At the higher buyins (say $100+), you will get check-raised after making a continuation bet about 75% of the time. You will get raised by air alot, and also made hands.

For example, you raise AK and the BB calls.

The flop comes 924. The BB has 10Js and checks to you. You bet 2/3 the pot. If the BB is a tough player, he will probably raise you here. He figures you for a couple of high cards, and if you have a PP he is probably willing to take that risk as it is more likely you have nothing.

In the lower buyins, people say "o well, i missed that flop, I'll fold."

[zoobird]

I play mostly freerolls, and your last sentence describes it perfectly. In freerolls (and I think most low buy in events) many of the players are only thinking about their own hand. They're not thinking "ok, the flop missed me, but it probably missed everyone so any bet is likely to be a c-bet, so I can steal here". So a flop like 952 rainbow is going to be very easy to take with a follow up bet. That said, I still think its worth betting 2/3 of the pot...1/2 just doesn't seem to win it often enough.

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree that the higher the buy in the more difference it makes.

Are higher limit players more likely to fold to a follow up bet? Or are you more likely to get called?

[/ QUOTE ]

Higher limit players are generally much easier to bluff. Low limit players tend to be tougher and recognize a continuation bet for what it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're kidding me right? At the higher buyins (say $100+), you will get check-raised after making a continuation bet about 75% of the time. You will get raised by air alot, and also made hands.

For example, you raise AK and the BB calls.

The flop comes 924. The BB has 10Js and checks to you. You bet 2/3 the pot. If the BB is a tough player, he will probably raise you here. He figures you for a couple of high cards, and if you have a PP he is probably willing to take that risk as it is more likely you have nothing.

In the lower buyins, people say "o well, i missed that flop, I'll fold."

[/ QUOTE ]

I was half kidding. On the whole, I think continuation bets work better against stronger players. Weaker players, typical of low buyin events, are likely to be calling stations. If they have something, they will call or raise you. Sometimes you have to make a followup bet on the turn to convince them you are ahead. However, some calling station types will call you down all the way with bottom pair or whatever.

Against stronger players, you have to make the continuation bet believable. You want to fire at an Axx, KQx, or low rag flop representing an ace, high cards, or overpair respectively. Stronger players are likely to raise or call with the intention of taking the pot on the turn if you continuation bet flops like K82,r or 77J.

Against weaker players, I would be more likely to cbet a flop that looks like it missed everyone. Against stronger players, I would cbet a flop that looks like it would hit the preflop raiser.

It also depends on how the table is playing. In online rebuys, between the rebuy period and the bubble, I would be reluctant to cbet or make any bluff.

There are different types of weak low buyin players. Online, you find a lot of maniac and calling station types. Obviously, a cbet works better against a weak/tight player.