Barry Greenstein on probe betting Live at the Bike

[bruce]

I had a friend playing yesterday at Live on the Bike which has a 10 minute delay on the internet. Hole cards are shown and there is commentary. Last night the commentator happened to
be Barry Greenstein. He was very interesting to listen to. He
discussed everything regarding holdem, from limit vs no limit,
and no limit cash games vs no limit tourneys. A fascinating
discussion to say the least. They do this from 6 to 10 PM
PST Wed thru Sat. I doubt he'll do it tonight, but I would
check. Anyway he kind of took a shot at Dan H.'s book. He
is not an advocate of probe bets. He stated that he loves
playing against probe betters in tournaments. When a player makes a probe
bet he will automatically raise them regardless of what he
has. Since they will miss the flop around 70% of the time
he can build his stack in this fashion. I'm not sure if I
necessarily agree with him. If I bet the same amount on the
flop than I am not giving away any information about the value of my hand. Perhaps what he was trying to say is that
from his perspective a probe bet signifies weakness which he can exploit whereas a pot sized bet on the flop regardless of what you have suggest you have strength. What does everyone think about this?

Bruce

[illegit]

If my probe/continuation bets are always 1/2-3/4 the pot, and my value bets are generally in that same range, how will Mr. greenstein know which is which? Please raise me with air when I bet half the pot with my flopped set Mr. greenstein. Please.

More importantly though 90% of the time you aren't making probe bets against world-class players so it's pretty irrelevant how Greenstein reacts to what seems to be a probe bet when most of your competition isn't B. greenstein.

[woodguy]

To illiget: Probe bets are not continutaion bets.

A probe bet usually comes from someone out of position who was not the PFR.

I agree with Barry and I usually raise any probe bet if I was the PFR and have position on the hand, regardless of what I have.

Once you raise the probe bet, they have to be very big to stay in the hand.

This is why its also usually a good idea to lead out when you hit a set when you are out of position and were not the PFR, especially against a strong player, as the PFR is more likely to raise than fold to your bet.

Regards,
Woodguy

[KramerTM]

Great, so I'm always betting on the flop OOP when Barry raised me PF and I hit it big. He raises, I reraise, I make money.

[illegit]

[ QUOTE ]
To illiget: Probe bets are not continutaion bets.

A probe bet usually comes from someone out of position who was not the PFR.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm well aware. I said probe/continuattion bets in case Barry responds similarly to continuation bets (as most PF raisors miss the flop as well), but if not then my comments can just be applied to probe bets. Doesn't change any of the content of my post.
[ QUOTE ]
Once you raise the probe bet, they have to be very big to stay in the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is great, but it has to do with how you generally respond to probe bets (or bets that appear to be probe bets) not whether or not you should be making probe bets in the first place when YOU are the probe bettor. If someone makes a value bet that looks like a probe bet, then you don't know which is which. Is Barry G. saying he himself never makes probe bets, esp. against weak players? Doubt it. He likely does it very often.
[ QUOTE ]
This is why its also usually a good idea to lead out when you hit a set when you are out of position and were not the PFR, especially against a strong player, as the PFR is more likely to raise than fold to your bet.


[/ QUOTE ]
Right, so like I said, please Barry raise my "probe bet" when i hit my set.

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps what he was trying to say is that
from his perspective a probe bet signifies weakness which he can exploit whereas a pot sized bet on the flop regardless of what you have suggest you have strength.

[/ QUOTE ]

Harrington stresses over and over again that to be a strong player you must vary the size of your bets, both probe bets and value bets, to prevent other players from getting a read on you based on bet size.

Greenstein may certainly be correct that weak players might often tip off their hand by the size of their probe bets, but I doubt his automatic response to a probe bet from somebody like Harrington would be to raise...

Also, Harrington himself says that his own response to somebody who places too many probe type bets is to raise. I think the line is something like "you talking to me, you talking to me...."

[barryg1]

[ QUOTE ]
Is Barry G. saying he himself never makes probe bets, esp. against weak players? Doubt it. He likely does it very often.
This is why its also usually a good idea to lead out when you hit a set when you are out of position and were not the PFR, especially against a strong player, as the PFR is more likely to raise than fold to your bet.

Right, so like I said, please Barry raise my "probe bet" when i hit my set.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. When you play no-limit, you have to read players and interpret their bets. Like everyone else, I make mistakes, but I often am able to deduce whether someone is making a defensive bet on the flop, turn, or river. I don't call with a small pair or fold with nothing -- I raise and put my opponents to the test.

2. I had to learn to make some of these value bets on the river against weak players in tournaments who will pay me off. In higher-stakes games, that kind of dinky bet would be asking for a raise.

3. Of course against a good player you may want to occasionally mix it up and make a dinky bet with a good hand or bet into him with the nuts, when he has the betting lead. But sometimes when he has an overpair he may get away when you reraise because he will put you on a set, whereas he might have put the reraise in and lost all his chips if you had made a straightforward check-raise.

4. In summary, you play each player differently and sometimes you will make a misstep. Players who read poker books will do better because they learn to play a better set of hands and they learn the value of their hands after the flop. This gives them an edge over the people they normally play against. But I think the increased education doesn't hurt me because it tends to make my opponents more predictable.

Barry

[woodguy]

Nice post Barry.

Wouldn't mind seeing you post more here in the MTT forum if you see hands that interest you, as opposed to the WPT forum.

Regards,
Woodguy

[LethalRose]

[ QUOTE ]

3. Of course against a good player you may want to occasionally mix it up and make a dinky bet with a good hand or bet into him with the nuts, when he has the betting lead. But sometimes when he has an overpair he may get away when you reraise because he will put you on a set, whereas he might have put the reraise in and lost all his chips if you had made a straightforward check-raise.

Barry

[/ QUOTE ]


I dont know if you play online or not (i assume you do) but I was curious if you mix up your game like this early on in the tournament? I feel like in an online MTT you are moving around too much to make these plays worthwhile. I tend to only make them when it gets down to 2 tables and I know I will be playing my opponents for a long period of time.

[barryg1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

3. Of course against a good player you may want to occasionally mix it up and make a dinky bet with a good hand or bet into him with the nuts, when he has the betting lead. But sometimes when he has an overpair he may get away when you reraise because he will put you on a set, whereas he might have put the reraise in and lost all his chips if you had made a straightforward check-raise.

Barry

[/ QUOTE ]


I dont know if you play online or not (i assume you do) but I was curious if you mix up your game like this early on in the tournament? I feel like in an online MTT you are moving around too much to make these plays worthwhile. I tend to only make them when it gets down to 2 tables and I know I will be playing my opponents for a long period of time.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I talk about mixing it up, I am referring to how I play against a particular player, not how I play against people who have not seen what I have previously done.

Barry