C-bets

[shaundeeb]

are they becoming outdated? I seem to think so more and more each day.

[NoahSD]

I think this too sometimes, but I'm pretty sure that unexploitable play involves a ton of c-betting in lots of different situations--probably not as much as most good players do now, but still a lot.

More importantly, c-betting against the average player is still really profitable. I have the fold to c-bet stat on my HUD, and it's usually like 60-70% I think.

[shaundeeb]

yah noah I've gone away from the more advanced stats lately I felt like they lied a lot because with 90% of people I play they know my game and react more then their stats would show due to my tendencies. Thus I am sick of the 3bet bluff on flop and I experimented with delayed c-bets a lot in the 100r earlier with lots of success. I dunno what would be better to adjust slightly to reduce it smaller c-bet amounts but more 2 barrels or checking behind and betting turn and river most of the time.

[Foucault]

The c-bet is probably the most profitable move in tournament poker, after the pre-flop raise. You just got to adapt to the adaptation. If people float you too much, open raise less often from early position and fire more second barrels (this works better also because if you're raising less then your hands will be on balance stronger when you are c-betting OOP). If you are getting raised, 3-bet more often, call and c/r turn, etc.

[shaundeeb]

yah foc I've done that and was wondering what's next after that i.e. in a developmental poker state I agree with noah I think I check the wrong hands right now and that's a concious effort of mine right now to check with a wider range not just air/big hands/big draws.

[Foucault]

[ QUOTE ]
yah foc I've done that and was wondering what's next after that i.e. in a developmental poker state I agree with noah I think I check the wrong hands right now and that's a concious effort of mine right now to check with a wider range not just air/big hands/big draws.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I'm still not clear on what the problem is. You're saying people are starting to exploit your double barrel, turn c/r, and flop check tendencies? What exactly are they doing?

[shaundeeb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
yah foc I've done that and was wondering what's next after that i.e. in a developmental poker state I agree with noah I think I check the wrong hands right now and that's a concious effort of mine right now to check with a wider range not just air/big hands/big draws.

[/ QUOTE ]

never folding at any point really been annoying maybe it's just running bad etc but I feel like 15-20% is my c-bet success rate.
I guess I'm still not clear on what the problem is. You're saying people are starting to exploit your double barrel, turn c/r, and flop check tendencies? What exactly are they doing?

[/ QUOTE ]

[nath]

I've definitely scaled back my c-bet frequency and I try to c-bet according to the flop texture, who called me, and a couple of other factors.

[Jurollo]

I don't c-bet nearly as much as I used to. I only do if the flop texture is good for it now.

[THEOSU]

i agree with a number of players here. I've scaled back my cbetting, although I still do it reasonably often. Also, in the past short period of time, I've been mixing in more checks with a hand. the combination seems to work well, because as scared as some players are of playing a flop, they seem even more incompetent on the turn and rivers.

[Jurollo]

Ok so OSU's post sorta brings up the best point in the whole thread. Basically C-betting like a madman is still profitable and so can be passive post flop play, as long as you mix it up and play weak and strong hands the same. Shaun for instance is getting played back a ton because of his image and not necessarily because C-betting is a dead art. I don't get played back at nearly as much anymore because I don't c-bet nearly as often, people do bet flops on me a lot now though which allows me to c/r a ton and I do it with weak and strong holdings. So essentially c-bet all you wish, just make sure you still do it with junk too and you will be fine.
~J

[bigballz]

delayed c-bets are the nuts. f the min checkraisers

[shaundeeb]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok so OSU's post sorta brings up the best point in the whole thread. Basically C-betting like a madman is still profitable and so can be passive post flop play, as long as you mix it up and play weak and strong hands the same. Shaun for instance is getting played back a ton because of his image and not necessarily because C-betting is a dead art. I don't get played back at nearly as much anymore because I don't c-bet nearly as often, people do bet flops on me a lot now though which allows me to c/r a ton and I do it with weak and strong holdings. So essentially c-bet all you wish, just make sure you still do it with junk too and you will be fine.
~J

[/ QUOTE ]

yah my stats will never change for anyone I've played reg with because they prob have soo many hands on me etc. So I just try to think the best way to interpret the stats they will see to mold them into what I want. Sorry this post I guess is more personal to my image then anything.

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
delayed c-bets are the nuts. f the min checkraisers

[/ QUOTE ]

omg

do you ever think theres another poker forum out there that we dont know about, and they are telling all their members, "listen, if you have a 2p2er at your table, and you call their raise pf, just check the flop, and when they cbet (which they always will), minraise them. THEYRE POWERLESS AGAINST IT!"

because i think that sometimes.

i have scaled back my cbetting a bit now because it really is ridiculous how often i see the c/mr or, if im oop, just the mr (or something close to the minraise... like i cbet 1200 and they make it 2800). and you just spew off so many chips like that.

i was worried that it was just some variance that i was letting get into my head, so im glad to see this thread has confirmed my suspicions that cbets arent getting the respect they once were.

[RichC.]

sometimes, if my c-bet gets check raised, i just shove over the top on them, works quite a bit too. need a good read obv.

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
sometimes, if my c-bet gets check raised, i just shove over the top on them, works quite a bit too. need a good read obv.

[/ QUOTE ]

my concern is that we are risking quite a lot at that point (in terms of chips and in terms of our "tournament life," which, as trite as it is, does have some value), whereas with their minraise they are risking relatively little, particularly if they "have it" some % of the time they do the c/mr. i used to actually 3bet over the c/mr a lot more often, but ive found that they keep showing up with some hand that they dont plan to fold, whether it be tp or some pocket pair with one overcard on the board... like, they make the minraise to "see where theyre at," and then when you try to tell them, they go "well hes probably bluffing," and call. i feel like the real answer might be to just tighten up your opening range so that you "have it" more often on the flop and can 3bet with confidence.

[shaundeeb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
sometimes, if my c-bet gets check raised, i just shove over the top on them, works quite a bit too. need a good read obv.

[/ QUOTE ]

my concern is that we are risking quite a lot at that point (in terms of chips and in terms of our "tournament life," which, as trite as it is, does have some value), whereas with their minraise they are risking relatively little, particularly if they "have it" some % of the time they do the c/mr. i used to actually 3bet over the c/mr a lot more often, but ive found that they keep showing up with some hand that they dont plan to fold, whether it be tp or some pocket pair with one overcard on the board... like, they make the minraise to "see where theyre at," and then when you try to tell them, they go "well hes probably bluffing," and call. i feel like the real answer might be to just tighten up your opening range so that you "have it" more often on the flop and can 3bet with confidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's soo true I used to shove 100% of the time over it but people don't fold anything now they aren't raising to see where they are at they just want to stick their stack in and double or bust.

[nath]

you guys just need to work on your soul-reading

[Exitonly]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
sometimes, if my c-bet gets check raised, i just shove over the top on them, works quite a bit too. need a good read obv.

[/ QUOTE ]

my concern is that we are risking quite a lot at that point (in terms of chips and in terms of our "tournament life," which, as trite as it is, does have some value), whereas with their minraise they are risking relatively little, particularly if they "have it" some % of the time they do the c/mr. i used to actually 3bet over the c/mr a lot more often, but ive found that they keep showing up with some hand that they dont plan to fold, whether it be tp or some pocket pair with one overcard on the board... like, they make the minraise to "see where theyre at," and then when you try to tell them, they go "well hes probably bluffing," and call. i feel like the real answer might be to just tighten up your opening range so that you "have it" more often on the flop and can 3bet with confidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's soo true I used to shove 100% of the time over it but people don't fold anything now they aren't raising to see where they are at they just want to stick their stack in and double or bust.

[/ QUOTE ]


so then do it for value???

this seems like real straightforward stuff...

[LearnedfromTV]

Before making any bet, you should think about whether hands you want to fold will fold and/or hands you want to call will call, all of which is a function of your hand, your range, his range, his tendencies, and board texture. Betting because you raised preflop is dumb. People who say stuff like "cbetting is a dying art" or whatever are confusing the issue. The really mean "bluffing the flop after being the preflop raiser is less profitable than before" or "when I bet medium strength hands on the flop after being the preflop raiser I get raised more than I used to." "Cbet" is a phantom; defining a bet category by "I raised preflop and bet the flop" isn't nearly as useful as some people seem to think.

Flop bets after being the preflop raiser aren't some special category; the main reason we think they are is that a lot of mediocre players fold too much to flop bets because they call too much preflop given their postflop plans. Plus Harrington is still stuck in a lot of people's subconscious.

I saw a post here a couple days ago that irritated me in Bond's checking as the reraiser thread. The post was something like "Always cbet A and K high flops" as though cbetting is something you do independent of your hand. The implied logic was basically "people fold a lot on A and K high flops," which is true but is not a reason to bet. What matters is whether you want them to fold and whether the range they do call with is better for your hand than the range they bet the turn with, the range they call a turn bet with, etc.

[mlagoo]

well, right, that's what we're saying exit, but it's hard to do it for value when you never have it /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[curtains]

this thread is too abstract for me. Give some examples plz!!

[Jurollo]

[ QUOTE ]
this thread is too abstract for me. Give some examples plz!!

[/ QUOTE ]
Pots I c-bet

I raise A /images/graemlins/heart.gif Q /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

Flop: K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 7 /images/graemlins/club.gif 3 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

C-bet!!!!!!!!

I raise A /images/graemlins/heart.gif Q /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

Flop: T /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 9 /images/graemlins/club.gif 3 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

Ahhhh... no c-bet!

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
Before making any bet, you should think about whether hands you want to fold will fold and/or hands you want to call will call, all of which is a function of your hand, your range, his range, his tendencies, and board texture. Betting because you raised preflop is dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dunno dude... i'm not trying to be lazy or anything, but in my opinion... it's easy to say what you said above, but when you're 9-tabling and playing even a little aggro, you really don't have time to go "ok, i have QJs, and his calling range of my PFR out of the SB is probably 22-99, A2s+, K8s+, Q9s+, and the flop is T42r, so i think he'll fold 40% of the time, so i think this bet is going to be profitable to the degree of cEV +107 in the long run." you just are like "alright, i have air and a couple backdoor draws, and he can probably fold a lot on this flop. i bet."

[curtains]

Headsup would often c-bet both /images/graemlins/smile.gif I dunno positions though

[LearnedfromTV]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Before making any bet, you should think about whether hands you want to fold will fold and/or hands you want to call will call, all of which is a function of your hand, your range, his range, his tendencies, and board texture. Betting because you raised preflop is dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dunno dude... i'm not trying to be lazy or anything, but in my opinion... it's easy to say what you said above, but when you're 9-tabling and playing even a little aggro, you really don't have time to go "ok, i have QJs, and his calling range of my PFR out of the SB is probably 22-99, A2s+, K8s+, Q9s+, and the flop is T42r, so i think he'll fold 40% of the time, so i think this bet is going to be profitable to the degree of cEV +107 in the long run." you just are like "alright, i have air and a couple backdoor draws, and he can probably fold a lot on this flop. i bet."

[/ QUOTE ]

You and I are saying the same thing, mine's more precise, yours more practical. Both are more useful than the generic "I raised pre therefore I bet flop."

I ninja-edited a little at the end of the paragraph you quoted.

[LearnedfromTV]

Simple example.

I raise, he calls.

Flop A /images/graemlins/heart.gif 8 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 2/images/graemlins/club.gif

He checks.

Bet: AA, AK, AQ, A8, A2, JJ, TT, 99, 88, 98, air.
Check: AJ-A9, A7-A3, KK, QQ

None of these are 100% of course.

ATx, sometimes check KQ, bet turn instead.

Etc.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Simple example.

I raise, he calls.

Flop A /images/graemlins/heart.gif 8 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 2/images/graemlins/club.gif

He checks.

Bet: AA, AK, AQ, A8, A2, JJ, TT, 99, 88, 98, air.
Check: AJ-A9, A7-A3, KK, QQ

None of these are 100% of course.

ATx, sometimes check KQ, bet turn instead.

Etc.

[/ QUOTE ]


Offhand seems like very reasonable ranges. This is the type of board where it's good to bet air though, some flops you will check air more often.

[0evg0]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Before making any bet, you should think about whether hands you want to fold will fold and/or hands you want to call will call, all of which is a function of your hand, your range, his range, his tendencies, and board texture. Betting because you raised preflop is dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dunno dude... i'm not trying to be lazy or anything, but in my opinion... it's easy to say what you said above, but when you're 9-tabling and playing even a little aggro, you really don't have time to go "ok, i have QJs, and his calling range of my PFR out of the SB is probably 22-99, A2s+, K8s+, Q9s+, and the flop is T42r, so i think he'll fold 40% of the time, so i think this bet is going to be profitable to the degree of cEV +107 in the long run." you just are like "alright, i have air and a couple backdoor draws, and he can probably fold a lot on this flop. i bet."

[/ QUOTE ]

whether or not you recognize this as laziness, that's really what it boils down to. you're making more $/hour 9-tabling, but dont fool yourself into thinking youre not giving up a lot of ROI because of situations like these

[luckychewy]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok so OSU's post sorta brings up the best point in the whole thread. Basically C-betting like a madman is still profitable and so can be passive post flop play, as long as you mix it up and play weak and strong hands the same. Shaun for instance is getting played back a ton because of his image and not necessarily because C-betting is a dead art. I don't get played back at nearly as much anymore because I don't c-bet nearly as often, people do bet flops on me a lot now though which allows me to c/r a ton and I do it with weak and strong holdings. So essentially c-bet all you wish, just make sure you still do it with junk too and you will be fine.
~J

[/ QUOTE ]

see this is what i don't understand, why does this aspect of metagame play any type of role in tournaments(except maybe the 109r where people will probably adjust over time).

i think you could just always play wa/wb with the kk/qq type stuff on ace high boards, always check garbage on drawy flops, never check big hands on drawy flops etc...and u'd probably find ur results are better than if u start getting fancy and doing something because you think to yourself, 'well if i do it with this type of hand i have to do it with this type of hand to otherwise people will exploit it'.

but that's just the thing, no one will exploit anything in the majority of the tournaments i(and i assume you) play in day in and day out. vs. people you know it's a bit different, but the vast majority of the time i think it's just better to play straight up and not get tricky and just profit.

[swede554]

I thought this article in May's 2+2 magazine had some good insight regarding C-bets. If you missed it, it's def worth to read IMO.

"Anatomy of the Continuation Bet"-

http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/current/Streib0507.html

[curtains]

I agree that for most part you don't have to mix up your play at all. Just occasionally you do against certain opponents.

[THEOSU]

mixing up your play has a couple of benefits in tourney poker:

1) you can set up weak opponents who think that because you played this hand that way you always play this hand that way.

2) it forces you to think of the best way to play this particular hand.

3) and, of course, the more weapons you have, the better off you are.

[luckychewy]

[ QUOTE ]
mixing up your play has a couple of benefits in tourney poker:

1) you can set up weak opponents who think that because you played this hand that way you always play this hand that way.

i disagree because most weak players won't take into consideration past lines, they will just take into consideration stuff like 'zomg he played Q8s to a reraise' or something irrelevant in a vacuum. i don't think weak players are observant enough that mixing it up is more profitable than not doing so.

2) it forces you to think of the best way to play this particular hand.

i disagree again, i think not mixing it up vs. weak players will always be better than mixing it up under almost any circumstance.

3) and, of course, the more weapons you have, the better off you are.

yea, in general, but i disagree a third time that you can't use this as an argument vs. a weak player who WILL NOT take into consideration specific past lines you've taken or exploit any super exploitable tendencies - which would be really the only reasons to mix up your post flop play imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Clayton]

I think mixing up your game is incredibly overrated until you reach a buyin level where you start seeing the same people more often (100r etc)

There's a very well written article by ZeeJustin in the Bluff issue a couple of months ago that addresses part of this.

So, basically what curtains said.

In regards to actually cbetting, congratulations, now you're learning some more about real poker! You know, thinking and stuff, reacting to other people more than you used to. Understanding betting tendencies and flop textures in order to formulate a gameplan on the hand that can be predicted and used for later streets.

Flop texture and hand reading make up so much of analyzing the cbet and the delayed cbet, something that just needs working on when you transition from the "cbet everytime OH NOES i got minraised" mantra.

[Exitonly]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
mixing up your play has a couple of benefits in tourney poker:

1) you can set up weak opponents who think that because you played this hand that way you always play this hand that way.

i disagree because most weak players won't take into consideration past lines, they will just take into consideration stuff like 'zomg he played Q8s to a reraise' or something irrelevant in a vacuum. i don't think weak players are observant enough that mixing it up is more profitable than not doing so.

2) it forces you to think of the best way to play this particular hand.

i disagree again, i think not mixing it up vs. weak players will always be better than mixing it up under almost any circumstance.

3) and, of course, the more weapons you have, the better off you are.

yea, in general, but i disagree a third time that you can't use this as an argument vs. a weak player who WILL NOT take into consideration specific past lines you've taken or exploit any super exploitable tendencies - which would be really the only reasons to mix up your post flop play imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

I disgaree lucky. Even weak players are going to notice how you play. You have to be aware of their perception, and make small adjustments. That's all mixign it up is. It's betting in a spot you usually check because you think they're more likely to play back at you this time.

This goes on against all levels of opponents, weak ones included.

I'm not saying to just randomly do different things to throw people off (though at certain levels i guess this could be done too? -- and maybe this is what you're talking about ), i'm talkign about thought out specific adjustments.

[NoahSD]

I think there's a bit of a vocabulary issue here. Some people (luckychewy?) say "mixing it up" to mean randomizing your play--i.e. playing an exact situation (one with the exact same reads and metagame as well as cards, position, and action) differently based on the second hand of your watch or whatever. Others just mean playing differently in spots with the same cards, position, and action, but not the same metagame.

[aejones]

Everything luckychewy said it correct except "check garbage on draw heavy flops." I would rather bet garbage on draw heavy flops because of two barreling (when stacks permit) and check medium strength made hands that can't stand a check raise.

[luckychewy]

[ QUOTE ]
Everything luckychewy said it correct except "check garbage on draw heavy flops." I would rather bet garbage on draw heavy flops because of two barreling (when stacks permit) and check medium strength made hands that can't stand a check raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

in cash i agree because of stack depth, but in tournaments people don't seem to fold draws or weak pairs with some semblance of a draw(gutshot) ever so i think 2 barreling loses a lot of value. i still do it sometimes, though.

EDIT: just saw u said when stacks permit. yea i agree.

[luckychewy]

exit/noah, i think it's very possible i am not understanding some of the vocab here because i agree w/ what exit said. if my image is bad i will often not c-bet vs. a donk or vs. someone who will c/r me wide, i didn't think this was what was being discussed. i'm confusing myself a little now, i'll relook some of this stuff later.

[LearnedfromTV]

[ QUOTE ]
I think there's a bit of a vocabulary issue here. Some people (luckychewy?) say "mixing it up" to mean randomizing your play--i.e. playing an exact situation (one with the exact same reads and metagame as well as cards, position, and action) differently based on the second hand of your watch or whatever. Others just mean playing differently in spots with the same cards, position, and action, but not the same metagame.

[/ QUOTE ]

An addition to this: A lot of people confuse "mixing it up" as a randomization move with making a different play in a situation that is superficially similar because something important is actually different. I think this is sort of what Noah means by metagame, but the concept is broader than "metagame" implies. A weak player might think, "I raised and now I have a pair of aces, should I bet or check," whereas a stronger player automatically knows his kicker is relevant. A mediocre player might play AJ the same on any Axx board, a better player takes board texture and opponent into account. The more variables you are basing decisions on, the more it will look like you are mixing it up randomly to an opponent who pays attention to fewer things.