varying your bet size pf

[pokerplayer1]

a lot of online advice recomends not changing your bet size pf except with respect to the no. of limpers in the pot (and some recomend changing your bet size with respect to your position at the table).

sklansky recomends in NLHE theory and practice that you should change your pf bet sizes depending on your cards!

a lot of online players say that good players will pick up on this and exploit it.

sklansky says you just need to mix it up a bit and nobody will be able to read anything about your pf bet sizes.

whose advice should i follow?
is it a good advice changing your preflop bet size depending on what cards have?

[cdlarmore]

I recently read in a great book (i think it was dan herrington) that you should for sure bet in different increments, but in no way should it relate to your hand size, he has some great words on it, pick up HOH1...
The conclusion was something along the lines of bets should be 2-6x big blind, but randomized in general with only a very small amount of bet size in proportion to hand quality so that it can not be picked up as a tell, but can be used for hand disguise or confusion purposes.

cdl

[Micturition Man]

God what a headache.

This is supposed to be the poker theory forum right?

Just vary your bet size with respect to board texture and stack sizes. That is the theoretically correct thing to do.

Obviously you may get a lot of mileage out of varying your bet size based on hand strength, but realize that is exploitive play and presumes specific flaws in your opponents strategies.

[Micturition Man]

FWIW I misunderstood the OP tbe talking about postflop bets.

[mvdgaag]

I'm not a fan of the things I'm going to write and stick with simple rules myself, but purely theoretically I think you can bet bigger with bigger hands and smaller with smaller hands, only if you sometimes bet the other way around. If you find the correct frequency of betting big and small you won't give your opponent information and still bet bigger on average with your big hands that you want to bet for value and smaller with your smaller hands that you want to bet for deception, pot control, whatever. Also some opponents might incorrectly label a certain size bet and make mistakes because of it, which will help you be more profitable.

There are so many situational variables that ask for a smaller or bigger bet than if these are also taken into account you'll tell even less about your hand.

You should view it from your opponents point of view and try to confuse them more than help them read you. If this is accomplished and you still bet more on the huge hands on average, than you might squeeze out a little extra profit.

It'll be hard to balance a strategy using this concept though. As long as you want to play a good game you can best stick with a simple rule that does not give any information, like 3-4bb+1 per limper preflop and standard 1/2, 2/3 and full pot bets post flop, unless you have a reason to overbet, push it all in or bet very small.

GL

[Albert Moulton]

[ QUOTE ]
sklansky recomends in NLHE theory and practice that you should change your pf bet sizes depending on your cards!

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't what NLHETAP actually said. What it said was ...

[ QUOTE ]
Different hands in different situations call for differently-sized raises.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, if you artificially constrain yourself to a system based on 4xbb+1bb/limper then "you soften up your entire preflop strategy" by failing to raise more when raising more will better achieve your objectives in the hand, and by failing to raise less when raising less will better achieve your objectives in the hand.

So he's not saying, "Always raise the same, larger amount with Aces than with 8s." What he's saying is "Put some thought into the size of every preflop raise rather than relying on some arbitrary formula."

HoH actually uses position, hand strength, and his wrist watch to vary his bet sizes. But if you were to average the size of all his raises, I would expect that the good hands in good position will, on average, be larger than weaker hands in weaker positions. His formula is an improvement over the pat formula of 4xbb+1/limper, but still not quite the ideal that Sklansky and Miller talk about when they say ...

[ QUOTE ]
Controlling your raise sizes intelligently will help you control your opponents, the pot sizes, and many other factors...Seemingly random raise sizes are just as unradable as constant ones, but they allow you more freedom, control, and profit.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, I think new NLHE players trying to learn an ABC TAG style should start out with 4xbb+1/limper when they choose to raise preflop. As they get better, or play more tournaments, they should develop their own variation of HoH's method. And as they get more skilled and play better and better opponents, then they should try to understand and apply what NLHETAP is talking about.

[HuskerFan85]

In theory, you should always look for a reason to raise or fold, not usually just to call. Just calling can be profitable when done sometimes too, but I think getting too tricky into online is a waste of time. Playing straightforward, especially in the lower limits, is probably the most profitable thing to do. Most players are only focusing on their own hand and their odds, and dont take the extra step to analyze their opponents. Once you ralize this, then you can add in a few cards up your sleeve, but nothing too dynamic- just to find profit where others are blind to see.

Theres really not set way on correct play PF, some will say maker a pot size raise and some will say vary your bet, and they both can be correct. It depends on the situation.

[binions]

[ QUOTE ]
a lot of online advice recomends not changing your bet size pf except with respect to the no. of limpers in the pot (and some recomend changing your bet size with respect to your position at the table).

sklansky recomends in NLHE theory and practice that you should change your pf bet sizes depending on your cards!

a lot of online players say that good players will pick up on this and exploit it.

sklansky says you just need to mix it up a bit and nobody will be able to read anything about your pf bet sizes.

whose advice should i follow?
is it a good advice changing your preflop bet size depending on what cards have?

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on the game. Online 6 max NLHE, since you open raise so often, I think it is fine to open raise the same amount each time so as to not give away your hand. In fact, I think it is proper to c-bet the same amount each time you get heads up on the flop in 6 max.

Other situations require differently sized raises.

[HuskerFan85]

I think the best way for most to play is textbook poker, and throw in a little spice here and there. Too many people start playing tricky thinking they can squeeze money here, squeeze money there, but easily get burned. Players arent dumb, and will pick up on this, too. If you play good, but make sure they see when you made a marginal play, perceptive players will notice this and always hold a little doubt to what you have. Its like what they say about alcohol, "use in moderation" . Anyone whose ever fallen prey to Tricky-Play Syndrome will know what I'm talkin about.

[PantsOnFire]

The easy and safe way is standardize your pf raise amount. Usually you start and figure out what the average pf raise is for your table. The standard is 3xBB but some tables the standard may be 4 or 5xBB. Once you figure out the standard, then use that for every pf raise in every situation (and add 1xBB for each limper). And another thing about the standard is that you really want maybe one or two callers for your pf raises. If you consistenly get many callers of your raise, you need to increase your standard.

Since having a standard raise is so generic, it is obviously not optimal. Here are some considerations for different pf raise amounts:

1. At a table of good players, you might want to raise a little less UTG and a little more in LP. The reason for this is that good players will respect a UTG bet for what it represents and will suspect a LP raise for what it represents.

2. You can range your raises from say 2x to 6x with different hands in different positions but now you have to keep track of your history and what you have shown down. And you have to keep track of how players have been reacting to this.

3. Another technique is if you do a pf raise out of your standard and end up showing the hand down, then use that info. For example, you raise 5x with 98s and show down a straight. Two hands later you get AA. This is good because now your same 5x raise will be fresh in the other players minds and you might catch someone off guard. Similarly, if you just raised 5x with AA and then get KK, try a 3x raise. I realize these situations don't come up often but I'm trying to get a point across about mixing up your game.

4. Late in tournaments when the blinds are large and Ms are low, sometimes even a min-raise will have the same effect as any other amount so why risk more?