Theory Post: Varying betsizes postflop on account of POSITION

[Relvin]

I just started thinking about this. It is an accepted convention for many to 3bet preflop out of the blinds a little more then pot (given full stacks) to negate implied odds and position a little.

Do you guys vary your postflop betsizes solely on the variable of position? I'll give some simple examples, the only thing that will ever change is position in each example.

1) Flop comes A72r, (for the sake of this unrealistic example we will say that you are 100% sure the guy has AT and will call you down so that you know you are value betting, but of course he is only willing to call certain amounts). So we are not really scared of redraws, we just want to take him to value town. Do you bet slightly less when in position taking into accuont that opponents are willing to call less when out of position on the flop? Or do you not factor this into you thinking? If so on the turn do you against bet less? Do you only use this type of thinking against decent opponent who value position (probably ..)

2) This time we are bluffing. We figure we can bluff a smaller amount IP then OOP to get a guy to fold. Do you guys bet less on flop bluffs IP then OP given exact same scenario in both spots?

summary:

-Bet more when bluffing OOP then IP against someone that values position on flop because it will take more to make him fold when he is IP? I am guessing against bad players it is probably just better to lean towards betting less because they don't really distinguish between the bet sizes much.
- make smaller value bets IP when you are pretty sure you are ahead and not scared of redraw because the opponent will fold more readily OOP but in same scenario bet more OP because person is willing to call bigger bets IP.

Sorry if this is trivial or bad but I am somewhat new to cash games and was wondering if any of you have thoughts on this. Please expand this thought process if you find this to be a useful idea also.

[Bottled Rockets]

good post.

[Dazarath]

In your examples, position is only indirectly related. Like in your first example, regardless of the reason, if I know the guy has ATo and he will only call 2/3 PSB but not 3/4 PSB, then I will bet 2/3 PSB. It's irrelevant whether the reason is because he's scared OOP or because his rule is that he only calls 2/3 PSB with TPGK. The second example is similar.

I think the concept is interesting, but the examples are off. Like you said, for the same reasoning that we raise more OOP, an argument could be made for betting/raising more OOP postflop. I don't do this myself, but I think it might be something to look into.

[Ship Ship McGipp]

if you bet more oop you will end up playing bigger pots but with less frequency, and if you end up betting less IP oyu will play more pots that are smaller but in theory get called more- so you need to weigh the idea of bet sizing and how it relates to your opponents- are they more likely to call a bet simply becuase of the bet or more likely to call smaller bets and fold to larger ones? obviously it should be the latter but is less likely to be against bad players.

think about that for a while.

[JooWish622]

[ QUOTE ]
if you bet more oop you will end up playing bigger pots but with less frequency, and if you end up betting less IP oyu will play more pots that are smaller but in theory get called more- so you need to weigh the idea of bet sizing and how it relates to your opponents- are they more likely to call a bet simply becuase of the bet or more likely to call smaller bets and fold to larger ones? obviously it should be the latter but is less likely to be against bad players.

think about that for a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

elab please. speak your mind ship.

[tufat23]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you bet more oop you will end up playing bigger pots but with less frequency, and if you end up betting less IP oyu will play more pots that are smaller but in theory get called more- so you need to weigh the idea of bet sizing and how it relates to your opponents- are they more likely to call a bet simply becuase of the bet or more likely to call smaller bets and fold to larger ones? obviously it should be the latter but is less likely to be against bad players.

think about that for a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

elab please. speak your mind ship.

[/ QUOTE ]




actually, i got all of that. thx mrjones

[Relvin]

[ QUOTE ]
In your examples, position is only indirectly related. Like in your first example, regardless of the reason, if I know the guy has ATo and he will only call 2/3 PSB but not 3/4 PSB, then I will bet 2/3 PSB. It's irrelevant whether the reason is because he's scared OOP or because his rule is that he only calls 2/3 PSB with TPGK. The second example is similar.


[/ QUOTE ]

I see what you are saying, but if he is a good player he may be willing to call more when he is in position then when he is out of position when the board is the same and he has the exact same hand. (yeah the examples aren't great but I think the point gets accross) In this case do you say to yourself he is willing to call 2/3P in both spots or do you say to yourself he is willing to call slightly more then 2/3P in position and slightly less OOP.