Flop Bet Sizing

[AsydRayne]

I'd like to open a discussion on optimal flop bet sizing. I think there are three schools of thought on the subject. For now, assume I'm referring to continuation bets, although I think we could have a similar discussion about bet sizing for flop leads.

School 1: Bets should be a consistent percentage of the pot on the flop so you give nothing away about your hand. This percentage can vary depending on the looseness of the table, but you bet all hands and all flops the same way.

School 2: Bet size varies with the flop texture, stack sizes of players, and position, but does not depend on your holdings. For example, you might bet 95% of the pot on a drawy board, and 60% of the pot on a dry board.

School 3: No effort is made to disguise your holdings. You bet based on your hand and what you're trying to accomplish (protect your hand, betting for value, bluffing etc.) You keep from becoming too obvious by mixing up your play, i.e. occasionally betting like your betting for value when you are bluffing, etc.

I started out in school 1, and now I think school 2 is superior. Is there anyone here that is a proponent of school 3. Are there any other possibilities?

I know that the general online consensus is that preflop a set bet size is optimal, but there seems to different opinions about flop bets. What do you guys think?

It would be interesting to know if anyone in school 1 or 2 moves into school 3 when it comes to flop raise sizing and turn betting.

[ScoobyDooo]

i go to the second school....i feel like stack sizes, position, and flop texture are very important when choosing optimal c-bet sizes

[AsydRayne]

Bump. Anyone else have comments on this?

[Lyric]

I am in all three schools depending on my mood.

School 3 is almost always best against very weak players.

[HedonismBot]

It depends how much better you are than the other players, if they're too good then bet a consistent amount but if you can usually out-think them then option 3

[Unknown Soldier]

mix between 2 and 3 prob ??

[ogdundar]

School 2, with exceptions of playing against far weaker opponents when school 3 is optimal (school 3 is mathematically superior if opponents dont read hands well or at all). A good example is when you open in late position, fish in big blinds calls. Flop comes AT4r, you bet 1/2 the pot with air. He folds if he doesn't have an ace or better, you win the pot the rest of the time. A small bet accomplishes the exact same thing as a bigger bet in this situation.

[FBP]

School 2 for me, but i agree with lyric, switching to school 3 when faced w/ very bad player makes sense. They won't exploit the info you give anyway so why bother hiding it.

[mikeysong]

wouldn't school 2 be optimal vs weak opponents as well?

even if he's a calling station, I'm still betting the flop almost 100% of the time vs really weak players

i.e. If a fish doesn't like to call down w/top pair weak kicker for 3 bets, then it's easy to push him off.

Also, since we're hu and the board misses us both a lot, it's best to make use of our position and pick up a lot of small pots (free money)

[dd323]

I've played a lot with bet sizing playing headsup, because i think a lot of bad tags over value information gleened from betsizing if you vary your bet sizes. In other words one of the biggest thing people look for is "he bets big when he has a big hand" or vice versa. The funny thing is, that if they see something unusual, they usually do the thing that they are most apt to do anyway, using the bet size as justification. So if villain never believes anyone has anything and is over aggro, and you bet size noticeably smaller than usual, that person is likely to bluff raise you.

Obviously school 2 is important, and where I start, but I also tend to randomly vary my bet sizing within ranges prescribed via school 2. But the important part is to pay attention to how individual villains are reacting (if they are at all). Then being able to use this information later to choose appropriate bet sizes for school 3.

I remember reading when I first started playing poker that the goal isn't to simply confuse your opponents, or give them no information, because a confused opponent can accidentally do the right thing. The goal is to be able to manipulate your opponents to doing what you want. Now obviously it is important to realize some people are good enough that you need to confuse them somewhat using game theory, but i think there is a significant edge to be gotten via bet sizing.