25-50 hand vs Diablo

[FoxwoodsFiend]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont really agree. If I could replay the hand I would be the turn and fold to an all in.

You're giving up here on the flop very often.

A big problem I have to deal with is that the bet pot button fcks with my head. I get into spots where all I do is pot pot pot, then feel very uncomfortable not betting the size of the pot. If all I've been doing is pot pot pot, how is a smaller bet perceived?

I think the solution may be to always manually bet a number, but I also like to insta-pot it sometimes.

Help.

-Jason

[/ QUOTE ]

Try deleting the "bet pot" image from your computer if that's doable. I think it's only useful preflop as that's about the only time I ever raise the pot.

[creedofhubris]

[ QUOTE ]
Except for a vague reference by El Diablo, not one poster quibbled with the pot size turn bet. In spite of the fact that any basic analysis would say that in most cases the bet should be either signifcantly smaller or an outright check.

[/ QUOTE ]

This time I agree totally.

[LyinKing]

[ QUOTE ]

it's such an obvious, classic line with AA/KK, and one i've been using since $25nl, that it kinda shocks me how nearly all the responses in this thread are saying to pay you off.

[/ QUOTE ]

agree totally.

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
Except for a vague reference by El Diablo, not one poster quibbled with the pot size turn bet. In spite of the fact that any basic analysis would say that in most cases the bet should be either signifcantly smaller or an outright check.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow, dont know how I missed this post the first time around. I am bumping this thread because someone else bumped a 'good thread' thread, and this was at the top.

I think the decision to bet could be argued - I like the bet/call in these tough shorthanded aggro games - but if you do bet, betitng the pot is DEFINATELY the right bet size. Here's why:

A smaller bet could be check called by a draw. Thats ok, but.. You arent allowing a draw to then play incorrect poker. Although you may avoid a tough decision (ie. if they checkraise all in) you lose out on EV, which is far more important.
A larger bet also gives more incentive to a draw to c/r all in - you WANT that, since that gives you a chance to put alot of money (say, potx3) when you have a large equity advantage w/ 1 more street to come.

I dont understand the phrase 'significantly' smaller, as well, because in the event of villain having say 88/99 (or a higher pair) the bet size wont make them slow down (which would be nice so we could get to showdown) but say they elect to c/c (which as other posters state, they're more likely to do w/ a smaller overpair to evaluate the river rather then a large one) you lose outright value when you have a huge equity advantage, there, too.

[fsuplayer]

edit: i misread hand.

[aejones]

BobboFitos, from what I've read that Sklansky posts in the MTT forum and here, what he advocates it very, very, very leaky. What I mean by this, is that all of his bets give off exact tells. Sure, every bet may be "mathmatically correct" or "theoretically correct" but if the size of the bet will always tell your opponent exactly what you hold (i.e., if you're betting 'enough to committ yourself' with draws always but a small amount with a set, it's awful for shania).

Honestly, it seems kind of ridiculous that we would want our opponents to always know what we hold unless we can play perfectly against them based on the fact that they're always going to be reading us perfectly.

I'm NOT saying that a smaller bet here is AWFUL, but please, please make sure you're making it with other hands, not just a hand that can bet 2/3 the pot and fold to a CR.

I remember reading the original thread, and I'd probably check behind here. If I did bet the pot, I like a fold if my opponent thinks I call tooo much, becuase he probably doesn't think you will fold getting 2 to 1.

[Requin]

There's nothing wrong with betting smaller with medium made hands and bigger with big made hands, so long as you can be bluffing in both spots. Obviously you might get CR bluffed more often when you make these smaller bets, since they know you don't have a big hand, but nothing's stopping you from calling the CRs more often if you think they are getting out of line. Basically it narrows your hand range alot for your opponent, but since in this spot you're in position and relatively shallow stacked at this point its not that big a deal.

[CrushinFelt]

Not betting this turn is sick and when any J-A hits the board you're lost. Yes you're going to have to fold to a c/r ai if you always do this with 1010, but if you do it with bigger hands as well you will get played back at and paid off.

[Mad Genius1]

Bobbo,

While I like your analysis, a merit to betting smaller is that it better controls the size of the pot in relation to stack-sizes, making it harder for villian to checkraise allin on the turn since it would be an overbet as opposed to a pot-sized raise. General high-stakes thinking states that people don't like to over-bet allin on the turn with draws, especially when the board is paired.

[MatthewRyan]

Can someone please explain why this hand was not 3 bet preflop?