|
|
#1
01-12-2007, 03:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
continuation bet TAG vs LAG
I already posted this in another thread but didnīt get any replies so here we go:
[ QUOTE ] I wanted to start a thread about c-bets again anyway because one question has been bothering me for quite a time now. It has to do with TAG vs. LAG c-bets... As a lag are your c-bets 3/4 - full pot size as well ? Because (iīm sure all of you know that) one of the most important skills of a LAG is to keep the pots small but this is exactly what you donīt achieve by making pot sized c-bets... Please tell where my reasoning is wrong or if it isnīt what LAg are supposed to do here! Not c-bet at all? But I donīt think this is the correct solution... thanks anyway in advance cheers monkover [/ QUOTE ] 
|
|
#2
01-12-2007, 05:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: continuation bet TAG vs LAG
Interesting question. I think SOME of the time LAGs should consider not C-betting at all, and instead go with the "delayed C-bet" on the turn as a mechanism of picking up uncontested pots. SOME of the time you should not C-bet at all on a read that your opponent is actually strong, since LAish behavior invites slowplaying as a counter. SOME of the time, ideally when your read says your opponent likes their hand the least, you should C-bet normally, and I think that means full pot. 3:1 pot odds (which the half-pot bet provides) is enough to allow someone with just overcards to ponder continuing or re-raising if they read you for weak and the stacks are deep.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
