C-bet worthless when flop missed?

[RichGambler]

Is C-bet worthless when you miss the flop?

I do not believe that C-bet on flop OOP is profitable even vs 1 opponent.

Typical scenario AQ raise 3x 1 caller flop 598 bet 50% of the pot guy calls. turn rag or 10 or J or K then check guy bets 50% of the pot I fold.

I think the profit comes when you hit the hand and it's very unlikely you can make profit in scenario like this.

3x raise 1 call 3x + 1xBB + 0.5BB = 7.5x

So lets say you bet 4x after the flop each time you miss.

let's assume opponent folds 60% of the time.
6x4.5=27$ won
4x7=28$ lost

Not to mention that on the full ring there is about 15%+ chance someone will have AA KK QQ AK and will reraise you 3x

If anyone did mathematical research how often 1 opponent folds after C-bet I would appreciate it.

[wheelflush]

it depends on the opponent. some people never fold the flop. those people get a delayed c-bet from me. (check flop, bet turn.)
also depends on my image. if i'm showing down crappy cards, they're more likely to look me up. standard play is to c-bet. i would not say it's worthless. i've won too many pots on the flop to say that.

[lippy]

You're ignoring the effect of c-betting... you get paid of much more on your monster hands when you consistently c-bet.

[alphatmw]

so your strategy is to only bet the flop if you connect? yes, i see absolutely no way to exploit that.

[El_Hombre_Grande]

You must c-bet a certain % of the time, more than never and less than always. The precise amount depends on your opponent and the preflop action. If you never c-bet you are giving far, far too much up, and it would be very difficult for you to get it back. In many instances, if you are the preflop aggressor, and you both miss, the c-bet takes down the pot. To play otherwise is called playing "hit to win" and its been proven -EV.

[El_Hombre_Grande]

I didn't address your concern that a quality hand is out against you. My statements assume that the action thusfar suggests that you are the aggressor/ top dog. If you suspect that is not so, then a c-bet OOP is -EV for sure. But part of poker is putting your opponent to a choice, and a solid preflop raise from you, together with a solid c-bet is putting AK to a choice.

[mvdgaag]

It is called a cbet, because you do it when you hit nothing as well... You continue your preflop raise. If you'd only bet when you hit there is no point in calling it a cbet (why give it a name when it's just a valuebet or bet to protect your hand, or whatever?).

The whole point of cbetting is that you do it to make your opponents unsure whether you hit the flop, got an overpair or have nothing. If you never bet without a hand you'll never give them the opportunity to fold and since they miss the flop 2/3 of the time and you raised preflop there is a good chance they would have folded if you had bet. Also if you only bet when you have something they would know that if you bet the flop you've hit it. You'll be very predictable.

Your math is flawed as well, because the money you pot in before the flop is no longer yours so shouldn't be added.

There is a pot of 7.5bb
You bet 4bb

You win 7.5bb 60% of the time
You lose 4bb 40% of the time

EV = (0.6)*(7.5) - (0.4)*(4) = 2.9bb

And even if you're called you might still win, I ignored that for the above example which makes it a worst case scenario within the 60% assumption.

GL

[SplawnDarts]

Generally speaking, the OOP c-bet is not a favorite of mine. Regular use of it indicates you're losing the battle of position, which means you're probably losing your money.

Now, situations ARE going to come up when you get unexpected action behind you, and as a result you may have to c-bet the flop. But it should never be the plan from the get-go.

[mvdgaag]

What would be situations not to cbet when you missed?

Here's some I use:

- Many preflop callers with position on you.
- Very coordinated flop.
- Very loose player(s) behind you.
- Someone has shown a lot of strength on front of you.

With the above considerations I cbet around 75% of the time even if I got nothing. And if I filter (poker office) for "raised preflop" & "first in raise preflop" and "bet" on flop and "no showdown" (cause I give up when called/raised) I have a consistent +2.4BB per hand over 1000 hands that passed the filter. With swings no bigger than 50BB (kind of smooth diagonal). That means 240 BB/100 just by this pattern, wtf?!?!? If I also filter I had no made hands on the flop I still have 1.94 BB per hand! Wow, this is reveiling... I raise about 15% of my hands preflop, that would mean this accouts for 0.15 * 0.75 * 240 = 27BB/100! The other hands I lose so much that I'm back to 8BB/100 ?!? Wow, I think I'll stop playing any other hands [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I must be mistaken somewhere, but I can't find it...

[El_Hombre_Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
What would be situations not to cbet when you missed?

Here's some I use:

- Many preflop callers with position on you.
- Very coordinated flop.
- Very loose player(s) behind you.
- Someone has shown a lot of strength on front of you.

With the above considerations I cbet around 75% of the time even if I got nothing. And if I filter (poker office) for "raised preflop" & "first in raise preflop" and "bet" on flop and "no showdown" (cause I give up when called/raised) I have a consistent +2.4BB per hand over 1000 hands that passed the filter. With swings no bigger than 50BB (kind of smooth diagonal). That means 240 BB/100 just by this pattern, wtf?!?!? If I also filter I had no made hands on the flop I still have 1.94 BB per hand! Wow, this is reveiling... I raise about 15% of my hands preflop, that would mean this accouts for 0.15 * 0.75 * 240 = 27BB/100! The other hands I lose so much that I'm back to 8BB/100 ?!? Wow, I think I'll stop playing any other hands [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I must be mistaken somewhere, but I can't find it...

[/ QUOTE ]

Good advice as to when NOT to c-bet; thats the way I think of it as well. My assumption is, I am going to bet after I've lead unless there'a one of those reasons not to--the field is hopelessly large, etc. The rest of the post is the interesting part. I've never looked at it that way, never really torn apart my c-bet results, but it makes sense. Quite frankly, the reason I haven't is that in my own mind c-betting is so obviously + EV that I don't give it much thought. But I'm going to do some some looking today at marginal c-bet situations....