Small or Large Bet Sizing?
12-26-2016
, 09:59 PM
Quote:
If you're not trying to balance or play GTO, because your opponent is exploitable, then for bluffing just pick the smallest size you think will work for it to be profitable. In a similar vein, you can maximise EV with value hands against a calling station by betting as big as you think will still get called by worse.
e.g. Against weak competition, a lot of ABC nitregs will be very value-heavy on the river, bet their standard 2/3 pot sizing, and only bluff about 15% of the time. (Which means the opponent should always fold their bluffcatchers).
Against tougher opponents, you might bet 2x pot, and be bluffing 40%. That strategy is a lot harder to play against, and it's also more profitable, because it means you can make a ton of "redline" money with complete air.
e.g. Against weak competition, a lot of ABC nitregs will be very value-heavy on the river, bet their standard 2/3 pot sizing, and only bluff about 15% of the time. (Which means the opponent should always fold their bluffcatchers).
Against tougher opponents, you might bet 2x pot, and be bluffing 40%. That strategy is a lot harder to play against, and it's also more profitable, because it means you can make a ton of "redline" money with complete air.
Not sure how the math's or EV behind over-betting works (i never use an over-betting type strat) but say we bet 2 into 1 and we give ourselves 66% on our bluffs so yeah we over-bet vs. a capped range?
And if villain isn't defending properly we profit/are going to be +EV?
-----
Also Arty do you mind looking over my previous post to see if any of the math in EX 1 was incorrect and anything you could add to it, also how would you approach the last 2 HH i listed?
Thanks man have a good new year btw
12-27-2016
, 08:32 AM
I'm not in the mood to solve equations right now. I have a spreadsheet at home (I'm away at the moment) where I just input things like 'proportion of value hands' or 'bet-size' and it calculates the unknowns for me. e.g. I enter 100% of pot for bet size, and it says I need 66.7% value. If I choose a size larger than pot, I can have more bluffs.
The thing I found with overbets is that when villain is capped, but you aren't, he'll give you credit for the nuts very often if you bet huge (especially in the micros where people learned that "overbets are always the nuts"), so it means you can get away with idiotic (exploitative) bluffs - like the ones I posted in my PGC - because villains will fold so often.
Like in this spot, villain never has a boat (because they would have check-raised a set on the flop), and they hardly ever have a flush, but I can have all the nutted combos, and by overbetting I can make them fold almost their entire range. They certainly aren't calling 40% of the time, or whatever number it needs to be for MDF.
If I'd made a "standard" bet of 1/2 pot or something, they look me up with Ax and various one pairs, which is the last thing I want when I'm airballing. So I bet 2x pot with 9-high like a boss and make them fold.
The thing I found with overbets is that when villain is capped, but you aren't, he'll give you credit for the nuts very often if you bet huge (especially in the micros where people learned that "overbets are always the nuts"), so it means you can get away with idiotic (exploitative) bluffs - like the ones I posted in my PGC - because villains will fold so often.
Like in this spot, villain never has a boat (because they would have check-raised a set on the flop), and they hardly ever have a flush, but I can have all the nutted combos, and by overbetting I can make them fold almost their entire range. They certainly aren't calling 40% of the time, or whatever number it needs to be for MDF.
If I'd made a "standard" bet of 1/2 pot or something, they look me up with Ax and various one pairs, which is the last thing I want when I'm airballing. So I bet 2x pot with 9-high like a boss and make them fold.
12-30-2016
, 09:10 PM
Quote:
I'm not in the mood to solve equations right now. I have a spreadsheet at home (I'm away at the moment) where I just input things like 'proportion of value hands' or 'bet-size' and it calculates the unknowns for me. e.g. I enter 100% of pot for bet size, and it says I need 66.7% value. If I choose a size larger than pot, I can have more bluffs.
The thing I found with overbets is that when villain is capped, but you aren't, he'll give you credit for the nuts very often if you bet huge (especially in the micros where people learned that "overbets are always the nuts"), so it means you can get away with idiotic (exploitative) bluffs - like the ones I posted in my PGC - because villains will fold so often.
Like in this spot, villain never has a boat (because they would have check-raised a set on the flop), and they hardly ever have a flush, but I can have all the nutted combos, and by overbetting I can make them fold almost their entire range. They certainly aren't calling 40% of the time, or whatever number it needs to be for MDF.
If I'd made a "standard" bet of 1/2 pot or something, they look me up with Ax and various one pairs, which is the last thing I want when I'm airballing. So I bet 2x pot with 9-high like a boss and make them fold.
The thing I found with overbets is that when villain is capped, but you aren't, he'll give you credit for the nuts very often if you bet huge (especially in the micros where people learned that "overbets are always the nuts"), so it means you can get away with idiotic (exploitative) bluffs - like the ones I posted in my PGC - because villains will fold so often.
Like in this spot, villain never has a boat (because they would have check-raised a set on the flop), and they hardly ever have a flush, but I can have all the nutted combos, and by overbetting I can make them fold almost their entire range. They certainly aren't calling 40% of the time, or whatever number it needs to be for MDF.
If I'd made a "standard" bet of 1/2 pot or something, they look me up with Ax and various one pairs, which is the last thing I want when I'm airballing. So I bet 2x pot with 9-high like a boss and make them fold.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/32...tting-1421114/
---
Yeah Arty thanks for the visual and example, agreed that exploitatively over-betting against villain's/bad-regs who don't know how to defend properly/MDF or know the math's behind it can be very profitable.
While i was going through the thread mentioned above OP talked about "using an over-bet sizing will increase the EV of our overall/entire range" he was obv referring to balancing.
So when we are talking about using x bet sizing in a scenario exploitatively we know that the EV of the other hands in our range won't drastically go down in this spot?
Also i apologize in advance if some of the statements i'm saying sound like complete gibberish as i took a long hiatus from poker and my brain is trying to rem certain things... (lol you know what i mean tho)
01-03-2017
, 07:09 AM
Quote:
It's hard to say what is the most "optimal" best sizing in NL as there are many different reasons...?
Ex:
So take a spot where you arrived @ on whatever street and you have little to no bluffs in your range vs. a semi-thinking opp., but you have a value hand and want to value bet.
Should our value bet sizing with our entire range (bluffs and value hands) in this spot be like close to half-pot or less because we rarely have any bluffs here so our opp. gets better pot odds to call w/worse hands or bluff catchers...?
(Vice-versa as well if we have more bluffs then value hands in this spot = larger bet sizing near pot...?)
^Basically i am asking if this is correct thinking giving our opp. good pot odds in spots where we are perceived to be too value heavy and in what "other" spots should our bet sizing be used exploitatively... (maybe like setting up for a shove to stack off on later streets etc...?)
Ex:
So take a spot where you arrived @ on whatever street and you have little to no bluffs in your range vs. a semi-thinking opp., but you have a value hand and want to value bet.
Should our value bet sizing with our entire range (bluffs and value hands) in this spot be like close to half-pot or less because we rarely have any bluffs here so our opp. gets better pot odds to call w/worse hands or bluff catchers...?
(Vice-versa as well if we have more bluffs then value hands in this spot = larger bet sizing near pot...?)
^Basically i am asking if this is correct thinking giving our opp. good pot odds in spots where we are perceived to be too value heavy and in what "other" spots should our bet sizing be used exploitatively... (maybe like setting up for a shove to stack off on later streets etc...?)
Big for value, small for bluff in small to medium cash
Medium for value, Medium for bluff in high level games
Just click button in Spins.. should be enough