Just wondering what most heads up players cbet % stat would be on average?

I know it's villain dependent, but still just overall

Also I seem to bet the flop too much

Like on a AKT flop after 3 betting with 4567, I'm like well if you don't bet you cant win this pot so just take a stab.

Like say you only bet 70% of the pot or even less, bluffing obv seems profitable, compared to just checking and seeing villain bet himself and take it down with likely nothing.

70-80% to my knowlege.
Ofc villain dependant.
Someone who calls cbets 50% of time you could pot all the flops.
Someone who calls cbets 75% of time you should balance value + drawing + bluffs to bets, drawing + air to checks.
Someone who calls cbets 100% of time you could only bet for value.

So there you have it 50%-75% CallCbet: Bluff more the lower it is, play more standard the higher it is.
75-100% CallCbet: Bet only for value the higher it is, play more standard the lower it is.

Villains with 75% CallCbet are the most dangerous. You need to find edge on them elsewhere than on the flops since you are playing about even with them on the flop.
Then again if they call 75% flops but call turn bets only 30% of the time after your cbet on the flop, thats where you find huge edge from.

^ Good post. It is better to use F2CB stat, only call CB ignores CR which is obviously very important too. Also remember that you can and should vary your cbet size according to flop texture which alters the defence frequencies you quoted.

3bet pots are a completely different subject, where cbet frequency depends much more on board texture due to range imbalances.

So what do you do when you 3bet with 5689ds and flop is AKT or A72, just c/f?

I up this because I'm interested too.

I would cbet A72 because it's a dry board.

You have to think more "does my range hit this flop?" Because of this I would be more likely to c-bet AKT than I would 467.

But AKT hits his flatting range too right?

A lot of players (most) aren't thinking about your range at all at the stakes I play. Even if you think they are, what % of hands are you raising on the button HU? I'd assume a pretty wide range that can rep just about any board. Vs a decent player, I think you would prob have more success on the lower boards because the higher boards hit their pf calling range harder than your extremely wide button opening range.

+1

Assuming I raise both let's say J736 and AAKK opponent will fold more on 457 where it's difficult to call unless you have 86xx than on AT7 where I hit top set.

We don't represent any hand at all by cbetting if we raise 80% of buttons, but we can cbet to take the fold equity if he calls the 40% of BBs so we can identify his range with more accuracy.

What about 3bet pots?

I think in 3bet pots lower cards 567 789 hit villains range more

Thinking about cash game it might be true because hands like KKQJ or T9QK would be a 4bet but this does not apply to sngs where being only 75BBs deep at best I would just call and see a flop with high rundowns so AKQ flop would hit both ranges.

The key is on the stat cbet in 3Bet pot.

Most opponents have like 90% so I see no reason to fold anything but complete crap pre given that I also know their action on the flop.

Q743 against AAxx which cbets after a 3bet on a Qxx flop must not fold with a STPR of 1, it is over 33% equity generally speaking.

Huhu it is okay to not make a cbet with absolutely nothing on even semi rich flops as the opponent with four starting cards tends to flop something. The percentage isnt significant and there are many other reasons and bet sizes to think about.