Originally Posted by johnny2toes
What your friend has wrong is that the logic of 'why bet if he always calls with better and always folds worse?' is good on the river but not on the flop. There are other reasons to bet the flop than just a decision between v-betting and bluffing: mainly protecting your hand, charging for draws and balancing your range.
The most likely scenario is that he missed and will c-fold, because he is a nit. This is a good result for us: whatever his hand was it had good equity against ours, and there are very little turns we like. Whatever your friend says, getting a little value with bottom pair and moving on is +EV.
Not polarizing your c-bet range is very good if your opponent is half-observant.
Finally, nits won't c-raise flop with air very often.
I totally agree with this and i feel like more and more this is being debated. There are some very good players who will use the argument of "can he call with worse/fold better" when deciding whether to raise or not even preflop.
I think its ill concieved and nonsensical but people really stick to their guns on this idea some times.
Think of preflop "range manipulation". Same thing.
"Don't 3 bet JJ from the BB vs a button raise because your opponent will have more hands to call you with when you bet/raise for value on A97r and on A97Q. if you just call preflop". As if the act of raising or flatting will LITERALLY change the two cards in opponents hand.
The only time the "call with worse or fold better" concept is strictly correct is when all the cards are out. That "don't 3 bet JJ from BB vs bttn raise" scenario is an actual quote from a video that was supported by good, thinking, players. I think alot of people are taking the river bet concept
WAY too far these days.