I've been killing my head lately and can't come up with a coherent heuristic for disconnected boards cbet size, SRP HU BTN vs BB.

I'm happy to cbet 1/3 on trips, paired, monotone and straights, and it seems to capture a whole bunch of what GTO likes to do.

But for disconnected boards it gets really tricky. The thing is on a lot of these, we are prefering 1/3 too, but on some, we want a big size also.

The thing is, even on those where we like to have a big size, most of the times the range also contain a considerable chunk betting 1/3.

So balancing those two sizes also is a task.

If you decided to get all your range to 3/4, for example, then you would also be deviating from GTO by not betting the 1/3 portion correctly (maybe you would lose less EV if this simplification was closer, but my guess is that these flops are a minority, and you would need to come with a coherent heuristic and spend extra mental resources on the table for maybe no that much extra EV?)

It seems to me the best I can come up right now, is just cbetting the flop for 1/3 on SRP HU pots on all flops so I can forget about being bet size exploitable, and focus on betting frequencies and defense ranges against raises instead, which is actually something where you can bleed out badly if not doing a decent work.

My plan is to continue having a big size on multiway pots (where we often bet less trash) and 3bet pots (where our range is stronger and makes things easier postflop, specially OOP).

Would this strategy resign too much EV?

Anyone does this with success?

Do you think it's reasonable?

Thanks!

The short answer is no--it will not give up a significant amount of EV under the assumption you compensate well on future streets. What is important is that the range/frequency you bet matches the sizing you choose and that you understand this will influence your bet sizes and range construction on future streets.

See also:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...tsize-1813124/

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...27/?highlight=

FWIW, solvers generally use smaller sizes on average in multiway pots because we have less equity and use smaller sizes in 3-bet pots because the SPR is lower, we almost always have an equity advantage and want to bet often.

In general, defaulting to cbetting 33% on most flops as the PFR HU will still be +EV because:
- We do almost always have the equity advantage so pushing that advantage will be +EV
- Population over-folds to small bets, even with conventional wisdom that low stakes players are stations, 80% of a BB range is a lot to defend.
- One of the obvious exploits to you betting too often with a small size is to check raise way more, which the majority of the low stakes population simply won't do.
- Executing a simplified strategy near perfectly will often have better results than executing a higher EV strategy that is more complicated and causes you to make more mistakes.

I realized this, thanks.

I moved to structuring an heuristics so I can pick one single size per spot which should be a bit better and still not as complicated as balancing two sizes per spot.

I've been working on a similar method for the turn and it makes a lot of sense.

On the river though, it seems to get tricky, do you think we can get away with it there too? Or having at least two sizes there on some spots is needed to not sacrifice much EV?

Thanks!

Thanks!

You should have more than one sizing for river in my opinion.