I read it somewhere, can't remember, that it was good to value bet Big. though big value gets get called less often, It was still more profitable. Big value bets called less often is more profitable than smaller value bets called more often.

my River value bets have been on the Big side and they aren't called often. I'm starting to think that value betting smaller amount for immediate gain is better for me, cuz it's Money right now, rather than waiting for that Big call later.

how do you guys size the value bet at river?

Here's a quick example on why value betting big on the river works out to be more profitable long term (and we should only be concerned about long term profitability, not short term).

Pot is $100. We have $100 left. Let's say we guess our opponent will call a $50 1/2 PSB 50% of the time. So the EV of a $50 bet is $25. In order for a $100 shove to be just as profitable as the, the opponent needs to call 25% of the time. The thing is, it's highly unlikely there is that much discrepancy (a factor of 2) of him calling the $50 bet versus a $100 bet; if he's calling the $50 bet 50% of the time, he's probably calling the $100 bet like 40% of the time, which is an EV of $40.

So, yeah, you're smaller bets will definitely get called a lot more and being short term results oriented with the money in your pocket you'll think you're making good money. But long term, you're really missing out.

GshovingtheriverisalmostalwaysthebestbetsizeG

One wrinkle to what GG just wrote: that math depends on making solid guesses at how often our opponent will call. Those guesses are based on a combination of poker psych and poker math (establishing hand ranges).

The argument for value betting small comes from the same math GG just gave us: Pot is $100. Our opponent has $100 left. It's 6PM, he's been at the table since 4:30PM, and we know from previous sessions that he only buys in once. We have an overpair to the board, and the way the hand has played out, we think he has a hand like TPWK or middle pair. But there was a two-flush on the flop, and he's seen us bluff rivers before.

Here I'd estimate opponent is calling $100 maybe 10% of the time. If he hero-calls and he's wrong, he has to get up in disgrace and face rush hour traffic on his way home. So the EV of the $100 bet is $10.

I think he'll call a $25 bet 80% of the time, though. It's such a small bet, and maybe we're bluffing, and he's just gotta see it. So the EV of the $25 bet is $20.

(BUT! I think he'll call a $50 bet 60% of the time. It doesn't force him out of the game, and he thinks I might have missed my flush. So, if I'm right, the EV of the $50 bet is $30.)

The huge discrepancy is present because of our impression of what calling an all-in will mean to him, and our impression of what his likely hand is.

I agree with GG that, when in doubt, value bet big. But "big" should be pegged to his likely hand range and what the bet sizes seem to mean to him.

This question has a very simple answer.
Ranges.

However, putting this into practice is *very* different.

In the example above, it is correct that shoving for $100 would be better. However, in order to understand why someone might be calling 100% of the time, vs 50% of the time, vs 20% of the time we need to look at all the hands that they got to the river with.

The tl;dr answer is that you need to decide what parts of their range will call $100, vs $50, vs $25 vs checking so that you can let the bluff. And that will be player dependent.

I'll try to make up some examples after work if I get a chance, but suffice to say that in general if you don't know what is a villain is calling with then we can't really know if it is better to bet bigger or smaller.

your bet sizing should really be chosen based on the strength of villains range on the river. If villain's range is almost always a weak TP or SP on the river then a smaller bet is probably more profitable because it will get called so much more. However there are also spots where villain almost always has a hand strong enough to call a big bet. However, sometimes villians range will have a lot of pretty strong hands and call a big bet just as often as a small one. so betting big, sometimes even more than pot, is the best play.

Bet sizing depends on the construction and elasticity of villains range, there is no defined formula for every spot

Also, look for inelastic ranges OTR. This means that the V is calling or folding REGARDLESS of the bet. A lot of times this will have to do with the board runout.

For example, limped pot, 6 players, flop Q82, we flop nut flush, bet pot, 1 calls, turn 3o, bet pot, call, river Ao. At this point, V has stuck with you on 2 pot sized bets, nothing has essentially changed.

If V was drawing (with K, for example, or a gutshot straight), he will fold to any bet. However, if he has a made hand (set, or smaller flush), it is extremely likely by now that he is calling any bet (having called 2 pot sized bets already).

In situations like these, you may as well bomb it, since when you DO get paid, you want to get paid the max.

Another example might be when you are positive a V is drawing to second best hand. When the draw you suspect comes in, bomb it. If you were right, he can't fold (he didn't call his draw to fold it when it hits....).

I'm assuming the question refers to, what do you do when you wind up OTR with the nuts, and I think this post nails it. Likewise, what GG said; they are either going to call, or not.

I think smaller sizing makes more sense when betting for thin value, because the profit equation requires mitigating losses, and theoretically, the smaller sizing makes it a bigger mistake for villain to fold. The fish typically get the second half of this concept, and I don't blame them for not getting the first part.

The key concept is that 1/2 villains call too often. Against a TAGish player, the fish assume you are bluffing the river way more often than you are. Partially because they think that's how poker is played, shoot I read a book one time that specifically said, "always call on the river."* Partially because of heuristics; they figure either you're a bluffer, or not. They see you bluff the flop a lot, so they conclude you're a bluffer. They saw you open-raise 87s OTB once; to them, that's a bluff too. If they catch you betting for thin value OTR, they are convinced you're a bluffer. Look at it this way. Everything a TAG does at every point along the way sets you up to get your big, giant river value bets called.

It even works against thinking players. They get so used to people slipping out little sucker bets with the nuts, if you overbet the pot it kind of tilts them into calling sometimes. That's one of my favorite tricks.

-----
*Won't mention the author, let's just say his initials are Phil Helmuth.