This is a concept that I want to dive deeper in to, and feel like I'm struggling with/probably learned wrong the first time around.
How I initially learned how to bet the turn:
1.We should bet smaller on the turn, along with our c bet on the driest of boards because there's not much that can pay us off, there aren't many draws to deny equity from, etc..
I.e. 2/5 live, $500 effective. We open $20 UTG, and BB calls. Flop ($42): K72r. X-we $20 and only BB calls. Turn ($82): 5r. X-we should bet half pot again because there's no FD and realistically no SD, not a whole lot of hands in V's range can pay us off.
2. Opposite of point one; more wet boards, that contain draws should be bet larger on the turn when they don't complete to deny equity, along with the larger c bet.
I.e. 2/5 live, $500 effective. We open $20 UTG, and BB calls.
Flop ($42): 9
8
5
. X-we bet $30-call. Turn ($102): 3
. X-we should be betting around pot here to deny equity from the draws, and set up river shoves on bricks.
How betting the turn was "re-taught" to be recently:
1. Going back to the first example (2/5, 100 BB, UTG v BB K725r), we should be absolutely bombing this turn because we have such a range and nut advantage that the fact that villain has less hands to pay us off is irrelevant, and need to set up a river shove. We want to be continuously setting up spots to gii otr (within reason, obviously 500 BB deep that's not an option.)
2. Going back to the second example (2/5, 100 BB, UTG v BB 9
8
5
3
), we should be betting smaller on the turn, and shouldn't have c bet as large, if at all. BB has the only straight, more sets, and more 2p, along with more of either flush should they come in by the river.
It was given to me as a general rule of thumb: bomb the driest of board turns, x/bet smaller on the boards that contain potential straights or flushes.
Which school of thought do you practice, or is it a mixture of both? Hopefully this thread doesn't turn into a **** show. Thank you.