I've been reviewing a lot of hand quizzes on Jonathan Little's website. He and his coaches often reduce their bet sizes on later streets, both in absolute terms and in percentage terms. To me, this screams weakness, particularly after taking an aggressive line, such as a preflop 3-bet or a flop check-raise.

Here are some example hands from the site. The first two come from 2/5 NL cash games, and the last one from a 1/2 NL cash game. Effective stacks are always over 150BBs.


A LAG limps from EP, and then a TAG raises to $20. Hero calls from the lo-jack with K Q, and then the CO, the BB, and the limper call.

Flop [$102]: J 4 5

Everyone checks to the Hero, and he bets $60. Only the original limper calls.

Turn [$222]: J 4 5 T

Hero bets $80, significantly reducing his bet-sizing relative to the pot, despite improving to an OESD.


In another hand, Hero is in the SB with 8 5. Everyone limps, Hero calls, and BB checks. The flop has 7 players.

Flop [$35]: 2 4 6

Hero checks, the BB bets $15, and everyone else folds. Hero check-raises to $75, and the BB calls.

Turn [$185]: 2:spade 4:diamond 6:diamond 2:heart

Hero bets $80, once again significantly reducing his bet-sizing relative to the pot.


In the last hand, Hero is in the CO with 7 7. UTG and two other players limp. Hero raises to $14. Only UTG calls.

Flop [$35]: K 6 4.

UTG checks. Hero bets, but reduces bet size to $12.


How often do change your bet sizes as in the examples above? What factors do you take into account when you decide to keep betting, but to tone down your aggression?

My two cents on this would be:

- betting the smallest amount that gets the job done (i.e. folding someone out) is likely best
- the biggest threat of a bet on a non-river street isn't the size of the bet, but rather the threat of facing a huge bet on the next street
- overall, small hands want small pots and big hands want big pots

Small bet sizing mostly accomplishes these things in these spots.

GcluelesssizingnoobG

i almost never do. i do realize the downbet is the rage these days, but when playing nl, i stick with a fairly consistent range.

what will cause me to change my bet size is the number of people in the pot if i'm at a looser game, position, and most importantly, who i'm up against. i have the players who i know will pay me off, and the players i know will fold to a min bet if they missed.

The smaller bets regularly work. Allowing 3:1 odds still makes draws thin.

Don't forget that smaller bets are sometimes perceived as bait.

I change bets quite often with the idea of targeting their range. Equity changes quite a big in the turn vs flop. Down betting turn keeps the bottom of their range when they check again and show weakness.

The 3rd hand you bet less because you want a 6 and a 4 to also call since a K will call a bigger bet.

If you bet half pot for instance it’s more likely that only a K will call and you lost value from his potential calling range.

Grinch from title alone. From absolute terms, never. By percentage of pot, often.

A LAG limps from EP, and then a TAG raises to $20. Hero calls from the lo-jack with K Q, and then the CO, the BB, and the limper call.

Flop [$102]: J 4 5
Everyone checks to the Hero, and he bets $60. Only the original limper calls.

Turn [$222]: J 4 5 T

Hero bets $80, significantly reducing his bet-sizing relative to the pot, despite improving to an OESD.

Feedback/Advice: In this hand, you're V's hand range consists of: straight draws, flush draws, bottom/middle set, and uncomfortable 1 pair hands to call 3 streets with. The flop bet is -EV compared to checking, but once you bet the flop there should be certain turns where you continue the story and this turn is definitely one of them. The story you are telling on the flop is that you have a good hand and are comfortable betting against a field of 5 players. This turn is relatively dry for what your range should be at this point, only hand you'd be worried about now is JT. When you bet flop and decide to bet turn here, you should bet this spot as if you are betting for value in order be balanced. You don't want solid opponents picking up on sizing tells that big turn bets are strength and lower turn bets are weakness. Also, when you down bet percentage wise here, you are giving your opponent profitable odds to come along to the river, which is less than ideal. The goal of your bet here should be to draw a fold, without making it obvious that you want a fold. I'd recommend going roughly the same percentage betting the turn as you did flop, maybe a little more. If you're betting this turn, I'm betting in the $135 - $155 range...can also make a case for checking depending on player type. Both options are vastly more profitable at your stack depths than a .33 PSB. I'd also plan on barreling most rivers that aren't clubs, 3's, or 8's


In another hand, Hero is in the SB with 8 5. Everyone limps, Hero calls, and BB checks. The flop has 7 players.

Flop [$35]: 2 4 6
Hero checks, the BB bets $15, and everyone else folds. Hero check-raises to $75, and the BB calls.

Turn [$185]: 2:spade 4:diamond 6:diamond 2:heart
Hero bets $80, once again significantly reducing his bet-sizing relative to the pot.

With no information about BB Villain, I am going to range his hand strength here on sets, straight, random 2 pair combos, and flush draw/ combo draw type hands, flush draws with 2 overs. When you check raise from the small blind, you're representing a straight/set, combo flush/straight draw. When villain flats the flop check raise by you, I'd discount the straight and leave his range as sets, 2 pairs and flush draw with over (can't really have combo draw with you having the 5 unless its 3Xdd. And because of his lead and you blocking all the good diamonds. I'm weighing him heavier on the value side with 2 pair/set. With your exact hand, I'd probably shut down on the turn when the board pairs and just go into check/fold mode on the turn and check/call the river if you hit. Too much of his range improves too boats on the turn, and quite often you'd be drawing dead. If you had bigger diamonds, JTdd for example I'd be more apt to bet here since you don't block some of the lower combo draws, even then pretty risky OOP.

If you decide you're going to bet here, this is actually probably a good spot to bet smaller. If you're betting for value here, on a paired board, you're most of the time hoping to keep flush draws in and maybe an over pair like 77//88. Those hands know they could be drawing dead or to 2 outers, so they're likely to fold to a 66% PSB, but could definitely continue against a 33 - 40%% PSB. The river is where you'll want to go bigger for both value and bluffs on this hand, the turn is not the spot.


In the last hand, Hero is in the CO with 7 7. UTG and two other players limp. Hero raises to $14. Only UTG calls.

Flop [$35]: K 6 4.
UTG checks. Hero bets, but reduces bet size to $12.

Feedback/Advice: HU on this connected of a flop, I wouldn't have a down bet size. I would check or bet, and if I am betting it's going to be $20/$25 every time. Any pair is calling you here, so even 77 can still be a value-ish bet. Down betting HU usually occurs in 3b pots, not so much in simple 1 raise pots.

The general point of betting in this spot would be to either get value with a made hand or get V to fold and end the hand. $12 is leaving value on the table when you have a made hand and is also likely to get floated more often. In the interest of balance, you'll want to avoid betting smaller when you're bluffing or don't know whether you are bluffing/raising as good players will pick up on the sizing tell and exploit.

you wouldn't bet $12 here with AK..so don't do it with 77


How often do change your bet sizes as in the examples above?
Answer: My feedback is pretty detailed above, let me know if you have any specific questions about the feedback. The only real time I down-bet is in 3B / 4B pot's HU. IN most other scenarios, it doesn't make strategic sense to bet smaller than you did previously.

What factors do you take into account when you decide to keep betting, but to tone down your aggression?
Based on past analysis of hands that I have played, I've found that most of the time's when I "tone down the aggression on later streets" it's a board that reflects poorly on my range but since I was already bluffing, I feel like I have to continue with some kind of bet to apply pressure. It has nothing to do with actually playing well and is definitely a give away sizing tell against good players.

I have learned/improved my sizing since and very rarely adjust bet sizing. The rare times I usually do bet smaller/ish on the turn, it's usually because my opponents range is capped and I want to set up a Pot size or over pot size shove on the river. but even then, you have to be balanced and sometimes have a nutted range when you bet small

[/QUOTE]

I disagree with your sizing assessment here Jeff. In my experience if they called a raise preflop and are HU, they will be calling a larger bet with any pair on this flop and with the normal backdoor draws they have, they should be calling.

Sure they call higher bets. What are you doing on the turn then? Making a same ratio bet thereby adding more to the pot with a marginal hand? Or will you be downbetting to only target the weak part of the range?

What am I doing on the turn with his exact hand? Mostly checking, unless a set is turned? In general, I'm not trying to go 3 streets of value with a middling pocket pair and 1 or more overs on the board. Expect a check from V on the turn, check back and evaluate the river action.

What am I doing on the turn with Hero's range here? Depends on the turn and the Villain. If he's a calling station that's likely to call turns too light, then go for value again. If he's only likely to call turn bets with hands that are ahead, then check.

Downbetting is mostly useful in 3B HU pots, I very rarely do it in multiway pots.

Downbetting can be worth it HU on the river when you're range is significantly stronger than your opponents and you're trying to get a loose call from them or get them to fold a middling hand or missed draw that might still be better than your actual hand. (Ex: if you put them on the NFD and you have na inferior draw and the river bricks, a downbet can be useful here).

Downbetting can also be useful to induce a LAG or aggro villain to bluff.

Outside of those circumstances, it's mostly a tactic that is not needed in lower stakes NLHE (2/5 and below)

I think to make this work you have to be disciplined to fold the river when the draw comes in when you have a hand. Even when the villain gives you 3:1 odds to call back. Otherwise, you'll start bleeding money.

So when you bet bigger on flop and got called you just shut down. Sure you don’t want to play 2-3 streets of value but why not consider splitting it into a 1.5 streets of value.

Bet 12 then bet 18. Instead of just betting 20 on flop and then checking down?

You still beat mid and bottom pair. You also beat flush and straight draws. Both will call this line more and you’d be protecting your hand vs the range you beat rather than betting $20 and shutting down.

Most weak pairs that I am beating will fold to that 2nd bet on the turn.

If those are actual hand quiz examples from Jonathan Little's website, he is out of touch with today's live games and that site is worthless. The first 2 hands are horrible

This is one of my concerns. Little is primarily a tournament player, while I primarily play cash games. I'm concerned about whether the cash game hands which are analyzed on the site are applying concepts from tournament play that don't really translate, and down-betting may be one of them.

Those were actual hands from the site. Little was the player in the third (1/2 NL) example. Some other coach was the player in the 2/5 NL examples.

I would have been more inclined to play the hands the way that jtm1208 analyzed them above.