Hi,

I try a lot with different bet sizes and one thing I am unsure of is the overbet on the turn.
Situation: I am the aggressor preflop and make an flop cb (between 33%-66% potsize depending on the board).

My question: what kind of turns are you going to overbet (lets say 120-180% of the potsize)?

1) Are we doing it depending on our holdings?
e.g.do we overbet good draws (e.g. a flushdraw+GS) / valuehands that need protection (e.g. TPGK on a flush/straightheavy board) / value hands like 2p or better?
To balance those hands do we also overbet bluffs or would it be enough to have the draws in our range?
Do we ever overbet the nuts (we probably have to, to not be too easy to play)

2) Are we doing it depending on the turncard?
e.g. a scare card for villain comes on the turn (e.g. overcard to the board like an A or K?) / a scare card which completes a flush/straight?

3) Are we doing it dependend of villain stats (e.g. villain folds a lot to turn bets / villain folds too less to "normal" sized turnbets

4) Position does matter (e.g. more turn overbets IP or OOP)?

5) Other reasons?

Are you doing overbets on the turn? If yes - how many of your turnbets are overbets (in % appr.) ?

Thanks and br

Starting out, I would base it on your exact holdings. Maybe stick to only over betting when you have either a strong hand (top 2 pair/set) or a really strong draw. That will keep you fairly well balanced, and of course you are doing it with hands you are okay if you get called or raised.

As you get more comfortable, then I think you can start doing it with lower equity bluffs on boards where you should have the nut advantage.

As you get better at ranging opponents hands on boards you can do over bets on turn and sometimes followed through on rivers. One of the more common spots you will find bluffs vs weaker players, ones who can find folds.

I agree you should initially be very polarized until you start to recognize players tendencies. Also if you do this a lot with bluffs you must play some of your strong hands in a similar fashion. Particularly against players who adjust. You may not notice players making adjustments depending on the stakes. If you do it too much expect the old check to you option and call you down.

tl;dr





https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...42&postcount=6
https://upswingpoker.com/overbet-str...example-hands/

thanks dubakkur2

YES! the Turn betsize (obviously ?!) depends most of all on the turn card.

do not randomly overbet just because you have a strong hand or a strong draw. or to bluff when you want villain to fold. i mean you can do that but that is basically just random button clicking. my expierence with "regs" who randomly overbet spots that are not overbet-spots are that they usually use the betsize to either bluff a lot because they assume population overfolds or they massively underbluff and only ever have value. dont be one of these guys.

You're asking the right questions. And I'll preface by saying that everything depends, but there are heuristics to look at.

Let me give you an illustration. Let's say it's UTG vs. BB single-raised pot. Flop is AsKh5d. You bet 33% pot (solver says to mix between 75% and 33%). What turns do you overbet?

Solvers says the best turns to overbet are turns with low cards. Cards like 6s, 7s, 8h, 3s, 2s, etc. These are not cards that give us the biggest equity advantage (actually, the 3s is the single worst card in the deck for us equity-wise), but they do give us the nut advantage: BB should never have AK, KK, AA to begin with, and should fold 66 to the modest c-bet (does population do this? That's another question). It also thinks BB should almost always x/r 55, so we get to this turn, and we have ALL the sets, and most of the two pairs. So it's time to overbet with hands like AA, KK, AK, 66, QJs, JsTs, even 8s8x.

Perhaps counter-intuitively, we should never overbet on an Ace turn. Why? BB should have plenty of Ax, and should never really x/r flop with them



2) yes absolutely. We want to do it on turns/rivers where we have a nut advantage.
4) we do it more IP. Solvers like smaller sizes OOP

In general, we do it for the same reasons we bet for 75% pot as opposed to 33% pot, just when the factors become "more extreme" There are tons of exceptions, of course

^^^+1000 Gold

You can overbet turn when you have a large range advantage over your opponent. Usually you have a range advantage anyway as the preflop raiser, but more so when villain is in the BB as they will defend wide.

This very much depends on the turn card, your examples aren't great though. Say the flop is 7h8h3d and you are button v bb. A Kc turn could be a good card, as it is more likely to hit your cbetting range than villains calling range, but 2c is possibly a better card, as given the board is a bit wet, villain would likely raise big hands on the flop. Therefore a total blank maintains your range advantage given you have way more big hands than they do.

A card that completes a draw isn't great, as this usually reduces range advantage - given both players likely have draws in their ranges.

what do you mean with range advantage?

this isn't strictly true, depending on what you mean by range advantage. Generally once villain x/c's a c-bet, any equity-wise range advantage we had is now gone.

In fact, in spots where villain called a c-bet, we often want to overbet turns that are quite bad for our range, equity-wise. These are often the turns which don't hit anybody's range particularly hard (and so it's good for the caller, who generally has a lot less air now that it's been narrowed). However, we generally maintain the top-end range advantage

yeah - equity wise the 2c is worse for IP than the Kc and OOP even has the equity advantage but IP is pretty much purely using a overbet strategy. on the Kc the regular betsize is still used very frequently

Well yes, I meant top end range advantage. Only we know how much air we have, which determines the overall range we have.

In the examples I gave, I meant we can realistically have all the nut hands, but Villain can't (or shouldn't, because he should raise them on the wet board).

well he is not supposed to raise all nut hands on the flop. it is totally fine to mix. but still it is not really that. if you would assume villain slowplays more sets than he should and Villain would have the same amount of sets on the turn as hero - hero would still only use the overbet strategy on the 2c turn.

It's more important what he does do, rather than what he should do. But yes, even if he manages to balance better on the flop and therefore does have sets, he still has way less overpairs given they generally 3 bet preflop.

there is no context at all ?! i said IF villain does not x/r his nut combos on the flop and has the same amount of sets on the turn we would still purely overbet because - you said we would overbet because villain is capped. and that is not true since we still go crazy with the overbet when villain is uncapped and has as many nut hands as we do.

true.. we have a big advantage in that part of the range but if hero would check his Overpairs on the flop and not have an advantage in overpairs on the turn second barrel - hero would again still only use a overbet strategy

I'm not clear what you're arguing with me about tbh, you seem to be saying that my explanation isn't the reason you should overbet, without saying what is the reason. I'm trying to help people understand, not be cryptic.

i am also trying to be helpful. OP asked why we overbet. you had a theory. i am saying the theory does not hold up. there are many possible reasons for why something happens. being able to rule out one reason should be helpful (In my opinion).

So do you have a theory?

One useful heuristic I noticed is that when the turn completes flushdraws (i.e. flop Tc7c5d turn: 2c), you should very rarely OB. Which makes sense if you think about the whole thing in terms of capped vs uncapped ranges.

Also one thing I haven't seen mentioned is SPR. We like to overbet usually when we couldn't get stacks in with 3 normal bets, so we want to put max pressure on villain with a polarized subrange. This way we can bluff more and he has to call down with a decent portion of his bluffcatchers because of mdf. There is a theorem by Sklansky if I recall correctly that if villain only has bluffcatchers with 0% equity against our nuttish hands and we have a completely polarized range we should bet the same % of pot on every street that gets stacks in by the river to maximize EV. So in SRPs that would be an overbet sizing, something like 115-120% pot. I don't know if there are situations where non-jam OBs are good in 3bet pots but it's probably rare.

And protection/equity denial is another factor. Vulnerable overpairs really like to OB, it provides protection and a likely scarecard on a later street would make it harder to valuebet even if we remain ahead. Something like top set, less so. (Also removal effects are often relevant).

Sorry for nitpicking, but I would be very surprised if AA top set would be an overbet because of blocker effects. Liked your post a lot though.

Zuko:

so you are saying overbetting doesn't have anything to do with top end range advantage or being up against a capped range?

no. i didnt say that. please no twisting words. bet size has something to do with topend rangeadvantage. but it also has to do with other "things". i dont randomly make this stuff up. you can check it with a solver.

Ah, you're a "solver guy". This makes sense now.

Ah you think you can calculate the highest EV Betsize or strategy without using a solver?

Wow.