Hi guys,

I checked a lot of good regs on micro limit and they have "low" cbet stat. I saw everywhere (and this is what I learned) the ~70% cbet frequency on flop.

What is your opinion on this? Do you think we should cbet less than 70% on flop and the 50-55% cbet is more profitable?

utg opens, btn calls
how much do you think utg should cb on average on all flops?

above average

well u hit the flop 1/3 of the time, so you miss 2/3 of the time. so you bet 66.666666667% of the time

edit:
but every moron knows a cbet and will not fold 100% of the time
75 % of the time in PS flop will be connected and drawy which u dont cbet.
ergo profitable cbet = (100%-100%*75%) of 66% = 16.6666667%
QED

Exactly this!

15-20%

Yeah bascially high cbet is a signal for old-school way of thinking and constructing ranges.

If you cbet too often ur open to attack from raises, having trouble not over folding at some point now or later.

It's also less bad for people to be reacting nitty to your bets seems they are more liner & strong having alot of the mid range checks as bets instead so light floats/calls are less needed

Your a big target to observant villians that are watching your fold frequences when missing cbet seems with a overly high cbet freq ur check range tends to fold 65%

If your playing poker vs reasonable people cbetting mindlessly won't serve you well longrun if villians know how to react properly

This. OOP w/ an IP caller is a range check on a lot of boards.

but let's say micro pop cb ~50% as utg vs btn
with very often a badly constructed range which leaves their checking range crippled
btn can now bet flop 100% or close to when checked to and barrel almost any turn. btn doesn't have to look at his cards and print

I think looking at this stat in isolation is useless and you shouldn't shape your strategy around it. The cbet stat could be a result of opening wider preflop or calling a lot of hands in position looking to outplay people postflop, or some other element that comprises that players whole strategy. And just because it's right for them it doesn't mean that'll work for you. I think it's important not to worry too much about what your stats look like (not ignore them completely) but focus on your decision making and how well you evaluate ranges and how well you manipulate situations to make your opponents make mistakes.

That being said, you could also be cbetting too much against your opponents. Use what you've noticed to evaluate whether you're cbetting strategy is working, or not working, and adjust. These are the sort of things we look for to guide us when we study using our hand history. But certainly don't just adjust based on what you've seen other good players doing, adjust based on work you've done looking at your game and your own experience.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

I just solved this spot for 15 representative flops, giving IP a range a regfish might flat, including very low-frequency traps and connected junk, using a 75% pot cbet for simplicity and the results were between cbetting 0%- ~30%. If I had inputted more optimal ranges for the IP flatter the percentages would be what ionutd said earlier. Checking your whole range from UTG would be much better than cbetting a large chunk of it.

Yeah I was afraid the 70% Cbet is too old-school. I didn't even feel the comfort with this play style anymore. I didn't know why I just felt something is not properly played.
Now I understand better.

Thank you guys

But depens on the flop, UTG vs BTN on 658 two tone hits more BTN Range than UTG, so UTG should cbet less on this board

It depends on a lot of things, but I'd say that anything between 40-60% should be viable.

I think this approach is not really working even when only looking at the IP or OOP stat.
From what i understand the EV difference between different Sizes on the Flop is not as big as on later streets. So if one player uses a simple 1/4 pot cb strategy when being IP he will obviosly be betting with a much higher frequency than a player who uses a 2/3 or 3/4 cb strategy. even though it is far from optimal to use only one size on the flop across all flops it is still winning money (most likely)

I crushed 2nl and 5nl with a cbet % less than 40

A reg at 25nl on ACR has 29% cbet

my cbet is higher now, but delayed cbets are where its at

FYI: Both OTB Redbaron and Linus Love have cbet percentages of 60.2 and 60.4 or something respectively

Small cbets are common in high stakes making their cbet percentages higher than what they would be with the more common half pot to 75% pot sizings you see more often at the micros


tfw u 3 bet or fold so u never get to use these exploits

Do you want to elaborate?

My delayed cbets have 55% success rate, and I use half pot as a standard.

The raw average hides important positional and range dynamics.

IP gets to cbet much more, obviously, and OOP pre aggressor needs to have a much stronger checking range. But not all IP is created equal. A UTG open raises has a big range advantage on most boards than a BB caller, allowing them to cbet more frequently and often larger, than say, a BTN v BB situation. Donk betting from the OOP player can be used (and can be GTO) fairly frequently on 765, 654 type boards that are terrible for the IP player.

OOP, a CO open raiser does not have as large a range advantage against the BUT caller and should be usually checking, whereas a UTG raiser still has a large range advantage over the BUT cold call. So, UTG cbets more frequently than the CO when versus the Button.

utg opening range doesn't have range advantage over button cold calling range afaik

It depends on the flop texture. Preflop it obviously does.

Is everyone who is saying we should cbet 15-20% of the time as UTG vs BTN basing this on GTO solvers?
Or is it based on actually trying it over a large sample size?
Is this at 2NL & 5NL or at 25NL & 50NL?

I find it hard to believe that giving free cards to people who would over-fold to a cbet is higher EV than playing GTO against them.

I've mentioned this before, but my cbets out of position are making me money.
Not a lot, but they're +EV and my cbet frequency is nearly 70% out of position.

Would checking more often be higher EV?
How would that work?


This thread feels like people are blindly stating GTO stuff without knowing the actual reasons behind it.

Or maybe I just don't understand them, in which case I would be very interested in reading them!

i dont know what makes money at 2nl. if people flat 20% on the button and then fold a s**** ton to cbets... yeah you can bet. so do you want to make money at 2nl or do you want to learn how to play poker?

one thing to learn would be that ionutd is most likely not blindly stating anything.

Agree.

Why should they be two different things?
My goal is to understand why we do stuff rather than to know what I should do in a given situation.
I'm not very interested in the GTO solution, because none of my opponents are even near GTO.
I am interested in knowing how they deviate from GTO (which mistakes they make) and how to abuse those.

Stating GTO says you should cbet 15-20% of the time UTG vs BTN on a 2bet call is completely useless information for me.
Again, I'm not saying the information is useless, but without knowing the reasons behind it, it is useless to me.


I didn't make such a claim. Please do not twist my words into something they are not.

it read like it referred to this

yeah that is said a lot and it is ... GTO always makes money no matter who your opponent is. sooo

bro u need to know what gto is to know how villain is deviating from it.

no it is not. you know now that your game has leaks because you are deviating from it and when you see someone cbetting too much in that spot you know he has a leak and you know you can exploit him.

well you did say it but then stop questioning if solver strategy is a good strategy and start trying to figure out why it is a good strategy. (No one claimed it is easy to understand what and why solver is doing what it is doing)

because you cant make a living a 2nl and when you move up in stakes there will be less fish and more and better regs who will probably ra** you. It is like open jamming AA for 100bb makes a lot of money if there is a whale at the table who calls any two cards. but it is not a good strategy by default.