|
BILLABONG
|
11-22-2004, 11:03 PM
Post subject: BETTING HALF THE POT vs. MATCHING POT
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 102
|
|
I was wondering how most of you prefer to bet in Texas Hold em no limit between betting half the pot with top pair vs matching the pot with top pair...in a heads up situation. Now I know alot of you will probably say you should mix up your betting. But I think that mixing up your betting between betting half the pot and matching the pot may give my opponent information about my hand. Does anybody agree with that? Here are some of the reasons I stick with betting half the pot heads up.
1:Betting half the pot heads up doesnt usually give my opponent pot odds to draw out on me (Considering I believe im very good about laying down my hand when I beleive im beat,so I usually dont give my opponent reverse implied odds, rememeber im a very tight passive player).
2:If I bet half the pot as opposed to matching the pot. And my opponent has something on the flop that im unaware of at that time, like a set or two pair,im giving him less money during that hand
3:Its kinda slowplaying in a way because only a maniac is goin to chase when you match the pot. However alot more players will chase if I only bet half the pot. So ill get more action. So you might say "Thats true, but what if your opponent hits? Well obviously*, anytime someone is drawing against you theyre drawing because theyre behind you in the hand,which means im the favorite, and so they might outdraw me some* times. But most* of the time, theyre not goin to hit.
So now I would appreciate some other insight about why this may or may not be wrong. And remember this is a heads up,me having top pair say like aces in the ho, type situation.
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
johnnyawe
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,064
|
|
well, you're right. If its you and one opponent, you actually want to bet the maximum amount that your opponent will still call, for optimal EV. In theory if you bet him out of the hand that it is -EV compared to him calling you down. This is course assumes you bet at least enough to give your opponent improper pot odds for a call. I learned this from a Mike Caro audio lesson.
If you bet half the pot, you are giving your opponent 3:1 to make a call, which still is incorrect to call with 1 card to come.
|
|
|
|
kidpoker22
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: D-Town
Posts: 43
|
|
I couldn't disaggree more with what you said. You claim that by betting half the pot you're not giving your opponent the correct odds to draw against you. That's totally untrue. By betting half the pot you're giving you opponent exactly the right price draw against. For example, say there is $1000 chips in the pot and you bet $500. Well, now there's $1500 in the pot and you're opponent only has to call $500. By my estimation he would be getting exactly 3:1 to call. That price is just right for drawing to a flush and open-ended straight.
I believe that tapping the pot on the flop is almost always correct. Then, if you still feel comfortable with your hand you can be half of the pot on the turn.
And also, being a "tight-passive" player is not a good thing. You might want to work on that.
|
|
KP22
|
|
johnnyawe
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,064
|
|
Well, who are we to believe? Kidpoker or Mike Caro?
Kidpoker, you should read the posts by michael1123 and koolmoe in this thread.
The odds of a flush card hitting are 4:1. If you give your opponent 3:1 then the pot odds are against him and you are rooting for him to call.
You have to understand that when you are calling on the flop, you really can't use the odds for two cards to come. If you could, then it would actually be correct to call a pot size bet. The reason you don't make that call is because you are going to be faced with another bet on the turn. It gets kind of complicated, especially in no limit. You really can't calculate your pot odds on the flop unless you know what kind of bet you'll be faced with on the turn. Koolmoe taught me all of this..
|
|
|
|
elanto
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,117
|
|
I agree with Johnnyawe, betting only half the pot will make those people chasing draws call you, and sometimes they will hit your draw, but if you play your hand correctly and fold when they hit, htis "tactic will play of in the long run.
Quote:
|
In the long run (even over the course of one multitable tourney), this should be very profitable, especially if you can lay your hand down once you know they've hit their draw. Since their chasing itself should be profitable to you, it should be more profitable to price them in than taking down a pot at the flop.
|
Quote:
|
I know thinking about playing like this sounds scary, as you do risk more beats. But then again, if we bet less (instead of trying to scare out a draw), we should lose to bad beats more often, but win a lot bigger pots when we have the hands. Plus, the bad beats we do get by people chasing against odds shouldn't hurt us near as much as they did when we were trying too hard to bet them out of a draw, since the bets aren't as big anymore (again assuming we can lay our hand down when we've likely been outdrawn).
|
(written by michael1223) just to back up my opinion on this. I totally agree with what he says.
The problem is some people, myself included, are afraid of being out drawn by some chaser. So to take them out of the hand we will usually bet the size of the pot and take it down right there, just because we are afraid...
-anto
|
|
<dwarfman> No I had sex for the first time on 23rd March 2005 at 11.56pm.
|
|
twosevoff
|
|
Flush
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 526
|
|
Personally, I like 2/3-3/4 pot-size bets. If I raised preflop and am first to act or checked to on the flop I'm going to make this bet 80%-90% of the time, regardless of what I have. Seems to be a good bet amount for folding out top-pair weak kicker or worse, gives incorrect odds to draw, and tends to get more action when you do have a hand. Also, since I play aggressively and am often betting the flop with nothing, I'd rather lose 2/3 of the pot-size rather than the full pot-size if I'm called or played back at and have to give up the pot.
|
|
|
|
TylerK
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: PEANUT BUTTER JELLY TIME
Posts: 1,791
|
|
This is definitely another "it depends." Remember that many people are betting "an amount of money" instead of "a percentage of the pot." One of my favorite bluffing situations is into a big pot that was built up preflop. Oftentimes into a big pot, even half the pot is "a lot of money" for someone to call with nothing, or top pair weak kicker, middle pair, etc. I LOVE those odds.
|
|
TylerK: its just gambling if i want to worry about money i'll go to work lol
|
|
zenbitz
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,911
|
|
actually, drawing to a 4 flush is more like 1 in 5 than 1 in 4 - because if you hold 2 clubs, and the board holds 2, there are only 9 left, out of say, 48 on the flop). outside straight draw is 1 in 6 (8/48 on the flop).
It's true, on the flop you get 2 chances, which makes the odds of you hitting on either turn or river more like 1 in 3, but you have to call another bet on the turn if you miss.
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
