Continuation Bets: When to Give Up

$0.05/$0.10

Delt TA in the CO. UTG limps. Table folds to me. I raise $0.50, SB folds, BB calls $0.40, UTG folds.

Flop comes 2Q9. I bet $1.00, BB folds.

Seems a kind of standard move and standard outcome, however, what if I had been called? Do I immediately give up the hand? Do I bet again on the turn unimproved? Considering how often this kind of things happen, is it +EV to call other players' c-bets? What if the table begins to notice I'm c-betting almost always, and surrendering on the turn? Any information would be appreciated.

Edit: Assume I have no reads on the players at the table (I generally don't). The only player I had a read on had $27.00, and went broke before I had a chance to get into a hand with him.

If he would have called, and not raised, your c-bet here, he could be drawing to that kind of flop. If a rag falls on the turn and he checks again, fire another barrel. But if a scary card comes, consider check/folding since all you have is an Ace-high. But then again, he could be holding something like A9, and think YOU are the one drawing. These $10NL players tend to get a little too tricky at times.

And don't EVER just call someone's c-bet unless you're drawing and he's giving you the odds to do so. If you think he's bluffing or think you have him beat, raise it up. If not, fold. There's another hand coming up in about 5 seconds.

Ask yourself this. What hands call this flop? What hands fold to a Turn bet? What hands raise a turn bet? How much do I need to bet to break even if villain calls 20%, 50%? Hands like this are 100% based on your opponents and have nothing to do with your hand at all. This is going to be about reads, stats and math.

Originally Posted by jyms

Ask yourself this. What hands call this flop? What hands fold to a Turn bet? What hands raise a turn bet? How much do I need to bet to break even if villain calls 20%, 50%? Hands like this are 100% based on your opponents and have nothing to do with your hand at all. This is going to be about reads, stats and math.

Great advice. Basically, if he's folding to c-bets more than he's raising or calling, it's +EV.

Also remember when the turn completes a draw, this could be a scare card for him too. It is never incorrect to Bet/fold.

I don't cbet this flop.

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

I don't cbet this flop.

I can't think of a good reason not to. ABCD theorem puts this in like a low B to high C category, and even that might be generous. We have practically zero showdown value so that might even bump us into a low C to high D range.

If villain called here I'd check behind turn and fold river UI. Generally speaking, even if he is only on a draw, he's not folding to a turn bet and he has a buttload of outs against you assuming you're ahead in the first place.

ABCD theorem?

Mood dependent. This is just not a flop I'm gonna cbet on. Lots of hands'll feel like calling. Of course, I also don't pot flops.

Try to develop reads on your opponents. For example, there's a group of nits on Titan, if they limp/call my raise, then call my Cbet, I can be 100% sure that they're carrying their hand till the river.

My note on a another player encountered yesterday is : "needs to be 2-barreled to respect Cbets".

But in the general case, I Cbet if I haven't been active too much in the last couple hands. It gives you more credibility.

Originally Posted by gosam

Try to develop reads on your opponents. For example, there's a group of nits on Titan, if they limp/call my raise, then call my Cbet, I can be 100% sure that they're carrying their hand till the river.

My note on a another player encountered yesterday is : "needs to be 2-barreled to respect Cbets".

But in the general case, I Cbet if I haven't been active too much in the last couple hands. It gives you more credibility.

How do you go about getting reads on other players--online? The only people I can get "reads" on are those that are just blatantly out of line with the way they play.

Read dependent.
Some ppl just wont go away to the first c-bet, even if they have air (they like to float).
Some ppl will only stay if they hit or have a good draw.

Against the first, not a bad idea to 2barrel sometimes, or if you have outs and position, check behind on turn, hope to snap a bluff if you hit your outs.
Against the second, get out UI, they're not folding.

You need to know your opponents, without reads, just give up and move on to the next hand

Originally Posted by euphoricism

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

I don't cbet this flop.

I can't think of a good reason not to. ABCD theorem puts this in like a low B to high C category, and even that might be generous. We have practically zero showdown value so that might even bump us into a low C to high D range.

If villain called here I'd check behind turn and fold river UI. Generally speaking, even if he is only on a draw, he's not folding to a turn bet and he has a buttload of outs against you assuming you're ahead in the first place.

This is probably the best NLHE non-shortstacking post I've ever seen from you.

kool?

Originally Posted by euphoricism

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

I don't cbet this flop.

I can't think of a good reason not to. ABCD theorem puts this in like a low B to high C category, and even that might be generous. We have practically zero showdown value so that might even bump us into a low C to high D range.

If villain called here I'd check behind turn and fold river UI. Generally speaking, even if he is only on a draw, he's not folding to a turn bet and he has a buttload of outs against you assuming you're ahead in the first place.

I agree completely with this, however, if your image is to give up on the turn you might consider a check-raise on the turn. He might be betting a draw, which gets more money in the pot if his draw misses, and you might take it down right there if he was trying to float. If a blank hits the river using this line, I bet hard. I've used this line quiet a bit to shut down floaters with good success. In fact, I can't remember the last time someone called down all the way to the river with this line.. and since I cbet 90% of the time, I get to use it a lot.

I like eupho's line best. Outlaw suggests a river bluff which, once you learn to spot your spots, is +EV. But for noobies I'll just add what I've learned. Cbetting and then 2barrelling on boards like this with (as jyms pointed out) zero showdown value often FORCES a river bluff, a la Outlaw's line.

Summary: your cbet is a bluff, your turn is a bluff, and on the river the only way to win is to bluff again. If you're not comfortable in these spots, you gotta disengage early, like eupho suggests.

So a C-Bet is a continuation bet, which just means you're waiting for a draw? Is that right?

Also what is ABCD therom. Many thanks

Robb, but if you didn't raise on the river, wouldn't that give your opponent the chance to think maybe you're just trying to open him up to placing a large bet that you could call, so maybe that might make him just check?

Originally Posted by LuckySlevin

So a C-Bet is a continuation bet, which just means you're waiting for a draw? Is that right?

Also what is ABCD therom. Many thanks

Here's the ABCD link: Renton Theorem aka ABCD Theorem.

Originally Posted by LuckySlevin

Robb, but if you didn't raise on the river, wouldn't that give your opponent the chance to think maybe you're just trying to open him up to placing a large bet that you could call, so maybe that might make him just check?

I see your point, but two counterpoints:

1. They don't think at the micros.
2. We don't have any showdown value, so having him check behind on the river isn't worth much.

Originally Posted by LuckySlevin

So a C-Bet is a continuation bet, which just means you're waiting for a draw? Is that right?

Also what is ABCD therom. Many thanks

Actually a continuation bet means that you are "continuing the betting", which means you raised pre-flop and have now "continued to bet" on the flop. A C-bet does not denote anything about your hand.

As for the ABCD Theorem, it is basically a method to break your hand down into 4 categories, A being the strongest group and D being the weakest (meaning if you don't bluff at the hand you probably won't win it). I am sure someone else can give a much more detailed answer to this one.

Oh thats very interesting I'm going to look into this. I had already done a very very basic version of this myself. I have a rank of four bets raning from poor, ok, good, very good. That I'm trying to use when making descisions about the quality of bet. I'll definately look into that theorm.

And rob - thanks for the counterpoints - I see what you mean about the showdown potential. As this guy has already gone in chances are he has something better than an Ace which isn't on the board, that's what you're saying right?

Originally Posted by LuckySlevin

And rob - thanks for the counterpoints - I see what you mean about the showdown potential. As this guy has already gone in chances are he has something better than an Ace which isn't on the board, that's what you're saying right?

Basically, yes. This goes back to jyms point. He's given me a lot of solid advice over the past few months. Typically, if we have showdown value, check/calling is often best. Example, A8 with turn J842. We don't have enough value to bet, but the 3 Aces probably make us best. Check/calling a half pot bet on the turn (read dependent) is often solid. Betting out is bad because it turns our hand into a bluff, i.e. the only hands that will call us have us beat.

On the river, things are clearer. Here, what hands will call us down on the flop and turn? Unless villain has lost his mind (not uncommon at microstakes, but we can't count on it), he's probably got some kind of combo hand with a flush card in it. It's just too likely that he has us beat already for checking it down to be profitable. If we get to the river, we almost have to bluff since we probably have only 10 - 20% chance (or less) of a showdown win. So if our bluff works even 25% of the time, it's probably +EV.

I like eupho's line because I don't like string 3 "have to bluff" actions together, each of which is marginal EV (and requires difficult reads) when the whole line is -EV and could have been avoided by trying to end the hand sooner, with no showdown.