Some Theory Questions at Micro Limits

This is kinda open for everyone to comment and discuss, but I'm reading through some Sklansky and some questions are arising... I know the answers will become more apparent with practice and more reading but wanted to gather some info from anyone willing to share...

1) When addressing bet sizing, Sklansky mentions the obvious of not sizing your bet too large to drive the opponent out of the pot. This is geared towards the best hand, but when you believe you have say 50% of villians range beat, is it better to bet to keep them in the pot for the 50% of range you have beat or bet to potentially force the fold for the other 50%? Did that even make sense? Ok, let me state it another way... say you put villian on pocket pair, AT+ and the board doesn't help him... you are holding TT... are you betting to protect against the upper half of his range or possibly encourage the fold of part of that upper half, if you feel he puts you onto a set?

2) Bet sizing to max your expectation seems very complicated... I think I understand the theory behind it but this seems difficult to put into practice... any thoughts?

3) The Hammer... Sklansky talks about the hammer of future bets... basically if I get this right, it involves going into your games as deep stacked as possible to ensure you still have that threat of big money behind... or am I oversimplifying this?

Ok, they are all probably obvious answers, but I was reading during lunch hour and this is where I got to...

I'll make brief comments because I'm finding some of the questions a little challenging (was up at 5am lol).

1) The way I look at this is usually if you think you have the best of it on the flop/turn then you want to bet enough to actually win the hand right then and there without opponent being able to see another card by giving him the wrong odds to call your bet. The only way this differs is if you know you have opponent drawing dead in which case you extract as much as possible.

For the example given, if I'm playing TT and flop no overcards, I'm likely to bet enough for opponent to not call and suck out an overcard with his KQ, AJ, etc. Possibly the wrong play?

2) To me this would mean sizing your bet to go with the odds, just like before. For example, if you can put villain on two overcards then he has 6 outs to call for improvement - your bet needs to reflect this. If you know they have 25% chance to hit, then you need to give them worse than 3 to 1 to call.

3) This would fall under always buying in for the table max to ensure you are as deep stacked as possible and can put anyone at the table in for all of their chips if you need to. It carries a threat that your opponents will know is there, especially if you wield it effectively. I know that if I see a table with one guy who has 2x the buyin sitting there with a bunch of small stacks, I don't even sit down.

Depending on the board, you need to make bets that weaker hands will call but better hands fold. Your forgetting about the third part of any range equation, the board. TT vs a range of any PP, AT+ is just too vague to make a decision.

And ponyboy you want your opponents calling to try and suckout with overcards, DUCY?

1) you want to be slightly ahead of his calling range, if you're not slightly ahead of his calling range might as well check/call (and if you're behind his betting range without the correct pot odds check/fold)
but you DO have to protect your hand when you have TT and you're not at the river yet
either he'll call incorrectly hoping to hit, or he'll fold correctly - but at least you get the entire pot as consolation

2) it is
3) it means bluffing on the turn when your opponent has a made hand is more effective than on the river
in your TT example, if the turn is a K and your opponent puts in a large bet you'd probably fold
but on the river you might call because you won't be afraid of future betting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jyms

And ponyboy you want your opponents calling to try and suckout with overcards, DUCY?

---

I do, but don't you also need to make the bet size appropriate so that the 1 out of 4 times they will actually get those overcards and take the hand you are still winning in the long run?

A question you can ask yourself when you're making a bet is 'what kind of hands is he calling a $2 bet with? What about a $5 bet?'

Obviously adjust for your stakes :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jyms

Depending on the board, you need to make bets that weaker hands will call but better hands fold.

---

Jyms - I've heard this statement elsewhere, but it seems like an oxymoron. Can you give an example please?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PlayToWin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jyms

Depending on the board, you need to make bets that weaker hands will call but better hands fold.

---

Jyms - I've heard this statement elsewhere, but it seems like an oxymoron. Can you give an example please?

---

i can! but im not jyms :shock: (or sarbox...)

Say you have AT and raise 4x from the button and the bb calls. The flop comes K52 rainbow. He checks and we cbet. By doing this, we are trying to get potentially better hands to fold. For instance, If the bb called with A2 we would be getting a better hand to fold by betting.

Different scenario. Same thing different flop
A92 rainbow again. Now by betting we again want better hands to fold, which likely wont happen because hands better than TPGK will rarely fold. But we also bet to get worse hands to call, like A7 or T9 or so to call

does that clear it up? jyms probably explain it better but im bored right now lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JKDS

Say you have AT and raise 4x from the button and the bb calls. The flop comes K52 rainbow. He checks and we cbet. By doing this, we are trying to get potentially better hands to fold. For instance, If the bb called with A2 we would be getting a better hand to fold by betting.

Different scenario. Same thing different flop
A92 rainbow again. Now by betting we again want better hands to fold, which likely wont happen because hands better than TPGK will rarely fold. But we also bet to get worse hands to call, like A7 or T9 or so to call

does that clear it up? jyms probably explain it better but im bored right now lol.

---

Thanks for the reply. Actually, it's still a little fuzzy.

In scenario 1, I understand c-betting, if that's what we're talking about. I see that A2 is the better hand and likely to fold, but K4 is also a better hand and much less likely to fold.

In scenario 2, I don't see that betting encourages the worse hands to call, unless you mean that betting prevents them from betting themselves and instead, convinces them that a call is the better option. In that sense, our bet would be a blocking bet, right?

No, because some people will call with A9 and we're getting worse hands to call which is EV+
they could have checked instead

Phil Gordon wrote (I'm paraphrasing) -
Every time you put $ into a pot, you should have a goal and know what your objective is - is it to thin the field? - is to bluff or steal? - is it to build a bigger pot to take down later? - is it to offer him horrible odds to draw? - is it to draw to your hand because your opponents have kept it cheap enough to justify a call?

The size of your bet will be determined by your goal, modified by your understanding of your opponent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ponyboy

1) The way I look at this is usually if you think you have the best of it on the flop/turn then you want to bet enough to actually win the hand right then and there without opponent being able to see another card by giving him the wrong odds to call your bet. The only way this differs is if you know you have opponent drawing dead in which case you extract as much as possible.

---

This is a horrible misconception of what a bet should accomplish. If you have the best of it, you gain nothing from your opponent folding, and gain a lot when he calls without correct odds to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ponyboy

2) To me this would mean sizing your bet to go with the odds, just like before. For example, if you can put villain on two overcards then he has 6 outs to call for improvement - your bet needs to reflect this. If you know they have 25% chance to hit, then you need to give them worse than 3 to 1 to call.

---

This is part of it, but if you have a bluff or value bet, there is a theoretical amount that will maximize your expectation by manipulating your opponent's calling/folding ranges. This isn't particularly complicated to do if you have all of the time in the world for analysis, but at the table you're best off to decide between 2-3 "standard" bet sizes.