Value/Cbet size on the flop after PFR ($10NL)

[crazywelshman]

(Excuse any obviousness and correct any idiocy please )

I've been playing a lot of hands recently at $10NL and I've noticed that the amount of play back I get after a cbet or value bet really changes based on the size of the bet when it's 1/2 pot vs pot sized.

Obviously this is a way generic overview and depends on the texture of the flop, peoples cards and who's in etc. but people seem to be a lot more willing to call the 1/2 pot size bet than the full one. I guess that's pretty obvious.

What really struck me was that my line of thinking had been, in general, to bet the larger, pot-sized bet in 2 cases: when I'm probably really ahead and when I'm probably really behind.

My thinking at this point has been either I'm way ahead, I really hope someone calls or raises because it'll help inflate the pot, or I'm probably behind, I hope this show of strength scares them off.

I'm starting to realize/think I'm just a donk doing this. The times I do get called or raised with the nuts I'm happy - but this is probably a smaller % of calls than I'd like and I'd get more value out of a smaller bet called more often. The times I get called or raised with the bluff then I'm spewing chips (and I'm way too often continuing the strength bluff on the turn - sure it nets me some pots but overall this must be a huge leak for me?)

So now I'm thinking it makes more sense to bet smaller with the nuts for value, and with the big bluffs since it looks more like value, and any cards I had beaten anyway will probably fold whether it's a 1/2 pot sized or full pot sized continuation.

That being said can I ask for feedback in the following situations, I'm convincing myself that I'm probably playing them all incorrectly at this point. (They're all situations I'd typically put a pot sized bet in right now)

Assume I'm on the button. One limper, and I raised to $0.40 with

BB calls, and limper calls.

What would you do on the flop, assuming it's checked back to you and that you all have roughly equivalent stacks at $10, 25/15 players, and the pot standing at roughly $1.20 with;

1) - This one I think I'm probably ahead, but there are lots of combinations out there that could beat me (AK, AT, other xT combinations that hit on later streets or broadways hoping to hit the straight) but I also think there're more I'm ahead of at this point.

2) - This one scares me so I'm half hoping to take it down now but I'm also half hoping to at least see another spade without paying any extra, and hopefully not a full house. As I'm typing this I'm wondering why in the hell I don't just check this one in general.

3) - This is a situation I'm just hoping for calls or raises.

Thanks for reading, and I'd appreciate any feedback, discussion, any thing

[Wikkiwikki]

1. Top pair hands get weaker as the the cards keep coming and should usually be played for thin value. A typical line would be to 1/2 pot here check back the turn and call the river (or suck bet it) keeping the pot smallish unless you improve. (small hand small pot)

2. the problem with checking this board is you get no money in once the flush hits. I would lead out for 2/3 the pot as a semi bluff because you improve like almost 50%of the time with these cards. The other benefit is if the flush card comes you can check back the turn and induce a river bluff. (bet on the come with tons of outs)

3. I usually pot here. It looks like a scared Ace and sometimes you'll get a guy to bluff or flat thinking your weak. Im looking to pot pot shove these spots, and I usually bet very quickly, for some reason people think it looks weak like I'm bluffing. (big hand big pot)

[couriermike]

I totally agree that the half pot c-bet doesn't get alot of respect but that doesn't mean you have to bet full pot either. I generally c-bet between 65-80%.

Try to be selective when you c-bet, most people c-bet too much, and only double barrel genuine scare cards.

Here's some good articles.
The ABC's of Continuation Betting by TLR
C-Bets, HUD Reads and Problem Solving by Robb

Alot of the logic behind c-betting is villain-dependent.
Hand 1, c-bet against anyone.
Hand 2, c-bet against a tag, take a free card vs a fish.
Hand 3, check or bet really small vs a tag, bet vs a fish.

[philly and the phanatics]

go wales imo

[crazywelshman]

I'm scared that I c-bet way too much at the moment and I'm literally throwing my money away doing that. I appreciate the responses and I'll make sure to head back to the threads you linked thanks!

Also, the explanation of the line with the (small hand small pot) suffix really made something click in my head there thanks! Hopefully...

[Wikkiwikki]

The times you dont c-bet are times that the flop hits his range hard but not yours.

For example you hold Ah-Qh utg and open to 3x and get called by a 30/24 on the button.

flop comes 7h-9d-10d

anyone with any piece of this board (pair/flush draw/straight draw) is calling your c-bet. A calling range might include all pairs lots of suited connectors and A-xs and even k-xs. Since your utg people know you have mostly high cards and missed this flop. Additionally the may float if you c-bet with any 2 just so they can try and steal the turn when a scare card comes.

[Carroters]

1. Bet

2. Bet

3. Bet

1 and 3 are just plain easy value bets where you need to be building the pot for 3 streets of value in most situations. Sizing depends on your opponents etc but you want to be betting each for atleast 2/3rds pot.

2. Is also a lol easy bet because.

A: You start building the pot with a draw to the effective nuts and hence give yourself good implied odds vs the stronger hands in your opponents range and the potential to win a huge pot on later streets if you make your hand.
B: You pick up the pot very often and protect your hand from random cards that can make pairs but are folding their equity share to a bet.
C: You can fold out some better hands by the turn like PPs etc on good barrel cards (you can't do this by checking)
D: You can get called by worse draws which you crush
E: Yeah, you simply have a ton of equity vs most of your opponents likely continuing range, it's almost a value bet by the strickt definition of value bet (ahead of your opponents continuing range) and is defo a value bet when you consider reason A more closely.

No reason to check anywhere here, without very specific rare reads that it's best for some weird reason.

Tomorrow shall be your first day of true poker enlightenment!