what the hell does this mean?

[Chopper]

not a take off the other thread, but a strategy question.

i am sick of seeing this. if you do it, please explain why, and help me bust the other dickheads doing it.

i see a flop (raised or limped no difference). flop checks around. turn looks innocent, but aggro minbets? then, if only called, he bets pot on river?

wtf does this mean? how often is it a bluff?

i also saw the same type line in a bigger pot. turn bet of a quarter into a $7.50 pot. calls around. aggro bets $5.25 on river.

wtf? it feels like a bluff, but i cant help but think it beats TP.

are people only doing this for AF #'s, or are they only doing this to see how much you like your hand? when you call, they know they can value bet/push safely, and hope you still call? or are they trying to get paid?

it is not done often at 10NL, but i see it quite a bit at 25NL, and it is pissing me off. it doesnt help that i am on a super-sick cooler right now, either.

thanks for any help.

[gingerwizard]

It's often a hand in my experience but it depends on how aggro the player is.

Often they'll bet small on the turn with a decent hand but when afraid of a draw then bet bigger when it doesnt hit.

The most aggro types often do this reading your check flop flat call turn as weak and bet biggar on river with greater perceived fold equity. (They of course don't think about it like that)

Best way to handle it is to take TPGK and call it down then make notes.

[bode]

i like doing this when im in the BB w/ something like K8 and the pot is limped around 3-4 handed. Flop comes Kxx and checkes around, i fire full pot on a 9/T/J turn card, then full pot a safe river and i get looked up by week 9/T/J's like every day.

[Chopper]

bode, no offense, but thats a bit different. you potted 2 streets.

i'm asking about the guy who minbets, you call, then he pots or 3/4 pots.

i'm trying to figure out what the increased size means all of a sudden.

could be buying a pot with no real interest in it. or could be that he actually hit his card. i dont know.

but, i do like your pot/pot with a weak TP line. i'll try that one.

and i'm calling down w/ TPTK, too, on the OP line in question. but, i usually have missed overs or a mid-pp, and cant. i can take the minbet, and chase overs or my 2-outer w/ implied behind, but cant take even a 1/2 pot bet with those cards.

just frustrating.

[gingerwizard]

Be glad that the impending psb is giving you correct implied odds to draw

[Silly String]

I agree with OP here. I see this line at 25NL and can't tell if they are just buying information with a quarter or what?
Anybody else do this? When & why?

[Miffed22001]

normally they are full of bull. I just tend to raise their river bet.

[Chopper]

normally they are full of bull. I just tend to raise their river bet.

that takes balls a "TAG" just dont have.

prolly why they do it.

[Chicago_Kid]

normally they are full of bull. I just tend to raise their river bet.

Careful--totally read dependent.

I've seen tight players min bet flop/turn in EP hoping for a raise. When they don't get it, they bet hard on the next street hoping to look bluffy and be looked up, or that you caught you second pair. I like doing this with sets after I get a caller, and an Ace hits on the river. Opp with Aces up calls EVERY time. One diff: I don't likey min bet.

On the other hand, LAG's will min bet looking for resistance. If they get none, they'll bet strong on safe looking streets. I've been cited doing this if I pick up addt'l outs on the turn.

[Chopper]

chicago,

when looking for resistance, do you fold your little bet to a normal raise...or continue to chase your outs? or, to get you to fold, does someone have to catch you with air?

[Knytestorme]

or the one I'm seeing at $50NL a lot lately.

min-raise flop bet, min-bet turn if min-raise is called, pot river....it's just too weird to ever be taken as a bluff. It always seems as though the min-bet on the turn is looking to be raised.

Only defense I have found against it is if they do it when I have a set and a safe river comes to raise them AI there and take the same line on flop and turn with air or made hand so they start getting nervous on the river.

Min-raise on flop just tilts me to fuck though :/

[allLiving]

Often times the turn mini-bet is a purpose-ful underbet to attract a re-raise, so he can come right over the top. He didn't get action from the caller, so on the river he tries to make up for it by pot betting.

[Chopper]

so, the majority of the time, you are saying these lines are actual strength?

[koning]

I've seen this too quite a bit at FT 0.10/.25. Also, min bet on flop and another on turn, then raised up on the river. When I see a min bet, I usually think it is an intermediate player hoping to find enough strength to get a caller or two when he wants to bet out stronger, or a really poor player betting a second or third pair. The poor player will fold though when you raise unless they're a maniac (then lucky you).

I am a newbie, so what do I know, but I have seen how this is like a not horrible play at $25 NL that will win some pots. Myself, I am usually happy to take the pot down early and move on and wait until I have some callers with a good hand. There is too much risk on getting outdrawn. I think it's just really a slow play with a feeler bet to check for enough strength to make a bet - from what I've seen at $25 NL.

Feel free to correct me here if there are holes in my thinking, I would love to learn another level.

[Geanosssss]

Min-raise on flop just tilts me to fuck though :/

[Geanosssss]

The only thing to do is raise their min-bet. Thats the only way your going to find out wher you are.

[Silly String]

I think a raise for information is terrible here. You will pay essentially the same amount by calling a PSB on the river.
BTW I hate the old bet/raise to find out where we're at line. I might bet in a similar situation, but I guarantee it isn't to find out where I'm at. I'm am defending my hand, value betting, or bluffing.

[Chopper]

...I am a newbie, so what do I know, but I have seen how this is like a not horrible play at $25 NL that will win some pots.

its not that the minbet itself wins pots. true, when no one caught even a gutshot, it folds the table in small pots, but it is more of a "set up" play, i think...but hell, thats why i asked.

if you only call this bet...he knows you have something, but are still afraid to raise...so when the blank appears to fall...HE KNOWS HE'S GOOD, and sends out a more normal sized bet...knowing you will fold.

its kind of a "practice bluff," to me.

i just wanted to know if it was a "i have a crap hand, and i'm bluffing at the next card" kind of move.

if it is...i need to raise the hell out of him when he does it, but still be prepared for a push-over-bluff, which i cannot call.

or, take my chances with the minbet, and c/call his normal bet on the next street...looking for the blank river where I "pretend bluff" back, and shove over his sorry ass...getting him to call my "bluff" with A high or worse.

is that possibly a solution?

[sejje]

i see a flop (raised or limped no difference). flop checks around. turn looks innocent, but aggro minbets? then, if only called, he bets pot on river?

wtf does this mean? how often is it a bluff?

I think it makes a difference if the aggro raised it preflop. Regardless, I think that line is almost always going to be a monster.

When aggressive players start making bets (or checks) that aren't they're usual style, they're trying to trap. Which is silly, of course, but they do it anyway.

He was probably hoping to get raised on the turn and check/raise the river.

Here's a good way to make sure, though: when he minbets the turn, pop him. Then check down the river. You get to see his hand cheap enough. If he reraises the turn, clearly he's not messing around.

Of course, he could just be a really bad aggro who thinks he can push you off every pot, but you should notice that if it's the case.

[mixchange]

raise all minbets 4x as policy, its usually a weak hand

[Geanosssss]

I think a raise for information is terrible here. You will pay essentially the same amount by calling a PSB on the river

How you figure that one out then???
You wont believe how often players fold in this situation, or call and then check the river to you, folding to a bet.

[Geanosssss]

raise all minbets 4x as policy, its usually a weak hand

...yeah, thats where i was getting to

[Chopper]

raise all minbets 4x as policy, its usually a weak hand

i agree and disagree here.

yes, we should prolly RR the minbet...as policy.

but when it comes out in a $4 pot, we need to raise more than $1...or we are GIVING odds, as well as good implieds, to chase.

i will bet soft to "price myself in" with a nut draw against habitual minraisers. if the pot is $6, i will sometimes lead out small (say $2) to give the minraiser a chance to sweeten the pot for me. if he folds, so be it. but when he minraises me, i only have to call $2 more into $12...pricing just about everything in.

i know you will all say that i really spent $4, but who gives a shit. i spent $4 into what is now $12 with a good chance to see a showdown for free, or bluff a river, or hit my hand with implied odds to get paid....oh, and sometimes they fold to a tight guys aggression, even if its a minraise.

if you do that with the nut draw, its gotta be +EV.......no, i havent actually done the math, but if someone wants to...by all means...

[koning]

Huge amount of min bets today on $25 NL at FT, and seemed to be mostly weak play. At one table, 4 had VP$IP of 30% to 36%, but also a few rocks that seemed to be playing the same game, so I saw trips turned over after min bets too. Llke a loose/passive limit game. I just tried to focus on being patient and waiting for a hand and not worry about bluffing.

Isn't this basically a sign of loose/passive play, and so the general idea would be exploit it with tag play?

[Chopper]

not necessarily. its either a sign of a moron or a thinking LAG, imo.

the latter can crush a TAG.

[koning]

Now that one makes me scratch my head. I would take a table full of LAGs anyday - that goes against what little I understand about poker now. I love the loose maniacs. BUT, I don't make my living at this game, so I may not know what I am talking about.

It seems like you're trying to figure out the proper LAG strategy to combat the LAG move - fair enough. My style is just less loose I guess. I run about 20/10 but the sample size is not large, about 1,000 hands since I started tracking with the (pretty shitty) MacPokerPro.

[Chopper]

my stats run about 20/10, too.

and a table full of GOOD maniacs will eat my lunch. one or two i can hold my own with.

but, a table full, and i tighten up like a rock, and you prolly should, too. so, when i get a hand that is playable into pressure, they know and dump before i get much money. and, if i am unsure, for a millisecond, the pressure they put on you either shows fear (thinking to make a call/bet), which they punish, or trap, which they dont fall for...when expecting it.

i prey on tables of passives. they let me get away with everything for cheap, and let me build a pot when i have the reason to.

it really doesnt matter YOUR style...if you sit at a table full of the opposite type of players...YOU are at the disadvantage, most times. a table full of rocks gives a LAG fits...he cant get action to steal with...he has to play conservative poker...which he does not know how to play. however, a table full of loosies gives a tighty fits, too. he gets sucked out on it seems everytime, and his AA get cracked, too. you need a mixture, and you need to know how to exploit who you are in the pot with...to gain maximum profitability, imo.

a minbet from a LAG, and a minbet from a passive are two VERY different things...with very different intentions, imo.

a minbet from a passive...followed by a pot bet, i fold almost everytime...as its easy to see he hit THAT card, whatever it does for him.

a minbet from a LAG can be just not giving away free cards, or setting you up, or a monster, or just messing with you, or for information...you just never know with those guys because they are always betting/raising. and when they follow it up with a psb, as well, you still dont know, it just got more expensive to find out. maybe that 4 made a straight, set, two pair, or air....you just dont know because it could be any of those...they can have almost any combo of cards in any position...if they are a good LAG.

i'm just trying to understand the psychology of a LAG. both to exploit, and imitate when conditions call for it. but, i cant do it/exploit it, if i dont know how/why they are doing what they are doing.

wow, now i'm out of breath...whew.

[Chicago_Kid]

chicago,

when looking for resistance, do you fold your little bet to a normal raise...or continue to chase your outs? or, to get you to fold, does someone have to catch you with air?

Depends on what I have, and how often I've seen them raise. I can laydown to raise with top pr if it's a normal player. Also, I will call with a draw sometimes if I think they will pay off.

[koning]

I see what you're saying. I've felt being over my head with LAg's better than me, and you can drop a stack or two real quick. I was thinking you were saying a LAG against a TAG of equal ability, in a general sense. Yeah, when I feel the looseness I just tighten up, but it's like you can't tighten up too much or you don't get the action. You just have to wait out the swing maybe, since you'll swing so hard with the LAG's.


I would say that if you are thinking you're getting min bet by a good LAG, you should hop out of the pot real quick unless you've got a real hand. It's got to be a sign of serious strength.

[Chicago_Kid]

it really doesnt matter YOUR style...if you sit at a table full of the opposite type of players...YOU are at the disadvantage, most times. a table full of rocks gives a LAG fits...he cant get action to steal with...he has to play conservative poker...which he does not know how to play. however, a table full of loosies gives a tighty fits, too. he gets sucked out on it seems everytime, and his AA get cracked, too. you need a mixture, and you need to know how to exploit who you are in the pot with...to gain maximum profitability, imo.

I look at this differently. If you are good at your style, you can have a HUGE advantage against opposite styles. For this argument I'll assume that you are either a LAG or a TAG, because aggression is the great factor of advantage.

E.g., TAG runs over TAPs, beats LAGs with better cards, and valuebets LAPs to death. LAGs can basically do the same as long as they avoid big mistakes with TAGs and other LAGs. LAPs spew money to everyone, and TAPs spew a little slower than LAPs.

The thing is that its hard to put yourself in someone elses head, so people are often more comfortable playing against those with the same style. I think you are describing those who are not good at adjusting at the table.

[Chopper]

oh no, playing with similar people is death. you all just beat up on each other...with the player with the smallest edge profiting only slightly over a looooong time.

you need to play opposite styles, and know how they play.

and i guess the true opposites are aggression and passivity.

[Chopper]

back to the original topic about what the minbet followed by a bigger bet means, essentially this is what i'm thinking...its to suck you in.

i never call this with this hand, but i wanted to just to see.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (9 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

Button ($13.90)
SB ($10.95)
BB ($0.40)
UTG ($36.85)
UTG+1 ($24.65)
MP1 ($23.50)
MP2 ($24)
MP3 ($25.45)
Hero ($24.40)

Preflop: Hero is CO with J, 8. Hero posts a blind of $0.35.
UTG calls $0.25, 3 folds, MP3 calls $0.25, Hero (poster) checks, Button calls $0.25, SB completes, BB raises to $0.4, UTG calls $0.15, MP3 calls $0.15, Hero calls $0.15, Button calls $0.15, SB calls $0.15.

Flop: ($2.50) A, 7, 2 (6 players)
SB checks, UTG checks, MP3 checks, Hero checks, Button bets $0.25, SB folds, UTG folds, MP3 folds, Hero calls $0.25.

Turn: ($3) 3 (3 players)
Hero checks, Button bets $1.25, Hero calls $1.25.

River: ($5.50) 4 (3 players)
Hero checks, Button bets $1, Hero calls $1.

Final Pot: $7.50

Results in white below:
BB has Jd Ks (high card, ace).
Hero has Jc 8c (high card, ace).
Button has As 9d (one pair, aces).
Outcome: Button wins $7.50.

[Chicago_Kid]

Huh? This is exactly what I described. A Laggy minbet to probe, then he followed with a bigger bullet on the turn after your weak call. Normally, you either fold or raise this turn right? Why would he try to suck you in with a big turn bet and K high and no draws? He's trying to knock you off the hand.

[Geanosssss]

it really doesnt matter YOUR style...if you sit at a table full of the opposite type of players...YOU are at the disadvantage, most times. a table full of rocks gives a LAG fits...he cant get action to steal with...he has to play conservative poker...which he does not know how to play. however, a table full of loosies gives a tighty fits, too. he gets sucked out on it seems everytime, and his AA get cracked, too. you need a mixture, and you need to know how to exploit who you are in the pot with...to gain maximum profitability, imo.

Your only picking out the disadvantages here.
What about when a TAG hits big at a table full of LAGs? Or think of the ammount of small pots a LAG will be picking up at a table surrounded by rocks. I could go on....

Certainly there are disadvantages when a TAG is surrounded by LAGs, and vice-versa, but I think the advantages out-weigh them.

[Geanosssss]

Huh? This is exactly what I described. A Laggy minbet to probe, then he followed with a bigger bullet on the turn after your weak call. Normally, you either fold or raise this turn right? Why would he try to suck you in with a big turn bet and K high and no draws? He's trying to knock you off the hand.

I prefer to raise his ridiculous flop bet.
I hate folding to a min-bet...its practically one of my principles. And calling with J high is a no-no...unless your floating which may just end up being more expensive in this example.
Raise on the flop and get it over and done with. If called, another bet on the turn should make them muck.

[Geanosssss]

Oh and by the way, (apologies for reverting back to other topic, and leaving third consecutive post) but I dont think that TAGs or LAGs min-bet.
Min-betting is not an aggressive play, it is PASSIVE! Min-betting is a passive play and only made by weak passive players IMO. Therefore raising is very proffitable as weak passive players dont like calling big raises

[Chopper]

Huh? This is exactly what I described. A Laggy minbet to probe, then he followed with a bigger bullet on the turn after your weak call. Normally, you either fold or raise this turn right? Why would he try to suck you in with a big turn bet and K high and no draws? He's trying to knock you off the hand.

there was other conflicting advice earlier in the thread...which is why i posted the hand. i agreed with your analysis of the minbet.

[Chopper]

Huh? This is exactly what I described. A Laggy minbet to probe, then he followed with a bigger bullet on the turn after your weak call. Normally, you either fold or raise this turn right? Why would he try to suck you in with a big turn bet and K high and no draws? He's trying to knock you off the hand.

I prefer to raise his ridiculous flop bet.
I hate folding to a min-bet...its practically one of my principles. And calling with J high is a no-no...unless your floating which may just end up being more expensive in this example.
Raise on the flop and get it over and done with. If called, another bet on the turn should make them muck.

and you would have been called. here we didnt have the hand to do it with, and i wasnt about to try and bluff him off the pot. i just wanted to see where he would go with the hand. the whole reason was to post the hand in this thread...so, i guess my thread officially cost me a couple bucks. oh well.

and i dont call with J-high. if you read my lines before the HH, you will see i say that i never do this...it was only for the purpose of this thread.

[Chopper]

Oh and by the way, (apologies for reverting back to other topic, and leaving third consecutive post) but I dont think that TAGs or LAGs min-bet.
Min-betting is not an aggressive play, it is PASSIVE! Min-betting is a passive play and only made by weak passive players IMO. Therefore raising is very proffitable as weak passive players dont like calling big raises

and i think you are underestimating the thought process of LAGs. they do this all the time. if no one bets, they fire. sure, sometimes its larger (when they are confident), and sometimes its a minbet (when they feel they MAY be best, and want to find out...but arent necessarily going anywhere, either).

yes, weak-passives do it too, but watching the table bully always do it is cause for concern...because you should easily see that he is not the weak-passive...he's a bit crazier.

that was the whole point of the thread...to determine, as a rule if possible, which bet meant which. and for now, i think we have some evidence.

i guess i can triple-post, too. damned, post whores...lol. they were supposed to join up. sorry.

[koning]

this is an interesting thread, since I 've been seeing it a lot at $25 NL at FT. However, be careful IMO about trying to make a rule on what to do or what it means. One night, it seemed more rocky play, another night, more moronic loose/passive.

Either way, it IS a sign of poor play right? And, I think it is either sign of a tight/passive bluff or loose/aggressive slow play. So, just look for other clues about the villains play and exploit it with solid poker.

[Geanosssss]

and i think you are underestimating the thought process of LAGs. they do this all the time. if no one bets, they fire. sure, sometimes its larger (when they are confident), and sometimes its a minbet (when they feel they MAY be best, and want to find out...but arent necessarily going anywhere, either).

The point Im making is that min-betting is not an aggressive play, its actually a very passive one. And if a LAG makes this play it is very out of their character.
People who min-bet are generally weak and passive, therefore I tend to raise these players and it is very proffitable.

[Geanosssss]

Either way, it IS a sign of poor play right? And, I think it is either sign of a tight/passive bluff or loose/aggressive slow play. So, just look for other clues about the villains play and exploit it with solid poker.

Yes IMO min-betting is a very poor play. You dont acheive a lot with it and it screams weakness.
Although on the other side of the coin it can send mixed signals to opponents, although in general I think its a weak, money loosing play.

[Chopper]

it is a weak play...i dont think that is up for debate.

but, what we are trying to find out is...what does it signal?

caro is published as saying one of the fundamental "tells" is that if someone acts weak they are strong...hence, the bigger bet on the next street.

but, i have found it to be a "feeler bet." while technically it is dumb to bet $.25 into a $3 pot.

smarter players will use it to their advantage by inducing moderately strong hands to semibluff and possibly commit themselves to the hand, as well as throwing them off.

i am now noting these donkeys, and trying to find out which ones are using it as a slowplay, and which are just stoopid, deserving a raise in the face.

however, originally, i was getting at the players that do this habitually. there are some of those, and they have very high AF's...and i was just wondering how "truthful" the AF was on them, as it could be very misleading if they are only minbetting as a habit.

i also am noting bet sizes from LAGs and semiLAGs. i want to know if they are betting soft or hard when they bet out/raise.

[sejje]

and a table full of GOOD maniacs will eat my lunch. one or two i can hold my own with.....

....and, if i am unsure, for a millisecond, the pressure they put on you either shows fear (thinking to make a call/bet), which they punish

Fair enough, but why would you play at a table full of good lags? Better yet, why would you play at a table full of good players?

Also, why would you act unsure? Just take a minute to act every time at that table. It's silly to give away timing tells.

[Jack Sawyer]

It's very likely to be a hand

FYP

[Chopper]

and a table full of GOOD maniacs will eat my lunch. one or two i can hold my own with.....

....and, if i am unsure, for a millisecond, the pressure they put on you either shows fear (thinking to make a call/bet), which they punish

Fair enough, but why would you play at a table full of good lags? Better yet, why would you play at a table full of good players?

Also, why would you act unsure? Just take a minute to act every time at that table. It's silly to give away timing tells.

i dont. just a generic statement.

[Chicago_Kid]

this is an interesting thread, since I 've been seeing it a lot at $25 NL at FT. However, be careful IMO about trying to make a rule on what to do or what it means. One night, it seemed more rocky play, another night, more moronic loose/passive.

Either way, it IS a sign of poor play right? And, I think it is either sign of a tight/passive bluff or loose/aggressive slow play. So, just look for other clues about the villains play and exploit it with solid poker.

I likey.

[Geanosssss]

I dont know if we can dulge into 'what the min-bet signals' too much at these stakes, as the donk who makes these min-bets usually doesnt know what signals he's trying to send out, and likes to bet for the sake of it. I wouldnt be suprised if they bet the min beause its easy.

At higher levels of play we would be able to go into this much deeper (if it even occurs at higher levels), but at these stakes the best play is just to raise and punish their awful play.

[pgil]

or to draw super cheap and punish their min betting ass when you hit

[Geanosssss]

or to draw super cheap and punish their min betting ass when you hit

Also good =]

[Chopper]

both obviously depend on your potential hand. but, i love to chase AK down as long as he keeps minbetting. they give odds to just about everything.

when you are getting minbet into a smallish pot ($2), what kind of payoff do you need to make it worth the chase? i guess anything is bonus material when you had the odds to chase your AK anyway.

[Geanosssss]

both obviously depend on your potential hand. but, i love to chase AK down as long as he keeps minbetting. they give odds to just about everything.

when you are getting minbet into a smallish pot ($2), what kind of payoff do you need to make it worth the chase? i guess anything is bonus material when you had the odds to chase your AK anyway.

Yeah your not really getting any implied odds when facing a min-better, but your right if your getting the odds then thats fine, anything else is just a bonus.