Explain Negreanu's Bet Size? (video)

Can anyone explain why Negreanu bet less than half pot on the flop here and what the reasoning is? I would have bet pretty high to deny equity to flush/straight draws, especially since it's multiway. Why was he trying to isolate with a marginal hand like a low pair?

https://youtu.be/1RR1rzRRpVU

Hmm... May be for image )) Or for balance...

It's like: you want others to fold but not sure about your hand. It looks you didn't decide: to fold or to raise higher. And you make some small bet.

Because if he makes a big bet and someone hit the flush on the turn or river he will be losing more money.

Jack Reacher said:

Because if he makes a big bet and someone hit the flush on the turn or river he will be losing more money.

Click to expand...

But the whole point is to give your opponent bad pot odds so they don't go chasing that flush to begin with, and if they do they are making a mistake with their odds and you will take their money in the long run. Hence why I mentioned equity denial being a better idea. Am I missing something? Does it have something to do with the fact it's multiway?

cheeeer said:

It's like: you want others to fold but not sure about your hand. It looks you didn't decide: to fold or to raise higher. And you make some small bet.

Click to expand...

So he's hiding his range with a smaller bet?

BelFish said:

Hmm... May be for image )) Or for balance...

Click to expand...

So then I assume he took an unconventional line here?

ventrolloquist said:

Can anyone explain why Negreanu bet less than half pot on the flop here and what the reasoning is? I would have bet pretty high to deny equity to flush/straight draws, especially since it's multiway. Why was he trying to isolate with a marginal hand like a low pair?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RR1rzRRpVU

Click to expand...

He said in an interview he is changing his play strategy because players were getting good reads on him so now makes him more difficult to read.

Ah. Makes more sense. Thanks.. Still though. That looked like a very dangerous move on his part, I guess he's trying to keep his bet size consistent? But in that situation it doesn't even matter if he were to play with his hand face up because the others would have no choice but to fold with bad odds.

Not sure I understand the rationale here.


Doug Polk questions virtually everyone's hand here, in terms of entering the pot or their bet sizing. The flop comes and Phil Laak is way ahead with the potential gutter and nut flush.


What was Negreanu representing if he had bet half pot- trips? Even then Laak can look to better him.


I'm also not sure why the flop bet is singled out rather than the river bet. At that point Negreanu was just hammering nails in his own coffin

DS3 said:

Not sure I understand the rationale here.


Doug Polk questions virtually everyone's hand here, in terms of entering the pot or their bet sizing. The flop comes and Phil Laak is way ahead with the potential gutter and nut flush.


What was Negreanu representing if he had bet half pot- trips? Even then Laak can look to better him.


I'm also not sure why the flop bet is singled out rather than the river bet. At that point Negreanu was just hammering nails in his own coffin

Click to expand...

I'm kind of starting to wonder if he did it because he called preflop from the stradle and was trying to specifically represent 3-5 suited lol (silly as it sounds). So maybe he bet smaller to make it seem like he was trying to induce a call to get better value with an already made hand? To try and trick Laak, which on the river he almost did?

ventrolloquist said:

Can anyone explain why Negreanu bet less than half pot on the flop here and what the reasoning is? I would have bet pretty high to deny equity to flush/straight draws, especially since it's multiway. Why was he trying to isolate with a marginal hand like a low pair?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RR1rzRRpVU

Click to expand...

I think a check here would honestly have been the best play. A half pot bet if you feel the need to bet your weak made hand is not the worst, betting larger only builds a bigger pot than you need to with a vulnerable hand like a 6 with no kicker.

I believe Daniel put everyone on big cards or weak holdings on this flop and expected to take the pot right there in my opinion(because I would never bet here). Getting action with his top pair no kicker is something he didn't really want, anything calling you may already have you beat like 77 -99 or better. Or in the best case scenario your opponent has a flush draw and your betting for value at this point I suppose(extremely thin), why anyone would bet 67 here for value I truly don't understand. I think he got caught trying to take the pot down right there with a ballsy bet (possibly bad bet), by Laak's nut flush draw, which in many cases your just never folding to one bet probably even two(possible consider a strong raise). Doug Polk who does the commentary on this video, is a very strong pro and broke down the hand very well in my opinion (saying the hand goes off the rails a little bit) was spot on when Daniel bet. Then he broke down the reason why Daniel may have made these bets which all make sense to me. I think Daniel played this hand extremely horrible for a player of his class, must still hurt him how bad he played it(on T.V). Cheers:beerglass:beerglass

ventrolloquist said:

Can anyone explain why Negreanu bet less than half pot on the flop here and what the reasoning is?

Click to expand...

I rewatched the flop. He bet exactly the half pot but his bet was added to the pot and it increased pot. During the hand he bet a bit less, a bit more than half.

ventrolloquist said:

So he's hiding his range with a smaller bet?

Click to expand...

No. I talked when you are scared to raise more but "check-check" will show you have nothing probably. So decision is stuck between these two and you make some small bet. Also famous as "block bet".