bgomez89
Resident Thugmaster
Silver Level
This
$4 NLHE 6-max: $4 NLHE : 88 utg VS min raise from the button on flop
This
Stu_Ungar
Legend
Silver Level
I do not believe that flop calling ranges are elastic (assuming the bet is bigger than a couple of bbs and smaller than pot)
I also do not believe that a fish's calling range is elastic at all.
I also assume that the majority of 4nl players are fish.
As for 2 way bets, they only exist in a vacuum. The concept applies better when a betting multiple streets, i.e you bet flop expecting to be called by both better and worse yet feel that a turn bet folds out better, so in effect the flop bet is the first half of the 2 way bet.
The 2 way bet dosent really work in practice on 1 street, its the notion that someone will call with underpairs yet fold all overcards. It probably used to be true a long time ago, but these days people c bet so much that Ace high is often the best hand when facing a cbet.
Last edited:
B
baudib1
Legend
Silver Level
I agree with most of your last post except this. I think betting 1 BB on the flop is going to get called really wide and make a lot of people spazz-raise with a huge range whereas 4-5 BBs will make them fold a ton.
As for two-way bets, it mostly happens on the river when one player's range is mostly bluffcatchers.
anyway, in this example, betting the flop on this hand is going to be so much better than any other option even if opponents are folding worse most of the time. At 4NL I think we can get called by quite a few worse hands.
Stu_Ungar
Legend
Silver Level
I agree that it is elastic when we bet 1 or 2 bb or potsized and above but fish apart from that I dont think its elastic at all.
The main reason I firstly suggested betting small was I posed the question why bet. The first response was, dead money and thin value.
Well thin value dosent exist on the flop, and given a bet of more than a couple of bbs to just under pot most players flop calling range is inelastic, if collection of dead money is the goal then we want to make the smallest possible bet within that range.
Then someone said no, its a value bet. OK fine I can see players calling the flop bet with worse, so therefore we now want to bet as big as possible within that range of betsizes as we want to be called and we believe that he calls with more worse hands than better.
Then we have spazz factor, but TBH why do you need to bet to cause spazz? The guy who spazzes out to a 1bb bet will likely spazz out to a check.
I think the reason people might make a 1bb bet is to get called wide and to get to SD cheaply. Which is the same reason people look at the strength of their hand and bet in accordance with that (big hand big bet, small hand, smaller bet). What that is doing is minimizing losses when you are wrong and minimizing profits when you are right. Once you understand that value is value and that in order to make a value bet you must beat 50% of his calling range then what you see is that betsize is irrelevent, by betting small you lower your winrate and by betting bigger you increase it. The trick is figuring out when you are value betting and being able to do it with a wider and wider range of hands.
B
baudib1
Legend
Silver Level
This is also hard to define on the flop; ergo I'd recommend that can accomplish different things vs. different parts of his range.
In general though when we are likely to be ahead but probably should be folding to a raise on dry flops I think 1/2-2/3 bet is optimal.
Stu_Ungar
Legend
Silver Level
Well obviously if you can make a betsize that causes him to fold 99+ shove 22-77 and call with A9+ then sure.
But in general value is a function of combinetrics.
Stu_Ungar
Legend
Silver Level
If he surrenders his equity share (i.e. folds a lot) then betsize is irrelivent; bet very small.
If he does not surrender his equity share (i.e. calls with Ace x type hands) then you are ahead; bet bigger
I just dont see the reluctance to exploit people who are easily exploitable.
JOEBOB69
Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Ok so he's a fish aka passive?So given what stu has said i should bet more on this flop for vaule pot size?With out a elastic bet size\call what is keeping me from getting paid off with a worse hand if i 3x pot size bet?Thats what does not make sense to me.
ChuckTs
Legend
Silver Level
All ranges are elastic, imo. They're just different degrees of elasticity.
Regardless how bad of a villain you're up against, if you open shove for 95bbs into a 10bb pot, villain's calling range is going to be different than had you bet 1/2 pot.
Most of the time when people talk about elastic ranges they mean the difference in calling frequency between a 1/3 pot bet or a pot bet, not like 1/10 pot - 5x pot.
Villain's a fish, will be calling with quite a bit worse, and so I'm betting liek 2/3-3/4 pot for value. Simple as that.
Regardless how bad of a villain you're up against, if you open shove for 95bbs into a 10bb pot, villain's calling range is going to be different than had you bet 1/2 pot.
Most of the time when people talk about elastic ranges they mean the difference in calling frequency between a 1/3 pot bet or a pot bet, not like 1/10 pot - 5x pot.
Villain's a fish, will be calling with quite a bit worse, and so I'm betting liek 2/3-3/4 pot for value. Simple as that.
JOEBOB69
Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
K Chuck thanks,but 1\2 pot for value then fold to the min raise isn't bad IYO right?
ChuckTs
Legend
Silver Level
I don't hate it but I typically go bigger here.
I think if we're folding we have to consider why. I'm not folding AA to a minraise here - he has too many 'raise to see a showdown' hands like TT imo. With 88 the number of those hands that we beat drops off a ton so I don't hate a fold - especially when so many more turns are so much worse for us.
I think if we're folding we have to consider why. I'm not folding AA to a minraise here - he has too many 'raise to see a showdown' hands like TT imo. With 88 the number of those hands that we beat drops off a ton so I don't hate a fold - especially when so many more turns are so much worse for us.
Stu_Ungar
Legend
Silver Level