ConDeck
Visionary
Silver Level
Did you (by any chance ofc) read "Easy game"? You sound a bit like it
No actually... who is the author? Sounds worth a read
Fknife
Legend
Silver Level
No actually... who is the author? Sounds worth a read
Andrew Seidman. The book is from 2011 though...
ConDeck
Visionary
Silver Level
Thanks, is it geared more towards online or live play?
Fknife
Legend
Silver Level
It's more about various concepts/ideas, not geared heavily towards any specific form of play. It's still a great book (one of my favourites actually) although lots have changed since 2011 so some of those chapters might be outdated (they actually are).
L
Lofwyr
Rock Star
Silver Level
Did you (by any chance ofc) read "Easy game"? You sound a bit like it
I was going to mention this book because it came from a time when Seidman conceived of three reasons to bet. Value, bluff and "to collect dead money" aka "bet to protect".
The whole reason 'bet to protect' is even a term is because it doesn't quite live up to being a full-on value bet as most people understand the term value bet. That is "bet to get a worse hand to call." As I said earlier though, what people call a protection bet is really just a form of value betting...a subset.
For a more clear example: Table folds to you on the BTN and you hold AKo and 3x. BB calls and flop comes 359 rainbow. BB checks to you, then turns his hand face up showing QJo and says plainly, "I will not call a bet." As you have the best hand but are clearly not going to get a call from this obvious worse hand, do you still bet? The answer is of course you do. Instead of betting to collect additional value from an opponent's call though, you are betting to collect the value of their equity that they are now folding to you.
In practice, you come up against situations like this reasonably often. You hold a hand that figures to be best, but that will not be getting called by anything worse. In many of these spots it is still correct to bet because of the value you collect when villain folds. In the above example, villain has about 25% equity (in all-in equity terms). If the pot is $40, then $10 belongs to villain and by betting you collect that $10. If, somehow, villain were to call a $40 bet while having only 25% equity, you theoretically are collecting $30 of their call.
limpnfold88
Visionary
Platinum Level
ConDeck
Visionary
Silver Level
Very well explained and yes I see what you mean here. While I still view this as betting for value, because in raw terms it is a EV+ move even when villain calls, but I like your concept of a subset.
S
seetheflop
Rising Star
Bronze Level
betting for value or protecting a hand
I've struggled with this and argued with fellow players I respect. I've concluded that if I make a bet that gives my opponent the wrong price to draw then if he calls he made the mistake. Should I bet so much too blow him out when I have a mathematical advantage? Of course as with most concepts in poker there are exceptions. One might be if pot is quite large all ready or if opponent i determined to draw regardless of my bet size making his mistake larger? What do you think?
I've struggled with this and argued with fellow players I respect. I've concluded that if I make a bet that gives my opponent the wrong price to draw then if he calls he made the mistake. Should I bet so much too blow him out when I have a mathematical advantage? Of course as with most concepts in poker there are exceptions. One might be if pot is quite large all ready or if opponent i determined to draw regardless of my bet size making his mistake larger? What do you think?