Archive for Tagpoker Forum A friendly place for winning poker players to share their strategy to making money playing poker.
 


       Tagpoker Forum Forum Index -> Heads Up Poker Strategy
N86xps

cbetting mediocre hands

I have checked my cbet frequency (after reading the leakfinder thread) and found out, that it is incredibly low (41.1%). And I know why that is: I am very often checking back mediocre hands on the flop, effectively polarizing my cbetting range. This is good for pot control + I have a chance to bring it to showdown. Also I check back everything if I cannot justify my bet from Value/Bluff point of view. I know, that this is not the way to go around cbetting, while cbetting relies largely on dead money, therefore it should be profitable to cbet practically anything.

I am not quite sure how to weigh those factors against each other. What I know is that I should cbet more (I am starting to do that, but I still feel, that I cannot justify it).

When I first started to play HUSNG (2month ago) I read the chapter on HU in Easy Game (that chapter is written by Balugawahale's friend Matt Coletta), he does advice to check back all the mediocre hands in the beginning of the match. But I guess this is more suitable for HU cash.
_red_dog

Don't check back.  I rarely do.  Early on im cbetting like 100% unless i flop like joint or something and he has folded to 3/3 cbets or w/e.

Cbetting doesn't rely largely on dead money.  Yes that is an important factor but IMO, the meta game u establish and the history/dynamic it creates will make it so much easier to get paid off.
N86xps

_red_dog wrote:
Don't check back.  I rarely do.  Early on im cbetting like 100% unless i flop like joint or something and he has folded to 3/3 cbets or w/e.

Cbetting doesn't rely largely on dead money.  Yes that is an important factor but IMO, the meta game u establish and the history/dynamic it creates will make it so much easier to get paid off.


I see. That's a good reason.

But what to do later on when the blinds get higher? Should I become more carefull and try to bring mediocre hands to showdown more often? A metagame thing: if we cbet a lot in the beginning, then we are less likely to get bluffed of a bootom pair...
_red_dog

U should still cbet.  like at 25/50, if stacks are 1500 eff, just min raise and cbet 100.  What do u mean less likely to get bluffed off bottom pair?
N86xps

_red_dog wrote:
U should still cbet.  like at 25/50, if stacks are 1500 eff, just min raise and cbet 100.  What do u mean less likely to get bluffed off bottom pair?


I mean, that by weakening my cbetting range I am effectively strengthening my checking range, so villan will be carefull if I suddenly check instead of cbetting.
_red_dog

Yes but if u r cbetting alot throughout the match, you shouldn't be checking strong hands.  He might view it as weak, if he isn't think or w/e.  But for the most part, if u cbet a lot, u should cbet ur nutted hands because it disguises it more than checking does.
aggsyb

N86xps wrote:
_red_dog wrote:
U should still cbet.  like at 25/50, if stacks are 1500 eff, just min raise and cbet 100.  What do u mean less likely to get bluffed off bottom pair?


I mean, that by weakening my cbetting range I am effectively strengthening my checking range, so villan will be carefull if I suddenly check instead of cbetting.


No he wont , a high cbet % means you expect villain to always cbet their value hands , if you suddenly check your repping weak SD value such as A high / K high and weak 3rd pairs etc making it correct for villain to bet turn bet river into u (board texture dependant)
N86xps

aggsyb wrote:
N86xps wrote:
_red_dog wrote:
U should still cbet.  like at 25/50, if stacks are 1500 eff, just min raise and cbet 100.  What do u mean less likely to get bluffed off bottom pair?


I mean, that by weakening my cbetting range I am effectively strengthening my checking range, so villan will be carefull if I suddenly check instead of cbetting.


No he wont , a high cbet % means you expect villain to always cbet their value hands , if you suddenly check your repping weak SD value such as A high / K high and weak 3rd pairs etc making it correct for villain to bet turn bet river into u (board texture dependant)


The thread was about whether to cbet "weak SD value such as A high / K high and weak 3rd pairs etc", and if I do cbet all these hands in the beginning of the much, then how is my villain going to put me on them when I suddenly decide to check it? I still believe, that when I cbet 100% and suddenly check it looks strong.
_red_dog

It really does not look strong.  Ever.

/thread
U Cook Socks

41% Is very, very low, which ever way you look at it. I think 60% is an absolute minimum.

Personally I find it makes hands much easier to play by C betting often. If you check behind your bottom pair hands you are giving them a chance to just take the pot off you. You are also giving them free equity.

Obviously you need to adjust to the player you are playing,and to a certain extent board texture, but as a general rule, I am usually betting , until I have a reason not too.
_red_dog

Why do people check their strong made hands?  To make them look weak.  So how can ANYONE, with an IQ>their age think that checking weak hands would look strong.  JFC.
N86xps

_red_dog wrote:
Why do people check their strong made hands?  To make them look weak.  So how can ANYONE, with an IQ>their age think that checking weak hands would look strong.  JFC.


Well, if the opponent knows, that people check strong hands to make them look weak, then he will be suspicious when I suddenly check.
NinjaReads

I've toned down my c-betting lately mainly because every other game is against a russian with no fold button but 41% seems very low.

Looking at my HEM, my 1000+ games on FT my cbet is in the 90+% but my button vp wasn't big, 65% because I found the best way to play the low stakes droolers was just play good hands and they paid you off no matter how many times you folded pre.

On Stars after 170 games my cbet has dropped to 80% but that's only because the games are so surreal and no one is folding, ever.
chesslw

^^ I understand what you are saying- e.g. that if you play against a total maniac who raises 4x, 7x preflop every hand, then he suddenly limps- it looks very strong.

But against any normal player who seems to know what he is doing, checking instead of betting looks weak for the most part almost always. Unless you have shown down some strong top pair hands where you checked to induce villain to barrel (e.g. if you feel he is unbalanced when you check back flop), or some other meta-game reasons, no thinking player will see you as strong.
_red_dog

N86xps

chesslw wrote:
^^ I understand what you are saying- e.g. that if you play against a total maniac who raises 4x, 7x preflop every hand, then he suddenly limps- it looks very strong.

But against any normal player who seems to know what he is doing, checking instead of betting looks weak for the most part almost always. Unless you have shown down some strong top pair hands where you checked to induce villain to barrel (e.g. if you feel he is unbalanced when you check back flop), or some other meta-game reasons, no thinking player will see you as strong.


Of course.

There was a specific situation though: IF I start the game by cbetting nearly 100%, then when the blinds get high enough if I start to check some mediocre hands with intention to bring it to showdown it will be a little less likely, that villain will see it my check as weak, so it will further increase the chance, that I actually get to showdown with, say, bottom pair.
BetMagicMoney

sigh this is no way to change you _red_dog Razz <3

FWIW i think my Cbet over my last ~800 games is like 85%
_red_dog

HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY THINK HE WILL SEE IT AS STRONG?  IF I AM CBETTING 100% WHY WOULD I EVER WANT TO CHECK A HAND THAT IS SUPER STRONG?  YES STACK DEPTH CAN ALTER THIS, BUT FOR ANYTHING 20BBS+ IT IS SO RETARDED, IT DOESN'T LOOK STRONG TO A FISH OR A GOOD REG.

FISH: "hey he checked he must be weak, because i check when i dont have a hand!"

Reg:"he is cbetting 100% and suddenly checks, if he had a strong hand he would cbet it because he is cbetting air and it increases the chances of me playing back at him with air and worse value hands, cbetting would unerrep his hand, so he must have a weak hand, im going to bet turn and bomb river so he folds"

idiot on tagpoker: "IFFF I ERRRM CHECK MY MEDIORCE HANDS THEY THINK I IZ SLOWPLAYING ZEE POCKET ROCKETZ, HEHEHEHEHE....HEHEHEHEHE, DAMMIT! I HATEZ WHEN I DROOL ALL OVER MY KEYBOARD!!"
Brokerstar

_red_dog wrote:
HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY THINK HE WILL SEE IT AS STRONG?  IF I AM CBETTING 100% WHY WOULD I EVER WANT TO CHECK A HAND THAT IS SUPER STRONG?  YES STACK DEPTH CAN ALTER THIS, BUT FOR ANYTHING 20BBS+ IT IS SO RETARDED, IT DOESN'T LOOK STRONG TO A FISH OR A GOOD REG.

FISH: "hey he checked he must be weak, because i check when i dont have a hand!"

Reg:"he is cbetting 100% and suddenly checks, if he had a strong hand he would cbet it because he is cbetting air and it increases the chances of me playing back at him with air and worse value hands, cbetting would unerrep his hand, so he must have a weak hand, im going to bet turn and bomb river so he folds"

idiot on tagpoker: "IFFF I ERRRM CHECK MY MEDIORCE HANDS THEY THINK I IZ SLOWPLAYING ZEE POCKET ROCKETZ, HEHEHEHEHE....HEHEHEHEHE, DAMMIT! I HATEZ WHEN I DROOL ALL OVER MY KEYBOARD!!"


Wow haven't seen you crack before, maybe the most tilted I have ever seen you Red!!  Shocked

OP there are some real valid points the guys are making here. To put it simply do not fall into the fancy play syndrome trap that so many players do. Straight forward poker just prints money in these games.

As Red said vs a thinking player your image of constant c bets serves to get you paid when you have a hand because they think you can't always have it.

Sometimes I will be checking mediocre hands on flops where I don't wanna get CR semi bluffed off of my hand vs an agro guy but a player that will fire turn and river often if I check back in some cases like that I use pot control. Or I may c bet flop and check back turn with medium holdings against a player that floats light OOP and fires rivers if he sees turn weakness (I turn my hand into a bluff catcher)

Just think about the overall logic to a play rather than taking lines to be fancy or to just mix it up for the sake of mixing it up.

Best of luck.
N86xps

Brokerstar wrote:
_red_dog wrote:
HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY THINK HE WILL SEE IT AS STRONG?  IF I AM CBETTING 100% WHY WOULD I EVER WANT TO CHECK A HAND THAT IS SUPER STRONG?  YES STACK DEPTH CAN ALTER THIS, BUT FOR ANYTHING 20BBS+ IT IS SO RETARDED, IT DOESN'T LOOK STRONG TO A FISH OR A GOOD REG.

FISH: "hey he checked he must be weak, because i check when i dont have a hand!"

Reg:"he is cbetting 100% and suddenly checks, if he had a strong hand he would cbet it because he is cbetting air and it increases the chances of me playing back at him with air and worse value hands, cbetting would unerrep his hand, so he must have a weak hand, im going to bet turn and bomb river so he folds"

idiot on tagpoker: "IFFF I ERRRM CHECK MY MEDIORCE HANDS THEY THINK I IZ SLOWPLAYING ZEE POCKET ROCKETZ, HEHEHEHEHE....HEHEHEHEHE, DAMMIT! I HATEZ WHEN I DROOL ALL OVER MY KEYBOARD!!"


Wow haven't seen you crack before, maybe the most tilted I have ever seen you Red!!  Shocked

OP there are some real valid points the guys are making here. To put it simply do not fall into the fancy play syndrome trap that so many players do. Straight forward poker just prints money in these games.

As Red said vs a thinking player your image of constant c bets serves to get you paid when you have a hand because they think you can't always have it.

Sometimes I will be checking mediocre hands on flops where I don't wanna get CR semi bluffed off of my hand vs an agro guy but a player that will fire turn and river often if I check back in some cases like that I use pot control. Or I may c bet flop and check back turn with medium holdings against a player that floats light OOP and fires rivers if he sees turn weakness (I turn my hand into a bluff catcher)

Just think about the overall logic to a play rather than taking lines to be fancy or to just mix it up for the sake of mixing it up.

Best of luck.


I actually agree with all those points. The guys went on tilt because of the other thread actually:).. They do not believe me, that fold equity can be negative.... whatever:)
Kim Cardassian

Although I am risking having red dog to completely flip out, I still have to ask:

Didn't you just give the exact reason for checking strong hands in your post? I fail to see the connection between your point (IE Don't check) and the examples you mentioned, although I did enjoy reading them...
N86xps

Kim Cardassian wrote:
Although I am risking having red dog to completely flip out, I still have to ask:

Didn't you just give the exact reason for checking strong hands in your post? I fail to see the connection between your point (IE Don't check) and the examples you mentioned, although I did enjoy reading them...


Sorry.. I am a little bit lost already. Are you asking me or Red_Dog?
Kim Cardassian

Red dog.
Zipps

I think you misunderstood a few things why Matt Colletta is polarizing his  cbetting range. I have read that book a long time ago and he wrote that he is cbetting with air and top pair+ hands  and checks back hands with low-mid showdown value like A high, which he tries to check down and lower pairs than top pair, because he thinks it`s more valueable to bet them on later streets or call a bet. It`s like Brokestar wrote more of a pot control line, with hands that can`t take a check raise against really aggressive people. You are also loosing a lot of value if you check them back against a total calling station. He would call your bet anyway, so you would just give him a chance to draw out and it`s also a fault to cbet air there if he calls you all the time. So I think you should base your cbetting range in regards to the player type that you are facing and just play straight forward poker.
N86xps

Zipps wrote:
I think you misunderstood a few things why Matt Colletta is polarizing his  cbetting range. I have read that book a long time ago and he wrote that he is cbetting with air and top pair+ hands  and checks back hands with low-mid showdown value like A high, which he tries to check down and lower pairs than top pair, because he thinks it`s more valueable to bet them on later streets or call a bet. It`s like Brokestar wrote more of a pot control line, with hands that can`t take a check raise against really aggressive people. You are also loosing a lot of value if you check them back against a total calling station. He would call your bet anyway, so you would just give him a chance to draw out and it`s also a fault to cbet air there if he calls you all the time. So I think you should base your cbetting range in regards to the player type that you are facing and just play straight forward poker.


Thanks. This clarifies it a lot:).
Wannawin

lol @ N86  - made this forum interesting today, at the same time managed to get some good players (that have been quiet recently) to explain some good concepts (before blatently telling them you don't agree) ha Smile
_red_dog

Yeah broker, pretty tilted, how retarded one human being can be (referring to Mr. Negative FE)
Brokerstar

_red_dog wrote:
Yeah broker, pretty tilted, how retarded one human being can be (referring to Mr. Negative FE)


As much as I understand your frustration and love the time you have taken to help this guy see the light (as it were), let's not turn the place into 2+2 there's more than enough name calling on that site to fill 1000 forums..  Rolling Eyes   Very Happy

Much love.

Broker
       Tagpoker Forum Forum Index -> Heads Up Poker Strategy
Page 1 of 1