Continuation Bet-Sizing
Monday, 1 April 2013
Sizing those c-bets with John "KasinoKrime" Beauprez of Quick Pro PLO
It’s basically impossible to have a c-betting discussion without talking about how to optimise our bet-sizing. But what are the main things we need to consider? Choosing the best bet size is primarily a function of board texture and SPR (stack to pot ratio), and the real key is to understand how all of the different turn possibilities will play out following different bet sizes. What SPR is being set up, how elastic are the opponent’s calling and raising ranges, and what are the possible turn textures?
Let’s start off with board texture. It’s typically better to c-bet smaller on dry boards and bigger on wet boards (to find out more information about these board textures, check out Lesson 8: Boarding School on PLO QuickPro). The explanation for this is pretty simple, and it relates back to what we have talked about in previous articles. People flop equity less often on dry boards, which means that they’ll generally be folding to your c-bets more often, so betting smaller makes sense because it gives you a better price on your bluff.
On the other hand, betting bigger on wet boards makes sense for a few reasons. First, wet boards hit people’s ranges harder than dry boards, as well as promising a wider variety of turn cards that will change the board texture. We also want to charge your opponents for their draws and for calling us down when we’re semi-bluffing. Additionally, betting bigger makes it more expensive for an opponent to float or bluff-raise, which they’ll have more opportunities to do on wet boards than dry boards. There are a few situations where c-betting smaller on wet boards makes sense. This happens when you have a monster draw and want to encourage hands that have reverse implied odds to come along with you – for example, when you have top set and the nut flush draw.
Next, noting how your bet-sizing will affect the turn SPR and how it fits into your game plan on later streets is very important. Are stacks deep enough to fire a second barrel? If your opponent calls the turn, are the stacks deep enough to fire a third barrel? Being conscious of the SPR allows you to leverage your stack on the turn by using the threat of a river bet to make your opponent fold his draw. Lastly, if you’re trying to get stacks in by the river with a value hand or strong semi-bluff, it’s important to plan your bets accordingly so that you don’t lose value by betting too small on earlier streets. Another big difference between NLHE and PLO is that, in the latter, you can’t just over-bet ship the river to maximise your value.
A moment ago we outlined a general strategy for sizing our bets based on board texture and SPR. But you might be wondering, does it ever make sense to c-bet full pot? After all, this is a pot-limit game, so shouldn’t there be spots where betting full pot makes sense? The short answer is yes, there definitely are. Besides the obvious cases where you’re bombing pot to protect your hand against draws on very wet boards, or in four-bet pots where the SPR is very low, there are a few cases where betting full pot makes sense. The first is against frequent check-raisers and bluff-raisers and, as was mentioned earlier, betting bigger is a profitable adjustment against these players because, from a game theory standpoint, if they choose to re-raise you as a bluff, it has to work more often to turn a profit. For example, let’s say we bet 50 into a pot of 100, and a player check-raises three times our bet to 150. He’s risking 150 to win 300, which means that he needs to be successful half of the time to turn a profit. On the other hand, if we bet 100 into a pot of 100 and he wants to check-raise three times our bet again, he’ll have to risk 300 to win 500, which means that it’ll have to work 60% of the time to be profitable.
Another benefit of betting full pot is that it’s generally perceived to be much stronger than c-betting the standard two thirds or half pot. About a year ago, I was getting really frustrated because I felt like I was getting floated or raised practically every time I c-bet, so I adjusted by c-betting full pot against the players that I felt were floating and bluff raising me with wide ranges, and as a result players were much more hesitant to get out of line against me. This obviously depends on who the opponents are, because some players’ actions are insensitive to bet-sizing, so against them you’re better off sticking to the aforementioned default recommendations. Against players that don’t respect your c-bets, adjusting by c-betting full pot is definitely an option.
Lastly, c-betting full pot defines your opponents’ ranges more than a standard size does. Since players are typically scared of getting outdrawn, they don’t have the discipline to flat-call big hands, meaning that if you c-bet full pot a player will reveal the strength of his hand by trying to get the money in quick to protect it. Likewise, when he does float you, you’ll know that his range is probably weighted more heavily towards a draw, which makes hand-reading both in position and OOP easier.