Nice analogy. Surely holds true when playing against a true GTO-villain. But when playing against normal villains, a 1/3 flop bet might be not optimal, but potentially counter-productive to even dangerous. a) you will get called (not raised) with strong hands and your big bet then will get raised on the turn, or you overbet / overshove into a strong hand on the River with a mediocre hand b) you will get bluff/value-raised more on the flop and don't know where you stand, increasing the risk of fatally overplaying your One Pair hand, getting into a weak passive trailing line
Question.. in the last example.. the A K 2 flop. I thought you were bet small on this board as it favours your range but you bet big on wet boards to charge draws. If you bet big on A K 2 arnt you making it too easy for vilian to fold bluff catchers
A big bet allows villain to comfortably fold his weaker bluffcatchers like pocket pairs, but it puts a ton of pressure on his Ax and Kx hands. Villain folding more bluffcatchers doesn't equate to us getting less value, because we win so much more against the bluffcatchers that do call. Only reason to size down would be to bet hands that are not strong enough to go for a bigger size (eg Kx), but that's generally something that we don't want to do on AKx boards. In terms of charging draws, that's not really the reason why we bet big. Flush draws have a lot of equity against even our strong hands, so it doesn't benefit us as much to be bloating the pot against them. Compare this to when you overbet with AQ on AK2, and get called by every single combo of Ax. The overbet is really effective here, because you build a big pot against hands that are almost drawing dead against you. Check out Q1 of this quiz for a more detailed explanation of why we bet big on AKx boards: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hia5l59B9vY.html
@@PokerGiraffe thats very interesting and i thank you for your reply. I have a follow up question. I now agree you should bet big, but when you get called, how would you proceed on blank turn and rivers and flush completing turn and rivers as you dont know if they are floating with a/x or k/x or a flush draw? And would you take the same line if pre flop you had JJ/QQ?
We mostly continue betting big on the turn, since our range is naturally polarized after our flop overbet. QQ/JJ would just check the flop, because they are not strong enough to bet big.
The idea is the same, if most of the hands you are raising are almost always ahead, then you can go as big as you want. But if you want to raise thinner for value with hands that are only good 80% of the time for example, then it would be important to size down and "test the ice".
Seems a capped flop of AK2 frequently brings a third suited card on the river when I bet big on flop. I’m like the kid at the end who thinks the ice is safe but then falls through.
Hah, just remember that it only happens a third of the time. And even when it does you're gonna have some flushes yourself too--possibly even more than your opponent, since most of his flush draws should be folding vs a turn overbet.
Holy fuck this is fucking based. In the beginning I thought this is just random BS metaphor but then you started speaking about the portion of nuts in villains range and realized this was good shit. Than finally you brought up flops with overbets as a kind of counter example to the initial ice skating metaphor and realized this is just ridiculously based and well presented.
This is all good when playing against good, strong players. But it could be a disaster when playing against weak players in the micro and the low stakes for example, where the weaker players don´t know when to fold and whern to continue.
Not exactly! We still have to call at some frequency after getting raised, in order to not be exploitable. But we lose less if we use a smaller size :)
Old school player here. I thought I would be fucked , coming back to poker. I started looking at GTO solvers and my play is pretty intuitively close to GTO
