You mentioned that 1/2 pot was too large of a cbet in several spots and that you'd be very hesitant to call or play back at it. Isn't this actually an argument for that sizing with bluffs too since it has far more fold-equity vs you?
Submitted by u cnat spel on September 2, 2012 - 18:55.
Hi Katipo,
In those spots where the stacks are very short, you can't do much when you have essentially no equity against villain's range. This is why betting less than half-pot is a better choice. Doesn't matter if they bet 33% or 50%, it's going to be very hard (and usually bad) to play back at it.
Example: 3bet pot, SPR of 2.5. We're on the button. Flop comes down KQ3hhd. We have 67ss. Villain bets 1/3 pot. That's all he needed to do to get a fold. If we have equity, we get it in. Essentially these spots tend to just become "I'm either getting it in." or "I'm not."
Comments
enjoying these videos but
Nice video!
you recently crushed hyper
you recently crushed hyper turbos really hard. Will u make a hyper turbo video?
You mentioned that 1/2 pot
You mentioned that 1/2 pot was too large of a cbet in several spots and that you'd be very hesitant to call or play back at it. Isn't this actually an argument for that sizing with bluffs too since it has far more fold-equity vs you?
Coaching page + Blog
Hi Katipo, In those spots
Hi Katipo,
In those spots where the stacks are very short, you can't do much when you have essentially no equity against villain's range. This is why betting less than half-pot is a better choice. Doesn't matter if they bet 33% or 50%, it's going to be very hard (and usually bad) to play back at it.
Example: 3bet pot, SPR of 2.5. We're on the button. Flop comes down KQ3hhd. We have 67ss. Villain bets 1/3 pot. That's all he needed to do to get a fold. If we have equity, we get it in. Essentially these spots tend to just become "I'm either getting it in." or "I'm not."
-u cnat spel