Small Stakes NLHE
– Miller, Mahta & Flynn – Study Notes
Part 1: Framework
To be a great player you
need to see every possibility that is out there, you need to consider all of
the options and not have a fixed strategy.
Showdown Equity & Steal Equity
When you really get down
to it there are only two ways to make money in NLHE
- Make the best hand
- Steal the pot.
All of our profit comes
from one of those situations and hopefully from a mixture of the two.
“Making the best hand”
refers to our expectation of winning at showdown. Pot equity, showdown equity,
showdown value, implied odds, implied equity and other terms fall into this
category. We will refer to these generally as showdown equity.
“Stealing the pot” refers to our expectation from winning the pot before
showdown. Fold equity, folding equity, steal equity are the relevant terms.
We will refer to a hand’s ability to win money before showdown as its steal
equity.
Every hand has both
showdown equity AND steal equity. For example, we have 87s on the button, we
could win by making two pair and winning at showdown OR we could win by raising
preflop, betting the flop with air and having our opponents fold. The showdown
equity and the steal equity work together to make the hand profitable.
This logic applies to AA
too. Imagine we have Ac As and we get to the river and there are four diamonds
on board, we could launch a massive bluff to get villain off a weak flush.
Quite obviously pocket aces is a profitable starting hand for anyone but if we
can add some steal equity to its obvious showdown equity we can make it even
more profitable.
So, we combine steal
equity and showdown equity to determine if a hand is profitable. To go to the
other extreme 72o has both steal and showdown equity, we could raise preflop
and the blinds fold or we could raise and flop quads or a full house and win
the pot. In this case though the combined equity is probably not high enough to
warrant the risk of putting money into the pot.
- All hands have two kinds of equity: showdown
and steal equity.
- When the combined equity is worth more than we
need to risk to play on then the situation is profitable
- When the combined equity is too small to
justify the risk, fold.
Using Equities To Make Decisions
How do I plan
to make money in this situation? Every single time we act we need to ask ourselves this question.
To answer it we need to evaluate our equities.
We need to
focus on why we are playing the hand even after we have determined it is
possible. A common mistake is to focus too much on the showdown equity of hands
like suited connectors and weak suited aces etc. They hope to see a cheap flop
and catch a monster, they frequently miss and do not bother trying to steal but
just fold. These hands do not connect with the board often enough to have good
showdown equity. Unless our opponents are extremely loose, these hands rely
on steal equity to be profitable. If we won’t frequently make money by
stealing then our default play is to fold them!
If our hand
relies significantly on stealing we must remember this fact as the hand
progresses. It does not mean we should steal every time but if we do not
take advantage of some steal opportunities/situations then we turn a profitable
hand into a losing one.
If we look at
hands that rely more on showdown equity acknowledge that they play in different
ways. Contrast KT with 44. With KT we will frequently make medium strength
hands that we can win one or two bets with and try not to pay off better. With
44 we will infrequently make monster hands so to make the hand profitable
we need to induce our opponent to pay us off when we do hit. So see that
these two showdown equity type hands profit in different situations and require
different plans.
Imagine we
open T8o in the blinds. We are rarely going to make a big hand so we plan to
make it profitable by stealing. Where does our stealing equity come from? Do we
expect to win the blinds preflop? Do we rely on postflop steals to supplement
the preflop steal? We have to consider where the profitable steal is going to
come from. Before we put one chip in the pot we need to consider how frequently
and at what points in the hand we will need to steal to show a profit.
Remember the
questions we need to ask ourselves at each decision: How do I plan to make
money in this situation? What is my showdown equity? What is my steal equity?
Which one will be more likely to win me money? How should I plan my play to
make the most of the equity I have?
Stealing
Stealing well is critical to no limit success. Too many
players concentrate on winning money with made hands and give stealing
relatively little thought and, therefore, condemn themselves to only marginal
success. They win lots of money at showdown but lose nearly as much in hands
that don’t go to showdown and their win rates hover around zero. We are going
to fix this…..
Marginal hand
situations often rely on steal equity to become profitable. If, for some
reason, you are uncomfortable stealing postflop with a marginal hand (being out
of position, aggressive opponents, opponents won’t fold etc) then you should
play tighter preflop (in early position for example) and fold more marginal
hand that rely on steal equity to be profitable (suited connectors Axs etc).
Playing speculative hands in early position is a common and major leak. Unless
we can steal well we should play very tight in early position (or unless it is
a really loose weak game). When our steal equity is low we should play much
tighter regardless of position this does not just mean if villains are
loose and weak. For example if we are at a table and playing opponents who call
wide on the button and use position to steal well then we should play tightly
even from the cut off in a 6 handed game.
The rule is
simple:
Avoid playing speculative hands unless
we
expect to have significant steal
equity.
Or the more general case:
If we have low
steal equity, we need high
showdown equity
to play.
Otherwise we
should fold.
Here is the bottom line… Play tight or learn how to
steal!!
What Makes Stealing Likely To Succeed
We have all tried to bluff a crazy player who will not
fold! It does not work.
Several factors help us steal. They include:
Position
Stacks deep enough that villains are not likely to commit with one pair
Fewer players, making running into a big hand less likely
Non aggressive or timid opponents
Having an image conducive to stealing
If we have enough of these factors we have steal equity
and should consider playing to steal. On the other hand, if we have none of
these factors and will not be stealing we should avoid even suited connectors
and other reasonably attractive preflop hands.
Examples….
1. Position.
We have 7c 6c on the button in a tough 6max
NL200 online game with 100bb stacks. One player opens to $6. We are very
unlikely to have the best hand but we are in good shape to steal. We 3bet (re
raise) to $24. Everyone folds. Or, alternatively, the opener calls and checks
to us on the flop. We bet $35 and he folds. Sometimes that opponent will 4bet
us preflop, or one of the blinds will come along, or we will get check raised on
the flop. However, as long as that does not happen too often we profit from
stealing. Making a good hand with our 7c 6c is just a back up plan. Now replay the hand being
out of position. Say we have 7c 6c UTG in the
same game. We open to $6 and the cut off calls. We miss the flop (as we will do
most of the time). We make a continuation bet of $12. Cut off calls. Is he
calling to bluff us on the turn? Has he got a made hand? We don’t know. We
might fire another barrel on the turn or check raise the turn with air but that
can get expensive. Throughout the hand the cut off has been able to exploit
knowing our action before he had to act and before we knew his.
2. Stacks
deep enough that villains are unlikely to commit with one pair. This time
we have 200bb ($400). We open for $6 in the cut off with Th 9h. The big blind raises to $18 and we call planning
to outplay him postflop. The flop comes Ks Js 4c giving
us a gutshot straight draw. Villain checks and we bet $30. He check raises all
in. Belatedly we realise villain only started the hand with $60 (30bb) so his
all in means we just have to call $12 more. Getting 9-1 we call. He has Kc Qs. We got it in as a 6-1 dog. What went wrong
here? Well each player put 9bb into the pot preflop. Villain only had 21bb
behind. There is next to zero chance he will fold top pair if he hit (actually
he would be hard pressed to fold second pair in a decent aggressive game
especially if you always bet if he checks). All he has to do is check raise all
in to profit. So, the preflop open is fine by us. Calling the 3 bet is horrible
(because he only has 30bb). Folding or 4 betting are the only reasonable
options and we should usually fold. Now let’s play the hand again with deeper
stacks and we both start with $400 (200bb). We open CO for $6, BB raises to $24
and we call.. Flop is same Ks Js 4c and he
bets $30. If we play back at him now or on the turn he will be in a difficult
situation. He has just top pair and the stacks are deep. Suppose we just call
the $30 flop bet. The pot is then almost $100. At this stage your opponent has
top pair, is not committed, and has two streets left to play. If he checks the
turn we have an excellent opportunity to stel. We bet $70 and that immediately
puts him to a tough decision. If he calls he puts 33% of his stack in when not
committed and he is at our mercy on the river. Our bet forces him to guess for
big money. So, deeper stacks make it easier to steal as villains won’t want to
risk their entire stack as often.
3.Few
enough players that you are not likely to run into a big hand. In a 6max
NL200 game we have Ad 5d UTG. Should we play?
Assuming that we will raise (and not limp) we need to consider how often we
will get 3 bet. If someone comes in with a decent sized 3bet we will be forced
to fold or put in far too much money out of position with a mediocre hand
(assuming 4bet bluffing is not profitable). Fortunately in this example our
opponents are relatively tight and will usually only 3 bet with JJ+, AK and the
very occasional suited connector type hand. The chances that any one opponent
holds such a hand is roughly 1 in 30 so the chance one or more of our five
opponents has such a hand is roughly 1 in 6. So roughly one sixth of the time
we open from UTG with a small suited ace we will fold without seeing a flop.
This is a big hurdle to overcome. We need to steal very often to overcome it.
So, for most players, opening Ad 5d UTG is a
significant leak. Now suppose it is folded to us on the button with Ad 5d in the same game. With just two players left to
act the chance of getting 3 bet drops to about 1 in 15. So, once fewer players
remain, the chances of running into a bigger hand drop dramatically.
4.Non
aggressive or timid opponents. In a 6max NL200 game we raise on the button
with Ah 9h. The big blind 3 bets. He is not aggressive so likely has a big hand
so we fold. Alternatively, the small blind calls. He is timid. The flop comes
Qs 7h 6c so we
have ace high. He checks, we bet $10. We will take the pot down often on the
flop. If he calls he will almost always have a good hand and we can give up and
wait for our next opportunity. A more aggressive opponent might 3 bet more
hands from the big blind or check raise on the flop with air. Both actions
reduce our earn from stealing.
5. An
image conducive to stealing. We have only played a couple of hands in the
last two hours. We raise to $6 in the CO first in and only the button calls.
Flop is Kc Jd 9c and misses us completely. We check, the button
bets $8 and we check raise to $24. The button folds. Now let’s change it a
little. We have been very active for two hours and we just took a bad beat. The
same action and we check raise again. This time he calls. Now we have no idea
what he has or what he is going to do. He could be calling with nothing just to
bet big on the turn as he is tired of us pushing him around. And of course he
could still have a big hand. Either way we are less likely to win the hand.
Often a tight image makes it easier to steal. Other images can also help
though. For instance players will tighten up preflop if we have gotten all in
several times in a short period as they do not want to face our aggressive
betting when we hit a pair.
These are basic concepts about stealing. None is absolute.
When evaluating steal equity keep in mind that most successful
steals happen when nobody flops top pair or better. In these situations the
player who makes the last bet usually wins. If we play chicken well, we gain
more value from stealing. That is one good reason that a good loose aggressive
player does so well against weak tight opponents particularly in short handed
games. Let’s move on….
Part 2 – Beating Online $1-$2 6-max Games
Introduction
Why did the authors choose NL200? If we play a stake other
than this will this book be relevant etc?
In short. This level is the ideal level to have the most
critical no limit concepts. If we learn to beat NL200 then we can beat 99% of
no limit games in the world. Learn the concepts in this book, apply them to our
game and we will destroy the competition!
The longer answers….
The Threshold For Professional Play
The authors want us to turn pro. This level is the
critical level for turning pro as good players at this level can earn $10000
per month even with a relatively relaxed playing schedule. So if we learn to
play this level they have succeeded. If we prefer to play live then we are in
even better shape. Live players are not used to the sort of aggression we will
learn and we will run them over. They compare it to putting a professional
footballer in a game full of 14 year olds!
Developing A Robust Strategy.
We can beat the easy micro games with a simple, limited
strategy like nut peddling. This will not succeed at higher levels. Good
players can beat nut peddlers by stealing a lot and refusing to pay off their
good hands. Once we look at NL200 games strategies like nut peddling will not
work well enough, we will need to adopt a more complete strategy. We will have
to bluff AND play hands for value. We will have to reads hands. We will have to
adjust to our opponents. We will have to exploit whilst not getting exploited.
This book will teach us a strategy for this level and this is the first level
where we will need a more advanced strategy.
Stealing Blinds And Playing Position
Blind stealing is the cornerstone of any successful 6max
strategy. It is the absolute bedrock of a winning player’s game. This is not
just theoretical. The difference between a break-even player and a modestly
successful pro is one blind steal per 100 hands. Also, we will see immediate
improvements in results as this is a constant source of profit.
Blind stealing basically means making a raise preflop in
order to win the pot immediately. What does it mean to blind steal better than
we already do? There are two basic variables:
1. Stealing
range
2. Raise
size
We can choose to steal with a hand or we can pass up on
it. And we can raise to various amounts. We can adjust both of these variables
to optimise our blind stealing strategy.
Stealing Range
Initially we discuss stealing from the button.
The top factor for determining our stealing range is how
tight the villains play in the blinds. If we have two tight opponents then
sometimes we can steal 100% of the time and make a profit. To find out how
tight our villains are we can look at their “fold v steal in blinds” stats
using our tracking software.
We already know that we need to look at both the blinds to
find out a true folding percentage. For example if they both fold 80% then we
do 0.8 x 0.8 = 0.64 so we see they fold 64% of the time on average.
We also know how to work out our required success rates.
For example if we raise 3bb on the button we are risking 3bb to win 1.5bb so 3
/ 4.5 = 0.67 so we need to succeed 67% plus to make an immediate profit.
Bear in mind we say immediate here as this assumes we make no money
postflop.
Even with these two examples we can reasonably open any hand on the button. We make money when
they instantly fold (around (36% of the time) but we also can use position on
the flop to bluff and obviously make winning hands too to show a profit.
If both players
fold to a steal about 80% of the time
we can
reasonably open any hand on the button
and make a
profit
So, we can steal profitably with any hand. That does not
mean that we actually have to do this. We do not want to pound too much on
tight players in case they react and play back at us. Just mix it up a little
bit and show them that you can fold sometimes!
But do not fold too often!! Keep on stealing. If they are
ultra tight then do not let them off the hook. If they are set mining nits then
just keep stealing as they will not adjust.
Raise Size
In theory we would like to raise as little as possible as
we are risking less for the same reward. In reality raising smaller changes
some things:
1. Folding
frequency
2. Postflop
expectation
Theoretically speaking villains should fold more often
against bigger open raises and fold less against smaller ones (by the basic
premise that we give them better odds to call with smaller raise sizes). In
practice though, typical players do not adjust their calling frequencies in the
way that they should. Most players (especially tight ones) will keep folding
regardless of dynamics. So small raises pay off against players who will not
adjust their ranges.
Postflop expectation is also important for determining our
steal size too. If we have a small postflop expectation then we should
steal/raise small preflop. Example, we are on button, villain is tight in big
blind and folds to steal 90%. When he does not fold however, he 3 bets. Now,
because he folds so often our steal is automatically profitable. But, because
when he does play we face a big 3 bet forcing us to fold most of the time we
have zero postflop expectation. Therefore, we should make our steal small
versus this player.
With little
postflop expectation
make our steal
size small
Now let’s say the big blind plays differently. He folds
80%, calls 17%, 3bets 3%. Against him our steals won’t win quite so often. But,
a lot of the time where he continues we will see a flop. With position and
initiative we can still win the pot postflop with a well timed bluff. The more
postflop expectation we have then the more reason we have to make a bigger
preflop raise. In fact, if we have reason to believe that we will win many pots
postflop then we should actually raise as big as possible. As we have the skill
advantage we can win bigger pots postflop (remember thought we are talking
about bigger small pots here not getting stacks in etc).
Important to note here that the authors are not telling us
to raise different sizes depending on our hand strength. At NL200 villains will
be able to pick up on this (personally at the lower/micro levels I think its
fine but the authors do not confirm or debate that).
Our postflop expectation is mostly determined by how
villains play. Going back to the player who folds pre 80%, calls 17%, 3bets 3%
so when he calls we know he has a medium strength hand but not decent enough to
3 bet. Now let us assume he plays passively postflop. He checks nearly every
flop to us and fold if he misses. If he does catch a draw or a pair he will
usually call one bet. If the turn does not improve his hand he will check again
and fold hiw weak draws and pairs. So if he does call flop AND turn he will
usually have either a very strong draw or top pair or better. Now this postflop
strategy is a FIT OR FOLD strategy.
Also note the villain is only concerned with his own hand and does little to no
hand reading. This strategy is easily exploitable! It loses to a strategy of raw
aggression. Just keep betting and the vast majority of the time he will fold.
We will win lots of small pots and lose the occasional bigger one. Choose
moderate bet sizes and use hand reading to give a big edge over him.
Bottom line: If a player tends to defend his blinds by 3
betting rather than calling we should open smaller. If a player defends his
blinds by calling more than 3 betting AND THEN USES A FIT OR FOLD STRATEGY
after the flop then we should use a larger open sizing.
Choose small
steal raise sizes against 3 bettors
choose large
steal raise sizes versus
callers who then
play fit or fold
When in doubt use smaller sizes – its less exploitable!
Return To Stealing Range
We now know to steal 100% on the button versus tight blind
players. What do we do if they are not so tight?
Let us say we will not show an auto profit from raising
ATC. Also let us assume villains in blinds will never call but will 3 bet to
about $24 (12bb). Few players will 3bet 25% of hands but how would we adjust?
Firstly we cannot steal 100% of hands so let’s fold our off suit trash. To
adjust we can play back by calling and making a postflop play or we can start 4
betting as a bluff (these options will be discussed in a later chapter btw). In
practice we will not come up against many of these players – even players who like
to 3bet will often fold enough to make stealing profitable.
When stealing
against players who often 3 bet
when they
defend, choose a small bet size
and trim the
worst hands from our range
If our villain defends often but prefers to do so by
calling then our stealing range is determined by how they play postflop. If
they play a fit or fold strategy then we can still steal aggressively – often
still up to 100% as we will rarely get to showdown.
Against players
who defend often and prefer to defend
by calling but
then play fit or fold postflop
choose a large
steal raise size and still
open most of our
hands
What about calling stations? They call a wide range
preflop but then do not fold much postflop either! We need to tighten up a bit,
stealing is a weak strategy versus stations. If the big blind will call 70% of
the time when we open the button we need to stick to a range that we can play
for value postflop, something like:
22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q7s+
54s+, 75s+, 96s+
A2o+, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o
This is around 40% of hands. It is flexible and will
depend on how villain plays. Remember stations will force us to pass on steals
but they will make up for that by paying us off with our value hands after the
flop.
Calling stations
force us to tighten up our stealing range
With a value
range choose larger raise sizes
And value bet
aggressively after the flop
When we have two very different types of players in the
blinds we will need to take the more conservative of the two associated
strategies. So if we have a fit or folder with 80% fold v steal ( strategy:
100% open, big steal raise size) and a frequent 3 bettor (strategy: tighter
range, smaller size) then we should go for the tighter range and smaller size.
Stealing From The Cut Off
Now we have not only one more player to contend with who
is left to act but also he has position on us. We should greatly curtail
our stealing. Against three tight players we can still open with around 40% of
hands (as per the range for the button open versus calling stations):
22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q7s+
54s+, 75s+, 96s+
A2o+, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o
If one of our opponents is aggressive or loose
(particularly the button) then we drop the weak hands from this range:
54s+, T8s+
A2o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo
This is approximately 30% of hands. If the aggressive or
loose player is on the button then remove even more such as A2o-A7o.
So, there are 3 players so steal less than on the button.
40% range versus three tight players and 25% to 30% range if loose or
aggressive player(s).
As for sizing still keep it conservative.
Stealing From The Small Blind
In general people fold their big blind too often versus
the small blind. If we raise to 3x from the SB we only need them to fold 62.5%
to auto profit so we raise 100%.
If the big blind
folds more than about 60% of the time
open every hand
from the small blind
It is not so easy though. If we get a decent player on our
left he will defend by playing 80% of his hands. He might 3 bet 35%, call 50%
and only fold 15% trash hands but he can play so loosely as we are playing 100%
of hands and he has position. Against this loose defending strategy we
have to tighten up or it is disastrous!
Depending on how he plays postflop we could tighten up to the 30% range
as per the cut off stealing range:
22+, A2s+, K9s+, Q9s+
54s+, T8s+
A2o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo
So, similar to the cut off we have to play fairly tightly
when conditions are bad for stealing. But, unlike the cut off, we can open 100%
of hands if the big blind is tight. It is important to identify our villain and
know which strategy we are going to employ.
Putting It All Together
Because online
6-max games tend to play fairly tightly preflop, blind stealing is extremely
important. Indeed, an aggressive blind stealing strategy can improve a player’s
overall win rate by 1.5bb/100 ($3 per 100 hands in a $1–$2 game) over a tight
or weak strategy. A good percentage of your opponents will play
tightly enough from the blinds that you can profitably open 100 percent of your
hands from the button and from
the small blind. Stealing from the cutoff is more dangerous, so even under good
conditions you should typically avoid opening trash from the cutoff.
When your
opponents defend their blinds by calling then playing a fit or fold strategy
postflop, you can steal with a wide range of hands and rely on taking pots away
postflop. When your opponents are looser, more aggressive, and less willing to
fold, you have to tighten up on your stealing. But often you’ll be compensated
for the lack of stealing opportunities against these players by making more
money on your good hands.
“How much is aggressive button stealing worth? Poker success can be
measured in big blinds per 100 hands. Suppose you are a solid winning player in
$1–$2 who makes 4bb/100 hands. You open 30 percent of your button hands (e.g.,
22+, A2s+, KTs+, QTs+, JTs-54s, J9s-64s, A9o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo-54o). A little less
than half the time you have the button it is folded to you. So in a 6-handed game,
about 8 times per 100 hands it will be folded to you on the button. You raise 30
percent of those hands, or about 2.4 hands per 100. Now suppose you expand your raising range to 80 percent of your hands.
Of the times it is folded to you on the button, you are now raising an extra 50
percent of the time. This is 4 extra hands per 100. Against blinds who fold 80
percent of their hands to a 2.25bb raise, you win immediately roughly 64 percent of the
time. This nets 0.15bb per steal attempt not including any money you make when you
get called or re raised. You win 0.15bb and free roll on postflop play.
Now suppose you are against blinds who do not 3-bet often. Say of the 36 percent of the
time either blind calls or reraises, they re raise 12 percent of the time. Even if
you fold every time they re raise, 24 percent of the time you will see a flop with 5 or
5.5bb in the pot. If you win just 1bb of that on average, you net an additional
0.25bb per hand. This is a quite conservative total of 0.4bb per hand. At 4 extra hands
per 100, the successful pro earns an extra 1.6bb/100 by expanding his button opening
range from 30 percent to 80 percent of hands against tight blinds. This yields a 40
percent increase in overall earn.
Stealing from tight blinds is a tremendous source of profit. It is also
an easy strategy that does not require great play to be
successful.”
Barreling
Here we are referring to continuation betting the
flop, turn and river which is also known as firing the first, second and third
barrel.
Firing these barrels at the right time to exploit
different villains strategies is a critical tool for maximizing our profit.
Before talking about specific opponents though we are going to learn a generic
optimal strategy. The authors here make a (massive) footnote referring to
the fact that a generic optimal strategy is not quite the same as a game theory
optimal strategy in the Nash sense of the term. A generic strategy is one that
works best against the general type of player that we will come up against and
so refers to “regs” and not to “fish” or other outliers. So it is a good
strategy to fall back on against strong opponents and unknowns but it is worth
pointing out it is not the strategy to maximize our profits.
The generic optimal strategy looks like this… We will
start at the river and work backwards. On the river we will bet strong hands
for value, but we will also bet enough of our busted hands as a bluff that will
force our opponents to pay off some of our value hands or he risks getting run
over. We will check down some modest hands and try to win at showdown. This means
our river betting range is polarized.
On the turn we will bet our good hands for value and
we will bet enough bad hands for balance so that again our opponents will be
forced to pay us off sometimes or risk the chance of getting run over. In
general we will be betting a larger proportion of our hands on the turn than we
will on the river for the following two reasons: 1. When our opponent has
called preflop, flop and turn he must have some strength so we will need a
stronger hand to bet the river profitably (conversely on the turn he has only
called twice so his range is weaker when we make our turn bet). 2. Betting the
turn to get value from draws is feasible on the turn, villains obviously cannot
draw once the river card has landed!
On the river we will choose our worst hands to bluff
with, that is the hands that have little chance to win at showdown. We do not
bluff with our medium hands because often when they fold we would have beaten
them anyway so we gain nothing. Bluffing with a bad hand wins something the
times that they fold.
On the turn we do not necessarily want to bluff our
worst hands. We will often choose decent drawing hands to bluff the turn with
and give up with our very worst hands. The obvious advantage of (semi)bluffing
with a draw rather than stone cold bluffing is that we also have the chance to
win if we are called by completing our draw. So, on the turn we bet good hands
for value, we bet weak hands as bluffs to balance and the weak hands that we
choose are usually those that have a chance to improve if called. We will
mostly check behind with medium hands and terrible hands with some big hands
and draws for balance. And the overall percentage of hands we will bet on the
turn is significantly greater than on the river.
The logic on the flop is similar for that on the turn.
We can bet even more hands on the flop because villain has only called once and
therefore his range is much wider and weaker. We will also bet to charge our
villain to draw. Because we are betting more good hands for value we can bet
more weak hands and draws to balance.
So, overall, the generic optimal strategy is to
bet a large amount of hands on the flop, bet a smaller percentage on the turn
(weighted towards betting good hands for value and betting some draws as semi
bluffs for balance) and bet a smaller percentage again on the river (in a
polarized fashion).
Obviously our villain does not have to check/call
every street, they can check raise or lead into us etc. These things will lead
us to adjust our strategy. Surprisingly though these adjustments do not change
the strategy’s basic form. They do affect decisions with hands on the
borderlines, but the threat of getting check/raised is not enough to abandon
the entire framework).
This strategy leverages position and the no limit
structure to the full. It makes it very difficult for villains to play modest
hands profitably. Example given is villain with A5 on A96. Assuming we have a
fairly wide range preflop the villain is a favourite against our range on the
flop. The trouble for him is that he cannot convert his position because if he
is ahead we probably bet the flop but check the turn and river and when he is
behind he has the problem that we might barrel all three streets. He also
cannot respond by simply folding to the larger bets because we will bet enough
bluffs to force him to choose between paying us off or giving up with hands
with good showdown value. So even though he is winning on the flop more often
than not he will win small pots and lose big ones if he tries to get to
showdown. Therein lies the power of this strategy.
The critical component of this strategy is that the
big turn and river bets will usually be value hands but will be balanced enough
with bluffs and semi bluffs to deny the opponent the ability to simply lay down
when we bet. Many players make the mistake of not bluffing on the turn and
river enough to balance their value bets. This is extremely exploitable. For
example the player with A5 on A96 (from above) can call the flop easily knowing
that a turn bet if it happens will define the hand and he can happily fold and
if it does not happen he gets to showdown and often wins. In fact, even just
giving up too often on the river can be a critical error.
In response to the large number of players who give up
on the turn and river too easily many good players respond by calling one or
two bets hoping to check the hand down. If their opponent follows through with
a big bet they can fold happily. It works well versus these players who give
up, but against a strategy that includes bluffs it pays a heavy price.
Furthermore it does even worse against a strategy that includes even more
bluffs than the generic optimal strategy.
So we will bet more hands on flop than on turn than on
river! Our barreling strategy will always resemble this no matter the opponent.
But, depending on our opponents mistakes we can alter the strategy in different
ways to further exploit them.
Deviate
from the generic optimal strategy
only
consciously and only when it benefits us
Principles For Continuation Betting
Whether to cbet or not after missing the flop can be a
complex decision. By betting we are more likely to win pots where opponent
flopped weak. But we are also going to lose more money when they flopped
strong. We need to balance these factors to make the most profit.
Principle 1: Just Do It
Very strong opponents for us to have a measured approach
to continuation betting. Luckily, most opponents we will face are not strong
enough. So the basic strategy is summed up thus: JUST DO IT!
This is because the main trade off is that we win pots
more OFTEN versus all the bad hands but lose more MONEY versus the good hands.
Typical opponents fold too much facing pressure and added to that they don’t
win enough with their good hands. So by continuation betting versus these
players we will succeed more OFTEN than we should and lose LESS MONEY on
average when we get caught. So we bet. Authors talk about nearly 100% in HU
pots, 70 to 80% in 3-way pots and be more measured in 4 way or more. The
general premise here is that villains will not know how to adjust and will fold
way to often either immediately or later in the hand. Overall we are better
continuation betting too much than not enough.
Principle 2: Don’t Use A Sledgehammer When A Slightly
Smaller Sledgehammer Will Do!
Villains often think in binary terms on the flop, they
will fold or call no matter what cbet size we employ. So on dry flops and in
3bt pots we can cbet smaller and get the same result as if we bet bigger – so
go small. On coordinated flops we might need to go bigger and think about
firing another barrel because villains can have a piece of the flop more often
and call wider.
Principle 3: Back Off Against Strong Players
Occasionally we will see a player who uses our aggressive
barrelling strategy against us. Signs to look out for… A normally aggressive
player starts to play a trapping game against us (say he calls down AA
versus us when his normal play is to be aggressive). A player who begins
check raising the flop frequently – typically this play is used sparingly
at these stakes, if someone starts doing it he may be exploiting our weak
range. A player begins floating us frequently or begins raising us with
position either on the flop or on later streets – same as above, he could
be exploiting us.
If someone seems to be doing this at all against us they
may be adjusting. We should cbet fewer hands and consider the following
guidelines:
Check more often when out of position than when in
position. It is a lot easier for them to exploit us if they have position.
If we 3bet from the blinds for example, we versus this player we should check
our good and bad hands alike as checking bad hands saves money and checking
good hands reverses the play on the villain when they try to steal after our
show of weakness. Against a good player we can check more than half of the time
out of position (but still cbet more than half in position). If we do cbet out
of position if we believe villain to be able to float then we should check the
turn with our made hands to punish the float.
Check more often when the board connects well with
opponent’s range. When TAG players call our preflop bets they often have
good big card hands, pocket pairs or some connected hand (usually suited). So
our cbets will work less often on big card flops or connected boards so we
should check more often. As with being out of position we should also check
some good hands too if we need to balance.
Be more willing to rebluff. Say we raise preflop
and a 26/24 calls out of the blinds. Flop comes K52r. He checks, we cbet 55%
and he check raises half the pot. Sometimes (but not always) we should reraises
as a bluff. Villain can be testing us on this dry flop with nothing so by
occasionally rebluffing we can protect ourselves from being outright exploited.
Also, when out of position, we can occasionally check on a semi coordinated
board with the intention of check raising as a bluff. Making this play
occasionally prevents the villain from auto profiting with a “bet when checked
to” strategy.
Another thing to watch for is villains who pounce on weak
bet sizes, earlier it was suggested to bet small if we can get away with it but
against these villains bet bigger to avoid getting played back at (until he
figures this out!).
The authors believe that we
should not have to employ these tactics too much at NL200. Most players will
not be able to trap and bluff/rebluff us against our aggressive flop betting.
But if we think we have found a player who can then we know what to do!
PAGE 73
