ITH Poker Forum

[antneye]

Yes, if you are going to 3-bet we really want to have the positonal advantage on the flop....this is so much more important than simply being the preflop aggressor. When it comes to deciding to c-bet, we need to have a plan. If we bet we are likely getting it in against pressure since the pot is bloated. While our c-bets will often take the pot down without any further action, we really need to be aware of board textrure and be willing to check behind and create a four card flop on occasions.
<br />

<br />
When you create these low SPR spots, you are pretty much deciding to bet/call with almost any piece of the flop. When you wiff but have some draw potential, it is often better to just check it back. And re-eval the turn.

[WWJfergusonD]

Slotboom has some good stuff in his first book (haven't received his second one yet) about manipulating your opponents with bet sizing. The min-bet into the field when there are several players between you and the pre-flop raiser is a play I like a lot. And I recently got caught by the min-re-raise pre-flop to expose the guy who's holding aces. I 4-bet in middle position, then realized "great, now they both know exactly what I have."
<br />

<br />
The min-bet as a weapon is a valuable tool.
<br />

<br />

<br />
Would you use a strategy of mostly pot-sized bets in holdem?

[wolffink]

I saw where I think Ed Miller mentions in his site on how few hands actually reach showdowns which I assume means barreling more on the Turn. If you bet, you don't have to have a hand.
<br />

<br />
I'm working out all of this in my head. I have both Slotbloom's and Hwang's book. I"ve finished Rolf's but not Hwang's.
<br />

<br />
Now when I check on the turn and Villain fires out a near pot size bet I suspect he's barrelling. It's annoying.
<br />

<br />
Yet I am in low stakes and players are famous for loving to call. This is not an optimal situation. I have done it but I have outs.
<br />

<br />
Brunson in SS mentions his style of Holdem of betting and picking up a lot of pots. He acknowledges he's going to run into good hands--but it's a freeroll because of all the pots he's picked up.
<br />

<br />
What I'd take this to mean -- and this is counter to some advice which says don't bet hands you'd like to see the next card (flush draws, guts shots, etc.) -- bet hands that have no value -- is to take one stab at pots with nothing and then shutdown (mostly) -- but with hands that have outs -- often fire a second barrell.
<br />

<br />
I would also think that barrelling is not something you always do. It is like most things in poker situational. If a scare card comes and your opponent checks, you can bet and try to move him off his hand.
<br />

<br />
Who is your opponent? What are his stats? What position is he in? What was the preflop betting?

[wolffink]

I love Jeff Hwang's book. It is a fantastic book on Omaha.
<br />

<br />
One thing I do not necessarily agree with his common perception that less than pot-size bets mean weakness.
<br />

<br />
Rolf Slotbloom uses various bet sizes and advocates using less than pot size bets on the flop with both your monsters and your barreling. Before reading Hwang's book I did not often bet pot on the flop. I'd heard that betting pot makes it easier for players to play against you--it means you have it.
<br />

<br />
Now, in Omaha you have to be aware of the nuts. You usually do not have them. So if someone does bet strong on the turn in position --this makes it very very hard for opponents. They consider that you have it and they are facing two more pot size bets.
<br />

<br />
Most of the time Villain will be "weak" and not have the nuts. It's just statistics rather than not betting full pot on the flop or on the turn. But players may play their monsters the same way. 75% pot size bet on the flop. 50% pot size on the turn. If they have a monster they want you call.
<br />

<br />
I suppose the percentage play is to re-raise big on the turn and put pressure on --simply because most of the time Villain won't have it and has to assume that you do.

[WWJfergusonD]

</span><table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>wolffink wrote:</b></span></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">I love Jeff Hwang's book. It is a fantastic book on Omaha.
<br />

<br />
One thing I do not necessarily agree with his common perception that less than pot-size bets mean weakness.</td> </tr></table>
<br />

<br />
Neither do I. The key would be awareness of how your opponent perceives the bets. And to make sure that you aren't giving away anything by your bet-sizing (to opponents who will notice).