Continuation Bets & Finding Out Where You Are In A Hand

[IQCrash 1]

I think the toughest time I have is when I'm just called instead of raised, even in position - and checked to, and called, then checked to again. It's difficult to put your opponent on a hand when he isn't really giving you much information to work with, so I wanted to give a shot at an example hand to see what our thought process should be, what information i'm perhaps missing to pick up on, and so forth.Full Table: 9 PlayersYour stack: 100kAverage Stack: 75kBlinds: 2000/4000Ante: 200It's folded to you in the CO with K Q You make a standard raise of 12,000, and it's folded to the Big Blind (who has 80,000 chips) and he calls the additional 8,000 chips.The flop comes down: A 7 3 Villain Checks.First Question: It's pretty standard to make a continuation bet here, right? You represented the ace before the flop and villain has checked to you showing weakness.You make a C-bet of about half the pot: 14,000 chips.Villain calls.Second Question: You should be done with the hand at this point, right? There are no draws out there, thus we have to assume villain is calling with an ace, set, or maybe even middle pair...The Turn is the T Villain checks to you again.Third Question: What does villains second check here tell us? Does he have a really weak ace? Is he slowplaying a set hoping we have an ace or will take another stab at the pot? Since it's checked to us again and we've picked up a gutshot, do we take another stab at this pot and spew chips, or do we take the free card and hope to catch our Jack?You check behind.The River is the 7 Villain leads out for half pot-sized bet.Lastly: He's shown zero strength so far, unfortunately we only have king high. Has he finally realized his weak ace is good? Did he make a bad call with middle pair and get lucky on the river? We have no information and obviously have to fold here -- but could we have taken this pot away or at least have gotten more information on previous streets is the real issue here.Anyway, thanks if you participate in this little exercise with me.

[dingas 0]

Trying to win every pot you are involved in is a terrible strategy in poker. It's okay to take a shot, but when you don't have the goods, sometimes you just have to give it up. Don't beat yourself up over pots like this, just move on to the next hand.Then again, you should sometimes fire a second bluff on the turn in spots like this. You should sometimes check the flop after you raised preflop. Most people play automatically in such spots: betting the flop, checking behind on the turn. Good players can exploit this. So mix it up.

[shpaget 0]

This is where reads and history becomes important.Is he the type of guy to call down middle, or even bottom, pair every time.Is he the type to call with top pair (regardless of kicker) but never raise it?On the turn, I'll gladly take the free card.On the river, it depends...I can attempt the steal, especially from a weak/tight player...if the guy is a calling station OR if I don't know anything about him I can check behind and get the free look at his cards for information.Besides a standard continuation bet, you've shown weakness too - so he may call you with a three, or a pair of sixes, or anything that . And he'll fold if he doesn't have anything...and if he doesn't have anything you will win anyway because you have the highest hand that doesn't hit the board.Poker isn't about winning the most pots, it's about winning the most money.

[IQCrash 1]

I'm not exactly sure why the first two replies have pressed the issue of not winning every pot you're involved in. Did I give the impression that's what the exercise was about? I'm not trying to win the hand above - I'm trying to find out how we can extract more information from the villain - which is why I broke up the hand into seperate parts. The continuation bet on the flop, what to do on the turn when it's checked to us again, and so on... (Also, since shpaget touched upon it - we're assuming we have no reads/history with the villain.)

[dingas 0]

How can you extract more information from the villain? I don't really understand how that relates to this hand. What more information do you need? You're almost definitely beat when he calls your bet on the flop. He has a pair or better at least 90% of the time.Will he fold to a turn bet? I don't know. That's what poker is about, making decisions based on limited information. With no read or history on the villain, you don't have enough information to make an informed decision.

[shpaget 0]

I'm not exactly sure why the first two replies have pressed the issue of not winning every pot you're involved in. Did I give the impression that's what the exercise was about? I'm not trying to win the hand above - I'm trying to find out how we can extract more information from the villain - which is why I broke up the hand into seperate parts. The continuation bet on the flop, what to do on the turn when it's checked to us again, and so on... (Also, since shpaget touched upon it - we're assuming we have no reads/history with the villain.)

My first problem is I misread your river section. Anyway - I made an assumption based upon a recurring theme I always see - people want to win every pot they've entered, are loathe to giving it up, and spew chips in the name of "possibly picking off a bluff" or "finding out what he had for further information" and so on.Here's my answer to your specific question - calling his river bet will extract all the information you desire. My opinion is the information is probably not worth the price you'll pay.Betting the turn, and getting called, probably won't give you too much more than his flop call has already given you...it may simply reaffirm your belief he has a weak ace, but you still couldn't rule out a smaller pair, or a stronger holding.

[shrimp4789 0]

thats a problem i have as well.....when he checkes the 2nd time, if you follow suit, and check again...that shows major weakness to him, and instantly says you were trying to steal the pot on the flop....he has to bet out on the riverbut if you bet.......and he calls....again your screwed cause your out of chips unless you hit 1 of your 4 outs (assuming he has an ace). i dont know, i hate the situation, but am interested as well to see the repliesps....i prob would have bet more than 14k into a 26k pot....maybe 18-20k.....dunno if that makes a difference

[copernicus 0]

1. A cb is standard, but it is a bluff and you dont ALWAYS have to cb, especially if they are getting called a lot.2. You have his range summarized pretty well, but that doesnt mean you are done with the hand. You have 6 outs against most of his holdings.3. The check to you probably eliminates Aces from his range, and I would discount sets and two pair here also. He's got some added risk from a slow play and with such a dry board a check raise isnt going to get the bet it needs. I put him on middle pair pretty solidly here. Youre almost certainly behind, but have a good draw against middle pair. You can either represent the A again with a semi-bluff and as many as 10 outs, or check and see what happens. Doing that risks him betting with air on the river. 4. Neither of you have probably improved, but what value he did have is still there. Since you checked the turn he's confident you dont have an A and has a good chance to take the pot away. Calling here would be pretty heroic though, and i think you have to give it up.The turn was your chance to take the pot down, though it would be a better play against a somewhat smaller (but not very small stack).

[RDog 0]

Most of the time I bet the turn here. A lot of players will call a flop bet with a mid pair here just because you could be making a continuation bet with a lot of hands. If he calls the turn, I am done putting money in the pot. My guess is you would have taken the pot down if you would have bet the turn. Hard for villain to not put you on an A at that point. There are no perfect ways to play hands like this. There are times I would probably play it very passively but most of the time I at least fire twice assuming at the least I have outs. The river I am laying it down, very, very unlikely you have him beat at this point and I am not looking to put more chips in at this point. Your check on the turn gave him a lot of information which is why I like a second bet usually on the turn.

[Briguy 0]

Firing a second bullet is completely villain-dependant. Since you have no reads, it's usually a bad idea. Against a loose-weak villain who is liable to give up on PPs and weak aces and check-raise strong aces or monsters, it's a good idea. Against a calling station, it's a disaster.

[copernicus 0]

Firing a second bullet is completely villain-dependant. Since you have no reads, it's usually a bad idea. Against a loose-weak villain who is liable to give up on PPs and weak aces and check-raise strong aces or monsters, it's a good idea. Against a calling station, it's a disaster.

Why is the consensus that there are no reads? I think his lack of a bet on the turn gives you a pretty solid read of MP or nothing. Inaction can be as telling as action.

[fckthis 0]

I dont fire a second bullet in this case, just because this flop is so dry. No fd, no real str8 draws, and an ace. To get called on this flop, you gotta go in shutdown mode.I think this discussion becomes more interesting if you hit a K or Q on the turn.

[RDog 0]

Why is the consensus that there are no reads? I think his lack of a bet on the turn gives you a pretty solid read of MP or nothing. Inaction can be as telling as action.

I agree with Cop, surprise, surprise. You do have a read here. My read is same as Cop, middle pair or in my opinion, weak ace. A continuation bet tells you it is one of the 2. A bet on the turn is the only way you are finding out which of the 2 it is. If you got called by 9's, 8's etc pre then the 10 on the turn puts one more over on the board to the villains holdings and a 10 has to be in the range he puts you on. I'm not saying every time you bet the turn as table image, etc. are always a big part of the hand. I am just saying that if your M O is to always make ONE continuation bet and then give up if you don't hit, you are going to get run over by good players. No doubt that if you bet the turn here, villain does not fire on the river unless he is very strong and is making a value bet to what he perceives as a decent size Ace from you.

[rayovac 0]

Firing a second bullet is completely villain-dependant. Since you have no reads, it's usually a bad idea. Against a loose-weak villain who is liable to give up on PPs and weak aces and check-raise strong aces or monsters, it's a good idea. Against a calling station, it's a disaster.

QFMFT.This is a great topic, as I'm sure we've all experienced this and in the long run, I think it will be a great addition to the forum.I am going to try and keep this conceptual, and not bring actual hands into it. It's the idea of a CB and how to play afterwards. A few points first.First.CB's came out when people read Super/System and Doyle said that whenever he raised preflop, he always bet the flop to keep pressure on his opponent. No matter what, whether he hit or not, he was betting. So, we know that it is accepted LAG and TAG poker to make CB's whenever you hit and miss the flop.Second Point.Play on the flop after you make a CB is totally situational. I've always been told that you make a CB after you raise preflop, on the advice of the first point, and if you get played back at, get out of the hand. That is, unless you've flopped the tits.Third Point.The style of poker today dictates that play is much more LAGish, and much more maniacal. This means that often time, you will see your CB's being raised because people know they are exactly that, a CB. I mean, in DN's blog he mentions two players getting it in with like Q9 and A4 when one of them had raised preflop.How to handle this. (if you hit)Still make your standard raises, and CB's, but change them up a bit. Sometimes I like to raise preflop and check/call the flop when I hit. Then I'll make a decent bet on the turn. It is very deceptive, and kills alot of these maniacs (especially on stars). Or, other times, when I raise preflop and I hit, I'll make a real out of line bet, like 2x pot or something crazy. Now the only problem with a real out of line bet on the flop, is that more likely than not, if you get called, you get called by a better hand. Or if you get raised, its by a better hand.How to handle this. (if you don't hit.)Dump it. Simple. If you have any non pair broadway that you raised pf, then you need to either check/fold, or check and see 4th street if given the opportunity. The way poker is played these days, is there is too much money to be made by playing solid LAG or TAG poker, that firing 3 random bullets at a pot on a pure bluff makes absolutely no sense.Wow. Long post, maybe ill edit with more later. That's all for now.

[RDog 0]

How to handle this. (if you don't hit.)Dump it. Simple. If you have any non pair broadway that you raised pf, then you need to either check/fold, or check and see 4th street if given the opportunity. The way poker is played these days, is there is too much money to be made by playing solid LAG or TAG poker, that firing 3 random bullets at a pot on a pure bluff makes absolutely no sense.

So now we only win pots where we hit the flop??? Continuation bets are part of Doyle or Harrington's books because they work if you use them in the right way. An A high board is perfect for a continuation bet.

[copernicus 0]

QFMFT.This is a great topic, as I'm sure we've all experienced this and in the long run, I think it will be a great addition to the forum.I am going to try and keep this conceptual, and not bring actual hands into it. It's the idea of a CB and how to play afterwards. A few points first.First.CB's came out when people read Super/System and Doyle said that whenever he raised preflop, he always bet the flop to keep pressure on his opponent. No matter what, whether he hit or not, he was betting. So, we know that it is accepted LAG and TAG poker to make CB's whenever you hit and miss the flop.Second Point.Play on the flop after you make a CB is totally situational. I've always been told that you make a CB after you raise preflop, on the advice of the first point, and if you get played back at, get out of the hand. That is, unless you've flopped the tits.Third Point.The style of poker today dictates that play is much more LAGish, and much more maniacal. This means that often time, you will see your CB's being raised because people know they are exactly that, a CB. I mean, in DN's blog he mentions two players getting it in with like Q9 and A4 when one of them had raised preflop.How to handle this. (if you hit)Still make your standard raises, and CB's, but change them up a bit. Sometimes I like to raise preflop and check/call the flop when I hit. Then I'll make a decent bet on the turn. It is very deceptive, and kills alot of these maniacs (especially on stars). Or, other times, when I raise preflop and I hit, I'll make a real out of line bet, like 2x pot or something crazy. Now the only problem with a real out of line bet on the flop, is that more likely than not, if you get called, you get called by a better hand. Or if you get raised, its by a better hand.How to handle this. (if you don't hit.)Dump it. Simple. If you have any non pair broadway that you raised pf, then you need to either check/fold, or check and see 4th street if given the opportunity. The way poker is played these days, is there is too much money to be made by playing solid LAG or TAG poker, that firing 3 random bullets at a pot on a pure bluff makes absolutely no sense.Wow. Long post, maybe ill edit with more later. That's all for now.

OOP you can't habitually bet whether you hit or its a cb. You need to mix up some checks when you miss, with cbs and with check/raises when you hit. Live or on a site where data mining isnt likely , so varying play isnt likely to be deceptive unless you know your table isnt going to break for a long time, cb's OOP vs 1 player are marginal at best, against 2 players a definite loser.

[rayovac 0]

No. I understand that you have to mix it up. It's just the way I play.

[ChrisRichey 1]

Rayovac: You need to learn to vary your play much more than this, because playing like that would make you way too easy to read. You are going to get a lot of people calling you, knowing that they can take the pot away from you later on in the hand. This may not be a problem in the smaller buyin mtts, but as you progress, the players do pay a lot more attention.

[rayovac 0]

Rayovac: You need to learn to vary your play much more than this, because playing like that would make you way too easy to read. You are going to get a lot of people calling you, knowing that they can take the pot away from you later on in the hand. This may not be a problem in the smaller buyin mtts, but as you progress, the players do pay a lot more attention.

Thus why I am here. LOL. And I do see your point, and its well taken.

[tskillz187 0]

I want Rdog and Cop to talk more about this. I feel this is the weakest part of my game. Adding to my stack when blinds are getting up there and not holding monsters, or adding through resteals or PF Allins. I literally just don't play postflop. While I think this is the best play for me right now (because people like Rdog will outplay me if I extend hands in these spots), it's definitely not the best way to play overall.With the hand in question, I play it about the same as OP. To Rdog and Cop, don't you HATE betting the turn at like 25k (a bit small) and having him call? I mean 25k is the smallest bet of reason that I can make, and if he calls I've spewed 51k with K high on an A high board. Now my stack is low and I'm in danger.I'm assuming the answer is you guys think you will take it down enough to justify losing half of your stack? I don't know I'm so uncomfortable with it.

[IQCrash 1]

I feel this is the weakest part of my game. To Rdog and Cop, don't you HATE betting the turn at like 25k (a bit small) and having him call? I mean 25k is the smallest bet of reason that I can make, and if he calls I've spewed 51k with K high on an A high board. Now my stack is low and I'm in danger.

Glad it's not just me. Looking forward to more discussion on the issue.

[navybuttons 15]

one of the most important insights this question raises that has yet to be discussed is mixing up your play by checking the turn in position in the hand described above with a hand like AK or AQ.that's all i have as everything else has been discussed and everything else i would say we be worthless to most people.

[RDog 0]

one of the most important insights this question raises that has yet to be discussed is mixing up your play by checking the turn in position in the hand described above with a hand like AK or AQ.that's all i have as everything else has been discussed and everything else i would say we be worthless to most people.

I love checking these hands on the turn for the same reason I would bet KQ much of the time. It looks like a failed continuation bet on the flop that you have given up on. The villain will almost always fire the river. And when you raise his river bet, it looks like a steal attempt.

[RDog 0]

I want Rdog and Cop to talk more about this. I feel this is the weakest part of my game. Adding to my stack when blinds are getting up there and not holding monsters, or adding through resteals or PF Allins. I literally just don't play postflop. While I think this is the best play for me right now (because people like Rdog will outplay me if I extend hands in these spots), it's definitely not the best way to play overall.With the hand in question, I play it about the same as OP. To Rdog and Cop, don't you HATE betting the turn at like 25k (a bit small) and having him call? I mean 25k is the smallest bet of reason that I can make, and if he calls I've spewed 51k with K high on an A high board. Now my stack is low and I'm in danger.I'm assuming the answer is you guys think you will take it down enough to justify losing half of your stack? I don't know I'm so uncomfortable with it.

Yeah, the stack size here is tough but at the same time, on the turn bet, BB has to make a decision, am I willing to lose all my chips with this hand. You are keeping the pressure on him, and at that point almost all mid pairs are tossing and a lot of weak aces. You have to do a lot of things you aren't comfortable doing in poker where all you are doing is screaming at the monitor is "FOLD!!!!" Hell, it still makes me squirm. But the fact is, if you aren't doing it at least some of the time, people will just start calling all of your continuation bets then take the pot from you. If I see a player that constantly backs off after he bets the flop, I will call the flop bet with a lot of holdings almost knowing that if he didn't hit, I can take it away on the turn or the river. This hand is tough because of the stack size. I still think you win it on the turn enough to justify betting it. The main thing I was getting at is that in general you have to be willing to fire more than one bullet at a pot sometimes.

[Briguy 0]

Why is the consensus that there are no reads? I think his lack of a bet on the turn gives you a pretty solid read of MP or nothing. Inaction can be as telling as action.

I don't base reads like "calling station" or "loose-weak" on the action of one hand, is all. The action in this hand points to some possibilities, but we really don't know if the villain is hanging on to a PP in a presumed WA/WB situation, playing a weak A meekly, calling because the call button is pretty, or slow playing Aces up or something against the aggressor. Knowing his calling standards would help clear up these questions. We don't know if we can push him off a better hand, nor how good a hand we can push him off, unless we know how weak his tendancies are. Because of this unknown, I'll mix up the second bullet without a read that encompasses more than just the action on this one hand.Edited to add: I tend to vary my c-betting based on random elements, such as "if certain key cards hit the flop, I will c-bet". I like to c-bet when I hit 75% of the time (check-raising the other 25%, generally) and c-bet when I miss with the same frequency (75%, else check-fold or check-call on a drawy board). I have no idea if these frequencies are even close to optimal...the 75% is quite honestly pulled from thin air. Is there some hard and fast rule about the frequency of c-betting? Is it really all just play-by-feel with some game theory thrown in for good measure? I don't know, but having clearer c-betting plans would certainly improve my (and anybody's) play.