Interesting continuation bet situations micro and low stakes

    • Hopey
      Hopey
      Bronze
      Joined: 05.03.2010 Posts: 193
      I have an issue with continuation bets, both making and playing against them. So I've been reading the poker blueprint chapter on the issue and I came across and interesting situation. Whilst the book uses exact cards for ease of explanation I think this could apply to many situations.

      THIS SITUATION APPLIES 6MAX GAMES AND TO OPPONENTS WITH TAG LIKE CHARACTERISTICS: NOT MICRO-DONKEYS!!!!

      Hero is CO and raises 3xbb with 7 :heart: 5 :heart: .
      BU and SB fold
      BB flat calls
      Flop is J :spade: 5 :club: 2 :diamond:
      BB checks, Hero bets 2/3pot, BB raises to 3 times Hero's raise.

      In this situation the book recommends either calling or 3betting. Explaining that in most games at the levels it has been written for the BB is unlikely to hold anything very dangerous. 22, 55 and JJ are likely to just call and hands such as AJ+ or QQ+ would usually have 3bet pre flop (bearing in mind this is against players that fall into something like a TAG category). I'm happy to trust this line, it seems logical (other opinions are available) and this is a situation that I have had trouble with prior to reading this.

      However whilst this information has been useful to me what I also struggle with is a situation in which a fairly TAGish opponent playing OOP vs me leads with a bet. E.g.

      Hero is CO and raises 3xbb with 7 :heart: 5 :heart: .
      BU and SB fold
      BB flat calls
      Flop is J :spade: 5 :club: 2 :diamond:
      BB bets 2/3 pot, Hero????


      How does leading rather than check raising give us different information about his hand?

      Thanks

      Hopey
  • 1 reply
    • EmanuelC16
      EmanuelC16
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2010 Posts: 13,897
      Hello Hopey,

      In my experience, such leads are more a sort of "info bets" with mediocre hands like middle pair up to top pair-no kicker. You ocassionally see monsters because they see you to have raising vs donkbets tendencies or a wide checking back range and wants value.

      Knowing this, I believe with a hand such as mid pair you are safe by calling because you ocassionally have the best hand, you have some pot equity and you can represent more hands that beat a midpair when you call instead of raising. That said, raising would probably still be +EV.

      When deciding my approach vs a lead I think about how I can potentially bluff him off if I don't have the best hand, how badly could the board develop for my range vs his (less FE for me or less value to get) and if I can induce future action if I raise my aggression in a spot where it's not a lot better EV in a vacuum (game dynamics).

      Regards,
      Manu.

      PS: Kickers are an important issue in such spots as well if you can bluff out lots of midpairs with better kicker.