Reasons to Bet/Raise In NLHE

[JKDS]

There are a bunch of threads lately that all have this same issue. The initial poster will have a hand history and will be betting just because he can, without any regard to WHY he should or shouldnt be. This is one of the single most important things to know about NLHE so you best know these. Seriously, you will not be profitable long term at this game if you dont know when and why to bet!

So...

Reasons to Bet/Raise In NLHE

1) For value: To get worse hands to call

2) As a bluff: To get better hands to fold

These two are the most important and you better have a god damn good reason to be betting/raising for ANY other reason. I mean it, you will be insulted and ridiculed if you bet for a reason other than the above and can't explain why it was better to do so.

3) For protection

4) For Information

Ok, example time because I really want this to sink in. These are actual hands, I didn't just make them up. As such, since I don't play perfect, there may be mistakes. I encourage you though to focus NOT on what hero should have done, but why hero did what he did. I.E....which of the 4 main reasons to bet/raise applied? There may be, and mostly is, more than one single reason.

So, lets get to it.

Please respond by going

"You are raising for x, because these hands do this, these hands do that, to protect against this, or to get information on that." Be specific. Im not giving you very much info about the players because the examples dont go past the flop. You're gonna have to do the best you with the information that i give.


Hand 1:
Sb is a 22/10, BB is a 10/7. Neither 3bets very often

$0.10/$0.25 No Limit Holdem
9 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by weaktight.com

Stacks:
UTG ($4.07)
UTG+1 ($27.33)
MP1 ($24.65)
MP2 ($55.97)
MP3 ($13.30)
Hero ($25.88)
BTN ($24.65)
SB ($24.15)
BB ($34.94)

Pre-Flop: ($0.35, 9 players) Hero is CO
5 folds, Hero raises to $0.75 ...

Why???

Hand 2

Villains are all 23/5 fish. They like limping and seeing flops.

$0.10/$0.25 No Limit Holdem
9 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by weaktight.com

Stacks:
UTG ($7.94)
UTG+1 ($3.73)
MP1 ($54.98)
MP2 ($16.26)
MP3 ($28.57)
CO ($24.88)
BTN ($12)
SB ($5.28)
Hero ($29.53)

Pre-Flop: ($0.35, 9 players) Hero is BB
1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.25, MP1 calls $0.25, MP2 calls $0.25, 4 folds, Hero raises to $1.75, UTG+1 calls $1.50, MP1 calls $1.50, MP2 calls $1.50

Flop: ($7.10, 4 players)
Hero bets $5.25 ...

Why Is hero raising preflop? What is his motivation?

Why did hero bet that much on the flop? What is he hoping to accomplish?

Hand 3

Careful now...

Villain is a 8/7 nit, plays fit or fold post flop. Tell me why I bet, or why I check. If i bet, how much and what is my goal? If i check, why?

$0.10/$0.25 No Limit Holdem
7 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by weaktight.com

Stacks:
Hero ($28.97)
UTG+1 ($30.31)
MP ($25.36)
CO ($8.49)
BTN ($10.64)
SB ($27.17)
BB ($43.50)

Pre-Flop: ($0.35, 7 players) Hero is UTG
Hero raises to $1, 4 folds, SB calls $0.90, 1 fold

Flop: ($2.25, 2 players)
SB checks, Hero ($27.97)?

[Micro2Macro]

1st

H1: bluff, u have 5 high
H2: value, u have the nuts
H3: the decision to bet or check depends on what level our opponent is thinking on, his calling range, and his betting range if we check. you say he plays fit/fold but does he peel Axx flops when you cbet with say, TT? If so betting may be fine if he has enough combos of worse to call, although, checking then leading the turn and mayyybe river depending on more factors could be fine and may even be ideal and more +EV even if betting the flop is +EV. if he bets with a very unbalanced range on the flop when checked to, our decision becomes really easy, and we will call or fold depending on his frequency and the range he is betting. (i.e. if he only ever bets the ace when checked to the ideal line is c/f flop lead turn and lead river for value. I could go deeper into this but I'ma leave it at that..

[spoonitnow]

It may be more useful to think of #1 and #2 differently. For example:

1) For value: To get an opponent to make a mistake by not folding

2) Bluffing: To get an opponent to make a mistake by folding

I say this because they're not inherently the same thing as what you said. If I hold say 99 preflop with 20bb stacks in the BB, you open in the SB to 3x and I shove, it benefits me the most for you to fold KJs. Now change the stacks to 2000bb and it benefits me the most for you to call. In both scenarios I have the best hand, but in the first scenario it's a mistake for you to fold, and in the second scenario it's a mistake for you to call.

What I'm getting at is that #1 and #2 in your list are getting at the same thing -- the point of a bet is to get your opponent to make a mistake. By breaking it up into the ideas of value and bluffing we're just trying to describe the type of mistake. It can often be useful to plan a hand in terms of what kind of mistake you want to get your opponent to make.

[XTR1000]

Reason #3 is pretty much the same as #1 (hardly can we protect our hand vs a range thats already ahead.)

I am also tilted by "betting for info". It´s retarded, sorry. If "information" was a reason to put money in the pot, then mind you that the information gained must be worth whatever amount you´re betting. Or put differently, the information you gain must increase the EV of your subsequent action at least by the amount you paid for that info. In order to capitalize that hard on one single response to a single bet you´d need an opponent which is very easy to read and predictable, but in that case, do we really need to pay for information?

[JKDS]

Very good points made already.

@protection: I used the term "protection" kind of loosely. There are times in limit holdem and games like stud and draw poker where it can be correct to bet with the intention of having worse hands fold. I don't have enough experience to say that these situations don't occur in NLHE, but should they ever it would be a reason to bet. But yes, the times I've thought about protection included times when I was value betting so I don't disagree.

@betting for info: I completely agree and actually don't think its possible to bet just for info, but rather that its a by-product of betting, for another reason, that should be taken advantage of.

For those two, I will stress again for any newbies reading this that those reasons to bet are insignificant when compared to the gargantuan importance of reasons 1) and 2).

As spoon pointed out, we make decisions by following the Fundamental Theorem of Poker. This theorem roughly says that whenever we make an opponent act differently than he would have if he saw our cards we gain, and any time we don't we lose and visa versa. Translated: we win money by making opponents make mistakes.

[celtic123]

I appreciate this JKDs

Im resonding without looking at what other people put, scrolling down SO I dont know whats coming, and deciding what I would do before I see whay you did, no peeking.

[quote="JKDS"]

So...

Reasons to Bet/Raise In NLHE

1) For value: To get worse hands to call

2) As a bluff: To get better hands to fold

3) For protection

4) For Information

Hand one



I would say this was a 4x bb as a semi bluff,I probably have the worse hand right now, so better hands could fold ,I want the button to fold. to give me best position.


Hand 2



Why Is hero raising preflop? What is his motivation?

a standard 4xbb raise +1 bb for each limper.

Motivation, Get everyone to fold , or maybe just one straggler.

Flop: ($7.10, 4 players)
Hero bets $5.25 ...



Why did hero bet that much on the flop? What is he hoping to accomplish?

the flop bet is 3 / 4 pot size.this gives flush draws and straight draws bad pot odds to call , We want People folding and to take the pot down, if someone comes with us, they are chasing with bad odds, so that be +EV for us good people from Planet FTR.

Hand 3

4x bb PFR is the fashion these days,

Fuck me, I didnt expect that .AI !!

Ive never done that. new territory for me.

Im out in the dark here. I see why you did it,hmm. he is a tight arsed nit, he probably has an A, so we want him to fold, WP.

If you were to check, I suppose he would pwn you. WP i say.

[shallam]

Reasons to raise on the flop.

1. Value bet - To make more money with the best hand. IOW, make opps either fold or pay too much to outdraw you. Protecting your hand eliminating opps is include here.

2. Bluff - To make your opp fold when you don't have the best hand.

3. Control - To make your opp check to you on the next round of betting.

4. Information - To put your opp in a position where his reaction to your raise will provide key information about his hand that will allow you to play the hand in a superior way. For example if he goes all in w the nuts and you fold when you otherwise would have called to river and lost more.

[shallam]

"Hero raises to.."


1. Steal the blinds.

2. Add deception to PFR range.

3. Hit a very deceptive-powerful hand, for example

A. a straight (ideal hand)
B. a flush
C. trips
D. two pair

4. Be aggressive.

[jyms]

#1 and #2 are correct, #3 and #4 are never reasons to bet in their own right and are only byproducts of the first two reasons. . If your betting for protection it's because you are likely ahead and are actually betting for value, and if your betting for information your an idiot. Your information comes from putting him on a range, and then narrowing his range according to how the action plays out. Reason #3 should be to collect dead money in the pot, ie: stealing blinds

[Erpel]

Hand 1:
First, I am betting as a bluff. By this I mean, this is a clear blind stealing situation. It is the blinds tendency to fold often that makes it profitable to bet as a pure steal. Since there is profit from the pure steal and they will fold regardless if we bet 3bb or 4bb we get more value out of stealing if we bet 3bb. Since we only bet 3bb we can bet a very wide range as the cost of every steal gone wrong is now less. This puts 54s firmly in our steal range. At the same time, 54s is also a good hand to play for implied odds (low bet size supports this principle). If the board should come our way there is a lot of value to extract from the hand. The implied odds part of the consideration is a value based reason for betting. We are not protecting a hand. If called or raised that will give us information - the probable range our opponents are playing against us. This is not a primary reason for betting, but something we need to take note of to make better decisions after the flop.

Hand 2:
First, I am raising for value. AA is a firm favourite to win against anything my opponents are holding and I want to get as much money in the middle while I am a firm favourite as possible. For the pre-flop bet there is no bluff component. There is no hand that I would prefer to fold. There is clearly an element of protection. I want the opponents to pay to retain whatever equity they have against my AA.
On the flop I am committing to the hand. I am willing to stack off. I am strong enough that if all the money goes in I will be happy about it. I bet for value - anyone who comes along will be weaker and it's hugely +EV for me to bet. Again bluffing is not a consideration. Protection is more of a consideration here. There are two spades on the flop so someone could be sitting with a spade draw. To price out the draw the bet needs to be a certain size. Arguably the biggest stack (MP1) might still get implied odds to call (or he would if he could see our cards and knew we were stacking off) but the two smaller stacks are certainly priced out from a pot/implied odds perspective even if they have the spade draw - they should fold and we want them to make a mistake by calling. The important point in deciding the size of the bet is pricing out draws. A secondary point is to ensure the bet is big enough that all the money will be in the middle by the river.

Hand 3:
Initially, This is a pretty classic way ahead / way behind situation. What makes it a way ahead / way behind situation is the combination of a super dry flop and a very narrow opponent range. Opponent certainly plays all pocket pairs - that's 78 combos or 5.9%. AK and AQ are 16 combos each or 2.4% between them making up 7.3% of hands. That's a pretty good approximation of the hands that produce a stat-line of 8/7. We could say that maybe he folds a selection of AQo, AQs, AKo because he's out of position and he may read enough hands to think that our UTG raise is strong, but for the sake of this discussion I'll assume his range is 22-AA, AK, AQ.
WA/WB situations are often mentioned in the same breath as pot control. The basic profile of a WA/WB situation is that the next card is unlikely to change the current equity balance. If you're ahead you are likely to stay ahead and if you're behind you are likely to stay behind. If the opponent has 99 and we bet the flop he'll almost certainly fold. If we check two streets and the cards coming are below 9 and we then bet the river he'll almost certainly call. Or another perspective is if the pot grows big we are almost certainly behind, but if it stays small we are almost certainly ahead.
We need to consider the opponent tendencies. It's described as fit or fold. The fold part is easy - if he missed the flop he'll fold to any bet. The fit part can be misunderstood. It could mean that he will bet or raise if he hits. But it could also mean that he calls if he hits. AQ might be a check/calling hand for a fit/folder where AK is a betting hand. Out of the 110 combos possible for his starting range the following do not have blockers:
22/44/66/77/88/99/TT/JJ/QQ (6 each - 54 total)
33/55/AA (3 each - 9 total)
KK (1)
AK (6)
AQ (12)
So, 82 hand combinations. 54 (perhaps 55 with KK) of which will fold if we bet. 27 of which perhaps less likely as we might have expected a bet from them.
If we could trust the villain to have bet out almost every time with the 27 hand combinations that beat us we have a traditional WA/WB situation where the correct move is to check two streets and then get a bet out of him on the river where he will call a large part of his range even unimproved and despite being a fit/folder.
If he takes his fit/folding extremely seriously so he folds even a second pair on the river we are better off betting the flop because there is no value in delaying the bet and we could only give him a free shot at his two outs.
If the villain is more likely to check/call his 27 hand combinations that beat us and only rarely bet out in this case we will need to check behind and fold to a turn bet. If he checks the turn again we can be almost sure that he has one of the 55 (reduced by turn blockers) combos that we beat and we can decide how fit/foldy he is on the river and based on that either take the pot away on the turn or try to extract a bets worth of value on the river.

[kmind]

#1 and #2 are correct, #3 and #4 are never reasons to bet in their own right and are only byproducts of the first two reasons. . If your betting for protection it's because you are likely ahead and are actually betting for value, and if your betting for information your an idiot. Your information comes from putting him on a range, and then narrowing his range according to how the action plays out. Reason #3 should be to collect dead money in the pot, ie: stealing blinds

There are 3 reasons to bet. These are they.

[JKDS]

Numbers 3 and 4 are reasons to bet as stated by David Skalnsky in the Theory of Poker. While he is talking about poker in general, I didn't see a reason to exclude them just because they are rarely, if ever, used without also betting for value or as a bluff.

Though on a technical note, collecting dead money in the pot is very often just getting better hands to fold, if not immediately preflop then with a plan to get them to fold post.

[JKDS]

@celtic: nope. Erpel hit this pretty hard, read his response and post questions if you got them.

[rong]

If your betting for protection it's because you are likely ahead and are actually betting for value, and if your betting for information your an idiot.

lol

[spoonitnow]

Betting for protection happens when it's a bigger mistake to check and let your opponent see a free card than to bet and have only worse hands fold and better hands call. As someone said earlier, these situations typically don't happen in big-bet games where the bets are large relative to the pot.

[XTR1000]

I think that whole protection strat was nicely termed in easy game, when bw added "betting to capitalize on dead money" as reason #3 to value bets/raises and bluffs.

Good example would be opening marginal holdings on the button. Hands like 58s or K9o can´t necessarily expect to fold out a notable number of strnger hands, nor do they generate value from weaker holdings. However, folding out all those 30-50% equity hands adds a great deal to our winrate. Same goes for cbetting small pairs on A high boards, where we cant fold out stronger made hands nor get value, but seeing overcards to our 33ish hand fold is a cool thing.

[jyms]

Numbers 3 and 4 are reasons to bet as stated by David Skalnsky in the Theory of Poker. While he is talking about poker in general, I didn't see a reason to exclude them just because they are rarely, if ever, used without also betting for value or as a bluff.

Though on a technical note, collecting dead money in the pot is very often just getting better hands to fold, if not immediately preflop then with a plan to get them to fold post.

The dead money thing is something of value that could be discussed for sure. Like, MP opens 4 BB and is fairly tight, you have JJ OTB your certainly not calling so you bump it up to 14BB and he calls. The flop (28BB) is something unthreatening like 863r, your probably not getting called here by worse (value), and your certainly not folding better (bluffing) but we bet anyway, call it protection if you want, but our hand doesn't really need protection from AQ, KQ, or AJ or any underpairs. Given the fact that the pot is fairly big and those hands have about 25% equity. you really want to just take this down now and make them give up there equity. Getting shoved on here would suck badly so making a smallish Cbet really would not suffice and I would be happy taking the dead money. That's not protection, that's making them make a mistake

I just thoroughly believe that if you only ever justify the reasons to bet as either a bluff, value or as just picking up dead money you will never make a mistake and bee prepared for following actions like raises and calls.

[Sasquach991]

How about:

Reasons to Fold?

Reasons to Call?

[jyms]

I think that whole protection strat was nicely termed in easy game, when bw added "betting to capitalize on dead money" as reason #3 to value bets/raises and bluffs.

Good example would be opening marginal holdings on the button. Hands like 58s or K9o can´t necessarily expect to fold out a notable number of strnger hands, nor do they generate value from weaker holdings. However, folding out all those 30-50% equity hands adds a great deal to our winrate. Same goes for cbetting small pairs on A high boards, where we cant fold out stronger made hands nor get value, but seeing overcards to our 33ish hand fold is a cool thing.

Balugawhale is my new messiah

[knaplek]

Reasons for betting/raising

1. To gain value when your opponent calls
2. To gain equity when your opponent folds
3. To manipulate your opponent into playing in a more exploitable way

Number 1 is primarily value betting in the conventional sense, but this doesn't necessarily mean betting the hand with the most all-in equity. With position and a hand that forms a more polarised range than your opponent's you can actually improve your value vs hands that would have more equity were the money to go in immediately.

Number 2 is "bluffing" but also includes semibluffing and betting for protection. In reality, whenever you bet a strong hand you will almost always gain EV whether they call or fold, so while your primary objective is 1, the equity gain through 2 is still a gain relative to checking through.

Number 3 covers, among other things, betting for info. But it is flawed in that it assumes your bet will make your opponent play in an unbalanced way. This will often be the case but you'd need to have a good reason to do it. Let's say as a stupid example that you have a medium strength hand that is ahead of 70% of your opponent's flop betting range, but he is very polarised and will barrel in a balanced way across all 3 streets if you call. If you minraise however, he will fold out the bottom 40% of his range, and never bet or raise hands worse than yours before showdown. This way although you are not getting value from worse hands, nor making better hands fold you actually gain EV, since you will now be winning at showdown 50% of the time. This is less than your flop all-in equity but more than your "real" equity. Obviously this is a ridiculous and extreme example, but I don't think anyone can deny that it is possible at times to manipulate opponents into a situation that is more +EV for you, even if it would not be were they to play correctly against your range.

[OhioRounder]

if your betting for information your an idiot.

funny but true

[Micro2Macro]

Betting for protection happens when it's a bigger mistake to check and let your opponent see a free card than to bet and have only worse hands fold and better hands call. As someone said earlier, these situations typically don't happen in big-bet games where the bets are large relative to the pot.

Wow this is like the best explanation I've ever heard about betting for protection. No one seems to ever explain it correctly but this is just pure book worthy.