Continuation Bet. A Lot.

Being the nerd I am, I have actively collected a lot of poker data over the years. A whole lot. In the past ten years alone, I’ve played well over a million hands combined of online Texas Hold’em, Stud, and Omaha. The majority of these hands and/or sessions were recorded either via automatic tracking software or manually in a long series of spreadsheets. I have also added other players’ hands to this database, actually going as far as purchasing blocks of data from various online re-sellers. All-in-all, I have data on over three million real poker hands that I have used to help evaluate and test theories, and prove (or disprove) specific strategies and tactics.

I’ve used this data for everything from helping put together preflop starting hand recommendations, to quantifying the power of position, to determining optimal bet sizing in different situations, and even to help me figure out the best times of the day and week to play that are the most profitable for my own specific LAggy style. As the old saw goes, you can’t improve what you can’t measure, and all this measured data I’ve collected has served to greatly improve my own game.

Lately I used these data to analyze flop continuation betting scenarios. This analysis resulted in an honest-to-goodness formula a beginning player can use to determine whether they should c-bet in any specific situation or not. The method itself is quite simple: you calculate your fold equity based on a point count system, then do the same for your pot equity, and finally just multiply the two numbers together and look at the result. Depending upon the number you get, you then either fold, c-bet, or slow-play your hand…

….ah, but all of this can really be boiled down to a much, much simpler let’s-cut-to-the-chase recommendation:

When in doubt, you should probably continuation bet

The simple fact is this: in small stakes games, if you were the preflop aggressor, you should be firing a continuation bet on the flop at a relatively high frequency. Depending on the number and type of villains in the hand and the texture of the board, this number can range from 60% to higher. Heck, against weak-tight nits on super-dry boards, you should probably be firing a flop continuation bet nearly 100% of the time.

This empirically-based conclusion of mine can be proved analytically by doing some simple algebra with a basic expected value equation. Setting EV equal to zero and ignoring any showdown equity you might have, one can easily see that Fold Equity = Bet Size / [Pot Size + Bet Size]. Here’s that relationship plotted out in X-Y fashion:

What this chart demonstrates is that you only need a villain to fold 33% of the time if you fire a half-pot-sized continuation bet on the flop. Given the fact that the villain is going to miss the flop around 35% of the time, this means a c-bet generally has a high percentage chance of working.

Now, the bad news is that actual (i.e, not required) fold equity will vary as a function of Hero's c-bet size, which is something we’ve ignored in this simple analysis. In other words, a small bet size may only need a small villain fold frequency to be break-even, but villains will fold significantly less frequently if they’re being offered good pot odds, which a small bet causes. At first blush, this argues in favor of c-betting less frequently on the flop, but the other thing we’ve left out of the analysis is that we have ignored showdown equity for all those cases when the c-bet doesn’t result in a fold. These two factors (more or less) cancel each other out, which means that roughly speaking, you should in fact be continuation betting a relatively high percentage of the time on the flop.

How high, you ask? My three million hands of empirical data suggests a continuation bet frequency around 75%. Said another way, you should be flop continuation betting as a bluff an average of three out of four times in small stakes games. Further, I suggest that your c-bet size be around 60-65% of the pot; this seems to be the optimal risk:reward sweet spot that applies enough pressure to the villain, while risking the least amount of the hero's stack if the villain calls.

Bottom line: Three million hands of data don't lie: continuation bet most of the time in small stakes games, and make your bet sizing to be around 60-65% of the pot.

Continuation Betting for Dummies

I haven't been posting here much due to crazy work travel, work problems, and, well, work, work, and more work. That said, in the limited spare time I have every day I have been making slow and steady progress on the ABC lessons with Le Monsieur. The latest one that I just uploaded to our shared Evernote lesson notebook was a big 3000-word treatise on when to continuation bet on the flop. (There are six additional lessons that accompany this one, btw...)

I thought this when-to-cbet lesson would be a snap to write, but in the end it took me nearly 3 weeks of research, errant thought, false-starts, and general noodling around to come up with a step-by-step instructional that a newbie can follow to determine whether they should c-bet on the flop or not. It also gives guidance on how much they should bet in each case.

Writing this lesson was a really fun--and sometimes aggravating--experience, but I think the end result is really useful. I also think it's kind of ground-breaking in a way; in fact, I've never seen this type of approach to c-betting addressed before anywhere in poker books, blogs, or in training videos. This is basically cutting edge stuff, folks.

Anyway, you'll have to wait for the app to come out for the full step-by-step version, but here's the TL;DR Cliffs Notes version of cbetting:

1. First determine your fold equity (FE) in the hand. You have to estimate what the likelihood is that the villains who saw the flop with you are going to fold if you bet. I've touched on this before in this blog, like in Bug's Poker Tip #7 and Tip #17 before, but not nearly to the extent I did this time around, nor did I quantify each effect, nor have I put in a sequential, step-by-step process. Long story short, the significant level-1 factors that influence your FE include: number of villains, board texture, type of villains, stack sizes, preflop action, position of the players, and the hero's image. I've spent hours wading through poker tracker data to actually determine the approximate weightings and importance of each of these, and I now have a solid and easy means to accurate estimate FE in a poker hand. In a nutshell, my method uses points that you assign for, say, the number of calling stations left in the hand, or who has position on whom preflop, etc.  You total the points and end up with a FE estimate. It's pretty cool stuff if I do say so myself-- oh, and dead simple to do.
2. Second, determine if you want the villain to fold or not, which of course hinges around your own hand strength, or pot equity (PE). This seems simple on the surface, but again, when you're teaching level-1 poker to a newbie, and you're trying not to inundate them with hand reading, poker stoves, leveling, etc., it's surprisingly challenging to actually determine whether your hand is strong enough or not to want a call. Again, I spent a lot of time sorting and analyzing real poker hand data, and now have come up with another simple point count system that does a reasonably accurate (and conservative) job of determining your pot equity in a hand independent of villain's range.  Related to this is a method of determining if your hand is vulnerable or not to getting out drawn on the turn and river. And yes, once again, this is not as easy as it sounds to do, but I think we have a very innovative and simple method figured out.

Okay, so after you have the FE and PE's of a situation estimated, the third and final step is to plot them against each other on a 2-d chart. Here's a simplified version of the graph, and if you've done a reasonably good job estimating your fold and pot equities, this type of chart actually can go a long way toward helping you a) decide to if you should c-bet; and b) determine how much you should bet:

Researching and writing these lessons continues to be extremely fun and educational. I also think it's going to result in a really powerful training aid for beginning and intermediate poker players. And, oh yeah, it also helps offset all the work, work, and work that my day job insists on dumping on me lately. 

All-in for now...

-Bug

Bug's Poker Tip #17

Think Before You C-Bet

When we were the preflop aggressor in a hand, we're usually going to get checked to on any flop. If our opponent missed, he's probably going to check. If he hit, he's also going to check and let us lead, so he can call or check-raise. So should we "continuation bet" or not? Remember that we miss the flop on average 65% of the time. This means our opponents do, too. In other words, you should be c-betting quite a bit if you were the PF aggressor. But that doesn't mean you do so blindly. Like all betting we do in poker, there needs to be a damn good reason to put any chips into the pot. If you can't think of a damn good reason, don't bet. This really isn't rocket science, folks. The two primary reasons (as always!) for betting (and that includes c-bets) are: a) get better hands to fold; and/or b) get worse hands to call.  To help figure out your line, there are some significant factors to consider, including:

• Number of Villains. How many villains are in the hand? The more there are, the less likely you should be to c-bet as a bluff. Fold equity drops quickly as the number of opponents in the hand increases.
• Board Texture. What is villain's preflop range and how likely did this board hit that range? If his range hits hard, don't c-bet unless you have a strong hand yourself. It's all about %'s and equities.
• Villain's Skill Level. The more skilled he is, the less likely he'll cooperate with your chosen line. If you're OOP and the villain pegs you as a high c-bettor, for instance, you may get floated and have to give up on a later street. Similarly, if he's a calling station, you may have little to any fold equity, so bluffing with air is probably -EV in the long run.
• Villain's Stats. Specifically, what is his FvCB% stats? In other words, is he playing fit-or-fold? If he is, then c-bet away. If he's not, be careful.
• Your Hand. Did you hit this board? If so, how hard? In other words, do you have a Value hand? Will your opponent think you're just c-betting pro forma, or will he put you on a Value hand and not pay you off?

Again, the name of the game in poker as always is to Think Before You Act. Ask yourself why you are planning to c-bet. By definition, an "I don't know" answer means you actually don't have a valid reason to continuation bet. Said another way: check, don't bet. 

All-in for now...

-Bug

Bug's Poker Tip #7

Evaluating board texture is key to successful continuation betting.

There are a lot of factors to consider when deciding when to c-bet on a flop. Among the most important of these is the texture of the board. A flop of K♥7♠2♦ is much less likely to hit an opponent's range than K♥Q♥9♠ . The former is relatively dry and light, while the latter is wet and heavy. Remember why you're c-betting in poker in the first place: it's either to get a worse hand to call, or to get a better hand to fold. Factor your opponent's hand range in with the board texture, and then decide why you're considering c-betting. If you can't come up with a good answer, don't bet.

All-in for now...

-Bug

Continuation Betting 101

Long-timer readers of this blog are probably sick of me writing this, but I honestly can’t help myself: It is vitally important to remember that there are two--and only two--primary reasons to bet in poker: 1) to get a worse hand to call (read: Value); and/or 2) to get a better hand to fold (read: Bluff). Yes, there are other, secondary reasons to bet (isolation, giving opp the wrong odds to draw, etc.) but these first two are the biggies. If you can’t figure out which of the two you’re trying to achieve with your bet, you probably should not be betting in the first place. Further, it's important to note that this concept extends to all types of betting, including the ubiquitous flop continuation bet, or cbet.

Definition: a continuation bet is a bet made by the preflop aggressor when nobody has bet before him on the flop. The preflop aggressor is the last player to have put in a raise before the flop.

If you’re the preflop aggressor, making a continuation bet on the flop often makes good sense. Why is this?

For starters, you’ve shown strength by raising, whereas all your opponents have shown weakness by calling. Thus you, the aggressor, are perceived to have a strong range. In this case, your cbet is perceived as a value bet, and it’s difficult for your opponents to stay in the hand unless they also have something strong themselves. Remember that most flops miss everyone, and therefore it's hard to call a flop bet without an actual hand. Hence, the first bet on the flop often takes down a pot. In other words cbetting is primarily done as a bluff (but it can also certainly be done for value).

(A secondary benefit of cbetting when bluffing is keep your opponents from running over you. If you bet the flop whenever you hit, but check whenever you miss, your opponents can (and will) exploit you simply by folding when you bet, but betting when you check. Hence, against observant opponents you need to bet both when you miss and when you hit. This adds a measure of deception to your game, and it makes it very hard for your opponents to know if/when you’ve hit the flop. Remember, at its core, poker is about deception, and getting your opponents to zig when you zag...)

Ah, but this doesn’t mean you should always cbet 100% of the time. There are many times when the situation dictates that you need to check (or call).  As it turns out, there are six primary factors to consider when deciding whether to cbet or not:

1. Our Own Hand. Most people associate cbets with bluffs on missed flops. However, every once in a while we actually hit a hand. In these cases we should mostly value cbet. ABC poker dictates that with a value hand, you want to build value, and this means betting to build a pot. The only real exception to this is when we hit the flop so hard that we have a virtual lock (e.g., full house, quads, maybe top set on a rainbow dry board, etc.) and we're convinced our opponent is going to fold to any bet we toss out there. If we flop a monster we sometimes need to give our opponent the rope needed to hang themselves. But let's be clear: if we hit an average value hand there is usually a lot of risk in slowplaying. We're also not building actual value. Most of the time when you have a value hand, go ahead and cbet.
2. Number of Opponents. The more opponents involved in the hand, the better the chance that one of them has hit the flop. On average, we and our opponents miss the flop something like 70% of the time. This means that if you're facing two opponents on the flop, there's only a ~50% chance that both missed it (70% x 70%). With three opponents the probability shrinks to approximately one in three (70% x 70% x 70%). In other words, the more opponents you face, the smaller the chance that a cbet bluff is going to take down the pot. This leads to the oft-cited advice to play straightforward in a multiway pot. You can c-bet more liberally heads-up, but dial it back when two or more opponents are sticking around.
3. Our Position. If you are the preflop aggressor, are in position, and everybody checks to you, you generally have a decent idea about the strength of their hands. (Although some players will obviously check to the raiser with strong cards and then raise when you cbet.) In general, however, when you have position you should be more inclined to cbet than if you don't. When you are out of position you have no indication as to how your opponents like the flop, so you will have to proceed far more carefully.
4. Our Image. How our opponents perceive us has a great impact on the success rate of our bluffs (but only if they're actually paying attention and/or playing L2 poker). For example, if we have been been a rock for the past hour at the table, but now raised in early position, a continuation bet on the flop has a good chance of success. On the other hand, if we have played the part of a maniac for that same period of time, and now open raise from the button, the chance are that our opponents see through us is probably pretty good.  (The good news with this, however, is that at L3, we can use this information to our advantage, and make our Value hands look like Bluffs, and vice versa, and therefore induce huge mistakes by our opponents.)
5. Opponent Tendencies. Any and all information about our opponent tendencies should factor into our decision whether to cbet. For example, if the villain plays fit-or-fold after the flop (meaning he will fold to a cbet unless he hits the flop) we can profitably cbet almost all the time (and do so with smaller than average sized cbets, too, thereby risking less). On the other hand, against a calling station we should forget about cbet bluffing altogether. Postflop stats such as "fold to cbet %" or "flop check raise %" are very useful indicators, especially with larger sample sizes of data.  Notes are even better.  In other words, use your L2 skills to determine how you think the opp will react to your cbet-- before you actually fire out the cbet.
6. Flop Texture and Ranges. The final thing we need to consider is the board texture and how it connects to the villain's range. If the flop hits our opponent's range but missed us, it rarely make sense to cbet as a bluff.

Finally, it's useful to note that if our opponent is a solid L2 or higher player, he's looking at all these same six factors, too, so you need to include that into your decision to cbet or not. Remember, our opponents aren't (for the most part, anyway) stupid; they're thinking and evaluating and deciding when you're full or it and when you're not.

Okay, that's it for now. There's obviously a lot more to cbetting than just this little introductory primer. In a future post or two, I'll discuss how a program like Flopzilla can help you address factors #5 and #6, above. There are also Implementation factors to consider, such as bet sizing as a function of board texture and villain tendencies. For me, cbetting is an area of my game that I'm currently working hard on to improve; hopefully you can get some benefit from this exercise, too.

All-in for now...

-Bug

When 50% does not equal 50%

"They say of Texas Hold'em that it takes a minute to learn and a lifetime to master. This is not true. It takes about ten minutes to learn and it cannot be mastered, ever." - Pat Walsh, "How to Win the World Series of Poker. (Or Not)"

The quote above is the opening line from an entertaining little read I picked up at a local used bookstore this past weekend. I've only gotten about ten pages into the book, but I've LOL'd three times thus far....

...which has absolutely nothing to do with today's topic on c-betting, but what the hell, it's my blog, and if I want to non sequiturize my way to the the topic du jour, well then así es la vida.
---
A few posts ago (here) I discussed a couple of weekly podcasts I listen to. Well, yesterday was a good example of why I do this; Bart Hanson's podcasts make me think. Specifically, in this week's podcast (on the topic of light check/calling situations), Hanson made a comment about opponent cbetting stats. I didn't write down his exact quote, but it went something like this:

"A loose player's cbet range is wider than a tight player's range, even if they're c-betting at the same frequency."

Ah......ha!

Or, maybe that should that be written as "Ah.... duh!"

Let's consider two opponents: Player A plays a TAg style preflop (e.g., 15/12), and Player B plays a LAg style preflop (30/25). Everything else is identical about these two players, including HUD-displayed postflop stats. For argument's sake, let's assume that they each continuation bet the flop 50% of the time (i.e., when they were the preflop aggressor).

Now, let's say you're in the big blind with a medium pocket pair. Call it 8♦8♣. Preflop, they raise in EP and you decide to just call. Everyone else has folded, so you're heads-up.

The flop comes out Q♥-7♦-2♣, which is as dry and light as a calcified bone. You check to the raiser. Your opponent fires out a 2/3-pot sized bet. What do you do?

The standard answer here is to look at their post-flop aggression numbers, focusing on their cbet stats, and then make a decision. But both of these players are identical, right? Both have 50% c-bet numbers, so how you react to Player A should be the same as how you should react to Player B's c-bet, right?

Bzzzzt.

They may have identical HUD stats, but the two players are definitely not playing the same way. Player A is much more selective preflop with his starting hands, so the 50% of the time when he cbets he still has a very strong hand and/or connected to this flop. Player B, however, has a much wider opening range, and therefore there is a higher chance that he missed this flop. Flopzilla can show this better than I can explain it; here's how hard the flop hit the two players:

Player A is twice as likely to have hit a set than B, and 25% more likely to have top pair. They both have ace-high an equal percentage of time, but B missed the flop completely 32% of the time, while A only strikes out one out of eight times, or 13%.

Said another way, I'd be much more likely to give up against A in this situation, but against the Player B I would strongly consider check/raising the flop and then leading the turn if he hasn't gone away.

Remember, there are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics. Be careful what you read into your HUD display numbers. The numbers aren't wrong, but your interpretation of them might very well be.

Alles klar, nicht so?

All-in for now....
-Bug
PS: So, Mr. Multi, is this post more to your liking?

Poker Quiz Question #52 Analysis/Answer

Here's my analysis of Q#52, which is the last official quiz in the Donkey Test series....

You're in a $5/$10 NL cash game. Everyone has $1000 stacks. It's six-handed. You raise UTG with A♠-T♠. The big blind calls. He's loose-aggressive, but has been check-folding to your flop bets during the last few rotations. The flop is 2♥-9♥-J♣. Is this a good flop for you? What should you do?

1. Good Flop, Bet
2. Bad Flop, Check
3. Good Flop, Check
4. Bad Flop, Bet

Reads: A LAg flat called your UTG raise from the big blind. Given the stakes of the game, let's assume he's a competent player. He is probably putting you on hands like AT+, A8s+, 22+, and a bunch of broadways and/or big SCs. He knows he'll be OOP in the hand, he doesn't reraise, and he's normally aggressive. WIth all this in mind, his range looks and smells like a small to medium pair to me, plus maybe some other random suited connectors. Call it 99-22,QJs,JTs,T9s,98s

Estimate: The problem didn't explicitly state this, but I assume that he checks to you on the flop of 2♥-9♥-J♣. This is a moderately wettish flop, and/but it missed you completely. Against his range on this board, you're a dog at something like 25:75. Said another way: bad flop for you.

Decide: The problem statement says that he has a propensity to check-fold to your flop cbets. The board is wettish, and has either hit him (in which case he's coming along) or it missed (in which case he's probably going to fold to a cbet). In other words, I think you can probably bluff here and get him to fold out many of his small, non-set pairs and most of his SCs that are of the wrong suit/flavor. Our line is therefore a Bluff.

Implement: Bet, but fold to a reraise and/or shut it down on the turn if the villain doesn't go away.

Answer: Bad Flop, Bet

------------------------------------------------------
And now what do I do now that the quiz series has run its course? It's been almost a year since I started work on analyzing and discussing all 52 Donkey Test "Quiz Questions" within this blog-- and now I'm finished. Whew.

Seriously, I really enjoyed doing this exercise, and in fact plan on continuing from time to time with my own questions, hands-of-the-day from other websites, reader-submitted hands, and interesting poker questions I  see in the forums. I've received a lot of really useful and positive feedback on my analyses from various folks reading this blog, so I'd like to keep some type of regular quiz going.

When I first started out with Q#1, I admit I didn't really do a great job analyzing some of the hand situations in a formal, logical process. In fact, I think made some mistakes. That's the bad news. The good news is that knowing I was flailing away to get to an answer on each quiz helped in part to lead me to creating REDi (initially called "RED-M," and proposed on or about the time I tackled Q#16). After some evolution and tweaking, I now honestly believe REDi represents a pretty good approach to breaking down a poker hand situation and arriving at a well-reasoned and defensible answer. The more I use REDi, the stronger I think it is in analyzing both simple and complex poker questions alike.

In any case, I hope you guys and gals enjoyed reading my quiz question analyses as much as I did puzzling over them and writing down my thoughts. If you've missed any of the questions, or want to go back and reread any of the posts, I've created a separate page (found at the top of my blog home page, as well as here) that provides a hyper-linked table of contents that will get you to each of the 52 individual questions and answers. Thanks for your indulgence...

All-in for now...

-Bug