What's the point of betting so small on the flop when you have such a narrow preflop range?

he is pretty much the biggest fish to have ever walked the planet, want him to call flop with K2 and stuff u know

well personally I prefer the small bets on less draw heavy boards, or against someone more likely to shove over you, or as a bluff ( which I suppose would polarize your range a bit ). Perhaps vs a fish it doesn't matter too much, but once your repping the top 3% of hands or something, might as well play more ABC. A bad player has a lot of hands that he's going with on that board. I think I agree with your play more if it was just a 3 bet pot and not a 4 bet pot vs a 3 bet and a call.

dude this guy is not folding K2 on the flop, for real

since we are gonna get it in on the turn either way betting bigger dosnt accomplish anything, its 10000x better to bet small, probably smaller then this just to keep him in the pot

This was what I used to do back in the day vs most people. Dunno if random 4bets are top3% either. Back in the day when I played 5/10 NL most good people had a fair bit of random high cards and crap here too.

Even if it's 6%. People are going to play against him as though he has a big pair. So they are never going to do anything but call here with drawing hands getting 4.5:1. (assuming they have brains)

Perhaps that's not the case vs this fish, but the math of poker is unavoidable. If he really is floating with 100% of his range then longple size makes more sense. Long is checking the turn giving him a chance at two streets for 4.5:1 and longple is basically never going to fold when he shoves turn or river. I think your giving your opponent too many options and not punishing his bad preflop call enough. Your basically relying on him spewing off and punishing himself, which definitely works vs some people.

Clearly I don't have any idea how LINDER plays, perhaps he's got 60% vpip never folds to raises pre and floats every single flop to a small bet and then spews off when checked to on further streets.


I think the play becomes bad when your oop giving your opponent the chance at two street's for a very small price with the intention of never folding, perhaps I'm wrong. Clearly I'm generalizing since I have zero reads and I'm sure long isn't checking every turn.


I'd also like to add that my logic applies to the very specific preflop action, flop pot size/texture and stacks remaining.

On November 13 2012 05:53 DustySwedeDude wrote: This was what I used to do back in the day vs most people. Dunno if random 4bets are top3% either. Back in the day when I played 5/10 NL most good people had a fair bit of random high cards and crap here too.

It's not so much that he has to have the top 3% of hands here or even only AA KK QQ, it's that playing back or trying to make plays vs that narrow of a perceived range would be suicide. He may have AA KK AK QQ here or he may have random 9Ts or 27o, it doesn't really matter. What matters is that his perceived range is incredibly strong and playing against him becomes fairly easy and straight forward post flop. Even for a bad player.

Perhaps there are some players who only 4bet like this with trashy hands because of how strong it looks and how easily they can take it down on the flop with a small bet. But that wouldn't be very balanced and clearly longple is not one of them.

Basically all I'm saying is that when your hand is basically as defined as it's every going to get in this game, there is no point in trying to play tricky or trying to get your opponent to spew off( vs most opponents). If the flop texture is very draw heavy and remaining stacks are not much larger than the pot, that point is only emphasized more.

Also when I comment on hands I'm generally not commenting around the specific opponent as decent reads/playstyle/stats are rarely given.

tried to find the story where guy is overthinking everything vs fishes, but failed