Bet Sizing

This is probably the most difficult post I have written mostly because it is a subject that I do not claim to be an expert in, or even have a faint clue at times.  I have a hunch that bet sizing is probably one of the most difficult skills to master in no limit poker, whether it is a cash game or tournament.  I cut my teeth on limit games, so this is something I have had to learn about later in my life.


In a limit game it is sometimes important to build a "protected pot".  By this I mean that you increase the size of the pot so that it is impossible for someone to give you incorrect odds for your draws.  For example, in my old friend, the 2/20 spread game (as explained earlier the worst of the worst hybrid games), with nearly the entire table limping for $2, or sometimes $4 from a straddle, the pot may be $15-30 preflop.  This is a great opportunity to raise from the button with your suited connectors, which usually need a big pot, lots of players and multiple streets to make your hand.  By raising small here you can build that protected pot.


If you have a big made hand, say kings or aces, with a bet limit of $20, if you bet the maximum and get even one caller, any subsequent player is getting pretty good odds to call with their draws.  Once the pot reaches $100, the $20 maximum bet is giving 5/1 odds....plenty for those flush and open ended straight draws, and even enough given "implied odds" for overcards, backdoor draws, gutshots, etc.  That is why the game is so difficult.  If you raise, the game is so loose that you get multiple callers and cannot protect your made hand.  If you don't raise, you just encourage all sorts of riffraff to join the party.  What's a player to do?




One thing I think you can do in this situation is simply play very tight.  Refuse to limp in early position, fold to raises, and re-raise early position raisers.  That is just playing smart, solid poker.  A quirk in this strategy is the "Monte Carlo" board.  With quads or straight flushes paying anywhere from $150 to $500, it is too tempting for lots of bingo players to justify calls with suited connectors or small pairs.  Often you will put in a big raise with your kings, only to be called by 6/8 suited because "you can make a straight flush" ha, ha.  But then he hits either a weak flush or a straight or two pair and snaps you.  The answer is simple.  Make them pay for their draws.  On an uncoordinated "dry" board you just keep betting.  On a scary coordinated "wet" board, you bet and see what the response is.  Calls on more than one street turn on the caution or stop light.




But let's leave this discussion and move onto no limit bet sizing.  Here we have the opportunity to really price draws out.  Some of the biggest mistakes I have made in tournaments have been pricing draws in or out.  Small bets on coordinated boards beg the draws to call.  Big bets beg them to fold.  I personally tend to lean towards the fold size because I want to win a small pot rather than lose a big one.  I am thinking this is very erroneous play.  What you really want is a bet that encourages your opponent to call with incorrect odds.  An example might be betting a pot size on a two-flush board.  This gives your opponent 3/1 odds on a 5/1 draw (pot = 100, you bet 100, now the pot is 200, he must put in 100 to win 300), while his flush draw (assuming no other outs), is 9/47 or over 5/1.  If you made the bet 1/2 pot size, pot =100, you bet 50, he now must call 50 to win 200, or 4/1.  Still not correct but closer and given "implied odds", not a horrible mistake for the draw to call.



Tip: Bets of around two thirds to three quarters of the pot show the best risk/reward ratio when considering a bluff or punishing drawing hands.


What I often see is players willing to call much larger bets on their draws.  They take horrible odds to try to get lucky.  I also see players way over-bet their made hands trying to eliminate the draws from calling.  Both of these are mistakes in my (humble) opinion.  The drawing player is taking the worst of it and relying on luck, while the other player is giving up equity, particularly when the other player is willing to call any bet on his draw.  By controlling the pot size, keeping it smaller, you can give the player willing to "gamble" incorrect odds and yet also give yourself room to fold the hand to bad turn or river cards.




Another bet sizing error that I see a lot is shoving or over-betting with small/medium pairs or AK.  There are points in a tournament that this is the correct play, particularly with small stacks or even 10 big blinds.  Both hands are essentially shouting "don't call me"!  The correct play seems to be a fold with most hands or a re-raise with your big hands (QQ,KK,AA), unless you have the monster stack at the table and the player is very short and desperate.  Your correct bet size if this happens is nearly always a re-raise rather than a call if you are late position as you do not want to get caught in a squeeze situation from an early position player.  It really takes a monster hand or chip stack to call a shove and re-shove or re-raise.  You really need to pay attention to stack sizes of limpers or blinds here because now that the pot is gianormous you may get other short stacks willing to gamble or big stacks looking to take out multiple players.  If the money is near the bubble you have a much better shot at isolating.


Well, that's about it today on bet sizing, other than my renewed vow to not over-raise.  I am leaning towards 2.5x the big blind on an opening raise with no limpers, and adding a 1/2 bet for every limper.  My goal is always to get the blinds out of there and make the limpers pay for their weak- ass play.