bet/fold versus check/call

[ace2daface]

ive heard these phrases used in hand analysis threads. can someone please explain when these techniques are used and against whom?

 

[doops]

This is a little vague. However, it mostly refers to pre-flop play. Bet/fold refers to a style of play in which, if you decide to play a hand, you raise it up. If you don't want to raise it, if it's not worth a raise, you fold it. And, typically, this concept involves raising a specific amount, without regard to your cards, which helps hide the strength (or weakness) of your hand.

Checking and calling are weak moves. People who seldom raise are considered weak players because they are not making bets to get value out of their hands. Some people call or check with strong hands to trap other players. This can be effective, or it can backfire badly.

In post-flop play these choices take on added dimensions. Trickiness and strategy are involved -- or considered.

 

[Dwilius]

No, I think this is usually on the river, doops...when you have a medium/good hand. Either you can check/call because it will induce enough bluffs + value bets you beat, that would otherwise fold if you bet...or you can bet/fold because your opponent will likely call with enough worse hands that otherwise would be checked behind...and a raise would be a pretty clear sign you were beat.

I think some math behind deciding which is more profitable is found in Sklansky's first holdem book, which was about limit poker. Can't be judged as accurately in NL I suppose, but the ideas are still relevant.

 

[F Paulsson]

http://fredrikpaulsson.blogspot.com/2008/07/betfolding-versus-checkcalling.html

(Pardon the plug)

 

[S93]

No, I think this is usually on the river, doops...when you have a medium/good hand. Either you can check/call because it will induce enough bluffs + value bets you beat, that would otherwise fold if you bet...or you can bet/fold because your opponent will likely call with enough worse hands that otherwise would be checked behind...and a raise would be a pretty clear sign you were beat.

I think some math behind deciding which is more profitable is found in Sklansky's first holdem book, which was about limit poker. Can't be judged as accurately in NL I suppose, but the ideas are still relevant.

This and def read the FP link.

example. You have AK and the board reads AJ842(the flop was rainbow,so no flushe/FD). You think villains range is Ax,9T and sets based on flop/turn action. Since u beat most of his range since there are alot more Ax combos then sets and there was only really one draw on the board this would be a good spot to bet/fold, villain is most of the times only raising the river with sets but calling with Ax and folding T9.
He also check behinds most Ax and bets his sets and 9T(and since 9T is such a tiny part of his range bet/fold is better then check/call imo).

 

[ace2daface]

Thanks guys.

So under bet/fold you are initially value betting your range against theirs(they will call if they have a medium strength hand that may rate to be weaker than yours) and folding to a raise because then their range is then likely polarised to a range of hands that beat yours.

The more likely villian is to bluff more of his range then the more value there is in a check call scenario?

Is this thinking right?

Furthermore, what does it mean when you say a hand has showdown value?

Also Bet/fold versus check/call - i realsise that this is primarily used for river decisions but can it also be employed on the flop/turn?

Sorry for all the questions but i need a few "aha" moments to improve my game and im hoping you guys can help me out.

 

[F Paulsson]

Thanks guys.

So under bet/fold you are initially value betting your range against theirs(they will call if they have a medium strength hand that may rate to be weaker than yours) and folding to a raise because then their range is then likely polarised to a range of hands that beat yours.

Correct.

The more likely villian is to bluff more of his range then the more value there is in a check call scenario?

Correct, but be careful not to overestimate how often they bluff. Specifically, you should be check/calling the river if their range is such that they either mostly have you beat or they have a missed draw. To give an example, there's little value in check/calling the river on a board like



... with AK after betting flop and turn, because he can't have a draw, and if you have him beat it's because he has either a weaker ace or a pocket pair. In other words, there's nothing for him to have "missed." See what I mean?

On the other hand, check/calling a river such as



... with AK can (versus certain villains) be fine since he'll have missed with all flushdraws and straightdraws.

Furthermore, what does it mean when you say a hand has showdown value?

It's not a strictly defined term but usually means a hand that is better than your opponent's hand on average before any betting occurs, which makes it a dicey thing to try to pinpoint. But since I'm already on a roll with examples...

Using the second board above, 9-9 has "showdown value" in that before any river betting takes place it's reasonable to believe your hand is better than his on average. He can have an ace, two pair, or a set (or full house rather) but the majority of the time he'll have a weaker pair or a missed draw. Your hand is stronger than his average hand. Here, you may opt to check/call if he's very aggressive because your hand can't beat the hands that he would CALL a bet with, but his range for betting himself when checked to is much weaker.

Also Bet/fold versus check/call - i realsise that this is primarily used for river decisions but can it also be employed on the flop/turn?

You can certainly check/call or bet/fold the flop and the turn as well, although the dynamics are a bit different. Very generally speaking, the flop is not a great place to start to think about check/calling vs. bet/folding because your opponent's range is still very "blurry." You need to be able to narrow his range by a fair amount in order to make b/f vs. c/c decisions and before you're able to narrow it enough it's better to think in terms of equity and pure value.

Sorry for all the questions but i need a few "aha" moments to improve my game and im hoping you guys can help me out.

Well, this IS a big aha-concept. So if you get this down pat, you've taken a big step forward.

 

[ace2daface]

Thanks FP. Gold as usual(not of the Jamie Kind ).


Ok, A few further questions.

I know that the board/villian and the pattern of the hand is highly important in deciding whether to B/f or c/c but what hem stats would help you decide if the situation was c/c of B/f? ie river agression, wtsd etc

or do the stats matter less in these situations? obv sample size would be important as certain river stats take time to converge.

Also a BTW FP. I understand that you value time away from the tables analysing your game and running filters. Would it be possible at some point to do a video of a "leak finding" away from tables HEM filter review and what you look for and how you approach that aspect as i would much like to see what i should be doing away from tables?

 

[F Paulsson]

I know that the board/villian and the pattern of the hand is highly important in deciding whether to B/f or c/c but what hem stats would help you decide if the situation was c/c of B/f? ie river agression, wtsd etc

I use the "Bet River%" in HEM to help me with these things. In fact, I use it so often that I keep it up in my main HUD. I've been told it's very strongly correlated to river aggression, so I suppose you could go with either but I just started using BR% and have stuck with it. Typical BR% values are around 20-30%. Anything lower is someone who's extremely scared to bet the river. Anything higher has to be a fair share of bluffs. If I have a borderline decision on the river and I see that villain's BR% is > 40% I have an easy check/call. If it's between 30 and 40, it's tougher but I probably still lean towards check/call (ESPECIALLY if I'm up against someone who knows how to bluffraise). Anything lower than that and I'd rather bet for value.

Also a BTW FP. I understand that you value time away from the tables analysing your game and running filters. Would it be possible at some point to do a video of a "leak finding" away from tables HEM filter review and what you look for and how you approach that aspect as i would much like to see what i should be doing away from tables?

If I find the time, I might do that. I wouldn't hold my breath though; time has become a valuable commodity lately

If you're curious about finding leaks in HEM, the easiest and probably most "bang for the buck" place to look is preflop. Even with huge databases postflop analysis is very difficult given how much player types, boards and even metagame influence your results.

One very basic "filter" I think everyone should run now and then is to just to select the "Position" report and make sure you're not losing money in any position. I mean, you're obviously going to lose money in the blinds but it should be less than your blind investment. That's a good place to start. You should see "rising" winnings for later and later positions.

 

[ace2daface]

thanks again FP. going to digest all this and see if i can come up with more questions.

Is it wrong that i was testing these theorys out before posting? ie i would consider if it was a bet/fold situation but still call after they raised me just to see if i called it right and also to see the theory in action?

I know its spewing money but i consider testing these things out and seeing the results. it like an investment. i might lose money now but save money in the future by getting the decisions right.

It would be similar to calling someone down on different boards to see what people generally bet with etc or calling someone on the river so that in the future you get an idea of what a certain bets mean.

 

[F Paulsson]

I wouldn't recommend making bad plays in order to "learn," no. I see where you are coming from but the information you're looking for is so fickle anyway (just because one guy bluffraised, are you really going to draw inferences from that next time you get raised on the river by someone else?) that I'd just try not to do it. You'll get plenty of opportunities in the long run anyway, because it's bound to happen that people raise you when you have the nuts, etc.

 

[doops]

OK, I didn't get the question. And, clearly, my river strategy needs improving. I tend not to get all that tricky on the river. Crying calls factor in a good deal. Thanks for the discussion.