Betting for information.

[dsaxton]

This is something I've thought about some, and was wondering how everyone else feels about this idea.

The main disadvantage to betting for information I feel is that a perceptive opponent will start to notice that this indicates weakness and play back at you. In a way, the bet becomes senseless because it no longer yields information, and there's a significant chance it'll just be lost. I've played plenty of heads-up matches where I've picked up on this and stolen a lot of pots as a result. So, if you're to bet for information, it seems it would be important to also make the same bets when you have strong hands, like two pair or better. I think this should tend to make your opponent prone to only raise with legitimate hands. Generally, I prefer to make the same pot-sized bet if I'm going to bet at all just to avoid potentially revealing weakness.

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?

[dalecooper]

I also tend to bet the same amount (or percentage of the pot) in almost all betting situations. No sense giving the game away.

I do think however that most bets should serve more than one purpose. You would hardly ever be betting for information without also theoretically betting for value - you think you have the best hand and are betting on that idea. The only information you want is if you're beat already, or if they're drawing to something. Opponents won't look to bluff you if you often show down strong hands after such bets - I lead out the same way with top pair top kicker, two pair, a low set, any hand along those lines. I only get into slowplaying with top set on a non-dangerous board, a flush on an obvious flush board, a flopped boat, etc.

[dsaxton]

Yeah, I tend to play similarly. I've become increasingly wary of slow-playing the more poker experience I've gotten. Not only because of the potential of being outdrawn, but also because of the potential value that is lost when you don't bet. Also, I think that playing a very powerful hand somewhat faster than usual may encourage players with strong second best hands who may be prone to slow-play to put more money into the pot once they discover you're willing to do the same with what they mistakenly think is an inferior hand.

I guess I do vary my bets somewhat, but generally just for deception. It can be useful for your opponent to think you're weak when you have a huge hand, and check-raising or check-calling then betting big are both too indicative of strength, I think. I prefer making a "weak" bet with the hope of getting raised, and then perhaps reraising or just calling then check-raising once the pot is large.

[Spandrel]

Yeah, I tend to play similarly. I've become increasingly wary of slow-playing the more poker experience I've gotten. Not only because of the potential of being outdrawn, but also because of the potential value that is lost when you don't bet. Also, I think that playing a very powerful hand somewhat faster than usual may encourage players with strong second best hands who may be prone to slow-play to put more money into the pot once they discover you're willing to do the same with what they mistakenly think is an inferior hand.

Sometimes, it is not slow play if you flop a monster and you have 1-2 players on smaller draws that need to hit for you to get paid off. If your opponent legitimately flops a smaller made hand than yours, then betting right away insures that you can take him down right away and get paid off before he can outdraw you to something even larger. If your opponent is attempting to draw to a lower hand, then you want/need to string them along to get paid off If your opponent is sitting on garbage and just trying to catch cards to make some marginal hand, then betting at any point will force them out, and it isn't much of an issue. It all depends on the hand your holding, but I'm assuming we're talking about flopping something larger than a set.

[r8ed]

This is definitely an important part of good poker. And figuring out how much to bet is tricky especially when people seem to catch on. I try to vary mine but tend to bet relative to my hand strength (which I still have to work on). But even throwing out 1 BB on the flop when you have nothing gets everyone to fold about 20% of the time. Then if you get called and follow up with a bigger bet (2/3+ pot) on the turn, you will get a fold or a reraise. Usually a fold if they only called the 1BB on the flop and the turn offers no improvement. I tend to bet 2/3 of an unraised pot regardless of my hand if I'm in the last position. Winning these smaller pots can really add up and put you in position to capitalize on your strong hands.

It would be interesting to see if anyone has more insight on betting for info.

[dsaxton]

This is definitely an important part of good poker. And figuring out how much to bet is tricky especially when people seem to catch on. I try to vary mine but tend to bet relative to my hand strength (which I still have to work on). But even throwing out 1 BB on the flop when you have nothing gets everyone to fold about 20% of the time. Then if you get called and follow up with a bigger bet (2/3+ pot) on the turn, you will get a fold or a reraise. Usually a fold if they only called the 1BB on the flop and the turn offers no improvement. I tend to bet 2/3 of an unraised pot regardless of my hand if I'm in the last position. Winning these smaller pots can really add up and put you in position to capitalize on your strong hands.

It would be interesting to see if anyone has more insight on betting for info.

Sometimes. Often when a player makes such a small bet, particularly at lower-stakes tables, I'll raise or check-raise with nothing because it's cheap to do so, and likely enough they're weak and will fold.

[r8ed]

You would think people would do what you do, but many times they don't (I play .25/.50). If they just call, i know they dont' have much anyway, else they would probably raise. Then I put a bigger bet on the turn depending on the card and either take it down or figure out that they hit the turn or were slowplaying and fold. Or I check to see if they check or raise. Maybe by then I hit something.

[UncleBuddy]

I also tend to bet the same amount (or percentage of the pot) in almost all betting situations. No sense giving the game away.

I do think however that most bets should serve more than one purpose. You would hardly ever be betting for information without also theoretically betting for value - you think you have the best hand and are betting on that idea. The only information you want is if you're beat already, or if they're drawing to something. Opponents won't look to bluff you if you often show down strong hands after such bets - I lead out the same way with top pair top kicker, two pair, a low set, any hand along those lines. I only get into slowplaying with top set on a non-dangerous board, a flush on an obvious flush board, a flopped boat, etc.

One thing I have noticed in my SnGs are the guys that are consistent bettors. They are usually right on 3-5Xs the blind preflop and potsized after. I usually ID the guy as someone who has an idea of what they are doing.

I then baffle them with with out of position raises and scary looking minimum raises. So if you ever get beaten by going all in against a guy who raised 3.5Xs UTG with 2-5 offsuit who hits a straight....you know its me.

[JeffreyGB]

Sometimes, it is not slow play if you flop a monster and you have 1-2 players on smaller draws that need to hit for you to get paid off. If your opponent legitimately flops a smaller made hand than yours, then betting right away insures that you can take him down right away and get paid off before he can outdraw you to something even larger. If your opponent is attempting to draw to a lower hand, then you want/need to string them along to get paid off If your opponent is sitting on garbage and just trying to catch cards to make some marginal hand, then betting at any point will force them out, and it isn't much of an issue. It all depends on the hand your holding, but I'm assuming we're talking about flopping something larger than a set.

Umm...allowing an opponent to draw out in order form them to improve to a 2nd best hand is the definitition of slow play - literally. Trying to do this with a hand that isn't monster caliber is the definition of "OmfG U MFer! WtF dId U ST@Y iN!!?" (That is, it's the definition of a play that will make you look and feel like an idiot - I should know: it's one of my worst leaks currently).

- Jeffrey