A minimal bet into a giant pot was the signal of a fish however now it’s GTO accepted. Dara O’Kearney offers us one instance why that’s.
If I have been to explain my USP in terms of poker teaching and content material, I’d say that I assist poker gamers perceive why solvers take the strains that they do. Lots of people are intimidated by solvers however if you get launched to them the fitting method, they’re fascinating and actually open up an entire world of risk.
One of the weird quirks solvers advocate is small bet sizes. There are a variety of completely different causes to go for a smaller betting measurement on a variety of completely different boards, however in the present day let’s have a look at a hand I just lately confirmed a scholar.
We open UTG with this linear vary:
The Big Blind defends with this polarised vary:
The board is J J 4.
In this example, when the Big Blind checks the solver advocates betting 100% of the time and all the time betting only one massive blind right into a 5 massive blind pot. This is the smallest we will bet, if the solver was allowed to bet much less, it might.
It’s a really odd bet sizing and when you noticed this on the tables your first intuition would maybe be that you simply have been up in opposition to a fishy participant. So why does the solver bet small?
A polarised board
This is a really exhausting board to hit, there are flush attracts however no straight attracts. Unless one in all you has a jack then it’s seemingly whoever had the perfect hand preflop has the perfect hand now. As the UTG participant that’s most definitely you, you’ve gotten a big vary benefit preflop.
When a board is difficult to hit, solvers often bet small. Before we even have a look at how the Big Blind ought to react there’s a logic to a small bet sizing.
If we’re bluffing then we’ve got probability of taking it down for the minimal, given the Big Blind usually has nothing and only a few attracts. Betting the minimal due to this fact has the perfect ROI attainable. Betting one massive blind to win a 5 massive blind pot solely has to work 20% of the time to be break even.
If we get examine raised we will simply muck the hand having misplaced the minimal. If they name we will arrange a second bluff on the flip to probably take it down whereas nonetheless retaining the pot small and manageable.
If they name and we’ve got a giant hand, that small bet may need been the one bet sizing they’d have continued for. Also, small bets like this usually induce bluffs from gamers which is nice for us when we’ve got a hand.
The solver tells the Big Blind to examine/increase us with most of their jacks and a few bluffs like KQ with a diamond, palms that may hit a giant draw on the flip for a second pure bluff. When we get examine/raised and we’ve got a hand, we all the time flat. Reraising is rarely a good suggestion on such a polarised board, it might make all of the bluffs fold and all of the robust palms proceed.
Solvers additionally advocate small bet sizing when there may be excessive ICM strain on the participant who is roofed. You see it occur so much on the bubble of Super High Roller tournaments. Even when the board is sort of moist, it’s a comparable, polarising scenario. You want a a lot greater hand to proceed with if you find yourself prone to busting on the bubble, so it turns into a ‘you either have it or you don’t’ state of affairs, on this case being you both have a high two pair or higher sort hand, otherwise you don’t. A small bet ought to do the job extra usually if you simply wish to take it down and it’ll string individuals alongside/induce a bluff a variety of the time if you need some motion.
If nothing else, maybe the speedy takeaway is to not instantly assume you’re taking part in in opposition to a fish once they fireplace out a single massive blind as a continuation bet.
If you need extra perception like this, Dara has a regular newsletter the place he offers free ideas like this on a regular basis.
More from Dara O’Kearney
