Hey all,

I have a general question after hearing commentary in one of Matt's hands in Video 4 of the MTT series that got me thinking..

Its the hand that Matt Calls an utg raise with 58s - he explains the reasoning behind it perfectly .(stack sizes - opportunity to bust large stack and take tourney)

However it is the comment at the end of the hand that is the most interesting part for me... both players check a k44 flop and after Matt bets the turn and is called, the utg raiser then leads on the river - Matt raises and takes the pot - saying '...calling the turn and then leading the river is pretty weak' -

So my query is - Are there other general betting sequences that can be verbalised in the same way the turn and river betting took place in Matt's hand? - I know this seems very broad and every hand is different with numerous factors at play - but I was thinking are there other principles of betting that could be categorised irrespective of the hole cards in the same manner?

If this is not very clear here is another scenario of betting that I have seen and implemented - You flop a monster - so you bet flop - then check turn (to signal weakness) - then bet River for value (or shove if villain leads) -

eg I am the preflop raiser with QKo - Flop comes QKK - I bet the flop (hoping to make it look like a cbet due to been the aggressor) I get a caller - I then check the turn to imply weakness and hope my opponent will lead - if not I can still bet the river after seeming weak on the turn..

I know this query may sound vague and all the various betting sequences come up in the video's at different points- but it would be really interesting if there was a spreadsheet or document with some General but vital Betting sequences and their potential meaning - as a kinda guideline or reference. ... or maybe I am reading too much into Matt's comment at the end of that hand!

Either way looking foward to any feedback!
Col.

Hey col.

You've picked something very very interesting to discuss here, and I'm glad that my explanation in the video made sense! I should have said something slightly more regarding the hand though rather than just

"calling the turn and leading the river is pretty weak".

It goes with regards to the rest of the hand aswell. Firstly he checked the flop. Now, its pretty much only newbies or bad players that check the flop with big hands. I cant remember who exactly it was, but seeing as this was deep in the tournament, I doubt him to be tremendously weak.
So let me just explain it a bit further.

He checks the flop - Now I don't want to stab here just on the off chance that he is actually slowplaying. The turn should be a stronger indicator of the kind of hand he has got. Afterall, he's not gonna want to check two streets in a row with a big hand as he will be wanting to get, at least, some value from it. So this is a perfect spot to bet and try to take the pot.
I cant remember where, but a couple years ago I seem to remember some kind of Poker programme on TV where a player (who was commentating) said that 2 checks is usually a good signal that you can take the pot on the turn (in a heads up pot).
So even when he calls here, I am like 99% sure he has little or nothing. And then the weak lead on the river just made no sense at all. The river card wasn't one that you would think would've helped his hand, so his bet just made no sense at all. It was just to easy to take the pot away from him with any kind of decent raise.

One common mistake a lot of players make (and a deciding factor between the "OK" and the "STRONG" players) is that they tend to play there own cards. Like I explained, the river is the perfect example of where I played my opponent's cards rather than my own. It didn't matter what 2 cards were in my hand, it was just clearly evident that my opponent was UBER weak and that pot had my name on it the minute I bet the turn.
A good method of learning to do this is by playing Heads up sng's or cash, where you and you're opponent are going to miss most flops, so playing the player becomes that much more pivotel.


As for other general signs like this, well you might actually be in a bit of luck. Ok so its not necessarily for NLHE MTT's but I have recently started studying short handed PLO and in one of the books I have began to read, there are a number of examples like this. These are referred to as "INDICATORS".
Now, these indicators, are meant to show that when you float your opponent (meaning that you call behind with little or nothing aiming to take the pot away on a later street), your float has a decent chance of success.

Number 1 is a "Weak Stab" at the pot. This being when your opponent bets half or two thirds of the pot on the flop, when, in Omaha, a pot bet on the flop is a lot more common from someone with a strong hand.

Number 2 is a "Continuation bet". Now we all know what that is, but still some players will pot cont bet the flop. This is where reads become important, ie. "Player X bet 2/3 of the pot on a flop where he hit the nut flush. His pot bet is not what he would usually do in this situation if he had a strong holding". Again, this is a good chance for you to call behind and see what he does on the turn.

and finally, Number 3 is a "possible steal bet". Here the author just implies that any bet from the original raiser after the flop is always a strong candidate for a float. Now, I must point out I do find these a little contradictory of each other but the general principle is there.
And ok, these are slightly different as these are regarding flop play in Omaha. I mean, a half or 2/3 pot bet on the flop in a NLHE is pretty standard and if you float every hand you are eventually going to get trapped to death by the solid players.
But the general principle is there. There are a lot of these kind of things that you can pick up on yourself. Maybe some new ones too! It just takes hours and hours of play and concentration.

One final slight example is something I encounter frequently in heads up, and thats the smaller bet on the flop than preflop. Say my opponet raises to 150 (25/50 blinds) preflop and then leads for 100 on the flop. This is either really weak or really strong, it just depends on the reads that you have whether you can raise here and take it away or whether the alarm bells should start ringing.


I hope this has helped and a great subject for you to pick up on.

Matt

i agree w matt
great question, and tuff to give simple answer

matt gives some good specific examples and the thought process that is used to identify the weakness
the problem is there are virtually unlimited examples of weak lines that dont make sense
bad players are very creative in their "thinking"
i generally try to keep a few things in mind

what is guy representing?
is this in his normal range?
does his actions match what he is representing?
has he acted like this before?
do we have some interesting recent history between us or others at the table?
overall do his actions make sense overall?

one thing i noticed after i had moved up stakes and then moved down to makes videos at stakes that were lower was that it was a lot easier to spot things that made no sense. I think this because you stop seeing some of the silly plays at 50nl 100 nl 200 nl, so when i popped down for a video, the crazy things just stuck out more as not making sense.
so i think it will come with experience and playing more hands.

will you still get fooled, sure happens to everyone, but not as often and that helps the old win rate

hope this helps hg

one other important note in matts explanation
he said it was easy to take pot on river with any kind of decent raise

bet size bet size bet size
at micros it is common to see weak lead bet or min raise on river
both are typically signs of weakness
when you are going to bet or raise, do it like you mean it
it wont work everytime, but notice most times you will have a hand, being a TAG player
and that makes it tougher for opponent to play back at you without the goods
aggression again leads to clarity

also a half pot bet by last player, effective button, in a multiway pot is almost always a weak bluff in the micros
if you are in early position you should check raise liberally with any reasonable hand, a call is WEAK
(i generally only called with a big draw to keep players in the pot to pay me when i hit,
or longshot draws like a gut on a 3 tone flop vs multitable deep stacked opponents)
micros players fear the check raise and dont understand the situation

FYI-it is fine to make the steal yourself in this situation, just make a real bet 3/4 to full pot bet

gl hg

GREAT post and reply's, HG your commentary really helped, as with you taylor, could you guys discuss more in video/articles or posts what to do when the flop misses you?

Thanks Matt and HG for quality replies to my question.. I have read through it once and I need to go back over the points again, but thats exactly the type of information I was hoping to get, and learning the 'Indicators' (betsizing, street by street action) as you both describe is priceless..

I really like that concept of been able to play your opponents cards will mean the difference between been 'ok' and a 'Strong' player..
also the 'aggression leads to clarity' has been a leak in my game as I would tend to call too much without getting villain to define his hand better thus leaving me with less information by the river.. and usually with a big decision to make as opposed to taking control of the hand..

The power and confidence of been able to float and take away a hand in position and utilising what I think each opponent bet means, and countering it , is something I'm working on, and that is why the commentary in that MTT hand was gold...

I'm really looking foward to the HU series too Matt as I think thats really going to bring some more armoury to everyone's game..

Thanks!
Col.