I really feel that betting 50 - 75% of the pot after the flop is no longer a C-bet, even though that's pretty much the actual definition of a C-bet. Let me explain...

The internet world has woken up. Your average grinder has read a poker book or two, and the low stakes tables are filled with these guys squeezing out a profit of 1-7%, which is respectable nowadays. Actually, I respect anyone who doesn't lose money at the tables, but that's a different story.

My point of this thread is that our C-bet ranges need to be widened. 50 - 100% of the pot for C bets should move up to 75 - 125% because of one reason:

PLAYERS NOW EXPECT C-BETS

Clear and simple. If you bet more than they expect on a J72 type of flop, they believe you. I think the numbers need to be changed from the Doyle Brunson days of poker.

What are your thoughts? I really want to hear from the old hands as much as the new players if possible.

While betting more is going to get more folds, we need to be careful that we don't bet an excessive amount, since this will cause our EV to be lowered.

With Passive players, I fully agree, they seem to be everywhere right now and betting more could drive out their weaker pairs and draws. Another option against these players is double and triple barreling, as they may often have junk in their range that can't stand extra heat. (Being careful not to bluff calling stations though)

Against tighter/weaker players, we shouldn't need to bet so much as many are content to fold to a smaller bet just as much as a large one, betting more just causes us to risk more.

Against more experienced players, we should be cbetting in a way realistically representing hands within our range. It's hard to get folds if our opponent realizes our range missed the flop, they may call or raise (often times as a bluff).

In general, I think people need to study up on this. Focusing on learning how and why cbets work on certain boards against specific players can really be helpful to a lot of players.

I understand what your saying... and to a certain extent i agree...
I feel it could be profitable ONLY if you dont get called...
But people catch on very quickly,
Do you cbet the turn also if they call??? and how much?

''Against tighter/weaker players, we shouldn't need to bet so much as many are content to fold to a smaller bet just as much as a large one, betting more just causes us to risk more.''

As youve said, no need to bet so much against weaker players. Ive found on NL50 especialy you get a lot of weak players playing their BR in one stack... And if you check the flop to them and they bet out, Check raise them and they fold 8/10 times... So sometimes cbetting is a bad idea...


''Against more experienced players, we should be cbetting in a way realistically representing hands within our range. It's hard to get folds if our opponent realizes our range missed the flop, they may call or raise (often times as a bluff).''

The more experienced players are always expecting a cbet , if not a trap... So more or less im cbetting depending on the flop, weather its suited etc.... Im plaing my rags like i would my big ones....

QUESTION FOR RAKEGAURD -

If a player does what you saying on the flop and cbets the pot or 125% of pot...
How much do i raise?
Or do i flat call and take it down on turn...

Ive found a lot of players often click 'pot' to bet instead of thinking about their bet simply because their lazy...

At the microstakes most players shove all-in for $2 on flop with a pot of .20

Gives horrible pot odds for anything. Although mostly its bottom pair, I find they tend to get lucky.

Microstakes usualy isnt really poker IMHO... its just Fucky Luckers all in any hand...
ive seen a youtube video of a guy freaking out when he won $1.20 in a pot... lol because his AA held up...
And screwing when he lost $0.24....
Some people are seriously odd...

A comment from the video was something like this-
'Your screwing because you just lost the equivilant to getting chese on a Mc Donalds Burger'
lol

Yeah, also at microstakes... I see a lot of people buy-in for 20BBs. Shove with ATC, double up from some ridiculous luck; and then they leave the next hand. I suppose this could work in the short term, but I would think that luck runs out long-term.

I totally agree microstakes isn't real poker.

I have to disagree and say microstakes is poker. At the micros people are at their most exploitable, though I will say it is harder to use your reads to exploit as there often is so many people in the pot getting in the way. Often it is best to just nut-peddle your way up the stakes, I did this when I was new and made it to 10nl, where play became a little more "normalized"

Honestly, I still get excited when I win with AA, even at 2nl (I withdrew quite a bit because I was getting angry at 10nl). Each win though Is a step to the next level, and every loss pulls us back down. Add that to our being emotional creatures, taught by society to HAVE to win, it can be frustrating playing poker at times.

20BB shortstackers ARE really bad and likely can't win in the longterm as the rake at 2nl will destroy their profit. I'm told it's more sustainable at higher levels are rake isn't as high, but it's very looked down upon in the poker world.

Back on topic now, if people are expecting cbets they will try to adjust (Note: When I say range, I mean hand range, not betting range)

If they adjust by calling...
We can widen our value betting hand range, tighten our cbet bluffing range and include more hands that have equity if called (Draws, Gutshots, Backdoor draws), and double barrel if we have some fold equity on the turn

If they adjust by raising...
Increase our upper range of hands that continues against raises, tighten up our cbet bluffing range, increase both our 3bet valuebetting and bluffing range (only if we have good reads!).

As far as checkraising in place of a cbet, for the people who autobet when checked to, that's cool. Though I'm curious as to what hands you do this with.