C-betting dry and dynamic flops OOP

LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 641 ✭✭✭
edited February 2019 in CORE
In CORE's lesson on types of flops, 832r is described as a dynamic flop due to the best hand likely not being made yet. That makes sense. Because it is dynamic, it is advocated to reduce our c-betting percentage on this board OOP.

Two reasons are given, both confusing to me:
1) we don't have to deal with raises. This baffles me as this is not the kind of flop where I would expect villain to raise a lot (what does he rep?)
2) we can increase our check-calling frequency. Why is that specific to dynamic flops and not others? And somehow I'm not convinced that that's a reason to decrease our c-bet %

For the record, I understand why we want to reduce our c-betting percentage on wet boards, so let's focus the discussion on dry dynamic boards.

Currently, looking at the dryness of the flop, my strategy would be to c-bet this flop with pretty much my entire range, as all pairs can bet for protection and value, Ax and Kx need protection too, 9x-Qx can fold out better hands, sets and big overpairs for value, etc. I expect a lot of fold equity due to the dryness of the flop.

So can someone explain further the reasons that are given to decrease our c-betting % on a dry but dynamic flop, and/or explain why my c-betting strategy would hence be flawed?

Comments

  • NinjahNinjah Red Chipper Posts: 1,183 ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2019
    When we're out of position on a flop like this one, we expect our cbets to be floated a lot. When this happens, cards that are good for our range will connect with Villain quite often as well. So we end up in two common spots: we either end up barreling at a high frequency because we have a lot of air and we bloat the pot too much with it or we fire once and give up, ultimately x/f a ton. We can protect our range by looking to delay a cbet or to x/c and lead favorable turns.

    Where the disconnect is likely coming for you is that you probably play in games like I do where people overfold and in that case, the exploitative play is to bet this flop since V will fail to connect with it so often. That's fine, just recognize the difference and why it exists.

    PS. I also disagree with the worry of getting raised here as there are no natural combos of 2 pair and no reason for V to raise a set.
  • MichaelBMichaelB Red Chipper Posts: 211 ✭✭✭
    If I were playing in position against you I would call you down very lightly if you consistently attempted to barrel from this flop forwards. I would also float you a very high percentage of the time, looking for favourable runouts to expose a crack in your armour so that I can exploit your aggression either on the turn or river.

    To me it's simple, for you to bet this flop, you're repping A8+ and 88+, which is fine, but my positional advantage is going to allow me to divine even the slightest deviation from that narrative as the hand progresses.

    So to my mind, in a spot like this, a penny saved is a penny earned.

    Without any specific history, I think if you had 3bet me pre and I'd called you in position, it'd be a different story, because now the range advantage sits squarely in your court, and I'd have to have either hit hard enough or be willing to play for stacks were I to try to move against you.
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 641 ✭✭✭
    edited February 2019
    Ninjah wrote: »
    When we're out of position on a flop like this one, we expect our cbets to be floated a lot. When this happens, cards that are good for our range will connect with Villain quite often as well. So we end up in two common spots: we either end up barreling at a high frequency because we have a lot of air and we bloat the pot too much with it or we fire once and give up, ultimately x/f a ton. We can protect our range by looking to delay a cbet or to x/c and lead favorable turns.

    Where the disconnect is likely coming for you is that you probably play in games like I do where people overfold and in that case, the exploitative play is to bet this flop since V will fail to connect with it so often. That's fine, just recognize the difference and why it exists.

    PS. I also disagree with the worry of getting raised here as there are no natural combos of 2 pair and no reason for V to raise a set.

    That makes a lot of sense, thank you.
    MichaelB wrote: »
    If I were playing in position against you I would call you down very lightly if you consistently attempted to barrel from this flop forwards. I would also float you a very high percentage of the time, looking for favourable runouts to expose a crack in your armour so that I can exploit your aggression either on the turn or river.

    To me it's simple, for you to bet this flop, you're repping A8+ and 88+, which is fine, but my positional advantage is going to allow me to divine even the slightest deviation from that narrative as the hand progresses.

    So to my mind, in a spot like this, a penny saved is a penny earned.

    Without any specific history, I think if you had 3bet me pre and I'd called you in position, it'd be a different story, because now the range advantage sits squarely in your court, and I'd have to have either hit hard enough or be willing to play for stacks were I to try to move against you.

    That is true, I would probably also do the same if I were playing against me lol.

    Thanks guys! Probably just made my $5 back for this week =)

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file