You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Sky Poker forums will be temporarily unavailable from 11pm Wednesday July 25th.
Sky Poker Forums is upgrading its look! Stay tuned for the big reveal!
The probe bet - underrated?
Suppose you have 89, there is 2000 in the pot and the flop is K84 against one other player. Both of you have 5000 in your stacks and you are first to act.
Conventional theory states that you put in a chunky bet, maybe 1500 and if the villain comes over the top, then you fold.
But how about putting in a much smaller bet of 400 as a probe bet, just to see where you are? Are you really going to be raised by anything except a K or a bigger 8 after which you can fold and not suffer too much pain? If your little probe bet is just called, you can know you're probably ahead and really go to town on the turn, providing an ace doesn't fall.
I'm starting to like this play - after all, poker is also about losing the minimum as well as winning the maximum. What are your thoughts?
I've never heard TK, Ed or Mark mention probe bets on 865 - I'd be interested to hear their thoughts about this too.
Conventional theory states that you put in a chunky bet, maybe 1500 and if the villain comes over the top, then you fold.
But how about putting in a much smaller bet of 400 as a probe bet, just to see where you are? Are you really going to be raised by anything except a K or a bigger 8 after which you can fold and not suffer too much pain? If your little probe bet is just called, you can know you're probably ahead and really go to town on the turn, providing an ace doesn't fall.
I'm starting to like this play - after all, poker is also about losing the minimum as well as winning the maximum. What are your thoughts?
I've never heard TK, Ed or Mark mention probe bets on 865 - I'd be interested to hear their thoughts about this too.
Comments
But also alot of the time by the call you prob know your 8 is good because what will call you on a k84 board other then a k or a better 8. So by puttin in a small bet your minimising your loses.
BB.
But with 98 on a K83r board, it's hard to imagine a situation where b/f is good, considering thats a board most people will c-bet close to 100%.
I raise these probe bets a very large % of the time, and a very large % of the time they either fold or fold to a turn barrel.
It's pretty transparent, so unless you're balancing it and doing it when you have KQ then its absolutely horrendous.
Even then, i'd rather balance them by c/c them both than donk betting them both.
i would seriously try and avoid making the donk bet a 'tool' in your arsenal, maybe it will work against a weak opponent but against a thinking player you will be exploited in the long run... i don't think i ever donk bet, maybe 2% or something rediculous, and i probably only do it so i can barrell a turn and if needs be river on a board that misses my opponents range.
a thinking player will look to a bigger sample size than one individual hand and appropriate their play around this. a thinking player would assess your style and see how this correlates with making a donk bet... if he thinks your a nit he is obv gonna pass and likewise if you are pretty loose.... my point is that you may feel good when you take the pot down but everytime you villain folds to the donk bet you have missed value from their immenant c-bet. everytime villain calls you have only succeeded in pumping the pot with a marginal hand, and everytime he raises you are in a world of hurt.
Maybe you know more than Mr Harrington, or maybe you need to open your mind a little to new ideas.
i think you will find 'donk' betting to be a generic term... whilst a probe bet is an alternative im going to stick to my own vocab, and 'donk' bet is far more apt for this post.
in this particular situation Dan Harrington would probably not advocate this play.... He is a great player with great ideas, but you have obviously misinterpreted or incorrectly applied what you have read.
as for me needing to open my mind, my mind is open... thats why i am on this forum giving my opinion, which is based upon information i have ACQUIRED and agree with.
i have formulated my view from many things, each situation in poker is different so no book can define what to do and when in a single given hand, all i have done is applied my experience of donk bets and formulated an answer to your question.
It would help though if you talked in relatives rather than absolutes.
I'd like to get this thread back on track. I'd be interested to hear other opinions on the Probe Bet.
I think it can be a sophisticated play against good players, but will apppear to be a 'donk' bet against unsophisticated players.
I'm not convinced it should be dismissed so lightly - JH's comments for example, though 100% valid, are easy to make. Surely there must be at least one other person out there who is interested in this digression from ABC poker?
Harrington on hold'em is very very outdated bro.
And this is neither a "new" nor is it s "sophisticated" play, just think about it, If you are going to DB to "gain info" you are either going to get him to fold air, raise air (to which you will consequently fold or call and c/f the turn), or flat call anything from 86s to KK. So really how much useable information do you gain. Surely it would be better to check/call and get value from his air range when he value bets. And with regard to "but then you're guessing for the rest of the hand" retort, thats retarded, you're always guessing in a sense but if you know that he's going to be c-betting a large % on that board, then obv you're maximising your ev by c/c if you expect him to fold his air to a donk-bet.
Did you post this because you wanted people to post opinions or because you wanted people to agree with you?
Two fairly qualified views have taken the time to articulate well thought out, logical answers, and you counter by quoting harrington and inferring we are ABC players.
Ugh, I don't know what to say, really.
We shared Tables last night, (well done on the 2 wins!) & you asked me to take a look at this.
I share the view that most Posters had, but you seem to be a little dismissive of their replies.
But you did ask, so......
I really don't like that example one iota, but I don';t know what the Blinds were - & that's key to the answer.
Ignoring Blinds relative to stacks for the moment, I'm 100% fine with "probe bets", but in the example, no no no no no.
It's not a probe bet at all, it's not even a Bet - who would fold anything to a bet of that size? It can only get us in trouble over the long term.
Why not just bet it propely?
The stack sizes here make it pretty awkward to follow-through, to be honest, but that is something we should address BEFORE making the original pre-fliop Raise.
This situation = wrong tool