Betting For Protection

The whole idea of betting for protection is one that I feel I am really only now starting to understand. Most people, when they first start playing, are way too concerned about protecting their hands. You see them overbetting and moving all in with one pair hands in spots where they will never be called with worse.

Many better players like to make fun of the fish who talk about protecting their hands. Because betting for protection is so popular among weak players, many stronger players think it is an intrinsically bad play.

I’ve been trying to reach a more nuanced understanding of the concept recently. My current thinking is that it has a lot to do with, not whether you will get drawn out on, but whether future streets are likely to be +EV for you. Sometimes you have a hand that will play well on future streets, in which case you aren’t concerned about protecting. Other times, you have a hand that can’t improve and can’t catch bluffs, in which case it’s often best to take it down right away.

Here’s an example, from the $1000 FTOPS 6-max:

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold’em Tournament, 120/240 Blinds 25 Ante (6 handed) – Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
UTG (t11184)
MP (t3707)
CO (t4892)
Hero (Button) (t11375)
SB (t8732)
BB (t8370)
Hero’s M: 22.30

Preflop: Hero is Button with 5, A
2 folds, CO bets t480, Hero calls t480, 2 folds

Flop: (t1470) 6, 4, 4 (2 players)
CO bets t680, Hero calls t680

Turn: (t2830) 5 (2 players)
CO checks, Hero checks

River: (t2830) A (2 players)
CO bets t3707 (All-In), Hero calls t3707

Total pot: t10244

Results:
Hero had 5, A (two pair, Aces and fives).
CO had 9, J (one pair, fours).
Outcome: Hero won t10244

With a hand like 65, I’d be far more inclined to bet the turn. This is because my opponent is pretty much freerolling me on the river. He’s probably not betting it unless it either improves him or is a scare card, in which case I won’t be able to call anyway. Like here, I would have folded 65 on the river (probably).

With the A5, though, there is a fair chance that I dominate my opponent. If he has something like AQ, then good things can actually happen if I let him see the river. Plus, one of the best bluff cards on the river is actually going to improve my hand.

5 thoughts on “Betting For Protection”

  1. An example from the good old full ring days when people used to limp/call low pps in EP all the time: you raise their limp with AK, flop is K72r, it’s tempting to check back because you know they have a pocket pair and they’re never putting in any more money unless it’s 77 or 22, so you’re not getting called by worse, and you’re certainly not folding out better. The problem is, they’re never putting in more money on later streets without a set either, so by checking flop, you’re just letting them draw to a two-outter that will cost you a bunch of money. It took me getting stacked by turned sets against those guys a couple of times to realize that checking the flop is just letting them freeroll me.

    • If those guys were really check-folding whenever they missed their sets, then I’d agree with you. In my experience, they often would call a bet if you checked back the flop. Or, if they were also limp-calling suited connectors, they’d sometimes bluff the turn. I usually considered the chances of those things higher than the risk of letting them draw to a 2-outer. Also, if those guys start getting excited on a K-high flop, don’t stack off to them.

    • I just glanced at it, and it looks likes the only thing they screwed up was that I had J9s, not off-suit as they say in the first part of the HH. Is there something else I’m missing?

      I do appreciate the heads up, though- I didn’t even know they’d published this!

  3. FWF made a pretty good statement about ‘betting for protection’ that is mostly in line with what you’re saying here – something along the lines of.

    “Giving up free cards is a fundamental error in poker, and shouldn’t be done unless the EV of checking can outweigh the EV lost by not betting.”

Comments are closed.