Do you pay attention to bet sizing patterns?

philipabb

philipabb

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Awards
1
Poker Chips
20
Casino Coins
0
One thing I’ve started noticing is that some players seem to use different bet sizes depending on the strength of their hand.

For example, a player might consistently use a smaller bet when they’re bluffing or have a marginal hand, but suddenly switch to a much larger size when they have a strong hand.

I’m not talking about one isolated hand — I mean seeing the same sizing pattern several times against the same player.

Do you actually keep track of these patterns, or do you think bet sizing is too inconsistent to be useful?

Have you ever noticed a sizing pattern that helped you make a decision later in the session?
 
Reply
  • Like
Reactions: Debi, Nameless14 and nilsharker
I think it depends on the player, but bet sizing is very useful.

I try to think what are they trying to tell me? Is the sizing meant to show strength or weakness.

The other thing to look at is how they react to your sizing, some players will call any min raise but wont call for 1.5x etc.
 
Reply
  • Like
Reactions: philipabb
TeUnit said:
I think it depends on the player, but bet sizing is very useful.

I try to think what are they trying to tell me? Is the sizing meant to show strength or weakness.

The other thing to look at is how they react to your sizing, some players will call any min raise but wont call for 1.5x etc.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree. I think the reaction to sizing can sometimes be even more useful than the sizing itself.

I’ve also noticed that some players have very consistent patterns, but you need to see it a few times before trusting it. One unusual bet doesn’t mean much, but if someone keeps doing the same thing with similar hands, I definitely pay more attention to it.

The min-raise example is a good one too. Some players seem to have completely different ranges depending on whether they’re facing a small raise or a bigger one.
 
wavefunction said:
Certainly ,It provides valuable information
Click to expand...
Exactly. One example is when a player shoves all-in after missing a flush draw. If you notice that a specific player does this repeatedly, it becomes very valuable information. Next time you’re in a similar situation against that player, you already know that an all-in doesn’t necessarily mean a strong hand.
 
there are patterns but because we play poker we should mix behaviours at the table
 
Reply
  • Like
Reactions: philipabb
miroslata32 said:
there are patterns but because we play poker we should mix behaviours at the table
Click to expand...
I agree. There are betting patterns, but we should mix our behavior at the table. I never want to give a player a free or cheap draw that gives them the right odds to outdraw me. But if we always bet big whenever the board is wet, an observant player will notice that pattern. The challenge is to charge the draw while still keeping our betting patterns unpredictable.
 
That is the reason why some pros or streamers like Denys Chufarin and Kmart uses randomizers (numbers between 1 and 100) to decide to make a flat or agressive raise, or bet small or high to stay unpredictable.

I will definitely note this when playing 2 or 3 tables. But sometime I grind a lot tables to make one big stack and then focus on that deep run, in the stage of 8 tables I wont notice too much.

When playing a short amount of tables, I will definitely use any exploit possible. If the moves they make trigger your intuition try and follow it as long it is correct and profitable.
 
GTOSunRun said:
That is the reason why some pros or streamers like Denys Chufarin and Kmart uses randomizers (numbers between 1 and 100) to decide to make a flat or agressive raise, or bet small or high to stay unpredictable.

I will definitely note this when playing 2 or 3 tables. But sometime I grind a lot tables to make one big stack and then focus on that deep run, in the stage of 8 tables I wont notice too much.

When playing a short amount of tables, I will definitely use any exploit possible. If the moves they make trigger your intuition try and follow it as long it is correct and profitable.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Randomizing makes sense when you want to avoid becoming predictable, especially when playing fewer tables and having more time to pay attention to opponents.

When playing 8 tables, I think it becomes much harder to notice these small patterns. But when you're playing 2–3 tables, those little betting patterns and timing tells can become very useful exploits. If your intuition picks up something repeatedly, and you can confirm that it is actually profitable, I think it's worth following.
 
Reply
  • Like
Reactions: GTOSunRun
philipabb said:
One thing I’ve started noticing is that some players seem to use different bet sizes depending on the strength of their hand.

For example, a player might consistently use a smaller bet when they’re bluffing or have a marginal hand, but suddenly switch to a much larger size when they have a strong hand.

I’m not talking about one isolated hand — I mean seeing the same sizing pattern several times against the same player.

Do you actually keep track of these patterns, or do you think bet sizing is too inconsistent to be useful?

Have you ever noticed a sizing pattern that helped you make a decision later in the session?
Click to expand...
Definitely, there's a lot of giveaways in it for sure
 
Hi,
Of course I keep an eye on them. For instance, there are players with big stacks who make massive raises—like 12 times the big blind from UTG—just to keep everyone out and steal the blinds; however, from what I’ve seen, these players don't last long at the table. The key is to maintain a consistent raise size—adjusting it based on the current blind level or your stack depth—regardless of whether you're holding pocket Aces, 77, or 5-4.
That’s my take, and it’s generally how I play—though not always; I mess up sometimes, too
 
Yes, but as you pointed out, I only turn it into a "note" once I have a “solid foundation.”
 
TerryBLE said:
Yes, but as you pointed out, I only turn it into a "note" once I have a “solid foundation.”
Click to expand...
Exactly. The key is to observe the same betting pattern across multiple hands before drawing a conclusion. One hand can be misleading, but repeated patterns give you a much more reliable read on your opponent.
 
Reply
  • Like
Reactions: TerryBLE
Stringy said:
not really, maybe if a game has been played out for long but normally big is bad small is good check raise is dangerous
Click to expand...
You don't always need a huge sample to spot useful betting patterns. Generally, big bets can indicate strength, small bets can indicate weakness, and check-raises are dangerous. Of course, it depends on the player and the situation, but these are useful patterns to watch for.
 
philipabb said:
One thing I’ve started noticing is that some players seem to use different bet sizes depending on the strength of their hand.

For example, a player might consistently use a smaller bet when they’re bluffing or have a marginal hand, but suddenly switch to a much larger size when they have a strong hand.

I’m not talking about one isolated hand — I mean seeing the same sizing pattern several times against the same player.

Do you actually keep track of these patterns, or do you think bet sizing is too inconsistent to be useful?

Have you ever noticed a sizing pattern that helped you make a decision later in the session?
Click to expand...
Definitely worth focusing on if you see it happen multiple times. Sometimes I see players betting small with bad hands and then suddenly betting big ones with monsters. I usually wait until it happens a few times before I start paying extra attention to the player, because sometimes good players will use the same sizing for bluffs. ♠️
 
Reply
  • Like
Reactions: philipabb
Back
Top