CBet definition

[Darvini]

I was building a general fold to second barrel stat. Meaning how often player just calls flop and then folds to turn bet. Like this:

(lookup_actions_f.action='C' or lookup_actions_f.action='XC') and holdem_hand_player_detail.amt_t_bet_facing > 0 and (lookup_actions_t.action='F' or lookup_actions_t.action='XF') / (lookup_actions_f.action='C' or lookup_actions_f.action='XC') and holdem_hand_player_detail.amt_t_bet_facing > 0

And I tried to compare it to Fold to turn CBet. I thought that fold to turn CBet would be a subset of this stat but it turns out it isnt. So far it looks like holdem_hand_player_statistics.flg_t_cbet_def_opp are those cases where player just faced a flop cbet and not only called it. So if player raises a flop CBet he still faces a turn Cbet if the same player bets him on turn.

When I ran a custom report on myself I noticed that (holdem_hand_player_statistics.flg_f_cbet_def_opp and holdem_hand_player_statistics.enum_t_cbet_action='F') = holdem_hand_player_statistics.enum_t_cbet_action='F' Meaning both sum up the same number, but that (holdem_hand_player_statistics.enum_f_cbet_action='C' and holdem_hand_player_statistics.enum_t_cbet_action='F') differs from both. With opportunities holdem_hand_player_statistics.flg_t_cbet_def_opp was one more then (holdem_hand_player_statistics.flg_f_cbet_def_opp and holdem_hand_player_statistics.flg_t_cbet_def_opp) with the former being 696 and the latter 695. I dont know why there is one case difference but the folds are identical. I havent testet the river stats yet. So is the following correct:

face flop CBet = pf final action is call a raise and on flop face a bet from the preflop raiser
face turn CBet = face flop CBet and face a bet from the flop CBetter
face river CBet = face turn CBet and face a bet from the turn CBetter

Flop CBet = preflop last raise and flop bet
Turn Cbet = flop cbet and turn bet
River CBet = turn CBet and river bet

[WhiteRider]

As far as I'm aware, you can only c-bet the turn if you c-bet the flop and are called. If someone else raises they take the initiative and you can't c-bet again.

However, I have found a hand where 3 players see the flop and the PFA (preflop aggressor) makes a c-bet, another player raises, the 3rd player calls and the PFA 3-bets then only the 3rd player calls:

OnGame - €0.30 NL (5 max) - Holdem - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 3

Hero posts SB €0.15, BB posts BB €0.30

Pre Flop: (€0.45) Hero has 5:heart: 9:club:

fold, CO calls €0.30, BTN raises to €0.60, fold, BB calls €0.30, CO calls €0.30

Flop: (€1.95, 3 players) J:diamond: K:heart: 4:spade:
BB checks, CO checks, BTN bets €0.30, BB raises to €0.60, CO calls €0.60, BTN raises to €0.90, fold, CO calls €0.30

Turn: (€4.35, 2 players) 2:club:
CO checks, BTN bets €2.00, fold

BTN wins €4.14

Here, the button is the PFA and c-bets the flop but also 3-bets, meaning they made the last aggessive action so [it seems] that they are able to c-bet the turn too.
This means that there was a c-bet on the flop but the cutoff didn't face it (because they faced the BB's raise). The cutoff then does face a c-bet on the turn, though.

I will have to clarify this with the development team to see if this is intended behaviour.

[bender]

I think cbet definition (on every street) should count times when player who showed the most agression on the previous street bets again the next street (if has opportunity). I don't think you current definition is good. For instance, the only way to cbet river is to raise preflop, then cbet flop, turn and river; if player checks flop and bets turn (opponent just flats) and bets river this last river bet is not considered to be a cbet which is wrong I think.
Also, in a lot of cases when I get raised on the flop I look at cbet turn stat to determine how likely is the player to continue his aggression on the next street (if I flat), but in the same time I do realize this stat doesn't actually get incremented in this specific scenario, but I think it should.
I hope you understand what I mean. If this is not clear please ask me. I really want those stats to be changed.

WhiteRider, it appears that the way you say cbets are defined is the way I want them to be. However, I have an impression you are wrong about actually implemented cbet definition. I did some testing a while ago to figure this out and I may be wrong. Sorry, I can't test it right now because I am running maintenance.

[WhiteRider]

I'm still waiting for a definitive answer, but we think that if you make a c-bet on a street then you can make one on the next street regardless of other actions. So if you c-bet the flop then you can c-bet the turn even if someone raises you. However, if you do not c-bet the flop then you cannot c-bet the turn. A c-bet is a continuation bet, so it implies continued betting - if you check instead of betting on one street then there is nothing to "continue" on the next.

[bender]

I'm still waiting for a definitive answer, but we think that if you make a c-bet on a street then you can make one on the next street regardless of other actions. So if you c-bet the flop then you can c-bet the turn even if someone raises you.

I don't think this is intuitive for users of this stat. I you cbet flop, get raised and just flat, you shouldn't be able to cbet the turn. If you bet the turn this should be a donk bet. Flop raiser is the only one who should be able to cbet turn.

However, if you do not c-bet the flop then you cannot c-bet the turn. A c-bet is a continuation bet, so it implies continued betting - if you check instead of betting on one street then there is nothing to "continue" on the next.

I understand this. If I check the flop and bet turn, my bet on turn is not a cbet. I agree here. However, If I check flop, bet turn and bet river, my river bet should be a cbet (even though turn bet wasn't a cbet).
So, in my opinion, ability to cbet on a street should be assigned to the last agressor on the previous street (and him/her only) (the last agressor action could be bet/raise/n-bet). All bets into previous street last agressor should be donk bets if the agressor didn't have chance to act yet. Sounds like a simpler and more intuitive version of the cbet concept to me :)

[WhiteRider]

I will pass your comments on to the development team, although I doubt that the way that it is defined will be changed now, since people have been using it like this and changing it would cause more confusion.

If you prefer a different definition you can build a custom stat for it. If you'd like some help to do this please let us know.
Tutorial: Custom Reports and Statistics

[Darvini]

I agree that CBet should be possible only when player was the last aggressor on previous street and that is why I made new CBet stats for turn and river so that they are compatible with my thinking. But if cbet was only about last street aggression then there still would be need for a 3 brl stat.

Statistical reference guide says: "A continuation bet is opening the betting on a street when you made the last bet or raise on the previous street." So just making a CBet on the flop should not be enough to be able to make it on the turn. You should be the last aggressor.

btw. http://www.pokertracker.com/products/PT ... Schema.pdf crashes my firefox about every second time I open it. Is it just my firefox or is it the site?

[kraada]

I'm able to open that PDF so it may be you.

I just ran some additional searches on my database - all times where the player cbet the flop, cbet the turn, and faced a flop raise, they did 3-bet.

So my guess is that if you cbet, and you face a raise you can only cbet the turn if you 3-bet the flop - all of your actions have to have been aggressive each time you get one in order to cbet the next street. Once you break your aggressive "streak" you can no longer cbet.

So the vast majority of river cbets will in fact be triple barrels unless you play quite deep. As a preflop raise, flop bet, flop 3bet, and turn bet will almost always be all in (3BB PFR, 5BB cbet, 35BB flop 3-bet, 57BB turn shove) - you'd need quite a bit more than 100BBs in order to really have room for a river bet.

[WhiteRider]

I've had it confirmed by our lead developer that you can only make c-bets when all of your previous actions have been aggressive (and you were the preflop aggressor). If you call any raise you can't make any more c-bets.
i.e. If you c-bet the flop and re-raise a raise you can c-bet the turn, but if you call the raise instead then you can't.

[marvin]

you say that for being cbettor, the pfa must be the aggressor on previous street.
look this spot flop: villain check-call to Cbet executed by pfA. on turn villain donk bet, pfA raises and villain call (so pfa is aggressor but no cbet on turn). river: villain check, pfa bet. THIS IS CBET? pfa has been agressor in each street, but not has made cbet on turn...