---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by Hielko (Mid Stakes)

How? Assuming both ranges are same there's still a point where your perceived range is weak enough that villain will have inelastic playing back ranges which is not related to your bet size and they're not making a math mistake. In that case betting bigger is just spewing.

Here you are assuming that villain will have an inelastic playing back range. My whole point is that from a GTO perspective villain is making a mistake if that is the case, his range should not be inelastic w.r.t. your bet sizing. You base your argument implicitly on its own conclusion.

And your remark about someone being able to raise smaller to achieve the same leverage is also flawed, because exactly the same concept with regards to bet sizing is also at work there. You simply assume that giving better odds doesn't matter; but it does.

If you are bluffing someone with the maximum frequency possible it's at the point where bluffing more would result in you being exploitable slash -ev (by definition). You would become exploitable by people being able to float/rebluff/bluffcatch you effectively. When you bluff smaller those options are getting cheaper because villain is getting better odds to make those plays. And because of that a part of villains range moves from being breakeven/marginal -ev towards being +ev against your range. And to fix that situation you need reduce your bluffing frequency to restore the equilibrium.

All I'm saying is villain may be inelastic playing back range which makes bigger bet = lower playing back frequency not true. Obv bet sizing matters in general because villain's range's will not always be inelastic and all the GTO stuff can't be argued since math is math. Villain is not always making a mistake by using an inelastic range again us so bigger bet = more folds or villain is making a mistake is not true. Good example is when we bet large villain may view the bet as polarized (perceived range) and may cause them to call with more bluff catchers. They're not playing GTO but they're not making a mistake either unless our range is perfectly balanced.

Good example is when we bet large villain may view the bet as polarized (perceived range) and may cause them to call with more bluff catchers. They're not playing GTO but they're not making a mistake either unless our range is perfectly balanced.

Yeah, but at least his Call has a lower EV when he calls the same % of his range against also a bigger bet as he would call against a smaller bet, if both bettingranges are the same.

Fundamentally as you know, it is true that you can add more bluffcombos into your bettingrange the bigger you are betting.
But I know where you wanna go.
But the thing is that I think a decent REG will definitely decrease his playingback_range vs. a bigger Bet and vice versa, just due to the Odds.
Every C/Raise, Float, etc. would need more FEQ (B/c the costs for any of those moves would be higher).
Also of course every Bluffctacher needs more EQ...

So imo a decent REGs will of course fold more of his range to a bigger cbet (also on dry Boards) than vs. a smaller cbet

Time Link to 00:13:12

After he 4 bets you think about shipping, later on you search him if he plays other tables and the result is no and you then 5betbluff allin. Dont you think it is a reason not to 5betship if he is not playing other tables? (therefor less likely regular therefor 4 betbluffs not as often) ?

After he 4 bets you think about shipping, later on you search him if he plays other tables and the result is no and you then 5betbluff allin. Dont you think it is a reason not to 5betship if he is not playing other tables? (therefor less likely regular therefor 4 betbluffs not as often) ?

He's hidden from search, so more likely to be a regular.