Hi all,I'm a new member and have only just started watching some videos but one thing I'm a little confused about is optimal cbet sizing. In one video I watched it was advocating 2/3 pot but in another leak finder there was a suggestion to make it around half pot.Historically I've been using 2/3 sizing but I'm interested to heat thoughts on which is optimal.Thanks.
I originally switched to a 2/3 sizing because I felt it yielded more predictable and exploitable results faster in matches. That was in a turbo and regular speed structure on Stars (the old 5 minute, 10 minute structures). Today, with faster blinds and more advanced knowledge available, half pot bets at shorter effective stacks can make a ton of sense.That said, you see some variation, even among the most successful and best players in the game. Some really good players were betting 70/120, you might have seen some chatter about that here or on 2p2 last year, I remember it being talked about a bit then. When there isn't a widely accepted perfect "proof" for a strategy or approach (either general or against specific opponent types), there is more variation. Variance occurs throughout the playerbase, as different players think about things differently and experience different situations and respond differently. Even talking together players disagree. That's why it's so important to take a very analytical approach to situations. If you can really provide sound, solid reasoning for an adjustment or a strategy, and there are other things that you do that you cannot provide reason for... you might want to question those that you cannot provide reason for, particularly if you aren't experiencing the results that you are looking for.But one key is objective feedback, you can't ask questions to good players in a way that will just give you a feel good answer, you can't be bouncing ideas off of negative or uninterested or unskilled players and you can't just ignore feedback alltogether and assume everything you do that you have some reason for is enough (basically you have to convince other good players it is best, at least if you are getting their objective, focused, interested feedback).Now, in some situations you can both disagree on things like ranges, but if you can find some common ground on assumptions and solve some situations, you can get an idea of where your instincts and general adjustments are stronger or weaker.