Case Study Series: Exploiting Continuation Bets

A Common Leak Among “Solid” Players

Continuation betting is one of the most fundamental tools in poker. By following up pre-flop aggression with a flop bet, the aggressor represents a strong range, applies pressure, and often wins pots uncontested. Regulars know this—and many of them lean on the c-bet too heavily.

At first glance, this might look like good strategy. After all, aggression is profitable. But datamined hand histories tell a different story. Across millions of hands, a clear trend emerges: regulars c-bet at frequencies far above solver recommendations, especially in multiway pots and on board textures where checking should be the default. This imbalance creates systematic opportunities to profit—if you know how to adjust.

Step 1: What Theory Says About C-Betting

Game theory optimal (GTO) solvers prescribe nuanced c-betting strategies. They recommend betting more frequently on dry, unconnected flops (like A♠7♦2♣), and less frequently on dynamic, connected boards (like J♥9♥8♣). Solvers also advise mixing checks even on favorable boards, keeping ranges balanced and preventing exploitation.

In practice, a balanced flop c-bet frequency is often somewhere between 50–65%, depending on the situation. Anything much higher risks becoming predictable and exploitable.

Step 2: What the Data Reveals

Datamined hand histories show that regulars often exceed these theoretical frequencies, c-betting 70–85% of the time in single-raised pots and close to 100% of the time in heads-up situations. This overuse is even more glaring in multiway pots, where theory recommends much lower c-bet rates (often below 40%), yet many regs still fire more than 70%.

Why does this happen?

Habit and heuristics: Many players adopt “always c-bet heads-up” as a rule of thumb.
Pool tendencies: Because weaker players fold too much on flops, regulars assume betting every flop is profitable.
Fear of passivity: Regulars often fear “giving up initiative” by checking, even in spots where theory says it’s correct.

Whatever the reasons, the result is a consistent population-level deviation that sharp players can exploit.

Step 3: The Counter-Strategy

If regulars are c-betting too often, you don’t need to fight fire with fire. The exploit lies in calling wider, floating with backdoor potential, and raising selectively when the board texture and your hand allow it.

Practical Adjustments:

Float Wider in Position
- Hands like K9s on T♣7♦2♠ or QJs on 8♠5♦3♣ are often folds in solver land—but if villain is c-betting too much, these become profitable calls.
- The key is to leverage position to apply pressure on later streets when their range is weak.
Raise With Hands That Block Strong Continues
- On J♦7♠4♠, if villain c-bets too frequently, raising with hands like A♠5♠ or K♠9♠ works well. You block strong hands and fold out the weakest part of their over-wide betting range.
Punish Multiway Over-C-Betting
- Solvers drastically reduce flop c-betting in multiway pots, but datamined histories show regs don’t adjust. Calling with marginal made hands (like second pair) becomes more profitable, since opponents are betting ranges that should often be checking.

Step 4: A Case Study in Action

Spot: Button opens, Big Blind calls. Flop: T♦6♣2♠.
Theory: Solver c-bets here ~60% of the time, mixing checks with weaker hands and certain mid-strength holdings.
Data: Datamined histories show many regulars c-bet 85–90% of the time.
Adjustment: With a hand like 87s (backdoor straight and flush potential), solver might lean toward folding sometimes. Against an over-c-betting opponent, however, calling becomes clearly profitable, planning to bluff turn cards or hit disguised equity.

The adjustment doesn’t need to be radical. It’s about recognizing that their betting frequency is inflated, and your counter-strategy should exploit that inflation.

Step 5: Balancing Exploitation and Defense

As with all population exploits, there’s a danger of over-adjusting. If you float too wide or raise too frequently, sharp regulars can counter by tightening their range or barreling aggressively. The goal is not to abandon theory, but to shift slightly away from it when the data supports the move. A balanced approach ensures that you exploit leaks without becoming the one who’s exploitable.

Conclusion: Turning Aggression Into Profit

C-betting is powerful, but overuse makes it predictable. Hand histories reveal that regulars lean too heavily on this weapon, betting flops at unsustainably high frequencies. By calling wider, raising selectively, and punishing over-aggression in multiway spots, you can turn their misplaced aggression into consistent profit.

This is the essence of using datamined data: not just identifying leaks, but applying counter-strategies grounded in both theory and evidence. Regulars may look tough, but even their “standard” plays contain cracks—cracks that open up once you bring large-scale data to the table.