I think I'm going to kick off this idea with a set or an overpair I'm willing to go all the way with. I do think this kind of weak bet is going to invite a lot of raising.

As a result, I'm not really recommending it as primary strategy, just one to shift into if you have the feeling that people are laying down hands against you that they really should be calling or raising with.

I like Harringtons take on a continuation bet of 3/4 pot with missed and hit hands that you raised with the exception being when you limp and even the cocktail waitress tries to call the raise, that half pot in a massive pot is much stronger.

I like making a "probe" bet in my raised pots with a very strong hand that I want an aggressive player to try blasting me off my weak bet, and against weaker opponents in their raised pots, when my read is solid and I don't mind taking 88 unimproved really far and they are unlikely to attempt to outplay me. If you know an opponent is able to raise a blocking bet on principle alone half pot probing bets are asking for trouble with many hands that I think are good and a bigger lead into him with unimproved 55 vs his likely AK that missed in order to iniate a fold from him or a raise. I guess that is why the adage, "Set it or forget it." stands to be the easiest way to play little pairs. I think a skilled player can figure out how to win money with them in and out of position unimproved given the correct opponents.

I think mixing it up with the weak bet by taking down a pot with 88 unimproved vs. AK, and then making it with a strong hand in someones raised pot later will get you more milage out it. It might also make your next full pot bet in a raised pot look like TPTK instead of a set, which will induce more action from possible overpairs backing down.

You might want to try some experiments with shifting gears against different player types online before wading into the deeper money live game.

You know, I don't really like playing when I get too much action... I would rather be percieved as tight and getting little action past the flop, so that I can play position more than cards. I'm more likely to be able to get away with raising QJ with two limpers in the cutoff and making it stick on near any flop where the opponent doesn't hold a very good hand. Smallish bets and crazy mixed up play on draws, made hands, over cards, small pairs disguises my hands so well that my opponents think they can't read me. I want my opponents thinking they know what I got so that when I do start mixing it up I can win with nothing more often. I try to use tight image to disguise my loose play, going the other way is far more dangerous but more profitable.

Hope my thoughts didn't wander too far off topic, I need some sleep.

Yes, rd, I think you're quite right in saying that you really need to be read-based here.

I tried it on one tonight--not completely sure whether it was a mistake or not, although it did lead to laying down the best hand with no big loss.

Here's what happened: I raise QQ to $20 and get 5 callers, including some major LAGs. Flop comes 679 with 2 to a suit. I bet out $40 into the $100 pot and get raised to $140 by one LAG, who is very capable of playing T8 to a raise, one more caller, and I lay down. The LAG raiser had 68s (no flush draw), and I would have won. But I really didn't like my overpair all that much with a possible straight out there. And I'm not at all sure that full pot would have taken it down--maybe, maybe not. In all reality, playing the hand a bit defensively wouldn't have been a bad play there, I think (check-call unless it gets too heavy).

I think it's a play to make rarely and a nice one mainly to use in order to stay ahead of the game. Having made that laydown, I think I might try it on a set (big or little) or something like that next time. In any case, I don't think the tight players in the game could resist raising their big pair to a bet like that (if I'm the one calling the raise), and with the LAGs, there's a problem in calling raises with little pairs since they're very difficult to stack in light of the looseness of their raises. But they're likely to take a stab at it even with nothing on a weak-looking probe bet.

Anyhow, in introducing it into one's game, I think it's probably best to do on hands where you actually WANT a lot of heat. Once they start viewing that as your "bet on a monster," you can then use that read against opponents who know you.

For the moment, I see really only the two situations where I like the probe bet:

1) Sets (or similar) against loose raisers.

2) Sets (or similar) against weak-tight opponents with a suspected overpair.

And for the weak continuation bet really very similar:

1) You flop a big set after raising.

2) You flop the nut flush on AKs

Against TAGs, I don't really think the bet is particularly desirable at all, but, honestly, in my game, none of the tight players are sufficiently aggressive imo, and none of the aggressive players are very tight at all.