continuation bet EV exploit GTO ranges This video tests five c-bet strategies from complex to simple. Using solver analysis, it measures EV loss across different approaches. Results show simplified strategies lose minimal EV while being much easier to play. Range betting loses only 6bb/100 despite maximum simplicity. Simple c-bet strategies retain nearly all EV. Even range betting loses just 6bb/100 while cutting complexity dramatically. Strategic Simplification Breakdown: Complex four-sizing GTO strategy serves as baseline with 2.98bb EV for cutoff position Dynamic two-sizing approach (25% or 75% pot) loses zero EV compared to complex strategy Single 33% pot-size betting maintains 2.97bb EV with minimal strategic complexity PLO-style pot-betting strategy loses only 2bb/100 despite aggressive simplification Range betting every flop for 33% loses 6bb/100 but offers maximum ease of implementation Practical execution on later streets matters more than theoretical flop EV differences Defensive considerations require studying opponent bet sizes regardless of personal strategy choice
