However that doesn’t stop people overusing the play.

I remember once cold calling a raise with AJ and the flop came AAA. I thought “Nice, but how the hell will I get any action here?”. But I needent have worried because the preflop raiser, whom I had position on, bet all three streets for me, donking off 2/3 of his stack in the process.

Conversely, when I started playing about 2 years ago I remember stacking off with 3-barrel bluffs several times with AK unimproved and wondering why my opponent wouldn’t go away.

As it is a high risk play online, I think before trying it you need most of the following variables to be working in your favour:

a) your believe you opponent has, at best, a marginal holding
b) your opponent is capable of folding marginal hands
c) your opponent is either the very weak type who lays down frequently on later streets, or is a solid and observant type
d) your action preflop and on each subsequent street makes sense with regard to the texture of the board
e) you are perceived as a strong and a fairly tight player
f) you have shown down some strong hands on the river
g) you haven’t been seen bluffing recently
h) you have position

I would say a) to d) are critical.
I’m not saying never use it, just be extremely selective about the situation you try it.

It is just to let people think that I must have had a strong hand. I’m only playing small stake mtts but I think I am getting some advantage in the mental side of the game.

It can be hard folding some marginal hands especially when the adrenalin is up after a winning bluff but I find it help to keep my opponents guessing.

For instance, if you take the example of a $100 pot, I believe that any overbet bluff should only be made as an all-in bet when the final bet is no more than 1 3/4 of the pot (give or take). If that amount leaves you less than all-in, it is too likely to arouse suspicion, as there are few players who routinely make overbet sized value bets.

The presence of a “bet pot” button online only solidifies this concept. A live game will offer different opportunities, as the final pot size is not usually known by most players who have failed to track it.

I agree with Ed in his newest book that if you know that you should bet (bluff) but do not know how much, go with 2/3 of the pot. I would also adjust this up or down depending on your opponent’s stack size. Example: $100 pot, and your opponent has $150 left. If you bet about $70 here, a desperate opponent still can raise you enough to fold you as a bluff ($80). In this case, you are probably better off bluffing pot in this instance because even the dullest players intuitively understand that if they only raise you another $50, you are almost obligated to call and they are pretty much helpless to do anything about it. or better yet, bluff all in, whether or not this is an overbet.

Furthermore, structuring your betting according to stack sizes and planned bluffs is equally as important. For the inverse of the above case, if you have only $30 left and attempt a bluff at said $100 pot, you have either wasted your money or made a mistake earlier in the hand.

Given that data I calculated the “optimal” bet size for either a) having the nuts or b) bluffing with a surely losing hand. Since I win the pot anyway in case of a) I only looked at the additional money I can gain on the river. Since I will surely lose in case of b) I have to offset only the lost bets on the river (and not the pot itself) from the won pots, because the pot is lost anyway. I ignored reraises, because I would call them in case a) and fold in case b), so I regard them as a “call” in the calling-% of my opponent.

Results:
a) Just based on these assumptions, one should bet about half the pot to pot size when holding the nuts. One should NOT go for the almost certain call, but also not bet far more than pot size.

b) Interestingly the numbers indicate that one should bet at least pot size when bluffing. EV rises even more (but shallow) with increased bet sizes, as long as it cuts down the calling percentage. Betting half the pot (as if one were holding the nuts) has only about 1/3 of EV as betting the pot.

Here’s my question to Ed and all: What are your experiences with bluff/nuts bets on the river? Are pot sized bets a “golden” bet size that obscure best whether a bet is a bluff or a value bet?

3 barrel bluffs have their place but as always you have to pick your opponents carefully. But any half-decent player should be capable of using them profitably.

I agree with the earlier poster that they are easier plays to make in live games where loss of face is a factor.

To be a good player it’s vital to mix up your game, have the ability to improvise on the fly and have the courage of your convictions when you think you can push someone off a hand.

The friendlier nature of live play makes this much easier to get away with, simply because they lose face when making big calls and getting busted. There also seems to be this imaginary agreement of camaraderie because these are people you have been joking with and talking to for a few hours, and huge bluffs would be downright mean.

Online you are better off making large value bets with 3 barrels because you will get paid handsomely for doing so. Players don’t like to fold- it’s that simple.

Man, the feel for these things is so tough sometimes.

One thing that helped me a lot is to play a bunch of heads up and short handed games. I have been playing a bunch of $20 HU SNG’s lately. You get such a better feel for board texture and how your opponent is playing. I’ve also started to add some 6-max into my regular mix to get more play with the thinner edges.

One of the things I find hard to do is to go back to full ring (I’m primarily a full ring player) and not overdo it. You don’t play as many hands with the same players, so it’s harder to develop the feel and people are generally a bit more conservative in general, even in BvB situations which are no different than HU play.