Hand Discussion #10: My Thoughts

Ed,

I think that calling the flop and turn made it easier to bluff when the club dropped on the end. If you had chosen to bluff the flop or turn, would you have fired again on the river when the club dropped? Seems like the line is less believable as a club draw at that point.

Thanks,

Todd

Todd, I don’t know if it would be that more unbeievable if they had seen him be aggressive and/or push flush draws earlier. But yeah, call,call, raise sure looks like a flush.

I don’t know if how genuine it looked would be a problem if he fired earlier as much as the size of the pot by the river.

One thing i liked about raising on the flop is if you get called, check the turn for a free card for gutshot draw and the flush draw comes in on the river, I think that’s a good opportunity for a bluff on the river as well. Looks like you raised for a free card, took it, and got there.

But I’m glad Ed brought up the pot committed point. I notice that when the stacks are shorter but should be looking more even with bigger stacks. PNLv1 has helped me evaluate that more consistently.

I thought that was a reason to raise on the flop, however, was to make them uneasy with pot commitment decision early in hand.

Ed,
Were the opponents observant enough to fear a flop raise more, thinking that you know you are squeezed with 2 behind and are raising anyway? Or would that be minimal difference in if it would work or not (the preflop raise, I mean)

Todd… If I remember small stakes holdem about a river bluff, it only have to work ridiculously few times to be profitable! (one time on twenty… I dont remember exactly) so in my opinion, we dont care how this bluff would have worked on the river if we had raised the turn… just, its not a problem if the river bluff does not work everytime, its enough if it works sometimes to be profitable… moreover, raising the turn could make the pot so big that a donk will call with hopeless holdings while a timid player with strong holding could fold!

il-professore

That was a great book wasn’t it? It’s a little different here because that was a limit book and this is a nl hand. I don’t instantly recall the exact situation but that number would have reflected the size of the limit bet vs. the pot. In a limit game that is often around 1/20 the pot and so a bluff can have a relatively small chance of success and still be profitable. (5% chance being break even)

Here the pot is 225. Normally we would add Ed’s 40 for the call and then give the amount of the raise separately. But that wouldn’t apply here because of course nobody would call in this situation, to quote a line from Ed in T&P, ” you would have to be daft…” So he is risking 200 to win 225.

If his chance of success was 5% his EV would be 225-3800 = -3575/20= -$178 So this case is different. Ed’s bluff is saying here he figures it will work about 90% of the time or more. That’s why it’s great to follow him through a hand. I’m sure his estimation was very close to 100% , this is why reads are so important with the math.

Of course, you can also factor in the advertising value if you get called to offset your %’s some, but that’s beyond me. I would just think in the back of my mind that well, I do have that plus here if it fails.

I know this wasn’t a great explanation but if I said anything that was actually wrong someone please correct me so I am not giving out bad information.

somebody remember how many times a guy must fold to my river bluff to make it profitable? i dont remember, but its a strikingly low number of times! I think more than one on six times. but quoting ed: “I thought a bluff was still profitable, as my opponents would likely fold at least half the time to a big raise.”

Yes, I’m an idiot. Wasn’t thinking. On this hand it would need to work 8 out of 17 times for break even. 8*225= 1800 9*-200=-1800 So chance of the bluff working should be estimated at 47% or better.

il, my point being that its not a static number, neither in limit nor no limit. It always depends on the size of the pot and the bet amount. Of course, MUCH easier to figure in limit as the bet amount is static. In no limit not only is the size not set, but your chances of success estimation will change with the size of the bet you think about bluffing with. whew, heady stuff, huh?

Man, some type of edit button like the message board and i would look smarter, but since I’m a self-confessed idiot it doesn’t matter. Even that might not save me. AND making a thoughtless mental error doesn’t hurt much when your typing and not betting =)

Thanks Ed for sharing your insights once again. I’m glad to see I had the right idea this time.

That guy who kept folding his cards face up seems like he was trying to impress the table with how great a player he was (look at me I make great laydowns). But all he was really doing was giving you information that helped you to beat him.

Ego always seems to get in the way in this game, doesn’t it?

thank you jamleeco.

On the flop I put villain on a flush draw.

But after Todd replied to me then I started thinking flush draw or weak ace.

And it was a weak ace!

It’s all about range… and Ed had his range pegged!

Based on bettor tendencies I do agree with Ed that the turn was a safer bluff option. The blinds showed weakness twice… and villain kept on betting weak.

Club on river is scarier bluff since the donkeys could be trying to slow play flush, and think that’s the right thing to do.

…snip…
I don’t know if how genuine it looked would be a problem if he fired earlier as much as the size of the pot by the river.
…snip…

…snip…
so in my opinion, we dont care how this bluff would have worked on the river if we had raised the turn… just, its not a problem if the river bluff does not work everytime
…snip…

It’s true that the bluff doesn’t need to work every time and that it is a good bluff if you have a good read on your opponent. I think it is a good idea, though, to have your hand tell a consistent story, especially if your active on the button. I like to think about planning my bluffs in the same way that I plan my made hands. What streets and cards can I credibly bluff on, has my prior action made it tough for me to bluff here, etc, etc. Certainly a flop raise, check behind for the free card and a river value bet on the flush card tells a good story if the UTG player can believe that you semi-bluff your draws. If he can’t imagine you’d play a hand that way, I think you end up getting called by AQ/AJ quite a bit from a thinking or skeptical player. In Ed’s case, this didn’t seem to be much of a problem. He could probably have made the pot big on any street and gotten the villain to lay it down (while muttering “one of these time I’m going to call him…”).

Speaking of bluffs. Matt Lessinger’s “Book of Bluffs” is really a good read for this sort of thing. One worth adding to your library.

http://www.amazon.com/Book-Bluffs-How-Bluff-Poker/dp/0446695629

excerpt here:

http://www.hachettebookgroupusa.com/books/69/0446695629/chapter_excerpt21884.html

Ed,
Your last post held one key phrase I wouldn’t mind seeing you elaborate on more in-depth, in a separate post.
The phrase:
“I figured that if the bettor had an ace like I suspected, the board was only going to get scarier for him.”
Why/how/when, could the board ONLY get scarier? What would the general situation/circumstance be for this to be the case? What would your general thinking process be to make use of that if you put your opponent on the Ace? What would your general thinking process be to counteract a thinking opponent when you’re the one with the Ace? How does your position influence your thinking?
Thanks,
T

Maybe its just my bad English. I dont quity understand the meaning of the paragraph:

“But I just called again. I was figuring the same upsides from the flop would carry over on the turn. And they would. But I think the downsides of an immediate raise are smaller, and that makes it the more attractive play.”

Does the “immediate raise” refer to a raise on the flop or a raise on the turn?!?

Great article anyway! Just love your articles and the different approach from much of the other poker material out there.