Q&A #50: Optimal Bluffing Frequency
Don't miss one article! Subscribe to the Full Feed RSS or get NPA in your inbox.
Jim asks,
I know I am at very small stakes and bluffing shouldn’t be too much of a concern. But I am still trying to grasp me head around the concept and it’s bugging me to the point I need to ask someone.
In “The Theory of Poker” It says in an example of Bluffing Frequency, that if a pot lays an opponent 6-1, that, your chances of you bluffing him should be the same.
But what about other hands? What if the pot laid 4-1, 8-1, 12-1? You just can’t change your bluffing frequency on the spot to accomidate the hand at the moment. He doesn’t mean that I sit around and wait for the pot odds to be around 6-1 each time I want to bluff, that makes no sense. I just don’t get it.
I feel that even though it’s only .50/$1 table I play online, I feel that I am getting taken advantage of a bit because I am tight and fold to a raise a lot. When I do raise and get a hand, I am not getting any action. This is the reason I wanted to study bluffs. Besides, I think that practicing it for .50/$1 would be better than hitting the live $2/$4 since I am goig to screw it up quite a few times before I get the basics down.
Ok, this concept is a little tricky, so I’ll try to explain it simply. The Theory of Poker by David Sklansky explores what the game-theoretical optimal bluffing frequency is. You can think of the optimal bluffing frequency as the amount you could bluff so that you don’t care how your opponent responds, you’ll still make the same amount on average (i.e., your EV is the same whether your opponent calls or folds). That is, if you bluff at optimal frequency, there’s nothing your opponent can do… if they call, they’ll usually be paying you off. If they fold, then sometimes you’ll have bluffed them out. Damned if they do, and damned if they don’t.
The remainder of this article is insider content available to premium members only. Log in to your account or become a premium member and get instant access.
Tags: bluffing, david-sklansky, game-theory, optimal-bluffing, poker, the-theory-of-poker
Hi
What I tend to do is always bluff (semi bluff) every hand where I have a good draw (8 outs or more) or if the pot is large and I have a few outs.
This is explained in Ed’s book in his Q7s example for where you have few outs including back door outs.
if The pot is large then protect it, and if you have enough pot equity then bet for value. So in cases where a bet helps protect and add value and also shows you to be a bluffer, you are in a win, win , win situation and at low limits these hands make a lot of money even though you lose some of them.
I do not know how well this works in higher limit games or no limit but in loose games whether passive or aggressive this makes money.
I would love to know how strategys for this differ on NL tournaments as a bluff can knock you out completely but never bluffing could blind you out in a fast structure.
PeterL
My Blog