Questions Thread #13

Ed:

I’d love to see you discuss the right place for a leading bet in limit poker, aka the “donk bet” in short handed games. Can you give examples of when a leading bet into the field on the flop is better than a check raise?

Reguards,

Check Raise Remorse

A few months ago you posted an article on the $50 game at Party. You said it would be a series, but the series never came (a theme on NPA

Sorry I don’t have a specific question or hand history, as soon as I do you’ll be the first to know.

I switched from limit 2/4 to no limit last month. I ‘m playing about 10K hand a month.

I’ve started at the bottom at the $50 dollar tables (Stars, I’m not invited to the Party)

The only problem I really have, is whenever I go all in, I lose. And I usually have the worst hand. And it’s costing me all my winning.

Can you offer any general advice for all in situations at the micro stakes.

Because as far as I can tell I’m playing winning tight aggressive poker. Again going back to your experiences with the 50$ at Party.

Do you have to have the nuts to get it all at these limits?

Ed said: “I think the best way to learn isn’t to read what some blowhard like me has to say…”

Boy did that ever bring back memories! A while back I was posting on another forum - not a poker forum, but one about investing - and I spoke up strongly against the various “pie-in-the-sky get-rich-quick” schemes that often pass for “investing”. One of the forum regulars then called me a “self-rightous blowhard”! Needless to say I didn’t stay there long.

Ed, along those lines how about some more investment book recommendations? What did you think of Malkiel’s “A Random Walk Down Wall Street”? And did you ever get a chance to read Stanley’s “The Millionaire Next Door”?

Hi Ed, thank you for taking the time to answer our questions. I recently had a discussion with a friend of mine about the following hand, and we’d really appreciate comments on it. Unfortunately, we don’t have a hand history, but I will try to describe it as accurate as possible.

Hero is in middle position with a stack of 220bb. Hero has been dealt pocket 6’s and it is folded to him. He raises to 3xbb. It is then folded around to the Villain on the CO, who calls and has a stack of 160bb. Button folds and the small and big blinds also call, they have both been tight and have stacks of 100 and 200 bb respectively.

The flop comes 35J rainbow, and it is checked to Hero.

My friend described the villain as a maniac. This prompted me to say that he should have gone for the check raise on the flop, if he was sure that Villain would bet. My reasoning was that the blinds would be more likely to call his bet then Heros, and Hero could then put in a big size raise, after which everyone would fold.
If Villain would not bet, then it would depend on the turn if you would continue with the hand or not, there’s a good chance you’ll be outdrawn, but with this play you would win more bets in the long run.

However, my friend disagrees with the check raise play and says that it is better to bet out. There are too many people in the pot, and even if the blinds call the Villains bet, you could be beat already.

What do you think is the best play in this situation?

Hi, that friend is me and indeed i disagree.

If the checkraise would succeed it would have looked great on television. Though in reality it was a micro NL Holdem internet table and the checkraise move sounds a bit to FPS here ‘fancy play syndrome’.

I believe i should at least test the waters and make use of the fold equity (I was the initial raiser) and personally I really want to end the hand right there.

By checking in the hope to get a shot for the fancy check-raise i see a few scenarios.

1. I risk seeing the turn and prolly have to give up the hand.

2. The maniac makes the raise and i have to put in a lot of chips to force him out and gamble he doesn’t have the J or better.

3. Maniac makes the raise and the tight players call ? Are they all weak or not?

4. Maniac raises and one of the tight players decide to make the check raise move?

In all scenario’s i will have no idea where i stand and will have to put quite a few chips in the middle to win the hand for me that is a recipe for danger. I rather keep most of my hands simple and let my opponents decide.

I like Roman’s answer. I don’t really understand why I want to get a lot of money into the pot with a pair of 6s. If the maniac bets and both blinds call, I am going to have to put a ton of chips in to fold them out. They’re not calling even a maniac with nothing, surely.

There’s one peculiarity that I’m not sure if I’m just imagining, and, even if not, not sure how typical it is. That is, I’ve noticed that there are players who get really annoyed by over-whelming aggression and try to counter that with very questionable play. And it’s not even that rare. (And this is in full table fixed limit; short handed is of course another story.)

It usually happens after you’ve made a few preflop raises in a row, not that rare an occurence, and have perhaps folded a couple of those hands after not hitting the flop (and there being a lot of action on the flop).

Then, after a while, you pick up another raisable hand preflop and this “counter action guy” 3-bets preflop and bets and raises to the river. And when he turns over his hand, 57 offsuit, and you win with your top pair, you can’t but scratch your head wondering what the hell was the guy thinking.

And after a while, you again raise preflop, correctly, with your AJo or whatever and this guy again 3 bets, ultimately showing some strange T7 offsuit on the showdown.

Is this kind of annoyance of aggression common or I’m just imagining? By the way, I’m not complaing about it; it’s great. Especially because the annoyed guy usually isolates himself by 3-betting. Most of the loose player happily cold call two bets with any hand, but stay away from cold calling three bets. So you usually have a nice advantage on the flop against the maniac-against-aggressor.

You get so used to (and comfortable) these cold call with any two cards preflop players that this peculiar counter aggression strikes out. It almost makes me think that I should sometimes raise preflop with some questionable hand (after a few correct preflop raises) just to encourage this kind of irrational counter aggression.

Hi Roman and Jeroen,

If this is a micro stakes NLHE table, then I am going to question the initial raise with the 6’s from the middle with a couple of people left to act. It doesn’t seem likely with the maniac behind you that you would buy position with the raise and you open yourself up to having to call a bit bigger raise than you would like. Also, because this is micro, the blinds are going to ride along for a couple of BB once the maniac inevitably calls. The stacks are plenty deep, so you aren’t going to get priced out of the 66s, but I think I would prefer to limp/call as opposed to raising and having to call a raise from the blinds where you are squeezed with the maniac behind you.

On the flop, I like a check/call or maybe even a check/fold if the action makes it clear you are behind. For example:

4. Maniac raises and one of the tight players decide to make the check raise move?

I would think that being able to fold your 66’s here without putting any money into the pot on the flop is a nice outcome. Maybe it’s a move, but most of the time you’re just behind.

I think check/raising gets you involved in a biggish pot with a crappy hand, especially if the maniac bets and one or both of the blinds call. You’re not going to outplay the maniac. He’s a maniac, that’s his department. When you have a truly big hand or a real draw to a truly big hand, challenge him.

I’m a big fan of the c-bet generally, but in this case, I think it’s a good chance to pass on that option. Are there any hands better than yours that are going to fold to a c-bet? Doesn’t seem likely. Any hand with a J is calling and probably 77+ is calling as well. Is it going to clear out the riff raff? Maybe, maybe not. That board isn’t a board that hits a lot of raising hands but does hit a lot of drawing hands. I think that you often end up getting calls from overcards and honest draws. So, pass on the c-bet. Demonstrate that you can so that when you c-bet into a board where you can get a better hand to fold it is more likely to happen.

I really think you want to see as many cards as you can cheaply. You have a backdoor straight draw that has some value plus the two remaining 6s. Other than that, you are probably going to be in a place where you have to call a bigger bet than you want to with 2nd, 3rd or 4th pair.

Todd

Just to make my point clear: I totally agree that the check-raise play does not make any sense at the micro stakes.

However, in a bit more serious game, I would certainly consider using it in this situation. I think it would win more bets in this situation in the long run.
Sure, it is not without risk, but if you play it right, then I think it could work.

Hi Jeroen,

The interesting question is what sort of a game is this move effective in. My experience is mostly that of a tournament player. I use that sort of a move when I want to get an agressive player behind me off my back. I would use that sort of move beginning in the mid game where the stacks are such that I’m moving in, but not moving in with a ridiculous overbet and at a point where the villain isn’t priced in with any reasonable hand. So, somewhere where stacks are still around 50BB on average so that 10-12BB of pre-flop betting plus some reasonable flop bet lets me move in for 2 or so times the pot. When I’ve used or been abused by this move in a cash game, the game has always been playing somewhat shallow and fairly agressive. To me, the stack sizes are key.

Beyond that, I don’t really play in the kind of games where you make your money that way. It would seem in deeper stacked cash games that you want to engage really agressive players with big hands in big pots. It would seem to me that this sort of move would come into play when you have a really skilled agressive player behind you who you have to get off you back before he bets you to death but isn’t likely to overplay when you have a big hand. A really skilled, laggy sort. That’s not really the skill level I play at, so I can’t think of a time that wasn’t a shorthanded game where I pulled that move out of the bag.

Todd

Hi Tod,

I like your answer and couldn’t agree more.

90% of the time i limp with small pairs and use the other 10% to mix it up a bit (raise or fold, depends a bit on the table image).

I had a few reasons why i made that c-bet though.

1. The tight players folded quite a bit on the flop

2. Didn’t think it was likely anyone had a BIG draw. Rainbow flop and had two of the sixes that would fit in a possible outside straightdraw.

3. But most of all i used the c-bet to control the maniac and the pot a bit. He often just called a raise but would unleash a heavy wrath of big raises in a not contested pot. He would certainly reraise if he had part of the flop but that would give me some extra information and i was willing to pay for that with my c-bet.

The hand ended with the maniac calling my bet an extra J on the turn with another bet from me and him folding.

Hi Ed,

I have a question about river play. My comments appear after the hand history:

Full Tilt Poker
Limit Holdem Ring game
Limit: $2/$4
9 players

Pre-flop: (9 players) Hero is Button with qd jd
UTG folds, UTG+1 calls, MP1 calls, MP2 calls, MP3 calls, CO folds, Hero raises, SB folds, BB calls, UTG+1 calls, MP1 calls, MP2 calls, MP3 calls.

Flop: (12.5SB) 7c 6h jh (6 players)
BB checks, UTG+1 checks, MP1 bets, MP2 calls, MP3 folds, Hero calls, 2 folds.

Turn: (7.75BB) 9d (3 players)
MP1 bets, MP2 calls, Hero raises, MP1 calls, MP2 calls.

River: (13.75BB) 2h (3 players)
MP1 checks, MP2 bets, Hero folds…

MP1 is a fairly loose, aggressive player. MP2 is loose, passive, and completely predictable.
I know that it is almost never correct to fold on the river when the pot is big. However, as David Sklansky writes in his book Hold’em Poker, “there are times when your opponent can’t be bluffing and must beat your hand. When this happens, do not let the fact you are getting 20-1 pot odds to influence you. You are 1000-1. Save your money” (69).

I’m 99% certain that the bettor has a flush or at least two pair. If I were against only one opponent, I would make a crying call. In this case, I have a second opponent who is perfectly capable of check-raising. Is this fold correct? What if the aggressive player bet out, the passive player called, and I was closing the action? Would a fold be justified in that case?

Thanks,
Matt

Ed,

I’ve found your shortstack articles to be very informative. Is another installment in the works?

Hi Matt,

First of all congrats in finding such a loose game online. I can’t find them for the life of me in limit online. 40% and below pre-flop, that’s all I see unless I feel like playing for quarters. Blah!

In regards to you post, I would have placed the bet. If the aggressive player check raised, then making the fold is groovy. Just becuase he is capable of it doesn’t mean he going to do it. He has to have the hand.

So it boils down to you being up against this passive, predictable guy.

A hand that I think people could have had that they could hold on to to the end would be JT. It make sense for them to call (in thier mind)

Also, how were you playing up until that point? Did you fold a lot to a bet latetly on the river? Weaker players may not notice that you only do so on the river in small pots, they just think that “he might fold on the river if I bet out” Even a tight, predictable player at low limits may try to make a bluff in this spot in a pot this large, even if bluffing isn’t in thier normal arsenal.

Remember, you don’t have to be right all the time on this. You are right, I think you’re beat too. But if this situation would come across 14 times in a row in a lower limit game. I’d think you’d win at least once.

As far a your alternate universe hand where the aggressive player bet out the river and the passive guy called. I would say it would have been an easier fold. “One player can be bluffing, but two cannot.” Chances are you would be beaten here.

I’m sure D. Skalnsky is right in his writing, I just think he is talking about limits much higher than low limit.

Hi Matt, thatjimguy,

In regards to Matt’s post, I would make a close decision between raise and fold.

If I can be 100% sure that MP2 would NEVER bluff, I will simply fold. But MP2 can also have a straight draw before river. It is very hard to say that his bet is more than 7% (13.75-to-1) honest.

Because of the very big pot I would probably raise the bet if I had decided to play. I don’t want overcaller. And I could perhaps raise out a small flush from MP1. If I got 3 bet, I would just fold.

If,say,MP1 made a bet and MP2 called (or raised), then I would safely fold, even the pot-odd is bigger than 20-to-1. It is my understanding about what D. Sklansky is talking about.

Thomas V.

Jeroen,

I don’t like the cr with the pair of sixes at all. First of all, what if the Maniac makes a pot size bet and one tight player calls, now what. That’s a 36 bb pot. How big a cr do you think you need to be effective, and how much are you willing to risk with 2 other players and a small medium pair and an overcard? A popular overcard with non-reraising hands, QJ, JT, KJ even AJ calliing a raise from the blinds. These probably won’t get laid down.

I love maniacs in my game, but not with a small second pair out of position. Eeeech. I am not acting like I’m the expert, I speak from experience. I have made the same mistake. You make the pot-sweetner raise, only one overcard, you have a pair, and surely they will be a little scared because YOU were the preflop raiser. In my opinion, nice little sweetner, but that’s what it is. If you don’t flop a set or at least an overpair or strong draw, get out. If I check in this situation I just hope it looks suspicious, hope for the miracle check around and a chance to hit on the turn. Otherwise, dump this hand. Now a pair of T’s would be different. As previously stated, many hands besides a jack could have you beat as you stand.

Another thing I at least think I have learned; don’t pot sweeten into a maniac. Often like throwing chum in the water and that’s not good with small pair. In fact, most maniacs I’ve encountered, if they are on my left, wait for the premium hand and then don’t be sneaky. Make a slightly larger raise than normal like you don’t want callers and if they have anything, hold on for a wild ride on the moneytrain.

Disclaimer: I’m a converted limit player and am feeling my way, so I could be out in left field. I want to learn by being involved in the discussions. Good cards to you. JC

Hey Matt again and Howdy Thomas,

I think Thomas has got the right play here. Gotta admit, it sounds right and it sure is anti-intuitive to do. Rasing in to something you very well are beat on. I can’t say if this situation came around six months from now I would make the correct play like that, but it sounds about right.

Ed my boy, how’s about a few examples about situations like this and some proof of positive expectaion along with it if you would sir.

thanks

thatjimguy

Another hand:

http://www.pokerhand.org/?914877

The cold call with pocket sevens preflop was rather questionable, but I figured that he might have a wide range of hands and that the blinds would participate in the fun and I would probably have the position.

Now, the flop is of course best one could hope for, a set of sevens for me and draws and maybe a big pair for someone to drag along. It is checked to me and I naturally (?) bet. Two players call, including the preflop raiser.

At this point, I can’t quite narrow down their hand ranges. The preflop raiser could have a big pair, maybe AK-AT (not including AQ) so I’m quite confident that I have the best hand.

Turn comes the ten of diamonds. First player checks and the preflop raiser bets out. My decision here was to raise for two reasons: I didn’t want the third player to come along with some longshot gutshot straight draw. Also, he was facing a possible re-raise from the preflop raiser so the around 4-to-1 he was getting was not perhaps enough for flush draw. Also, I still might have had the best hand.

Still, on the river, since the opponent checked to me and had not raised me on the turhn, I figured I still had the best hand. Well, it turned out he had the set of tens.

Was my play anywhere near OK?

Jarno,

Hey there fella. I wouldn’t worry about the pre-flop call. Your resoning sounds about right for low-limit games. Unless you start getting a feel that your blinds are too tight against raisers, then maybe you could let it go easier.

Okey Dokey, on to da flop. Don’t worry about that question mark, you really must bet here. It was checked to you, even the pre-flop raiser check it. You have to try to get players out. You’re ever-so-nice trips are ever-so-vulnerable with both a flush draw and a stright draw. eech!

And if the pre-flop raiser were to check-raise, even better! Actually, it would be a bad play for him to do so, there was only you left for it to have been checked around. That wouldn have been worth the risk of course.

If he had a made hand like top pair or an overpair, his concern is the same as yours…eliminating players and getting rid of the draws.

So you are good here..on to the turn.

Yes, the raise is where it had to be. You still want to get rid of players. Yeah, he had the better trips, however, he could have just got two pair.

Actually, he was probally hoping you would raise to eliminate those players. If he checked, you would have bet and the other players may have called for one bet. Even then if he raised, they would stay.

Still correct amundo my man, and now, it’za floppy woppy time!

Yup! Bet it! If he check raises, whatever, call it. Yeah, he beat you this time, but most of the time, he’ll just have two pair. Or maybe not even that! Always bet to make sure you get your money. Don’t worry about the times you lose it.

The funny thing is he didn’t re-raise. What did he think you had? A straight? Considering, that you raised all the way through it’s not likely you would be on a runner runner eh?

What does that matter? Well, it helps you skim off some tilt knowing that we didn’t even take advantage of the situation correctly and that you could have lost more money if he did. Celebrate that you at least saved some cash there and that he’s not playing well, he’s just getting lucky.

Good job Jarno me-boy-o!

Thanks for the comments, but I’m not quite sure whether you were just having fun at me.

I wasn’t at all disappointed that I lost the pot. I was just glad that I didn’t lose more.

Matt,

I think you should have raised on the flop. You have top pair with a decent kicker, plus you represented a strong hand pre-flop with your raise.

Raising on the flop is good not only because it forces two players behind you to call 2 cold, but also because it buys you information, which is especially useful in this situation. Raising also gives you a chance to get a free card/cheaper showdown, if you really feel like there is a good chance you might be behind, i.e. if a really scary card hits the turn.

Hey Jarno,

Nah. Not having fun at you, just having fun. It’s really the long version of saying you played the hand right. I expanded all the reasoning so others can understand how I got there.

Later

ThatJimGuy

Hi, thatjimguy,

Yeah. I figured it was an honest answer, but I had a little doubt. But it would have been OK anyhow.

By the way, I think this kind of hand analysis where you know the outcome beforehand is somewhat problematic for beginners (like me). After you see the hand in the showdown, you’re going to have that “of course he bet like that with that hand” feeling and totally ignoring all the other possible hands that the opponent could have had and made the exact same play.

You might even begin to want to lay down more hands thinking that you’re “surely already beaten”. Luckily, I’ve read SSHE and I’m not trying to make big laydowns in loose/passive games. I’ve called down and won with Ace high many times.

But I honestly think that you’re maybe better off analyzing hands not knowing what your opponent really had. I mean, aren’t I right thinking that there is a (near) correct play in almost every hand regardless of who won the pot? Of course there are things like your opponent’s style (loose/passive, tight/passive) that come into play evaluating a play, but, still, there are moves that are more correct than others.

The classic example is (what Ed’s been preaching for some years now) when you’ve flopped a somewhat strong but vulnerable hand in the big or small blind after a preflop raise from the button. (So the pot’s relatively big.) It gets checked around to the button and the button bets and you absolutely need to raise (or, sometimes, fold). I think a lot players end up being afraid of a monster hand in these situations. But the decision to raise here is correct regardless of the button’s holdings. (I’m not saying you should always raise in these situations, but you know what I’m saying.)

So the value of seeing your opponent’s cards after the showdown isn’t so much in analyzing whether your play was correct (though sometimes that too), but to get a better understanding of your opponents style.

This actually resonates with some well researched areas in psychology which deal the ability to spot missing information. It’s not only difficult but sometimes downright impossible to notice something that’s missing. Psychologists have deviced puzzles where most if not all of the participants have not noticed a missing however long they have tried. These puzzles are trivial after you’ve been told the answer, but near impossible when tring to solve.

I think it’s the same with poker and analyzing hands. There is usually a very wide range of hands that the opponent would have played similarly. But after you’ve just lost a big pot to a monster hand, you can’t but think that you should’ve known that by the turn. But it’s often the case that there is no way you could have known.

I hope I some day become a decent poker player so that I can expand more on these findings of modern psychology applied to poker. I’m not an expert on that, but I know already a bunch of findings that explain a lot of “irrational” poker playing. People are very good at lying to themselves.

Poker is an endlessly complex and fascinating game, is it not. The more and more mucho hours you observe the more patterns you will see here. Watch out on the lying to themselves = irrational play part.

Often times an irrational play is preceded by hours of rational play, and the player has become tired, bored, behind, tilted, etc. Like the person who has mowed his/her grass for years safely, and then one day inexplicably reaches down and tries to clear the chute while the mower is running and loses a fingertip. This happens to people who have been extremely cautious and methodical over the years, but one time, whoops.

A good player will know they just did something “dumb” and try to recognize WHY they did it and store in memory bank. And a really good player will use the mental slip to their advantage later on if they notice someone noticed.

Someone made a nice graph of the expected value of texas hold’em starting hands based on a 120 million hand database from poker room.

It, of course, includes both bad and good players’ expected value so it might be a bit misinformative for some of the hands. (Especially small pocket pairs, perhaps.) But if someone after seeing that data still doesn’t believe in the power of big pocket pairs and big suited hands and refuses to raise with them preflop, I’m declaring them mentally incapable of playing poker.

If Ed decides to make another edition of SSHE, I think he should use this chart rather than the puny 60000 hand database in the current edition.

I’ve been trying out the short stack NL strategy in B&Ms while waiting for open seats at limit games of my level. I had tried it a couple times before when I used to play online and had some pretty good success with it. The problem I have now is that all the B&Ms I have access to require a minimum buy-in of 30BB, not 20BB, which tends to put me into more of a smallish mid-stack range. I usually play 1/2, so I’ll make a standard-big size raise before the flop, like 5x the blind, get like 1-2 callers, which usually puts me in a situation where going all-in would be over-betting the pot by a bit, i.e. there’ll be 30 in the pot, and I’ll have 50 left behind. Is pushing still best in this situation? What kind of adjustments should I make playing this kind of stack size when I first sit at the table?

Hey, sadly that hand converter wont work for Royal Vegas (aka pokertime)

My question is No-Limit this time.

- Other sitting in seat 1 with $11.80
- Hero sitting in seat 6 with $21.76
Hero posted the big blind - $0.50

** Dealing card to Hero: Kh, Td
5 Folds
Other raised - $1.00
2 Folds
Hero called - $1.00

** Dealing the flop: Kd, Kc, Tc
Hero checked
Other bet - $1.50
Hero called - $1.50

** Dealing the turn: 9c
Hero checked
Other bet - $2.00
Hero called - $2.00

** Dealing the river: 8d
Hero bet - $9.25
Other folded
Hero mucks:
Roaming wins $18.05 from the main pot

Did i push too hard with a potsized bet? I think i should have checkraised on the turn.. and raised another $4.

I like a pot sized bet or even a bit more there on the end. You’ll get called enough over time for that to be more profitable than a small bet in .25/.50. I would guess that the villain didn’t have anything and you made all that you were going to make on that hand. He probabably had some sort of middle pair with maybe a gutshot. He might have called a small raise on the turn, but it was already a terrible board for him.

1) in what stage is the PNL book, when can i expect it to be on my desk

2) how should i adjust strategy when moving to more agressive stakes(NL)

Hi Ed.

LAG but TRICKY (NL)

The other night I am doing really well and have my stack up to 400 bb’s. I positioned myself to the immediate left of the loosest and worst player at the table. And just as you have said, the money wave was crashing into me.

Then a new player is seated to my immediate left. It was obvious that he usually played in a higher stakes game than mine. (overheard comments). Also he was Asian and had alot of chips with him. I immediately begin to look for a place to run. Nowhere for now. I knew this was bad but decided I would stick it out and get as much education as I could.

He raised every pot 5-7x the bb. I knew he was just raising the stakes. I won a few pots using the fact I knew it would be raised after me. I beat him heads-up out of 4 or 5 samll pots (even trying to avoid him). I then got taken to school and couple hours later was slowly manipulated into playing a big pot with him on which he had raised 93o UTG PreF and then board was non-paired.

Even though you’ve told us to be wary of the diffence between LAG and a very tricky Lag I was looking to get educated and did. My question, short of running, is how do you best take advantage in this situation?

I know I’m not good enough for that yet and I will take a break while waiting for another table next time. But is there a way a good player can exploit this or would even a good player just not have this guy on their left?

For my question I am giving him the label of tricky because I noticed if he lost a pot, it was always a small one. He put two players on complete tilt because of the hands he played. And no matte how sneaky you tried to be against him back, he always seemed to know what you had. So could say experienced and good too. And he was taking advantage of weaker players by playing any 2 cards, but I would still say lag and tricky.

Edward,

How about an article about HOW to bluff. In the Sklansy book, they talk about “picking a card” to bet randomally instead of trying to guess at when toy do so. What do they mean by that? Pick a card when within the flop? One of my hole cards? Both of my hole cards? I’ve always been confused at this.

Thanks Ed

Jimmo

thatjimguy,

I’m assuming you’re referring to a situation where you’re drawing and decide beforehand that if you don’t hit the draw AND the final card is in some arbitrarily picked, you decide to bluff? That is, you have an external decision mechanism on whether or not to bluff. In this case, say the rank of the final card, for example.

The idea here is that from the game theoretic point of view, there is a optimal bluffing ratio. This ratio is based on the pot size and the bet size. If you bluff just the certain amount of time, it makes your opponent indifferent to bluffing. He can’t make more value either by calling more or folding more. (By the way, this can’t be solved for more complex situations, but The Mathematics of Poker provides solutions to somewhat more simplified games.)

Now, if you know the optimal bluffing ratio, say one out of ten, there’s the problem of deciding when exactly to bluff. Ideally, you should just assign one of the ten identical situations a bluffing decision and rest of them not. Unfortunately, every hand is unique so you’ve got to decide some other way.

What Sklansky suggests (if I’m talking about the same thing), is to pick some arbitrary draw to decide whether or not to bluff. If the bluffing ratio is somewhere around 1:3, you could just decide that if you don’t hit your straight and the river card is a spade, you will bluff no matter what. This way you can easily have the right bluffing ratio.

It’s almost impossible to decide in one’s head that “this is the one time in four that I’m going to bluff” because there is no representation of the other three times. Picking an arbitrary lottery of the cards provides such a representation.

Oh, and all that was just from the game theoretic point of view, based on the optimal bluffing.

Of course there are other factors into making a decision whether or not to bluff. Like the number one rule of loose-passive games: don’t bluff.

[...] couple weeks ago Jeroen posted an thought-provoking hand in Questions Thread #13 that generated a nice discussion (worth checking out). I figured I’d offer my thoughts. Hi [...]

Hey Ed.

AJo in the BB. NL live -full ring

My stack 30bb’s. (just lost a big hand and hadn’t made it to cage). The table has been playing fairly tight, I have been seated about an hour.

One mp limper, CO limps, button limps, sb folds,and I check in bb with AJo.

The flop comes 689 with 2 spades. I check and everyone checks behind. The turn comes Ad. I check, mp checks, CO bets 3 bb’s, button calls. There are 10bb’s in pot, I check-raised to 11bb’s.

The pot is 21bb’s with 7 to call. Mp folds, CO folds, button puts me all in for my last 19bb’s .

CO player fairly loose. The button who set me in was fairly tight but I had seen him play Ax couple of times. I called.

How should I have played this different caught with a short stack. All in preflop?

If my stack had been a normal 100bb’s or so and action had been the same (RR to me of 20bb’s), dump this,right?

Ps. Is there software I can use for posting hands that aren’t from the internet so it is easier for everyone to read?

I take it you didn’t have the As, right?

So why did you check raise? I seems like a bad board for that. I think you’d have a hard time getting rid of any hand that has connected with that board when they are calling 8BB into a 21BB pot. I’m also sort of questioning the amount. If you were going to call either player if they moved in, it would seem like you want to move in yourself if you have any hope of pricing out top or middle pair + draw sorts of hands.

Getting 2-1 I think it’s hard to lay this down, but I would question what the button is raising now that he didn’t raise initially? I’m thinking more often than not the button is going to show you a very strong hand like 57 or T7 suited (not necessarily spades). He would have bet a set or 2 pair on the flop. He would have raised if he made Aces up on the turn. Is he moving in on the turn with a hand like As7s or AsXs? That smooth call/shove is a scary sort of line to me. He has to know that you’d have a very hard time getting away from any kind of A high hand and he’s putting you’re chips in the middle like he’s worried about you drawing to a flush. I don’t think this is a hand I’d expect to win very often and be drawing dead a lot, but I’d have a hard time laying it down getting 2-1. (I have a really hard time laying these hands down and I’ve been thinking that’s a big hole in my game, so I may be overly pessimistic).

With a bigger stack, I think you check/call the turn and check/call a small bet on the river or check/fold if the river is bad and 3 people are still interested in the pot. I don’t think you can overcall 3 people and think AJ is going to be good.

Todd

I made the right read, but did i make the wrong play?

Saturday at my local B&M i was playing 3/6 limit hold’em. After about 20 minutes.. im involved in a hand with two college aged kids and one much older woman.

The two kids seem to think they’re the next Doyle Brunson and are VERY loose and pretty aggressive. The older woman i see as pretty much a calling station.

Early Limper
Kid1- Raise to 6
Kid2- Reraise to 9
Woman- Caps at 12

And im on the button with AKs. The first kid could have any pair and i figure as low as JTs to raise. The second i put on at least a pair of 10s, he seems slightly better and i dont think he’d reraise with anything id have dominated.

Now the real problem is the woman though. I dont think ive seen her raise yet.

So i threw it away. The flop comes an ace. Minor betting the rest of the way, and at the end she picked up pot with kings.

Should i have stayed with it up front?

Roaming,

In that situation I would definitely put the older woman on having Aces or Kings like 99 percent of the time, with her having Aces probably the far majority of those times. I think that if you expect your call to take you to the flop heads-up or three-handed, folding to 4 bets cold would probably be best. However, being suited, if you expect the pot to be about 4-6 handed capped preflop, you’re probably picking up enough equity from the other players to make the call profitable. You are definitely getting good implied odds to hit a flush draw with your hand and you have good showdown value if you spike your ace. You also have good position to control the action after the flop. This is a pretty easy fold, given the read, if your AK isn’t suited. If your suited though you really got to think about your implied odds.