|
good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
I have been doing a lot of thinking (insert laugh track here) lately about a type of bet that people have been noticing going on in the higher stakes games. I've talked to various people about it, and some, like Krantz, or Traheho, think the bet exists, while others, like whitelime, thinks it's hogwash. I've heard the type of bet I'm referring to on these boards as a "two-way bet," a "combo" bet, or, in my own terminology, a "value-bluff." I feel like someone needs to standardize a term for it.
Essentially what it is is a bet that functions in two ways. Sometimes, a worse hand will call (hence a value bet), and other times, a better hand will fold (bluff). Meaning this bet has two functions, hence, combo, two-way, or value bluff. I see durr do these kind of bets most often (i'd be curious if he sees himself as doing these kind of bets, or he views them as value bets or bluffs strictly). In any case, this is the type of hand I am talking about. Villian in the hand is a winning TAG, 19/15. I make a loose call of the rr pre, out of position. Flop is a decent one for my hand, so I check call (no point in raising). Turn trips up. Chk chk (sometimes I lead here, sometimes not). River double pairs the board. My hand certainly has showdown value here. However, given my image is probably that of a TAGish player who will call reraises with pockets (he's seen this a few times at the tables), if I bet here, I can rep a counterfeited hand like 33-66 and sometimes get looked up by ace high, or, if I bet, I can get a hand like 99, JJ to fold. What do people think of a river bet here? Is there any merit to it? Villian knows I'm very rarely reverse floating this dry flop, so he has to put me on something, at the very least a pocket pair, or maybe a house or even sometimes an overpair. I'd also like any commentary on this kind of bet, and what people think of it. Other people have sworn to me that a combo bet doesn't exist and is a horrible way to think about poker, but I tend to disagree. Thank you, dlpnyc21 Full Tilt Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $20 BB (6 handed) Hand History converter Courtesy of PokerZion.com CO ($1937.85) Button ($2235) SB ($3623.50) BB ($400) UTG ($1991.50) Hero ($2007) Preflop: Hero is MP with 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $70</font>, CO calls $70, <font color="#CC3333">Button raises to $310</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, Hero calls $240, CO folds. Flop: ($720) 7[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font> Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">Button bets $500</font>, Hero calls $500. Turn: ($1720) 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font> Hero checks, Button checks. River: ($1720) T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font> Hero?? |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
Dave,
I think two-way bets really cannot possibly exist. I mean, think about it. That's basically saying that he's going to behave irrationally. Because it means that he'll call some weaker hands in his range and fold some stronger hands in his range. He only has one hand range here. Maybe you know what it is and maybe you don't, but in truth he has some specific hand range here. And if you assume that he always sets some threshold within that range and calls with hands stronger than that threshold and folds hands weaker (which is rational, it's not rational to fold stronger hands than some hands you call with, right?) then it is impossible to have a two-way bet. Either there is a +EV segment of his hand range that he'll call and that you beat, or there isn't. If there is, it's a value bet, if there isn't, it's a bluff. It only SEEMS like it's a two-way bet, because it's a thin value bet or a thin bluff and so sometimes it goes either way. But this is just randomness and if it works out the way you wanted it to, that's because you got LUCKY. It is completely impossible for two-way bets to exist if your opponent plays rationally. It only seems that way because you have no idea what you're doing because you dont' know his hand range and you dont know how he acts with each segment of it. So you throw a bet out there, hoping to get lucky, and when you do you call it a two-way bet. - TWP |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
this is just a thin value bet
|
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
this is just a thin value bet [/ QUOTE ] no, it's what TWP said. against some players, it's a thin bluff. a value bluff or combo bet or whatever is just a blanket term to really describe a situation, imo. it can't really logically make sense. but it sounds [censored] cool |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
Dave, I think two-way bets really cannot possibly exist. I mean, think about it. That's basically saying that he's going to behave irrationally. Because it means that he'll call some weaker hands in his range and fold some stronger hands in his range. He only has one hand range here. Maybe you know what it is and maybe you don't, but in truth he has some specific hand range here. And if you assume that he always sets some threshold within that range and calls with hands stronger than that threshold and folds hands weaker (which is rational, it's not rational to fold stronger hands than some hands you call with, right?) then it is impossible to have a two-way bet. Either there is a +EV segment of his hand range that he'll call and that you beat, or there isn't. If there is, it's a value bet, if there isn't, it's a bluff. It only SEEMS like it's a two-way bet, because it's a thin value bet or a thin bluff and so sometimes it goes either way. But this is just randomness and if it works out the way you wanted it to, that's because you got LUCKY. It is completely impossible for two-way bets to exist if your opponent plays rationally. It only seems that way because you have no idea what you're doing because you dont' know his hand range and you dont know how he acts with each segment of it. So you throw a bet out there, hoping to get lucky, and when you do you call it a two-way bet. - TWP [/ QUOTE ] Okay, but let's say for instance that I bet this river. I have a decent approximation of his range, but I really don't know for sure. However, what I DO know, is that in this situaiton (or other similar situations), he will sometimes call with worse hands (Ax), and sometimes fold better hands (99, JJ-AA). I can only guess at his hand range, however, I am sure that this bet will function in two-ways always in this situation. How then, can this not be a two-way bet in this situation? I don't know for sure ever if I am value-betting or bluffing in this scenario. See what I'm saying? Also, what do you think of betting in this specific instance? (i also wanted to get advice on this specific hand). Thanks, sorry if I"m not making sense, it's late. dlpnyc21 |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
wait aren't thehre times where you say flip a coin to decide to call with a range X of hands? As in to bluff-catch X % of the time yoou need to call with this range and 100-X% you need to fold it. If your hand is in the middle of that range, doesn't that mean that some % they'll be calling worse and some % they'll be folding better?
Personally I've never believed in the 2-way bet, but theoroetically it seems possible considering people do play with that thought process at times |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
wait aren't thehre times where you say flip a coin to decide to call with a range X of hands? As in to bluff-catch X % of the time yoou need to call with this range and 100-X% you need to fold it. If your hand is in the middle of that range, doesn't that mean that some % they'll be calling worse and some % they'll be folding better? Personally I've never believed in the 2-way bet, but theoroetically it seems possible considering people do play with that thought process at times [/ QUOTE ] Yes, you are absolutely right. I think TWP is way off here. A lot of the time you have a hand that you think only beats a bluff, and they all merge together--the relative strengths are pretty much meaningless, there is no threshold determined by hand strength. Often times on the river that is the situation, guy bets, you only beat a bluff. A villain in this hand will sometimess call with Q high and sometimes fold JJ. His decision will be made based on his gut, timing, recent/past history, tilt, etc. The hand threshold thing doesnt make sense. A bet like this is hard to analyze in a nutshell. However the simple fact remains that it makes you harder to play against when your hand ranges are wider. This kind of line could plant a seed in someone's mind and make river decisions from that point on very hard. A lot of times people feel like their weak hands that only beat a bluff, also start to beat hands they think you might be value betting thin, and then they usually play bad and call too much. I generally like bets like this, especially because when you check here the villain bluffs close to 0%. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
There are times when it's actually correct to fold better hands and call weaker hands because of key cards. Say the board is QT752 with three spades and villain overbet shoves. If villain's range is mostly nuts or air then hero should call AA with the A of spades but fold bottom set. So if you know your opponent is doing this then you can two-way bet with two pair, getting called by AA and folding out sets.
|
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, you are absolutely right. I think TWP is way off here. A lot of the time you have a hand that you think only beats a bluff, and they all merge together--the relative strengths are pretty much meaningless, there is no threshold determined by hand strength. Often times on the river that is the situation, guy bets, you only beat a bluff. A villain in this hand will sometimess call with Q high and sometimes fold JJ. His decision will be made based on his gut, timing, recent/past history, tilt, etc. The hand threshold thing doesnt make sense. A bet like this is hard to analyze in a nutshell. However the simple fact remains that it makes you harder to play against when your hand ranges are wider. This kind of line could plant a seed in someone's mind and make river decisions from that point on very hard. A lot of times people feel like their weak hands that only beat a bluff, also start to beat hands they think you might be value betting thin, and then they usually play bad and call too much. I generally like bets like this, especially because when you check here the villain bluffs close to 0%. [/ QUOTE ] hrm basically every word strass said... |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
Because the board paired, a single pair you could have on the flop has less outs to outdraw the villain on the turn, allowing him to check behind a big pocket pair without much fear.
I think any bet you make here will defintely be a bluff. That being said, I think he isnt likely to have a T, and I think you get him to fold any pocket pair, so I like a bet here (as you are easily representing a T) |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
Dave, I think two-way bets really cannot possibly exist. I mean, think about it. That's basically saying that he's going to behave irrationally. Because it means that he'll call some weaker hands in his range and fold some stronger hands in his range. He only has one hand range here. Maybe you know what it is and maybe you don't, but in truth he has some specific hand range here. And if you assume that he always sets some threshold within that range and calls with hands stronger than that threshold and folds hands weaker (which is rational, it's not rational to fold stronger hands than some hands you call with, right?) then it is impossible to have a two-way bet. Either there is a +EV segment of his hand range that he'll call and that you beat, or there isn't. If there is, it's a value bet, if there isn't, it's a bluff. It only SEEMS like it's a two-way bet, because it's a thin value bet or a thin bluff and so sometimes it goes either way. But this is just randomness and if it works out the way you wanted it to, that's because you got LUCKY. It is completely impossible for two-way bets to exist if your opponent plays rationally. It only seems that way because you have no idea what you're doing because you dont' know his hand range and you dont know how he acts with each segment of it. So you throw a bet out there, hoping to get lucky, and when you do you call it a two-way bet. - TWP [/ QUOTE ] Two-way bets can most certainly exist. There might be a 2/3rds chance he calls with AA-JJ here, and 1/3rds chance he folds. There might be a 1/3rds chance he calls with AK/AQ and 2/3rds chance he folds. Imagine he makes his decisions by a 6-sided die. If 1 or 2 is rolled, and he has AA-JJ, he folds. If he has 3-6 he calls. If he has AK/AQ, and a 1-4 is rolled he folds, and 5-6 rolls he calls. Thats sort of what happens with the human mind. Noticed that he cant call with AK/AQ in situations where he wouldnt have called with AA-JJ (from other outside random circumstances or thoughts in his head). But that doesnt stop you from getting value from AK/AQ part of the time, and bluffing out AA-JJ part of the time. Its sort of a strange way of "covering your bases" depending on how curious he is feeling. You get value when he is curious sometimes, and you get him to fold sometimes when he is feeling cautious. Because you can never know for sure how curious/cautious he is feeling at that exact moment in time, it is therefore based on random chance based on what you know of his temperment. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
I agree with Strassa and other's with similar opinions, and I also have some more thoughts on 'two-way bets'. Say you have absolutely no read on this player, or at least you have no idea what he will do in this specific spot with any of the hands in his range. You think however that x% of players in this spot will call with worse, x% will fold better. You could say it's a two way bet of sorts because some of your opponents will fold a better hand, and some will call with worse. Does that make any sense at all or just nonsense?
|
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
The reason the bet is good is becuase you're putting pressure on your opponent (keeping him from putting pressure on you) and making your range less polarized. It isn't to magically fold out better hands while getting value from worse hands.
That's my main problem, the way it's interepreted by some people because of its name. It should be called a pressure bet. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
The reason the bet is good is becuase you're putting pressure on your opponent (keeping him from putting pressure on you) and making your range less polarized. It isn't to magically fold out better hands while getting value from worse hands. That's my main problem, the way it's interepreted by some people because of its name. It should be called a pressure bet. [/ QUOTE ] yah i agree. An actual two-way bet comes up extremely rarely (i'd be surprised if i had >3 of them lifetime), and needs a pretty predictable/dumb opponent. I feel like some live pros might get a few of them/yr. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
i also think theres a different type of 2way bet... where you don't know the kindv player your playing against, however the kindv player to get to a spot w/ a weak 2p might fold, but the kindv player to get there w/ a strong overpair would call. I remember seeing spots like these come up, and not having the extremely narrow hand range that would justify a 2way bet... eventually tho
|
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
kinda what i was trying to say, i suck at writing
|
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
Two-way bets vs. rational opponents don't exist.
|
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
Two-way bets vs. rational opponents don't exist. [/ QUOTE ] ya u def win the argument vs strass and durrr |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
Dave, I think two-way bets really cannot possibly exist. I mean, think about it. That's basically saying that he's going to behave irrationally. Because it means that he'll call some weaker hands in his range and fold some stronger hands in his range. He only has one hand range here. Maybe you know what it is and maybe you don't, but in truth he has some specific hand range here. And if you assume that he always sets some threshold within that range and calls with hands stronger than that threshold and folds hands weaker (which is rational, it's not rational to fold stronger hands than some hands you call with, right?) then it is impossible to have a two-way bet. Either there is a +EV segment of his hand range that he'll call and that you beat, or there isn't. If there is, it's a value bet, if there isn't, it's a bluff. It only SEEMS like it's a two-way bet, because it's a thin value bet or a thin bluff and so sometimes it goes either way. But this is just randomness and if it works out the way you wanted it to, that's because you got LUCKY. It is completely impossible for two-way bets to exist if your opponent plays rationally. It only seems that way because you have no idea what you're doing because you dont' know his hand range and you dont know how he acts with each segment of it. So you throw a bet out there, hoping to get lucky, and when you do you call it a two-way bet. - TWP [/ QUOTE ] This is a really good post, I strongly agree and couldn't describe it better myself. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
I firmly believe that the actual usage of "two way-bets" does not in fact exist. You have two ranges; your opponents and your own. The only thing of interest is the INTENTION of the bet, i.e what you consider the MAIN PURPOSE of your bet, the achieved effect you want. Because of this, you can only either valuebet, or bluff. You either bet for value, or you bluff, based on what you perceive to be your opponents calling range.
Yes, ranges DO overlap and thus hands that are within that overlapping range will create an illusion of two way bets, i.e when you bluff with your "best" bluffing hand and he calls with his worst calling hand, but that is purely an effect of overlapping; the INTENTION is still always just value or bluff. The only exception would be rare circumstances where for example you assume that you in fact have an inferior betting range compared to his calling range, but where you can make a small bet that you feel will induce a bluff so often that what you make out of calling his checkraise bluff (or the like) is MORE than what you lose all those times the opponent simply calls you. Thus, two way-bets only exists in terms of RESULT, not really as in terms of intention, and thus I really believe the whole usage of the term is pretty nonsensical. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
The reason the bet is good is becuase you're putting pressure on your opponent (keeping him from putting pressure on you) and making your range less polarized. It isn't to magically fold out better hands while getting value from worse hands. That's my main problem, the way it's interepreted by some people because of its name. It should be called a pressure bet. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this too, I don't believe a 2 way bet exists, because your opponent cannot both fold better hands and call with worse hands at the same time. The bet actually serves one purpose, which is to fold out better hands or get value from worse ones, and it's impossible for these two things to happen simultaneously. Indeed, this bet is because you don't know where you are in the hand and are hoping 'to get lucky' in that your bet gives you the desired effect of either working as a bluff or working as a value bet. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
thread over i guess.
if u perceive a bet to be neutral EV in a vacuum but plus EV for image reasons, u should obviously make it. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
FWIW, I agree with strassa and durr, too. Just not that it's a two-way bet. It's a thin bet (be it a value bet or a bluff) so YOU DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE IT IS. But it is still only one of them. It's a good bet, because either way it puts pressure on your opponent to make the right decision and since it's a thin bet then it's hard for them to make the right decision IN THIS INSTANCE. But since it's a thin bet, they really can't go wrong either way probably since by definition, thin bets are just about 0EV. If you wanna call it an 'indifference bet' bec you're indifferent between whether they call or fold pretty much, given their hand range and your hands strength which is pretty much in the middle of their range, then fine.
Basically I'm saying that your hand is good JUST ABOUT 50% of the time when called. So yea, occasionally some guys will fold a slightly better hand and some guys will call with a slightly worse one. But overall, the bet is probably 0EV in a vaccuum (but does make you harder to play against overall) so you think it's 'two-way'. But it isn't. It's really closer to neither a vb nor a bluff than it is to being both. But really it can only be one. edit: yea, luego made this post in one sentence. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
oh come on TWP you know you want to call it a two-way bet.
|
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
Two-way bets vs. rational opponents don't exist. [/ QUOTE ] There really shouldn't be an argument here. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
I firmly believe that the actual usage of "two way-bets" does not in fact exist. You have two ranges; your opponents and your own. The only thing of interest is the INTENTION of the bet, i.e what you consider the MAIN PURPOSE of your bet, the achieved effect you want. Because of this, you can only either valuebet, or bluff. You either bet for value, or you bluff, based on what you perceive to be your opponents calling range. Yes, ranges DO overlap and thus hands that are within that overlapping range will create an illusion of two way bets, i.e when you bluff with your "best" bluffing hand and he calls with his worst calling hand, but that is purely an effect of overlapping; the INTENTION is still always just value or bluff. The only exception would be rare circumstances where for example you assume that you in fact have an inferior betting range compared to his calling range, but where you can make a small bet that you feel will induce a bluff so often that what you make out of calling his checkraise bluff (or the like) is MORE than what you lose all those times the opponent simply calls you. Thus, two way-bets only exists in terms of RESULT, not really as in terms of intention, and thus I really believe the whole usage of the term is pretty nonsensical. [/ QUOTE ] I think that's exactly that... The bet is simply a realy thin bet, end of the story. Sometimes it goes one way sometimes it goes the other way, but what's important is what your intention were |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
the whole point of making a "combo" bet on the river is to make it harder for people to play against you in future hands--they obviously dont have some kind of magical bluff+value EV that is greater than taking some other line.
combo bets come up all the time on the flop/turn though. example, i raise with 99 BB calls, flop is T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. BB checkraises me, i call. turn is a Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] he bets and i push. he definitely has a range of better hands that he folds and a range of worse hands that call. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
ok, so there seems to be a somewhat divided sentiment, with the majority thinking a two way bet is hogwash. However, I know for sure that if I make a bet at this river, I know it's with dual intentions. I tend to agree with strassa on this one, but that's why I posted it in the first place. Some good discussion so far. The bottom line is in hands like this I know if I bet I will sometimes get worse hands to call and sometimes better hands to fold, so I know my bet will always serve two purposes. It's really quite in the middle here for me.
The second part of this thread was to ask advice on this particular hand. What do people think of betting here? dlpnyc21 |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist.... *DELETED*
Post deleted by FoxwoodsFiend
|
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
everything TWP said is right and i can't imagine anyone thinking otherwise on this topic. the value bluff just means "i have no idea what's going on here" [/ QUOTE ] the point is, we can never ever know for sure what we are doing in a particular hand, because we don't know with 100% accurately. I agree if we knew our opponents hand range two-way bets would never exist. However, given that we only know an approximation of his range, and we know for SURE that he will sometimes fold better and sometimes call worse, when we make a bet in a really close spot like this one how can we ever be sure that we are value betting or bluffing? Obviously other scenarios are much more clear. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] everything TWP said is right and i can't imagine anyone thinking otherwise on this topic. the value bluff just means "i have no idea what's going on here" [/ QUOTE ] the point is, we can never ever know for sure what we are doing in a particular hand, because we don't know with 100% accurately. I agree if we knew our opponents hand range two-way bets would never exist. However, given that we only know an approximation of his range, and we know for SURE that he will sometimes fold better and sometimes call worse, when we make a bet in a really close spot like this one how can we ever be sure that we are value betting or bluffing? Obviously other scenarios are much more clear. [/ QUOTE ] i'm mulittabling so deleted my post because i realized i can't really add anything right now. but your emphasis on certainty is weird and misplaced: say you think you're valuebetting mid set and the guy folds bottom set on the river. it's still a value bet even though it turns out you were "bluffing." certainty of somebody's range isn't necessary for whether we label something a vb or a bluff, the label is determined by what you THINK your opponent's range and corresponding actions are. the reason the value bluff is tempting as a concept is because you don't know what you think is going on. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
The bet absolutely exists, but only against really deep thinking players. e.g. those who are very specifically narrowing down your range, and those who are basing their decisions more heavily on their read at that moment than the relative value of their hand (even w/in their own range).
Also, even if we DO know villain's EXACT range, the fact that we don't know his exact hand, means it is possible for it to exist. A thinking villain isn't doing the same play with the same hand every time, and that isn't necessarily "irrational." donkey also hits it on the head regarding this specific hand: the bet is obviously not massive EV, but it certainly makes you tougher to play against, which should = +EV metagame against a 19/15. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
i am way too drunk to explain but i really wanted to say something about valuebetting vs bluffing (specifically on preflop/flop/turn vs river) and denying ur opponent the equity of the pot that he is theoretically entitled to.
if u shove an open ended straight flush draw which has 50% equity vs opponents QQ, u are semibluffing - how about if u shove ur QQ vs ur opponents open ended straight flush draw and he folds it? is it a bluff or valueshove? i would say that i would let this thought simmer with u all for a while, truth is obviously that i am way to messed up to elaborate but u know, it is all about denying him equity. i wish mdma was awake so i could ask him to put my thoughts into words BUT ALAS |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
yuch
|
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] everything TWP said is right and i can't imagine anyone thinking otherwise on this topic. the value bluff just means "i have no idea what's going on here" [/ QUOTE ] the point is, we can never ever know for sure what we are doing in a particular hand, because we don't know with 100% accurately. I agree if we knew our opponents hand range two-way bets would never exist. However, given that we only know an approximation of his range, and we know for SURE that he will sometimes fold better and sometimes call worse, when we make a bet in a really close spot like this one how can we ever be sure that we are value betting or bluffing? Obviously other scenarios are much more clear. [/ QUOTE ] i'm mulittabling so deleted my post because i realized i can't really add anything right now. but your emphasis on certainty is weird and misplaced: say you think you're valuebetting mid set and the guy folds bottom set on the river. it's still a value bet even though it turns out you were "bluffing." certainty of somebody's range isn't necessary for whether we label something a vb or a bluff, the label is determined by what you THINK your opponent's range and corresponding actions are. the reason the value bluff is tempting as a concept is because you don't know what you think is going on. [/ QUOTE ] Pretty sure its a bluff if they fold a better hand, not a worse one (then its a value bet, ducy?). I think that there is such a thing as a thin value bet, but it isn't as cut and dry as a lot of people have been making it out to be. A bet can be used to fold out many better hands in some cases, say your opponent doesn't realize the ability you have to merge your hand ranges to the extent you do and you bet pot all-in on a board of 34653 with A6 in a blind battle after you have been called twice. Here, he may fold 99, he may call with A5, deciding that you're still trying to represent the straight and that he is capable of floating the turn with a pair and gutshot to a higher straight, something like that. When called, it is really dependent on your image in the game, so you can gear the nature of the bet, most likely with your bet sizing/timing, to best fit what you view to be your opponents perception of what you would do here. He may look you up light, as we obviously want since we make more, or he may make a reasonable laydown and toss a 99 type hand or 65 type hand. The results allow us to be better paid regardless, whether it be this hand or in future hands. Since he may call with worse or fold better hands, it is a double-sided bet. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
There isn't much disagreement going on, it's just different perceptions, IMO.
It seems TWP/crowd are assuming "rational" ranges that can be defined, while Strasser/Durr/company are taking the "flip a coin" approach and saying that since the ranges are often unclear, the bet will sometimes work both ways. The bet accomplishes the same thing regardless of your perception, it's just some people are conceiving of a linear range that has a break-even point, while some people are acknowledging the randomness of what is going on in a hand so the range is "grouped" as Strasser says. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
There isn't much disagreement going on, it's just different perceptions, IMO. It seems TWP/crowd are assuming "rational" ranges that can be defined, while Strasser/Durr/company are taking the "flip a coin" approach and saying that since the ranges are often unclear, the bet will sometimes work both ways. The bet accomplishes the same thing regardless of your perception, it's just some people are conceiving of a linear range that has a break-even point, while some people are acknowledging the randomness of what is going on in a hand so the range is "grouped" as Strasser says. [/ QUOTE ] The best part about this post is that he was smashed when he made it, but I agree with it all. |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
what about some situation where hero has a weak made hand but appears to have a very strong hand, and villains range is fd's and good top pair hands. Something he has done means his range doesnt include monsters. Therefore when you bet he folds his good top pair hands, because he thinks he is crushed, and calls with his flush draws to try and crack your monster for lots. Combo bet, no?
ps im drunk hope i'm right [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
[ QUOTE ]
Often times on the river that is the situation, guy bets, you only beat a bluff. A villain in this hand will sometimess call with Q high and sometimes fold JJ. His decision will be made based on his gut, timing, recent/past history, tilt, etc. The hand threshold thing doesnt make sense. [/ QUOTE ] the threshold still exists. but its specific to the current situation RIGHT NOW. one hand the threshold might be the entire range, ie call with Q high. but 10 mins later same exact hand and action occur, but different table images, the hand value threshold could raise and you fold JJ. as has been said, i dont see a difference in the two sides that are supposedly in opposition. its just a different way of looking at the concept. ultimately, the bet is either for value or to bluff. so "2-way" doesnt exist logically. but as luego said, there is merit in denying someone their equity, and putting them to the decision. so, even though you throw out this "2-way" which really means "i dont know where im at", its still a good bet because the opponent has to make the tough decision rather than you, and theres fold equity involved. therefore they could easily make the wrong decision, since your bet was made out of confusion, they wont be able to get any read on your thinking. not to mention future metagame which is given |
Re: good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....
The only thing about this river is its always a bluff and never a value bet, and if anyone disagrees ur only going to win on a bet and he shoves as a bluff.
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:05 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.