A bluff 400NL

[cts]

[ QUOTE ]
You havent done a good job of repping a straight so two pair and a set are still calling.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, reread the board. That's why this is the perfect river card for this.

This is a good spot for this play and AI is the way to go of course, not $150 or whatever.

FeltBelt, you're reasoning in this thread is awful and while it's great to debate different lines, being stubborn and condescending to one of the better posters on these forums isn't the way to do it.

[FeltBelt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You havent done a good job of repping a straight so two pair and a set are still calling.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, reread the board. That's why this is the perfect river card for this.

This is a good spot for this play and AI is the way to go of course, not $150 or whatever.

FeltBelt, you're reasoning in this thread is awful and while it's great to debate different lines, being stubborn and condescending to one of the better posters on these forums isn't the way to do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tell me exactly which hands THIS PLAYER, not some theoretical player, will call $150 with but would fold for $300. That will tell you how much value the extra $150 or so of the all in has. If the answer is "well *maybe* one or two hands he'd call $150 for but fold to an all in", then you do the math to figure out the EV of the all in vs the 1/2 PSB.

Tight passives like to fold and when they call big-ish river bets (in both pot terms and absolute dollar terms) they usually have the bettor crushed. Hero can give this player a good opportunity to fold without risking his entire stack. So against this player, it's the play to make. But hey, double the risk when half would do if you really want. It's your money.

[MDMA]

You are simply not getting this.

You just simply want him to FOLD in this very hand, and do not care how this decision effects your overall strategy, or how well it goes along with it. You do not care about getting paid when you have a good hand. You do not care about making the same play with a bluff as with the hand you are representing. You do not care about making heroic calls as costly as possible and therefore as difficult as possible.

You are not being realistic, I realized that as soon as I read "Yes, so if he's decided he can beat the repped overpair, he's very likely calling $150 or a push". You are seriously even CONSIDERING him to be considering whether he would call if he could beat AA. That is just ridiculous.

I'll tell you when your "150 vs 300-bet-theorem" is correct. It is in the very unlikely scenario that he's as likely to call 150 as 300, and that everything he calls with is BEATING AA. In other words, if the fact that you having AA is MEANINGLESS, e.g you're AA is as GOOD as a bluff and that you are not ever getting VALUE out of your AA, then you are correct in betting 150 instead of 300. Do you see how [censored] RIDICULOUS that idea is?

You simply care about getting this guy folding in this hand like this is the first and last poker hand in your entire life, without taking consideration to ANYTHING else.

[FeltBelt]

Guy leaves for dinner in 5, and you don't share another table with him for a month. He doesn't remember that your AA and your bluffs look the same. You don't remember you made this play against him. You're out an extra $150 you could have saved by bluffing half the pot and getting him to fold the same range he would have folded anyways.

Ridiculous.

[Kirkrrr]

[ QUOTE ]
Guy leaves for dinner in 5, and you don't share another table with him for a month. He doesn't remember that your AA and your bluffs look the same. You don't remember you made this play against him. You're out an extra $150 you could have saved by bluffing half the pot and getting him to fold the same range he would have folded anyways.

Ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't what it's really about. Obviously if he can beat AA, he's calling anything, so that doesn't matter. But, there's a very good chance he's folding smaller overpairs like TT- or even JJ that he'd insta-call for 150 since he's getting a much better price.

On the other hand, I think I perfer a turn check-raise/free card to betting. You lose the pot if you miss everything on the river, of course, but now it's a much smaller pot you don't feel obligated to get stacked for to win. But, as played, potting the river is a lot better than half-potting because he will fold hands that beat A-high here that he'd never fold for a half-pot bet getting 3:1.

Kirk

[FeltBelt]

I guess I'm just not sure he folds JJ for 300 but not for 150.

[MDMA]

I seldom get annoyed on these forums (I mean, they are after all, just internet forums and I expect a lot of [censored] coming from them), but you are SERIOUSLY the most ignorant bitch I've ever seen here. You haven't got the slightest idea of the mechanics behind the game, and your post with that ridiculous dinner-thing shows this.

A clown with no poker knowledge whatsoever comes in here and tries to hand me my ass on a plate without realizing how [censored] stupid he looks with his piece-of-[censored] posts.

Jesus, you really pissed me off, congratulations.

[CallYNotRaise06]

i would take MDMA's advice over almost anybodys .


FWIW, MDMA's is spot on. your only worry in this hand is to get him to fold. nothing else matters right now.

[MDMA]

Actually, that part about getting him to fold right now and not worrying about anything else/balancing/credibility etc was me explaining how MoronBelt reasoned; I'm of the opposite view.

Either way, thanks for the kind words.

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
You just simply want him to FOLD in this very hand, and do not care how this decision effects your overall strategy, or how well it goes along with it. You do not care about getting paid when you have a good hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

MDMA I dont agree with you. I realize that you are sarcastic here and you are suggesting that quoted way of thinking is bad but its not. In fact the only thing you care about playing a poker hand is making a perfect play vs particular opponent. You dont care about about game theory, proper bluffing frequencies etc. You only job is in fact make a play with the highest EV in this particular situation in this particular moment. Of course while pondering your decision you have to take into account history vs this Villain and try to evaluate how he is going to play against you in THIS hand. If you can do the job of evaluating the situation better than the Villain which mean you can predict the way he play you just punch the perfect play which simply exists over your assumptions and have nothing to do with game theory.
Now when you make this play the situation changes (regardless of the result in that hand) and next time when similair situation arises there will be another factor to consider - Villain remembering you making 150 or 300 or whatever bet the hand before and maybe the perfect play will be diffrent. If you think that Villain is better than you then you have to use optimal game theory solution to negate his advantage and of course optimal bet size for bluff (and value bet) is simply allin (if your range have enough weak hands for every value hand but its minor factor).
The thing I am getting at is that there is in fact perfet play for particular situation against particular Villain and our job while playing is to find that play and execute it without worrying about future image, metagame etc. of course these things will change with plays we make and thats ok because we believe that we will evaluate them better and will be able to trigger another perfect play in the future.