Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

I think it's probably pointless to post this question as at some point against opponents like this it's mostly about 'feel' but I think I might learn something.

HU, 30/60. Both players are laggy, both play reasonably well (arguable, admittedly), both players clearly think the other is full of [censored] and are certainly never folding ANY piece, no matter how scary the board.

Lagtard A has been 3-betting preflop a lot with maybe 50% of his hands, and hasn't been hurt by it, though Lagtard B is up about 10BB.

Example: About 20 hands ago, Lagtard B raised preflop, was 3-bet by Lagtard A, flop came 623. Check, call.

Turn was an Ace, putting two clubs out there, A bets, B raises, A calls with his K8o. River blank, check/call, Lagtard B's K-high is good.

Which leads us to this hand and the question of river bluff-raises.

Lagtard B raises, Lagtard A 3-bets, Lagtard B calls.

Flop is A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].

B bets, A calls.

Turn: 5 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].

B bets, A raises, B raises, A calls.

River: K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].

B bets.

Situation #1: A has a busted ISD. Is raising +EV?
Situation #2: A raises. B has a busted ISD. Is raising +EV?

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

I can't for the life of me imagine why on earth you would raise in either situation. Neither Lagtard that you described will fold anything that even remotely resembles a hand with showdown value. Why waste an extra bet? Just fold and move on to the next hand.

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

[ QUOTE ]
I can't for the life of me imagine why on earth you would raise in either situation. Neither Lagtard that you described will fold anything that even remotely resembles a hand with showdown value. Why waste an extra bet? Just fold and move on to the next hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to agree, but the thing is that if A or B had marginal hands with showdown value there probably wouldn't be so much action -- either A has a great hand, or nothing, ditto with B. 11BB pot on the river, if B puts A on having zilch 20% of the time, and isn't afraid of a 3-bet bluff, raising makes sense, no?

Same goes vice-versa. A knows that B is capable of such goofiness -- remember that hand 20 hands ago -- and I can see a 3-bet bluff being reasonable here. ??

I got the action wrong in my original post.
 

In the final hand, I switched "A" and "B" postflop.

That is, preflop: B raises, A 3-bets, B calls, then:

On the A44 flop, A bets, B calls.
On the A445 turn, A bets, B raises, A 3-bets, B calls.
On the A445K river, A bets . . .

Question is does B raise, and if he does, does A 3-bet . . . ?

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

EXACTLY!!!!
Also, we want to go to showdown, because its possible given these lagtards, that our "nothing" is even better than their nothing, i would rather see a bet wasted showingdown and calling rather than bluff RRing! Also, I think these guys are going to showdown all day long.

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

[ QUOTE ]
EXACTLY!!!!
Also, we want to go to showdown, because its possible given these lagtards, that our "nothing" is even better than their nothing, i would rather see a bet wasted showingdown and calling rather than bluff RRing! Also, I think these guys are going to showdown all day long.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's interesting . . . let's say that the "junk" hand in question is Q2o. In that case, your argument is that there's very little point in reraising given the situation as he's never folding any piece, and you beat all other missed crap. On the other hand, if you had 62o or 92o or something similar, your junky hand doesn't even have high-card showdown value.

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

If I have 62 or 92, 1st off i am not getting involved, 2nd all i still cant bluff against this lagtard. Beacuase i may face a rr, and because hes never folding, he is a lagtard and a calling station, trying to Bluff raise a calling station is just ugly.

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

"If I have 62 or 92, 1st off i am not getting involved"

This isn't about you though...just imagine you got there, so now what?

"2nd all i still cant bluff against this lagtard. Beacuase i may face a rr,"

This alone isn't a reason not to raise! To be fair you made that statement in conjunction with some others:

"and because hes never folding, he is a lagtard and a calling station,"

But I have no idea how and why you believe these things to be true. It's damned hard to be a calling station on the river. We're not trying to get an opponent to fold a piece of the board...

I suppose my point here is: don't project, just think. It's not useful in poker to be emotional or assuming. However it usefule to understand the emotions and assumings of one's opponents.

-WT

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

Are we to view this as the last hand of a session?

With what range will B call a river raise and with what range will he 3 bet in your opinion? If we just fix some parameters the math isn't all that hard to work out.

-WT

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

[ QUOTE ]
Are we to view this as the last hand of a session?

With what range will B call a river raise and with what range will he 3 bet in your opinion? If we just fix some parameters the math isn't all that hard to work out.

-WT

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't view it as the last hand of the session, but in pure EV-for-the-hand terms, perhaps it's best.

I think that the lagtard in question calls a river raise with any piece, 3-bets his missed whatever about 20% of the time. Allowing for that rocking river bluff-cap [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

Meaning that player B, in deciding whether to raise the river, I think needs to figure that A is on a bluff around 25% of the time. I don't know that that's unreasonable.

What I find interesting about HU aggro is that after the first raise or two, if someone has a showdownable hand, they're generally going to revert to calling down, and let the other person continue to bluff if they don't have it, and let them value-bet if they do. In other words, continuing to raise in that situation is generally -EV. But if they have air, well, continuing to go after the pot is +EV relative to calling (maybe not relative to folding, obviously).

Given the turn action, both players are either semibluffing like madmen or have at least top pair, if not a straight/trips/boat. And I don't know that the main aggressor in this hand, player A, 3-bets the turn here with something like top pair -- I would think he either has trips or better, or he's bluffing.

Does he really have trips+ 75%+ of the time? Sure, he could have 3-bet preflop with something like 54s, *absolutely*. But it's a coordinated board and he knows that player B likes to bluffraise.

Other thing I find interesting is that hand 20 hands ago, where B bluffraised the river, A called down with K-high, and won the pot. After that hand, one would think that A would think B is less likely to bluffraise the turn because he knows that A is calling down with ANYTHING showdownable.

So if B thinks A thinks B 'learned his lesson' about bluffraising on late streets, doesn't that make a river raise by B more reasonable?

I don't know.

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

How can this question be answered without knowing if Lagtard A has a showdownable hand like 88? It only makes sense to checkraise if you have a complete bluff, not if you have something to showdown.

The risk to bluff raising the river, particularly given the example you earlier gave, is that you will get re-reraised on a bluff, and you will fold a winner. Or you will call because of this risk, and you'll find yourself crushed/dead on the turn.

So if you have a showdownable hand against a Lagmonkey like this, check-call seems best.

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

[ QUOTE ]
How can this question be answered without knowing if Lagtard A has a showdownable hand like 88? It only makes sense to checkraise if you have a complete bluff, not if you have something to showdown.

The risk to bluff raising the river, particularly given the example you earlier gave, is that you will get re-reraised on a bluff, and you will fold a winner. Or you will call because of this risk, and you'll find yourself crushed/dead on the turn.

So if you have a showdownable hand against a Lagmonkey like this, check-call seems best.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yer not paying attention. Nobody in this hand can possibly have 88. Either player is doing it with a monster or a bluff. We're not talking about showdownable hands like 88, we're talking about perhaps Lagtard B calling the river with Q-high or J-high instead of bluff-raising.

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

WT...
As stands, maybe I can clear the statements up...

If i get into a hand with 62 or 92, i wont rr bluff these guys ever,our fold equity is very low, and it goes to showdown to often because they are call heavy regarding pot size like this.

Dont raise because we are counting on a sheer bluff to make us money against a completely ridiculous aggressive player who may rr 62, why put yourself in such a horid situation that your trying to win a huge bloated pot with a bluff against such a monster.


Its not hard to be a calling station given your reads and their betting action, namely insane.

p.s. read the poll, everyone agrees that rring bluff in either situation is trash.

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

I agree that this is a completely ridiculous situation, and that both players are over-aggro and silly.

However, I can't help but think that GIVEN THAT FACT, the chance that player A has a strong hand is less than 75%, and thus, it may be +EV for player B to raise. I think situations like this hand are a little deeper than "don't bluff a bluffer".

But I may be wrong. As some smart poster said, when it comes right down to it this is a math problem.

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

if ur gonna bluff u should cap turn

u dont give him a chance to pair his JT, and u save a bet if he leads river

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

[ QUOTE ]
if ur gonna bluff u should cap turn

u dont give him a chance to pair his JT, and u save a bet if he leads river

[/ QUOTE ]

Either player calls the turn with JT just in case this is a semibluff and he hits the 4/6 outer. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying it's what would happen between these two -- witness that K8o hand I described.

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

what does that hand have to do with anything

the k8 calldown is pretty standard. the board is v drawy and the other guy's line doesnt really make sense for a strong hand. if u think that hand makes these guys insane enough to 3bet the turn with jack high no draw and then peel a cap, then i really dont think u have a good grasp of the language of heads up play

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

[ QUOTE ]
what does that hand have to do with anything

the k8 calldown is pretty standard. the board is v drawy and the other guy's line doesnt really make sense for a strong hand. if u think that hand makes these guys insane enough to 3bet the turn with jack high no draw and then peel a cap, then i really dont think u have a good grasp of the language of heads up play

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the overall situation is relatively easy to describe. At this point, it's a pissing contest, in which every 3-5 hands each raise is seen as a dare for the other person to raise, and the other person knows it's a dare but also knows the other person knows that. Bleah!

And I don't think he 3-bet the turn with J-high no draw, I think he had some sort of ISD or flush draw (you were the one that brought up JTo).

For what little it's worth, player B raised the river, and A folded. Player B had a busted ISD -- I know this because I was him. I'm not proud of the river raise, but I think it may have been reasonable. (I'm definitely not proud of the way I played the rest of the hand, but I'm still working on my game against hyper-aggro players.)

By the way, given the donkey-like sure-to-be-crushed-if-he-played-higher-but-definitely-a-winner-at-this-level play of my opponent, I wouldn't be surprised if he's a 2+2'er. If you recognize this hand, shoot me a PM [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

Grisga,

What were your hole cards?

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

[ QUOTE ]
Grisga,

What were your hole cards?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

Flop is A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

B bets, A calls.

Turn: 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

B bets, A raises, B raises, A calls.

River: K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

B bets.


[/ QUOTE ]

He said earlier in his examples that B/A had a busted inside straight draw, but was this on the flop? The only possible gutterball on the flop is 23 which made a wheel on the turn.

Grisga did you have something like 8 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]?

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Grisga,

What were your hole cards?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

Flop is A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

B bets, A calls.

Turn: 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

B bets, A raises, B raises, A calls.

River: K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

B bets.


[/ QUOTE ]

He said earlier in his examples that B/A had a busted inside straight draw, but was this on the flop? The only possible gutterball on the flop is 23 which made a wheel on the turn.

Grisga did you have something like 8 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]?

[/ QUOTE ]

I had 92o. I'm not proud. I was in fight-over-every-goddamn-pot mode. I think there are (much) better ways to handle this kind of opponent; I just haven't figure those ways out quite yet, so I was reduced to calling with no outs and bluffraising a guy who can tell when I'm probably bluffraising. Luckily for me, he was playing almost the exact same style as I was.

I quit soon thereafter, taking my 15BB or so and running. I still haven't figured out how to best play against a lagtard like that without really dialing down the aggression. I would like to think the answer is 'selective' aggression but when you're playing HU, you can't afford to be too selective preflop when on the button IMO.

(Of course, the strategy that works the best when I play a sane player with that style is sane player simply hits the flop a lot and takes lots and lots of money from me. Fit-or-fold seems a bit silly HU, though . . .)

For what it's worth, I still don't know if my play was correct, because he could easily have 3-bet the river here with a busted draw. I think the fact that he won with K-high on a similar hand previously worked in my favor, making him less eager to fire yet another barrel; also, my "call the turn 3-bet, raise the river" line is a good one in general for getting more money out of an inveterate bluffer who may fold to a turn cap, and I think he recognized that.

Re: Wacky HU action, Lagtard vs Lagtard, river bluffraising
 

It looks to me like after your opponent bets the river the pot has 11BB in it. Assuming you are folding to a 3-bet, you are risking 2BB to win 11BB by bluff raising, so you are getting 11:2 odds. If you estimate that he both has a better hand and will fold it at least 2/(11+2) = 2/13 = 15.4% of the time, then a bluff raise is profitable.

Cartman