[Diana Ross Fan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He calls out of turn, and whatever I bet stays in the pot. Now he gets the option to fold if I add more? Meaning cheap showdown for him if I'm bluffing.

That's stupid. I edited the post above this one, so please re-read it and give me your opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's only a cheap showdown if you don't want to increase the size of your bluff-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't play no-limit. I know you don't. You can't.

A NL player would recognize the flaws in this statement, and know that there are equity downsides to it. If I'm bluffing, I can't just keep throwing money in the pot because in a LOT of situations it is VERY unprofitable.

For instance, I bluff into a calling station to fold him off of bottom pair/high-card. He calls me prematurely, and I know he could have anything from middle pair to top pair, or even two pair, small flushes, and various other hands. His range is HUGE, and I can't just throw money out there to try and push him off of it because I'm liable to get called (this is NL and in a lot of situations you don't raise the river with what you would in limit). The thing is people catch on and start doing this crap with tons of hands they want to see a showdown with, and it just makes my decision on the river that much more difficult.

In NL people value bet stronger hands generally, and bluff more. I know your intelligent enough to see what I'm getting at here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he's intelligent enough to see that you don't have a point. Please provide us with one argument why player 2 should have to call; that does not include you don't play nl