Raising massive to look suspicious HU SNG

Knightsridge · #1 09-01-2007, 10:01 PM

I have noticed sometimes that people will raise 2-3 x pot to look suspicious holding the nuts (or close to it)

Example

Board is 4s5d6c9dAh and villain will bet 330 into a 180 pot. Trying to look like a bluff but having the straight. Do many do this or would most rather raise 90-120 for value.

jay_shark · #2 09-01-2007, 10:59 PM

You should prefer to bet 180 or your typical amount .

Suppose villain would call a% of the time when you bet $330 compared to b% when you bet $180 .

We should bet $300 iff 330a > 180b or a>.5454b

So when weighing which decision to consider , you would prefer betting $330 if you think the percentage of time he calls is a little more than half of the percentage of calls if you make a $180 bet .

In this situation , I don't see this being the case . You're more likely to get calls if you make a regular raise than if you do something suspicious for the first time .

hra146 · #3 09-01-2007, 11:16 PM

Its a very mathematical issue only dependent on what villain is likely to call at what %age of times.

According to NLH T&P you should tend to bet more if you made your hand in a very unlikely way. Or in other cases just how well your hand is disguised. On obvious 4flush boards or 4card straight boards overbets are generally the wrong choice.

Go for the "obvious" lurking bet and see how itll be called over and over again.

abcjnich · #4 09-03-2007, 04:33 PM

People don't do this to rep a bluff. Like hra146 said, this a mathematical issue.

It's balancing 4 options: chk/raising, leading for a normal amount, leading for a small amount to either get a weak call or to induce a bluff raise, or to lead-overbet.

These 4 options are 1.about math and what your opponent will do w/ X% of his range in response; and 2.if you're opp is smart, then psychology.

TheSalche · #5 09-03-2007, 06:53 PM

The problem with overbetting the pot to look suspicious is that you are probably only doing this with your big hands, and never doing it with weak/medium hands and bluffs. Unless you're playing at a stake where the player pool is small enough so that metagame matters I don't see the point.

Nichomacheo · #6 09-03-2007, 09:38 PM

Villain had Q5 in this hand. I think he played it perfectly vs me. If he had bet smaller I probably would have just called:

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t30 (2 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

Hero (t1245)
BB (t1755)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
Hero calls t15, BB checks.

Flop: (t60) 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
BB bets t30, Hero calls t30.

Turn: (t120) Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
BB bets t30, Hero raises to t150, BB calls t120.

River: (t420) 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
BB bets t1545 (All-In), Hero calls t1035 (All-In).

Final Pot: t2490

(I've been experimenting with limping pocket pairs. The flop is just mixing it up; normally I'd stick in a raise here.)