Theory: Bluffing (can you pull it off at < NL 100???) - Page 2

effang · #11 06-19-2007, 07:16 PM

lol, wth?

did you guys even read my post? i said BIG RIVER BLUFFS. I mean shoving the rest of your stack on a bluff. The stuff you guys talk about, i hope everybody at 2+2 is already doing it. the examples i see here are "bet when you have position and it is checked to you," which are fairly obvious.

1 dollar pots aren't "big bluffs." They are bluff catchers, and the other guy doesn't have a hand. If people have a hand, they're going to call 1 bb on the river. Maybe I should show this hand again, by what i mean a big river bluff.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (8 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

saw flop|saw showdown

MP2 ($24.65)
CO ($26.35)
Button ($9)
SB ($68.15)
BB ($24.90)
UTG ($7.85)
UTG+1 ($88)
Hero ($48.80)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.25, Hero calls $0.25, 1 fold, CO raises to $1.5, 3 folds, UTG+1 calls $1.25, Hero calls $1.25.

Flop: ($4.85) 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (3 players)
UTG+1 checks, Hero checks, CO bets $3.75, UTG+1 calls $3.75, Hero calls $3.75.

Turn: ($16.10) 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (3 players)
UTG+1 checks, Hero bets $9, CO folds, UTG+1 calls $9.

River: ($34.10) 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
UTG+1 checks, Hero checks.

Final Pot: $34.10

Results in white below: 
UTG+1 has 9c 2c (two pair, sixes and twos).
Hero has 8d Td (one pair, sixes).
Outcome: UTG+1 wins $34.10. 

You really think this guy is going to call a shove with bottom pair??

And this is the innate difficulty. At smaller stakes, you can't push people off of their hands.

At higher stakes, you're too afraid, or unfamiliar, with how to do so. Where do you find the medium?

effang · #12 06-19-2007, 07:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Threads is right, bluffing opportunities are plenty in the micros. They might be different from those at higher levels though. Villains at 25NL don't think much about what you think they think you have. They are not scared when they face pot-sized bets on 3 streets. They call them down with top pair and call you a luckbox when you flip over your set.

But a lot of players tend to be too scared of the board. Not all, of course, there are idiots who can't find the brakes even when the third overcard to their pocket sevens falls. But when i start noticing my flushes don't get paid off at one table, i start bluffing three-flush boards. Trying to find an example from today's play, i couldn't find a prototypical one, this here is the closest i played today:

Villain is 20/0/2, and has not lost a showdown yet. By the river i figured he likely had a bigger king, so i tried to win the hand with a bluff.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (5 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

UTG :#A500AF(Villain)/ ($14.05)
MP ($25.45)
Button ($37.10)
SB ($36.25)
Hero ($61.35)

Preflop: Hero is BB with K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
UTG :#A500AF(Villain)/ calls $0.25, 3 folds, Hero checks.

Flop: ($0.60) Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero bets $0.5, Villain calls $0.50.

Turn: ($1.60) T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero checks, Villain checks.

River: ($1.60) 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero bets $1, Villain folds.

Final Pot: $2.60

[/ QUOTE ]

we probably play differently. you bet the flop, and you checked the turn. there's no way you can put him on a better "king". or ANY hand, since there isn't ANY action. he had Ace high, and folded.

Steelerman · #13 06-19-2007, 07:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
lol, wth?

did you guys even read my post? i said BIG RIVER BLUFFS. I mean shoving the rest of your stack on a bluff. The stuff you guys talk about, i hope everybody at 2+2 is already doing it. the examples i see here are "bet when you have position and it is checked to you," which are fairly obvious.

1 dollar pots aren't "big bluffs." They are bluff catchers, and the other guy doesn't have a hand. If people have a hand, they're going to call 1 bb on the river. Maybe I should show this hand again, by what i mean a big river bluff.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (8 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

saw flop|saw showdown

MP2 ($24.65)
CO ($26.35)
Button ($9)
SB ($68.15)
BB ($24.90)
UTG ($7.85)
UTG+1 ($88)
Hero ($48.80)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.25, Hero calls $0.25, 1 fold, CO raises to $1.5, 3 folds, UTG+1 calls $1.25, Hero calls $1.25.

Flop: ($4.85) 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (3 players)
UTG+1 checks, Hero checks, CO bets $3.75, UTG+1 calls $3.75, Hero calls $3.75.

Turn: ($16.10) 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (3 players)
UTG+1 checks, Hero bets $9, CO folds, UTG+1 calls $9.

River: ($34.10) 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
UTG+1 checks, Hero checks.

Final Pot: $34.10

Results in white below: 
UTG+1 has 9c 2c (two pair, sixes and twos).
Hero has 8d Td (one pair, sixes).
Outcome: UTG+1 wins $34.10. 

You really think this guy is going to call a shove with bottom pair??

And this is the innate difficulty. At smaller stakes, you can't push people off of their hands.

At higher stakes, you're too afraid, or unfamiliar, with how to do so. Where do you find the medium?

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL, isn't this exactly what I addressed in my post? I don't think you can just say "At xxxx limit I can now make huge river bluffs." It's much more villain specific than it is level specific.

effang · #14 06-19-2007, 07:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
LOL, isn't this exactly what I addressed in my post? I don't think you can just say "At xxxx limit I can now make huge river bluffs." It's much more villain specific than it is level specific.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course it is player specific. EVERYTHING in poker is player specific. But in general, you are wrong. there are two pertinent assumptions that you fail to make.

1. the higher the stakes, the better the players (in general).

is this even debatable? better players move up, worse players lose their roll or move down. Few players enjoy grinding NL25 and NL50 like i do.

2. Better players are more capable of folding better hands. Better hands as in...sometimes they can fold AA and KK, and many times they can fold TPTK on a JT7 board.

This is a given as well. Being a better player means you make better folds.

Given 1, then we can assume that there are more players at higher levels that are more apt to fold better hands. And as such, at higher levels, it is easier to successfully carry out a large river bluff.

Steelerman · #15 06-19-2007, 07:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LOL, isn't this exactly what I addressed in my post? I don't think you can just say "At xxxx limit I can now make huge river bluffs." It's much more villain specific than it is level specific.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course it is player specific. EVERYTHING in poker is player specific. But in general, you are wrong. there are two pertinent assumptions that you fail to make.

1. the higher the stakes, the better the players (in general).

is this even debatable? better players move up, worse players lose their roll or move down. Few players enjoy grinding NL25 and NL50 like i do.

2. Better players are more capable of folding better hands. Better hands as in...sometimes they can fold AA and KK, and many times they can fold TPTK on a JT7 board.

This is a given as well. Being a better player means you make better folds.

Given 1, then we can assume that there are more players at higher levels that are more apt to fold better hands. And as such, at higher levels, it is easier to successfully carry out a large river bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course all that stuff is completely obvious. What are you looking for though? A magic level where all huge river bluffs start working. I just don't think you're going to find an answer like that. Even at NL100 and NL200 there's no doubt you will find donkeys who will make horrible calls with 3rd pair.

Sure, as you move up the ladder you're going to find less and less donks who will make such horrible calls but you'll still want to examine each hand rather than make generalizations.

jack frost · #16 06-19-2007, 07:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Given 1, then we can assume that there are more players at higher levels that are more apt to fold better hands. And as such, at higher levels, it is easier to successfully carry out a large river bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

To answer your original question YES.

You are correct with the above statement large river bluffs are more likely to work at higher stakes than lower stakes.

effang · #17 06-19-2007, 07:53 PM

My initial question:

So, at what level did you first start running huge river bluffs?

and the follow up. How do you learn to do it, if it's not possible (will get called) at the micros, and if it is expensive at higher limits?

People play micros to learn. You can't really learn how to pull off river bluffs/(no need) in the micros. As such, are you practicing your river bluffs at NL100? NL200???

effang · #18 06-19-2007, 07:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Often times when sizing my bluff bet on the river, I think about how much the player is willing to pay for a "curiosity call" (a call just to see what you have) and I try to bet just a little bit more than that.

But the first thing that you have to consider is whether your whole line makes sense. Even for a non-thinking opponent, I believe they are pricing their curiosity call against your line, even if they have little experience evaluating your line. e.g. if there's a 4-flush on the board, they may convince themselves that you have a flush and there's no need to pay to see it. If the board is dry, they may call you just to see how high your TP kicker is even if they don't have TP themselves.

I think one of the reason it's harder to pull off bluffs at lower limits is because the cost of a curiousity call is so cheap. Even if you bet the full pot, it may be a $5 bet and calling may let them sleep better at nights.

So for me, this is one of those times when I tend to consider the absolute value of the bet as opposed to the relative value of the bet to the pot.

So to answer your question, I think bluffs can be run at < NL100 assuming the absolute bet size is big enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely. If i was playing any smaller, I would never fold because 1 dollar would be worth nothing compared to the comfort of "just knowing."

CalledDownLight · #19 06-19-2007, 08:05 PM

I pull river bluffs at every level the game is just looser at lower levels it doesnt mean they cant ever fold a pair.

Steelerman · #20 06-19-2007, 08:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
My initial question:

So, at what level did you first start running huge river bluffs?

and the follow up. How do you learn to do it, if it's not possible (will get called) at the micros, and if it is expensive at higher limits?

People play micros to learn. You can't really learn how to pull off river bluffs/(no need) in the micros. As such, are you practicing your river bluffs at NL100? NL200???

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you kind of answer your own question here. I'd imagine that it's kind of a survival thing. Having spent alot of time at the lower levels, you clearly understand that it doesn't fit into what you need to do/can do.

I have to believe that if you moved up, you'd naturally run into a situation eventually where you couldn't just print money playing super standard. At this point it would become incumbent upon you to start finding plays like this to augment your win rate. Once players were good enough in general to force you to start thinking this way, you'd know it could probably work. Of course, even then it would be very situation and oppenent dependent.