Nate's Theorem on the "Value Bluff"

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]

Very interesting if true. I suspect that this is also an aspect that is fairly unique to NLHE. Hand values behave more continuously in something like LHE or on the pre-river streets in PLO.


[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, the difference between LHE and PLO and NLHE is that in limit bets cost so little, so the value comes relative to pot odds. even if you have no chance of winning the hand when behind, you only have to win fairly rarely.

NLHE and PLO are obv different. the value comes from pot equity, which needs to be very high, and from fold equity when bluffing/semi-bluffing.

so in LHE there's nothing so bad about calling down w/ 33, but in NLHE the problem is that although hand values may be almost as continuous, putting in so much money relative to the pot (as it starts out on the flop) with a hand that will almost never improve to the winner (such as underpair) can get ugly.

with PLO, things change again because even "worse" hands are simply much closer to coinflipping than normal.

[Big_Jim]

Van,

Nate already said that.
[ QUOTE ]
We don't know what percentage of the time we're up against opponent A and what percentage of the time we're up against opponent B. BTW, A and B can actually be different opponents or the same opponent at different times; it doesn't matter for the sake of this example.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Trix]

A while ago while playing 3/6 I think, I raised JJ and got like 2 calls..Q high flop, which got checked around. Turn A, checked to me, so I bet and got called by a regular. I decide try to bluff him off a queen on the river and instead I got called by some low pocket pair, was that a value bluff ?

[Money2Burn]

[ QUOTE ]
Firstly, the opponent can call with a worse hand (CW), which nets us a profit of $100.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not trying to be a nit, but wouldn't this net us a profit of 200?

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
A while ago while playing 3/6 I think, I raised JJ and got like 2 calls..Q high flop, which got checked around. Turn A, checked to me, so I bet and got called by a regular. I decide try to bluff him off a queen on the river and instead I got called by some low pocket pair, was that a value bluff ?

[/ QUOTE ]

By my definition, it's not a value bluff unless you expected it to show a profit both as a value-bet and as a bluff against certain types of opponents. So here's the question: if had perfect knowledge about your opponent's hand range and his range of actions with each hand in that range, would you have had a profitable value bet against him? If say your opponent's range when he calls consists of 75% queens and 25% middle pocket pairs, then you did not make a value-bluff; you just happened to get lucky.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Firstly, the opponent can call with a worse hand (CW), which nets us a profit of $100.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not trying to be a nit, but wouldn't this net us a profit of 200?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, because I'm considering only the net effect of the river action.

If you bet $100 and are called by a worse hand, then you've won a net of $200 throughout the hand but only $100 on the river because you had that first $100 coming to you regardless of what you did.

[aislephive]

Hey Nate, excellent post.

I recently posted a hand in SSNL which I kind of refer to as a "value bluff." On the turn, I bet to protect what perhaps is the best hand against various overcards, one card flush draws, and occasionally I get a call from a worse hand although rarely and it's specifically a hand like AhQx. Sometimes I get him to fold a better hand, like 66. And also, I can't really take much heat with my hand either and induce a river bluff.

It's definitely much more of a bluff than a value bet, but nonetheless I was curious what you think of this turn bet in general. Would you consider it a value bluff, or is it just a pure bluff? Do you think the higher EV play for me is to check the turn back or is betting +EV even though I don't expect to be called by worse or fold out better very often.

Villain here is 21/14 ish and pretty solid. My image is that of a lagtag playing at about 24/19.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $2 BB (6 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

saw flop|<font color="#C00000">saw showdown</font>

MP ($198)
CO ($218)
Hero ($200)
SB ($198)
BB ($285.90)
UTG ($121.65)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">CO raises to $8</font>, Hero calls $8, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>.

Flop: ($19) 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">CO bets $14</font>, Hero calls $14.

Turn: ($47) J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
CO checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $31</font>

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

These concepts become even fuzzier when you include hands that involve draws and/or multiple streets. There's value in your bet in the sense that a lot of times he has like K [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] and is just giving up and you don't want to let him see a river and improve or bluff you off your hand. But certainly you're not expecting to be a favorite when called.

[VanVeen]

oh, i should read more carefully!

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

Here is another example that might help to illustrate this concept. It's from a 15/30 limit hold 'em game that I played today.

A loose, poor opponent limped under the gun in a 6-handed game. The small blind called, and I decided to raise from the BB with Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. Both opponents called.

The flop was J [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], giving me top two pair. I bet, the UTG player called, and the SB folded.

The turn was an awful card, the T [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. Although this is an exceptionally conservative (and possibly incorrect) play, I decided to check and call, because I felt like my opponent would very often bet worse hands for me, and I'd certainly rather not have to deal with a second bet going in on this street.

The river was the A [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], an even worse card. I decided to turn my hand into a bluff and bet, figuring that this card had to be just as scary to him as it was to me, and that I'd get enough laydowns from hands like 9x and AJ to justify the small expenditure (limit lol). Instead, my opponent called with J [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] T [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] and I won the pot.

The salient point here is that my bet was either profitable as a bluff (not against this opponent obviously, but against the range of possible opponents) or it wasn't profitable at all. The fact that I got called by a worse hand is irrelevant, because the hand he called with was presumably just about at the weakest end of his calling range. If he's calling with one of the weakest two-pair hands on the board, he's also calling (or raising) with any stronger two-pair hand as well as any 9, X, or small flush; I had to be at least a 7:2 underdog when called. In fact, given the board texture, it is impossible to conceive of an opponent against whom this bet shows a profit when called (I'm actually a 60/40 underdog against a random hand!).