good time for a combo bet v. a TAG? or do those bets not exist....

[FoxwoodsFiend]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
everything TWP said is right and i can't imagine anyone thinking otherwise on this topic. the value bluff just means "i have no idea what's going on here"

[/ QUOTE ]

the point is, we can never ever know for sure what we are doing in a particular hand, because we don't know with 100% accurately. I agree if we knew our opponents hand range two-way bets would never exist. However, given that we only know an approximation of his range, and we know for SURE that he will sometimes fold better and sometimes call worse, when we make a bet in a really close spot like this one how can we ever be sure that we are value betting or bluffing? Obviously other scenarios are much more clear.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm mulittabling so deleted my post because i realized i can't really add anything right now. but your emphasis on certainty is weird and misplaced: say you think you're valuebetting mid set and the guy folds bottom set on the river. it's still a value bet even though it turns out you were "bluffing." certainty of somebody's range isn't necessary for whether we label something a vb or a bluff, the label is determined by what you THINK your opponent's range and corresponding actions are. the reason the value bluff is tempting as a concept is because you don't know what you think is going on.

[highhustla]

The bet absolutely exists, but only against really deep thinking players. e.g. those who are very specifically narrowing down your range, and those who are basing their decisions more heavily on their read at that moment than the relative value of their hand (even w/in their own range).

Also, even if we DO know villain's EXACT range, the fact that we don't know his exact hand, means it is possible for it to exist. A thinking villain isn't doing the same play with the same hand every time, and that isn't necessarily "irrational."

donkey also hits it on the head regarding this specific hand: the bet is obviously not massive EV, but it certainly makes you tougher to play against, which should = +EV metagame against a 19/15.

[luegofuego]

i am way too drunk to explain but i really wanted to say something about valuebetting vs bluffing (specifically on preflop/flop/turn vs river) and denying ur opponent the equity of the pot that he is theoretically entitled to.

if u shove an open ended straight flush draw which has 50% equity vs opponents QQ, u are semibluffing - how about if u shove ur QQ vs ur opponents open ended straight flush draw and he folds it? is it a bluff or valueshove? i would say that i would let this thought simmer with u all for a while, truth is obviously that i am way to messed up to elaborate but u know, it is all about denying him equity. i wish mdma was awake so i could ask him to put my thoughts into words BUT ALAS

[luegofuego]

yuch

[shootaa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
everything TWP said is right and i can't imagine anyone thinking otherwise on this topic. the value bluff just means "i have no idea what's going on here"

[/ QUOTE ]

the point is, we can never ever know for sure what we are doing in a particular hand, because we don't know with 100% accurately. I agree if we knew our opponents hand range two-way bets would never exist. However, given that we only know an approximation of his range, and we know for SURE that he will sometimes fold better and sometimes call worse, when we make a bet in a really close spot like this one how can we ever be sure that we are value betting or bluffing? Obviously other scenarios are much more clear.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm mulittabling so deleted my post because i realized i can't really add anything right now. but your emphasis on certainty is weird and misplaced: say you think you're valuebetting mid set and the guy folds bottom set on the river. it's still a value bet even though it turns out you were "bluffing." certainty of somebody's range isn't necessary for whether we label something a vb or a bluff, the label is determined by what you THINK your opponent's range and corresponding actions are. the reason the value bluff is tempting as a concept is because you don't know what you think is going on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty sure its a bluff if they fold a better hand, not a worse one (then its a value bet, ducy?).

I think that there is such a thing as a thin value bet, but it isn't as cut and dry as a lot of people have been making it out to be.

A bet can be used to fold out many better hands in some cases, say your opponent doesn't realize the ability you have to merge your hand ranges to the extent you do and you bet pot all-in on a board of 34653 with A6 in a blind battle after you have been called twice. Here, he may fold 99, he may call with A5, deciding that you're still trying to represent the straight and that he is capable of floating the turn with a pair and gutshot to a higher straight, something like that. When called, it is really dependent on your image in the game, so you can gear the nature of the bet, most likely with your bet sizing/timing, to best fit what you view to be your opponents perception of what you would do here.

He may look you up light, as we obviously want since we make more, or he may make a reasonable laydown and toss a 99 type hand or 65 type hand. The results allow us to be better paid regardless, whether it be this hand or in future hands. Since he may call with worse or fold better hands, it is a double-sided bet.

[craigthedeac]

There isn't much disagreement going on, it's just different perceptions, IMO.

It seems TWP/crowd are assuming "rational" ranges that can be defined, while Strasser/Durr/company are taking the "flip a coin" approach and saying that since the ranges are often unclear, the bet will sometimes work both ways.

The bet accomplishes the same thing regardless of your perception, it's just some people are conceiving of a linear range that has a break-even point, while some people are acknowledging the randomness of what is going on in a hand so the range is "grouped" as Strasser says.

[MYNAMEIZGREG]

[ QUOTE ]
There isn't much disagreement going on, it's just different perceptions, IMO.

It seems TWP/crowd are assuming "rational" ranges that can be defined, while Strasser/Durr/company are taking the "flip a coin" approach and saying that since the ranges are often unclear, the bet will sometimes work both ways.

The bet accomplishes the same thing regardless of your perception, it's just some people are conceiving of a linear range that has a break-even point, while some people are acknowledging the randomness of what is going on in a hand so the range is "grouped" as Strasser says.

[/ QUOTE ]

The best part about this post is that he was smashed when he made it, but I agree with it all.

[josh_x]

what about some situation where hero has a weak made hand but appears to have a very strong hand, and villains range is fd's and good top pair hands. Something he has done means his range doesnt include monsters. Therefore when you bet he folds his good top pair hands, because he thinks he is crushed, and calls with his flush draws to try and crack your monster for lots. Combo bet, no?
ps im drunk hope i'm right [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[greg nice]

[ QUOTE ]
Often times on the river that is the situation, guy bets, you only beat a bluff. A villain in this hand will sometimess call with Q high and sometimes fold JJ. His decision will be made based on his gut, timing, recent/past history, tilt, etc. The hand threshold thing doesnt make sense.


[/ QUOTE ]

the threshold still exists. but its specific to the current situation RIGHT NOW. one hand the threshold might be the entire range, ie call with Q high. but 10 mins later same exact hand and action occur, but different table images, the hand value threshold could raise and you fold JJ.

as has been said, i dont see a difference in the two sides that are supposedly in opposition. its just a different way of looking at the concept. ultimately, the bet is either for value or to bluff. so "2-way" doesnt exist logically. but as luego said, there is merit in denying someone their equity, and putting them to the decision. so, even though you throw out this "2-way" which really means "i dont know where im at", its still a good bet because the opponent has to make the tough decision rather than you, and theres fold equity involved. therefore they could easily make the wrong decision, since your bet was made out of confusion, they wont be able to get any read on your thinking.

not to mention future metagame which is given

[EmpireMaker2]

The only thing about this river is its always a bluff and never a value bet, and if anyone disagrees ur only going to win on a bet and he shoves as a bluff.