|
|
#1
08-16-2006, 12:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Pooh Bah Post - Inducing Bluffs
Well, it's tough coming up with a good PB post, since all the great posters on here have covered so many topics already, but I'll do my best by writing about this topic that I've been really developing for myself lately...
Bet, bet, bet. The key advice many people have in this forum (and by no means is it wrong) is to bet. My impression when I first came here was that the majority of players were very weak tight before they started posting and lurking around. After a bit of studying, learning, and getting humilated by other 2p2ers, they developed a TAG style that was more fit for extracting money at SSNL. The advice here is to be aggressive and stay aggressive...and most of the people here seem to get that. However, most of the posts here do not advocate slowing down and letting the other guy do the betting for you. This, in my opinion, is an integral and important part of the game, and there is a lot of money that is left on the table because people can't get the hyper-aggressive bug out of their heads for a hand here or there. So allow me to introduce (or familiarize - for many 2p2ers) the concept of inducing bluffs. Inducing a bluff is checking a hand we are almost certain is the best in order to give a weaker opponent a chance to bet at it. This play can be performed in position and out of position, and I'll look at both. Inducing a bluff - IN POSITION Suppose you pick up A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] in the CO in a 6-max NL100 game. Everyone folds to you, and you pop it up to $4. The BB (a tricky, trappy player) is the only one who calls. The flop comes A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. The BB checks, you throw out your c-bet of $6-$8, and the BB calls. The turn is the 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]. The BB checks again. What do you do? Conventional wisdom says we should keep betting at this. We are pretty sure that we have the best hand here. But the BB could have anything. He could have a monster like JJ he's waiting to unleash. He could have called with KQ on the flop just trying to look you up and hit a miracle T on the turn. He could also have a worse A and will call down to the river. His hand range is extremely wide. Well I am advocating a check behind (with the intention of calling a river bet) here. This ties right in there with pot control, but this is not the angle I am taking. Sure we want to control the pot size, but we also want to win as much money as we can (or lose as little as possible if behind). If we are behind, all we have to do is call one more bet (which we would have thrown out there on the turn anyways if we didn't slow down and stayed aggressive). If we are ahead, we missed out on some value by not betting on the turn. However, many times the villain holds a missed draw or air of some sort. He called on the flop because that is what donkeys do OOP, and he wanted to look you up. Your turn check just opened the door for KQ to fire a bet at you. You happily call and take an extra bet you wouldn't have won had you bet the turn. All in all, you kept the pot smallish and got to a showdown with a hand with great showdown value. Many people will say, "Well if we're ahead of an A, we lose value by not betting the turn." You're absolutely right, but what happens when a loose player check raises us all in there on the turn? According to Baluga, we have to fold. Donkey shows us A2 and we lose out on a decent size pot, cursing to ourself and taking a premature shot at him later with TPBK when he happens to run into AA. Sure, we may be giving up a little EV if that is the case, but getting check/raised there and having to give up our hand with showdown value sucks. Also, betting out a weaker hand that would fire a bet on the river if we checked sucks too. So in the long run, I would have to believe that checking the turn and calling a river bet is +EV. Inducing a bluff - OUT OF POSITION This is a bit trickier. I was looking back at Fim's fantastic posts a few months ago, when I saw his NL25 Pilgrimage .The genius of this post has been referenced many times, and it is no secret how great of a post Fim was. However, there was one part that stuck out at me. His #2 point of allowing a probable drawer to bluff at the river. Let's say we're raising from UTG with A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] and we get a button caller. The flop comes K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. We throw out a c-bet and we're called. The turn is the 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. We fire another 2/3 to full pot size bet and we're called again. The river is the 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. We have no reason to think that we're beat at this point. But let's think on another level at what the villain could have. He just smooth-called 2 bets. It's likely he's on a weakish king, but even more likely that he's on a busted spade draw. What does a bet here accomplish? Any spade draw is easily folding. Why not let him do the betting for us? I can't tell you how many times I have checked this river to have villain fire a 2/3 pot bet at me with a missed A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] draw. You also might get a weak hand like K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] to throw a bet at us because they are sensing weakness. Sklansky's fundamental theorem of poker said that we gain when we would do exactly what we would do if we could see the other player's cards. Well if you knew he was on a busted flush draw there, the correct play would be to check the river to allow him to fire a bet, since he couldn't call anything otherwise. The value we gain from probable drawers or donkeys with weak kings betting at us in this spot far outweighs the value we lose from not betting this river. These are just two isolated examples on inducing bluffs. You can adapt this idea to any part of your game and be as tricky as you want to be. My win-rate has gone up over the past few months, and I started playing around with this over the past few months. It could be a coincidence, but time and time again, I am looking up villains when they fire bets at me with total air after I checked the turn in position, or checked OOP on the river with a strong hand. 
|
|
#5
08-16-2006, 12:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pooh Bah Post - Inducing Bluffs
Excellent PB post. Your advice matches up pretty well with the way I approach hands like these, but it's great to have someone else do the work of setting the analysis down in words.
|
|
#6
08-16-2006, 12:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pooh Bah Post - Inducing Bluffs
Great post, Cappy. Thank you. I was already very fond of the turn check behind, but I'm new to inducing bluffs out of position. Definitely going to try that one sometime.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
