My (Flawed) Theory of Bluffing

[john kane]

I have been having a problem recently replying to many hand posts becuase a lot of the time the play seems reasonable whether it is for value or for a bluff. This is primarily becuase of the increasing number of solid 24/18 players whose hand range it is hard to narrow down, even in 3bet preflop hands.

For example:

$3-$6nl. Villain is a 24/18. Hero playing similar.

Villain raises in CO to $16, his standard raise. button fold, Hero calls in SB, BB folds.

Flop comes 4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] ($36)

Hero checks, Villain bets $28, Hero raises to $80. Villain pauses for a short while and calls.

Turn K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]($196)

Hero bets $154

Villain.....................

Now what do we expect Villain to do? Personally I think usually he folds. So thus we should like this line for bluffing. i.e. check-raise flop, fire turn should be a bluff line more often that a value line.

But what if turn is a 6 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], how does that affect the situation? Or pairing the board?

My problem is that we really don't know, we are playing our hand through the eyes of what we are trying to achieve. We see we have missed the flop, and occasionally we decide to bluff. However, our line is often the same as when we are playing for value.

Say this hand:

Same hand as before, this time Hero leads flop:

Flop comes 4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] ($36)

Hero bets $28, Villain raises to $80, Hero calls $52.

Turn K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]($196)

Hero checks, Villain bets $154, Hero shoves for $350 more.

Or what if Hero calls and shoves any river card.

I understand I have used a draw heavy flop, but nonetheless the principle still applies to other hands.

The problem with this plays are that at no point the Villain has shown weakness. Instead our bluff is not based on his weakness, but instead on our high aggression. The problem here is that we will do this with our strong hands anyway, thus it makes it impossible for the opponent to narrow down our hand between a bluff or value betting, and thus we have no true reason as to why he would fold when we are bluffing and why he would call when we have the strong hands, as our plays are fundamentally the same.

Maybe it's just that I'm lost, however, I feel trying to make plays in these type of hands simply isn't worth it. Opponents (mainly 24/18 types) tend to call more often than they should (or at least in my experience anyway) as they don't want to be bluffed off hands.

My problem is summed up in this thread:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post11454395

Where I wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
sometimes we bet here thinking 'i have the nuts, i will bet pot/overbet pot to rep a bluff' or 'i have the nuts, i will value bet 2/3 pot' but on the flip side 'he has me beat, i will bet pot/overbet pot to get him to fold' or 'he has me beat, i will value bet 2/3 to rep a value bet with a v.strong hand and he should fold his ace'.

my point is that all sorts of reasoning can come up in our brains, all which justify a different sized bet for a different purpose.

[/ QUOTE ]

I received a reply saying that we should do bluff when we think it is wise to do so when given our experience we know players will typically fold given our play, however, I feel this is pretty much flipping, given everyone differs greatly, and even factors such as mood come into the decision whether you call a big river raise with your mid two pair or not.

So I guess what I'm trying to conclude to myself is that trying to make all these fancy plays at msnl is of limited use, as we take the same leads when playing for value as we do as a bluff, just our minds convince us that he will more likely fold when we are bluffing and he will more likely call when we are value betting, despite the amounts being the same. We do this becuase we can easily justify to ourselves why he would fold/call whether or not we bet 2/3 pot or overbet the pot.

So thus this often massively increases the variance as we are relying on winning the flips of whether our opponents this time decide to call or fold.

So instead, when I come back to playing, I will go back to my old style, where I would focus on the players who called too much, and simply extract my money from them, rather than trying to make plays on 24/18s when I miss the board, and chalking it up as 'well next time I hit I should get paid'.

So, the conclusion to my flawed theory of bluffing, is don't bother the big bluffs where your opponents hand range is wide and your just trying to topple him over with strong lines such as check-raising then lead turn, or pot-pot-pot, instead bluff when you have seen weakness in your opponent (such as floating him then he checks turn) or if you have seen him play weakly on postflop and does fold more often than he should.

I say it's flawed, becuase as with everything it is likely exploitable, plus I'm sure there will be something wrong with it, however, although it may be kind of simplistic in that:

- focus bluffs on weaker players and when stronger players show weakness when you have floated them and they have checked turn/river.

- focus value bets on everyone, especially targetting the players who call too much.

I feel often I am reading on MSNL hand advice where the Hero is simply trying to topple the opponent by showing a lot of aggression, when we have no idea whether Villain is actually weak, given he has shown no weakness by his play, and we are only doing so becuase he has a pretty wide range pf (as 24/18s do).

Anyways, replies most appreciated.

[Slider]

Wowow,

Great post John Kane. I've been struggling with this concept a ton lately. My better roommates cr bluff the flop a ton, but if you don't follow it up with a turn bet, you leave yourself open to exploitation.

BUT - I think if you're playing 200bb deep, this line is worse because they can just call your lead on the turn assuming you'll do this with bluffs and big hands and most won't have the balls to fire the river again because after showing so much strength - the opponent didn't yield.

[john kane]

one other thing i'd like to add is i am not claiming this is anything new, in fact it's probably what some players having been doing for ages, just i've been having problems with my game at times with more 24/18 style players about and so wanted to get something written down.

[wtfsvi]

Do you think many 24/18s would catch on to the fact that you never bluff against them? Do you think now: "maybe, but if they start folding too much I will adjust"? If so, you are kindof back where you started.

[john kane]

agreed slider that with 200bb deep your in worse problems as with 100bb by the opponent calling the turn bet he will sometimes assume your going to push the river as you won't have a deep stack so your turn FE is greater, whereas 200bb deep they know a similar sized bet will occur so frequently.

wtfsvi, i don't mean never bluffing, for example, if i raise with 56s and the board comes 28K ill fire as i know i have no showdown value, but i think making bluffs when you have no evidence that your opponent is weak (when he raises pf and fires the flop) i think it gets pretty hard to justify raising them, and firing the turn (and river). After all why do you expect them to fold, when if you had flopped middle set you would be looking for them to call?

For sure as with anything there has to be some adjusting to the flow of the game and your own image, just i think there are some plays which simply are not worthwhile, plus they take your attention from the weaker players and instead your trying to use your laggier image against the better 24/18 players. Obv the other calling station players will pay you off more as your image is laggier, but they are calling stations after all, they should pay you off pretty well anyway.

[wtfsvi]

It seems to me what you are basically saying is 'just let the 24/18s exploit you and focus on exploiting weaker players in stead'. Are they really that good?

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
So I guess what I'm trying to conclude to myself is that trying to make all these fancy plays at msnl is of limited use, as we take the same leads when playing for value as we do as a bluff, just our minds convince us that he will more likely fold when we are bluffing and he will more likely call when we are value betting, despite the amounts being the same.

[/ QUOTE ]
There isn't really any theoretical logic behind this. In the hand where you c/r the flop, turn is 6d and you bet again. When you have flopped a set and are betting for value you'll bet even if you know villain will fold 75% (unless you think crai is better which it in general isn't). If villain folds ~40% of the time or more it's correct to both bluff in this spot with air and vb if your hand is strong.

Point being the fact that betting for value is correct doesn't mean you can't bluff profitable with weak hand in the same spot.


[ QUOTE ]
- focus bluffs on weaker players and when stronger players show weakness when you have floated them and they have checked turn/river.

- focus value bets on everyone, especially targetting the players who call too much.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is basic but great to keep in mind while playing.

[john kane]

wtfsvi, kinda yes, but more don't try and outplay the 24/18s becuase you are essentially flipping as to when they call and when they fold, so instead play 'normal' poker against them and focus on exploiting weaker players in stead'.

when i say 'normal' as in fold weak hands, call hands your marginally ahead of their hand range, and value bet them/induce bluffs with your strong hands.

just i think trying to outplay the good players on the table making bluffs when you have no reason to make them except they raises 18% of their hands pf so their range is pretty wide, especially oop, is not worthwhile.

[ipokeder]

this is not a groundbreaking strategy post, this is the thought process of someone who has resigned himself to being a 2ptbb MSNL grinder until he actually grows a sac

[ipokeder]

however i would personally appreciate it if everyone would play this way because it is actually ingenious and will make you rich and boost your sexual performance and make you run like the flash