Baby's First Bluff--Gentle Feedback, Please

[parappa]

I think that this is the first time I've ever gone in with absolutely nothing. This is a party 10+1, and it's been one of those endless bubble games with the blinds being folded around 1/2 the time, first bet on the flop taking it the other 1/2. In short, no one has shown any aggression in like 20 hands. I've folded my small blind a couple of times because I've had trash, and, importantly, I haven't come over the top of SB once in the game.

I'm in bad shape as far as chips go. SB has just gotten his 3500 stack down to 1500 by a bad all-in flop call, and I'm reading his limp as weakness. I think that he has enough chips to fold and still be happy with his game, and so I decide to come over the top of his limp.

Is this all reasonable? Is this terribly rash? Standard play? Are his odds too good to fold? Am I simply violating the axiom "don't bluff a fish?" I know that the only way I'm going to improve in tight games is by stealing some pots once in a while.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t400 (4 handed)

UTG (t1400)
Button (t4120)
SB (t1555)
Hero (t925)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
UTG folds, Button folds, SB calls t200, Hero raises to t725 (All-In), SB calls t525.

Flop: (t600) K/images/graemlins/club.gif, 4/images/graemlins/club.gif, T/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

Turn: (t600) 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

River: (t600) A/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

Final Pot: t600

[chill888]

[ QUOTE ]
SB has just gotten his 3500 stack down to 1500 by a bad all-in flop call, and I'm reading his limp as weakness. I think that he has enough chips to fold and still be happy with his game, and so I decide to come over the top of his limp.

Is this all reasonable? Is this terribly rash? Standard play? Are his odds too good to fold? Am I simply violating the axiom "don't bluff a fish?" I know that the only way I'm going to improve in tight games is by stealing some pots once in a while.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t400 (4 handed)

UTG (t1400)
Button (t4120)
SB (t1555)
Hero (t925)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
UTG folds, Button folds, SB calls t200, Hero raises to t725 (All-In), SB calls t525.

Flop: (t600) K/images/graemlins/club.gif, 4/images/graemlins/club.gif, T/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

Turn: (t600) 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

River: (t600) A/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

Final Pot: t600

[/ QUOTE ]

Looks OK to me. Sometime you bluff and get called. As you say you were in bad shape.

A few minor thoughts:

When making these sorts of bluffs it's good to have as many small "observations" supporting it. For example:

1. Have you seen him limp a lot before? If not, it's a bit suspicious.
2. Ever seen him limp and fold? Yes? More chance bluff will work.
3. Ever seen him limp and call a raise? If yes then careful.
4. Any notes on him tilting after a big loss? This is one of my favorite things to add to a note (similarly, many players are quite responsible after a big loss and this is also worth noting)? If yes, careful beacuse you sure don't want even a tilt call here.
5. Generally is he tight or loose?
6. Etc, etc. etc.

No great wisdom here, but my point is that often there are small hints that tip close calls in one direction or the other. IMHO, nothing wrong with bluffing here, but don't get upset if you get caught. Just part of the game.

Rarely is raising with absolutely anything a horrible play - and sometime you just have to make a stand. It's calling that requires a hand.

Was that gentle enough?

gl

[unfrgvn]

My .02. I think the problem here is you don't have enough chips to make him fold. Your push makes the pot 1325. He has to call 525 to win 1325, giving him about 2.5 to 1 on his money. In his place I would doubt that I was more of a dog than that to anything you might have. This might have been the spot for a stop and go. Check his call pre flop and then push on the flop if he checks to you. The problem in this case is he gets to act first and in his shoes I'm putting you all in on that flop. Still, if he checks you can push. If he's hit the flop, oh well. If he hasn't you might get him to fold.

[ChrisV]

He's not going to fold, his odds are too good.

You need a much larger stack. I would want it to be at least 1000 for him to call before trying something like this.

If you plan on running a bluff here, a better option is the so called "Stop And Go", where you check and then go allin any flop. That's complicated by the fact that you're acting second. I would check here and fold if he bets and I've flopped nothing, otherwise consider a bluff.

[stripsqueez]

i did a similar thing in a spot like this about 3 weeks ago with 32o - he called and i couldnt get past J9o - all bad

if you push with complete garbage in a spot like this and it doesnt work then you did a bad thing

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[PrayingMantis]

OK, to be gentle:

With the game you're describing, a better move would be to do quite the same thing, but with a bigger stack, and in a stage where you are not so desperate (probably with a somewhat better hand than this: although this is not the issue).

The problem with your push here, is that your opponent is going to call it most of the time. He completes PF, and that means he has some sentiments to the hand he holds (even if these are fishy sentiments). I don't see him folding to your push, which is not very intimidating at this point.

As others have said, in this point with your hand, checking PF and moving in if he checks to you on the flop, seems better.

So, basically it's a good aggressive move against fishy limpers (because even fish are afraid to bust!), but you better have bigger stack to make it effective.

Edit: the advantage of a stop &amp; go (a variation in this case), comes from the fact that many (weak) players like seeing flops. They will be ready to pay more PF just to see if their mediocre hand hit the full-house, but will sometimes play very weak and passive if they hit nothing. That's why stop &amp; go works.

[parappa]

[ QUOTE ]
With the game you're describing, a better move would be to do quite the same thing, but with a bigger stack, and in a stage where you are not so desperate (probably with a somewhat better hand than this: although this is not the issue).

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps it's psychological rather than poker-related, but the thing for me is that, the bigger my stack is, the less willing I am to put it at risk when I don't have the goods. I see players that are crushing the games that I'm playing in (oh, how I envy them), basically raising with any 2 over and over, then simply folding when they get played back at if they don't have a hand. By the time they've gotten caught, they have so many chips that it doesn't matter. Everyone at the table knows that they're at it, but it doesn't matter much--none of the weakies (this, unfortunately, includes me) will play back at them without a hand. While I can like academically see that a big stack is more intimidating, the truth is that I don't think I'd ever try a play like this when I wasn't desparate, and therefore have no folding equity.

How do I find my way out of this self-imposed dilemma? I've thought, after looking at some game theory discussions, that I might just keep a deck of cards near the computer, pick a card from it, and force myself to go all-in with crap if it's a spade (assuming that I've decided that 25% is the frequency I need, etc).

Any advice on this score?

[parappa]

[ QUOTE ]
Was that gentle enough?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, thanks very much. I think that "dood, that was the worst I've ever seen" would've made me slink back into my weak-tight hole /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[parappa]

[ QUOTE ]
My .02. I think the problem here is you don't have enough chips to make him fold. Your push makes the pot 1325. He has to call 525 to win 1325, giving him about 2.5 to 1 on his money. In his place I would doubt that I was more of a dog than that to anything you might have. This might have been the spot for a stop and go. Check his call pre flop and then push on the flop if he checks to you. The problem in this case is he gets to act first and in his shoes I'm putting you all in on that flop. Still, if he checks you can push. If he's hit the flop, oh well. If he hasn't you might get him to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. This is absolutely right. In fact, if he gives me credit for the top 25% he still has the odds to call with any 2.

[parappa]

Thanks to everyone who replied. The point is now very clear to me. By giving him odds to call, I'm not really making a bluff, it's more of an invitation to get all the money in here. It looks like next time I try this, I have to get his odds down much further than I managed to here, which (unfortunately) means that I'm going to have to risk more chips to do it. I haven't quite found the balance between risking more chips with a weakish hand and using those chips to wait for a better hand. I've had reasonable results with simply folding over and over, but I really dislike finding myself in a game that is crying out for someone to be aggressive and win it and being unable to pull the trigger. I can see the mistake that my opponents are making, but can't quite figure out how to exploit it because I'm busy making the same mistake.

[mackthefork]

For what its worth this is my advice, when I was doing the 5s on Party I was a very weak tight player as well, but my ROI was 40% and my ITM was near 50% as this chip and chair method was working fine. I started doing the 18 seat 5s on Stars and over time my game developed as I discovered that timed aggression and good methods of stack management in the middle game were having a dramatic effect on my ROI even though my ITM was suffering slightly.

I have however recently come to the conclusion that these same very aggressive plays go too far on Party and I often push and get called by better hands that I would never call with. This is a flaw in my game and I now need to start my Party game from scratch and rebuild from the ground up, my advice is for you to introduce aggression into your game very slowly and find the right level that works for you. These days in the 10+1s blind steals are not working for me and I need to tighten up my push standards, hopefully you can skip this irritating middle stage, but don't be shocked if you go to far and have to rein it back in a little.

Best Regards Mack

[PrayingMantis]

I think the answer for your question, is simply in gaining more and more expirience and getting a better and stronger over-all feel for the game, not only for the hands you get and play, and how you're opponents play, but also to the rhythm of the game: How many hands are there for the blinds to climb? Where will you be at that point? where will others be? How can you get there in a better shape? Is a risk worth it?

Assume you're approaching desperation, but still not there. You notice there's 1 or 2 tight players (or players who limp and can fold to aggression). You know that if you don't get a very nice hand in the next X hands, you will find yourself at a point where your stack will not impress anybody. Also, remember that players are more ready to call pushes that seem like "desperation", or "close to desperation" pushes, and rightly so. Therefore, the best time to apply aggressiveness is when it looks like you are not desperate at all, i.e, have the goods, or simply willing to put others in a danger of busting (which you can't do with a small stack).

It's a delicate balance. But if you're never willing to risk all your chips (without a hand) outside of the "danger zone", get ready to see much more calls (like here), or simply to dwindle away with a tiny stack way too often. I understand the psychological "paradox" you're talking about, but when you simply understand, *logically*, that taking bigger risks could very well mean bigger over-all rewards (if you do it wisely) then I'm sure you'll get over the psychological barrier. But it's a slow and gradual change, like most of the things in poker.

[betgo]

You don't always have to risk a lot of chips to bluff. When you are bluffing allin preflop, you do. If you both had big stacks, making that kind of raise would probably have caused your opponent to fold. Your opponent would know that if he calls you, you may fire again on the flop, turn, and river.

[betgo]

If you had a few more chips making this allin bluff with 42s is not as risky as it looks. It is really a semibluff. Since your opponent initially completed rather than raised, it is likely he doesn't have a big hand. You would probably be about a 3-2 underdog if called.

[SmileyEH]

You dont have enough chips to make him fold.

-SmileyEH

[unfrgvn]

[ QUOTE ]

Perhaps it's psychological rather than poker-related, but the thing for me is that, the bigger my stack is, the less willing I am to put it at risk when I don't have the goods. I see players that are crushing the games that I'm playing in (oh, how I envy them), basically raising with any 2 over and over, then simply folding when they get played back at if they don't have a hand. By the time they've gotten caught, they have so many chips that it doesn't matter. Everyone at the table knows that they're at it, but it doesn't matter much--none of the weakies (this, unfortunately, includes me) will play back at them without a hand. While I can like academically see that a big stack is more intimidating, the truth is that I don't think I'd ever try a play like this when I wasn't desparate, and therefore have no folding equity.

How do I find my way out of this self-imposed dilemma? I've thought, after looking at some game theory discussions, that I might just keep a deck of cards near the computer, pick a card from it, and force myself to go all-in with crap if it's a spade (assuming that I've decided that 25% is the frequency I need, etc).

Any advice on this score?

[/ QUOTE ]

I really like this thread, because it's forced me to think about things I've been doing somewhat by feel. Praying Mantis touched on this in his second reply by talking about the rythym of the game. Steal raising is a tool. Like any tool it can be over used. In the game you described it sounds like it would have been a useful tool to have. In other very loose games you might hard pressed to find a spot to use it, and might be better off just sitting back and waiting for others to bust.
Here's a question to ask yourself in any particular game, how good of a hand do they need to call my all in? Lets say it's a very tight game and they would only call with Aces -&gt; Jacks. If that is the case then are you any better off making the steal raise with pocket 10's then you are with a random hand? Yet I bet you would feel ok pushing with the 10's and not with 10 8.
I know it's never this clear cut but maybe this thought process will help.

FWIW I have a hard making this play with "any 2". I tend to try to find something either suited, connected, or at worst one gap. It makes me feel better to know that even if someone wakes up with a hand I have some outside chance to make a hand. I'm sure many will point out that the idea is to make them fold, so it doesn't matter what you are holding, but there you go, my own psychological barrier.