40-80 Tales of Darkness

[Clarkmeister]

4-handed 40-80. Excellent player, lurker and all-around good guy open raises on the button. SB folds, I call with 55 in the BB and bet the flop dark.

[pokahjokah]

What would you have done if he reraised you in the dark?
I do this sometimes to mess with people that bet in the dark. Although I don't play this high. (limit, not intoxicated) /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Rubeskies]

I would have check/raised dark...

[AceHigh]

Why not 3-bet preflop instead and then bet the flop (dark or regular)? I would guess you are looking for hands to 3-bet with out of the blind if it's going to be 4 handed for awhile.

Do you think you will get a fold more often on the flop the way you played it?

[Clarkmeister]

"Do you think you will get a fold more often on the flop the way you played it? "

I don't know, just seemed like a thing to do at the time.

I do dark bets from time to time, especially against good regular opponents, but this is the first time I can recall having done so without having been the last aggressor.

[TStoneMBD]

clark can you give your reasoning for betting in the dark against good players? ive never understood the value in doing this, and personally when a player bets in the dark against me i feel that he is giving away quite a large bit of information. do you feel that players get confused and misplay against you? i would figure that a typical weak player would more likely make this dark bet profitable than against a strong player.

[andyfox]

That's pretty hard to do from most seats.

[andyfox]

I like it because, had I been the button, it'd confused me. Confusion in opponents is good. But wouldn't an excellent player put you on moderate ca-ca?

[Clarkmeister]

"i feel that he is giving away quite a large bit of information."

Elaborate. Frankly, since most dark bets come after I 3-bet out of position preflop, and I would also bet those flops 100% of the time, and my opponents know this, I don't think that there is *any* additional info. All it does is speed up the game. In this case you may have a point, but I'd still like to know what info you think you are getting and how you think it's exploitable.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
I like it because, had I been the button, it'd confused me. Confusion in opponents is good. But wouldn't an excellent player put you on moderate ca-ca?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. The "it'd confused me" line is hysterical, because that's exactly what I was told after the hand.

2. I don't know, I can only think of one other time I've done this and I had AK. Regardless, I'm known to rarely fold anything so even if you put me on "moderate caca" you have to think you can push me off it, which is rare.

[johnnycakes]

I don't think I like it.

I wish you hadn't told us what you held, as I'm afraid it's influencing my answer, but, I think the button should raise your flop bet regardless of the flop.

I'd be confused too, but of the huge range of hands I could put someone one, AA-QQ are the least likely (though still possible).

Clark, what would you do if you were the button?
Do your cards (as the button) even matter at this point?

[Clarkmeister]

So I bet dark, the flop comes AQ8 and the button keeps looking at me, clearly waiting for me to act so he can bet. The dealer points to the 4 chips in front of me and says "he bet dark". Button then pauses, says "oh" and folds.

Later on he said he kept thinking he should auto raise once he saw the ace on the board, but he was paralzyed by confusion. Funny moment. FWIW, he said he had K9s.

[cpk]

he kept thinking he should auto raise once he saw the ace on the board, but he was paralzyed by confusion

NHSVWP!

[BottlesOf]

I feel like this anounces you have a pp. 22-XX maybe AA?

[DcifrThs]

id rather checkraise a flop i like than bet dark vs. his overs...unless he knows i often checkraise in which case i like the dark bet /images/graemlins/wink.gif

what does he this you like to do from the blinds?

also, did you get a chance to think about what i pm'd you the other week? lemme know.

-Barron

[TStoneMBD]

i think its ok to dark bet after 3betting preflop when it is quite apparent that you are going to bet anyway. however, you didnt threebet this preflop and therefore i feel that you are giving information away. against this opponent however, your dark bet confused him and so id say its an intelligent play, but against most intelligent players i think it just conveys information about the context of your hand. if i were to see a player bet in the dark, i would assume that he probably has a hand that plays farily well regardless of the flop. would you dark bet with a hand like JT? would you dark bet with a hand like 67?

[James282]

Man, I hate it. If he's so solid you're gonna get creamed here.
-James

[Clarkmeister]

Everythings easy to beat when you know what the other guy's got and you are seeing it posted on a message board.

[James282]

Fair enough, but what if he raises you here? If someone posted a hand that said, "I open raise K9s on the button and a tricky, very good player calls in the BB and bets dark. The flop comes AQ8. What should I do?" The answer would almost have to be raise. I understand that you intended to catch your opponent off guard and he doesn't have the benefit of hindsight, but let's say the roles were reversed, what range of hands would you put you on? If you think your opponent is easily intimidated by things like "momentum" and can be controlled easily postflop, then he is not as solid as you suggested. The answer is of course different if you do have such control over your opponent. If you do have so much control, however, I fail to see why you gained more using this line instead of three-betting and leading the flop. In that scenario you gain more when you are ahead and don't leave yourself so open to being moved off the best hand --- unless he could bluff raise this flop with k9s, which doesn't seem to be the case.
-James

[Lawrence Ng]

Clark, this post should go in the HUSH section instead because of the nature of number of players impacting your decision to bet in the dark.

Secondly I refuse to bet in the dark anymore. It screams 1 thing - big hand. Good opponents are either going to pump you or fold if you bet in the dark like this. You are either in a shitless position afterwards or you get crap in return to maximize the true value of your hand (not just 55 I'm talking about, but any hand you bet in the dark)

Lawrence

[Clarkmeister]

As I posted before, I have dark bet without being the preflop aggressor 2x, this one where I had 55, and the other where I had AK. If I start taking in all the other times where I have dark bet, the ace hands start to outnumber the non-ace hands. In fact Tommy has posted on here many times that dark bets mean ace high more than not. So in the end, if you are willing to bluff raise with no hand and no draw and the possibility of drawing near dead in a 4-5sb pot, then I guess you are playing at a level higher than me.

"I open raise K9s on the button and a tricky, very good player calls in the BB and bets dark. The flop comes AQ8. What should I do?" The answer would almost have to be raise."

If you say so. If I had posted a poll and no no knew my hand I'd bet that over 80% would have said fold. No hand, no draw, decent opponent, small pot.

[andyfox]

"In fact Tommy has posted on here many times that dark bets mean ace high more than not."

Actually, I think he's posted that dark checks usually mean ace high more than not. In my experience, dark bets, when not done whimsically, usually mean A-A, K-K or A-K.

[Clarkmeister]

Ah, I think you are right re: Tommy.

[GreywolfNYC]

I like the bet in the dark in this situation, simply for the mindf***k quality of it, which is exactly the result it got. I do not like a checkraise here, as one of the posters in this thread suggested. The heads-up checkraise on the flop is getting so over-used that I can't see how any good player wouldn't three-bet it virtually every time with any pair or any decent draw.

[Gabe]

what andy thought tommy said is what i think he did but what you said you thought he said is more accurate i think.

[mike l.]

*yawn*

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
*yawn*

[/ QUOTE ]

I know. Apparently though doing stuff like this from time to time is offensive to a bunch of people around here. I also love how perfectly everyone can play against it when they know what I have. Clearly I need to post more hands where I use my opponents perspective and keep my hand unknown.

[James282]

I'm not offended by it at all. I also didn't know the other metagame considerations(that you had darkbet a few other times during this particular session). Playing shorthanded requires you to mix up your attack and defense strategies, and this seems like a fine way to do so. I just think that while small pairs have good showdown value, they also can leave you high and dry if your opponent is tricky. You know that there are going to be 2-3 overcards the overwhelming majority of the time, and if this player is as Excellent as you say then I think he's just going to make life difficult for you. With an ace high hand it's different, because your showdown value is relatively the same but you have more ways you can improve. If you had already done this with ace high a few times then it of course becomes a more viable option. I'll admit that I hadn't read any posts when I responded the first time, and hadn't read all of the responses in the thread the second time. Since it had "confused" this excellent player I figured that this was the first time you had done it, I was apparently wrong.

But yeah, I think posting hands to "play against you" would be more interesting because it gets rid of the bias that will naturally happen when you know the person's hole cards. It seems as though you posted this hand to help mid-high limit players bring another tool to a shorthanded game instead of receive criticism on your play, which is fine, but I do agree that looking at it from the opposite perspective would be more helpful. It would let the reader see the value of your play by being in the opponent's shoes and being as confused by the play as your opponent, thus causing them to realize that this is a viable way to confuse his opponents in the future.
-James

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
Excellent player, lurker and all-around good guy open raises on the button.

[/ QUOTE ]

Name starts with a C? Not too many excellent players in these parts.

~D

[Clarkmeister]

"It seems as though you posted this hand to help mid-high limit players bring another tool to a shorthanded game "

Nah, I just posted it because I know Tommy likes posts with dark betting or checking, and since I was at home sick, I figured it would give me something fun to look at during the day.

You make a good point though that I *do* need to remember, namely that people take my posts seriously, and I need to put clear disclaimers on posts like this that are more story than strategy.

[mike l.]

"Apparently though doing stuff like this from time to time is offensive to a bunch of people around here."

exactly. but that's exactly what i was telling you when i was posting hands you were yawning about a couple months ago. theyre boring to you and i, but most everyone on here is perplexed or even angered, by what you and i consider standard limit hold em.

by the way i dont think betting dark is something that should only be done time to time. it will permanently f*ck with all but the greatest opponents heads (and since there are no great opponents dont worry about it!) and can be done for profit and amusement as often as you like.

[mike l.]

"I need to put clear disclaimers on posts like this that are more story than strategy."

nice fumble. why dont you just say it how it really is: dark betting is smart limit hold em.

[JohnnyF]

Here's why this hand is funny/interesting. I had been raising many, many hands (as evidenced by the K9s here). It is also very important to note that Clarky and I have played quite a few hours against each other and show each other probably far more respect than the other deserves. We couldn't give each other any respect in such a short game though.

When this hand went down, I did notice the chips in front of Clarky after the flop, and it totally froze me up. This is such a funny goof-ball play, and let's face it, if he makes this play once every three years it would be a shock. So now I'm looking at these chips. And I ask the dealer and Clark and everyone else, "Did he bet blind?" I'm shocked and confused.

And then I know what he has. One of two types of hands. The first is an Ace-Queen or Ace-Jack type hand - maybe even Ace-Ten although less likely. The other is a smallish pocket pair (I actually had him on 77 or 66, so the revelation of 55 is not a big surprise to me). With all that said, Clark makes a very strong game theory play and bets out dark, in essence saying "Guess what I've got?"

This play would not, not work against a stranger or a weakie, but when you're facing off against each other so much, it really creates an interesting situation, especially against a player like Clark.

So now I look at the flop and it has an Ace in it. I absolutely have to raise here. If you don't know why, then you'll have to ask Sklansky. He'll elaborate.

Of course, I can't raise. You know why? Because I was confused. This isn't a stranger - this is a player I respect and he's playing goofing. So I start laughing and muck. Next hand.

Johnny

[Clarkmeister]

"and let's face it, if he makes this play once every three years it would be a shock"

C'mon, you are going to ruin my rep as the forum maniac.

[JohnnyF]

OK -

Then I mean a "strong solid player" would do this every three years. A "total maniac knob" like Clark can't help himself but to find different creative ways to dust off his chips each and every hand.

Just a typo.

J

[Clarkmeister]

Thank you.

BTW, I posted the one with that guy who checkraised me on the river with the 85 - how long did he last in that game?

[JohnnyF]

That really is the metagame consideration that everyone needs to understand when thinking about this hand. We had three solid players in a game with one total fish. The three of us were a lot less concerned about playing big pots against each other since we knew that the money was going to eventually come from the one spot. It made your blind bet here strong since I'm less interested in making your car payment by overplaying my hand and more interested in moving onto the next hand which were certainly be +EV (by a longshot).

So Clarky leaves and we get Hippie Danny from Texas in the game to keep it four-handed. We play about 2 hours after Clark leaves and I eventually get all my money back as the fish dusts off the $3k he'd run his stake up to, and the three remaining players look at each other, shrug, and go eat.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
So Clarky leaves and we get Hippie Danny from Texas in the game to keep it four-handed. We play about 2 hours after Clark leaves and I eventually get all my money back as the fish dusts off the $3k he'd run his stake up to, and the three remaining players look at each other, shrug, and go eat.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's got to be one of the best "results" posts of all time. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

I blame you for me being sick, btw. If you hadn't one like 0 for 10 against him to start the sesson, he wouldn't have had so damn much money in front of him, and I would have just gone home and slept and maybe don't get full-blown ill. But noooooooooo, you have to let him run up to over 3 racks, which he is guaranteed to redistribute, making it impossible for me to get up and leave my 1/3 fair share of his chips behind.

[JohnnyF]

Games like that require total commitment, and the fact you left $1k or so of equity on the table proves that you've got way too much money anyhow.

I know it is easy to blame the other players for getting you sick, but I'm sure your chlamydia will clear up with a little rest.

That really is a bad beat.

[Your Mom]

[ QUOTE ]
Games like that require total commitment, and the fact you left $1k or so of equity on the table proves that you've got way too much money anyhow.

I know it is easy to blame the other players for getting you sick, but I'm sure your chlamydia will clear up with a little rest.

That really is a bad beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think we need to keep this Johnny guy around.

[Clarkmeister]

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Slik Rik]

<font color="red"> clark can you give your reasoning for betting in the dark against good players?</font>

It seems like invariably the bet in the dark in a situation like this is meant to slow someone down in my opinion.

[fnord_too]

I really do not like this. The only possible advantage is psychological, but I don't think that is an advantage here. IMO truly bizarre playes beg for showdowns, and I am not sure you want to increase the liklihood this hand goes to show down.

Here is why I strongly don't like this: if you set aside any psycological impact, then what you did is essentially equivalent to three betting pre flop but letting your opponent see what the flop is before reacting to that bet. I just don't see the upside in voluntarily restricting the information you have here. I think in cases where your action is independant of the flop, and your opponents know that, then sure, there is no harm. Here I do not see that to be the case.