100/200 bluff hand

[ggbman]

This is from a few weeks ago, i am not currently playing this game because i suck at high limits /images/graemlins/smile.gif I though this was interesting at the time though. The SB in this hand is solid, and probably views me as over aggressive and a bit loose. He has been playing back at me a ton. I think his preflop range is A4+, any 2 cards over 9, any pair, and some occasional random stuff like K7s etc...

Party Poker 100/200 Hold'em (5 handed) internettexasholdem.com (http://www.internettexasholdem.com)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif, J/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">SB 3-bets</font>, BB calls, Hero calls.

Flop: (9 SB) 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 7/images/graemlins/club.gif, 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">SB bets</font>, BB folds, Hero calls.

Turn: (5.50 BB) 2/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">SB bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises...


Now i am getting 10 to 1 on the flop, obviously an easy call. On the turn, lets make a few assumptions. Lets say he never folds an ace, but he folds all other non pocket pair hands. Also, if he calls the turn with ace high, assume he is always paying off my river raise when a J or 9 hits. I am checking behind any river except those cards. Is this play +EV?

[Nigel]

My gut feeling is no.

I know that's not the analysis you are looking for, but I just think there are too many hands for him to hold that he is not folding (any pair and all aces).

It's a weird spot to bluff and if he knows you know this then maybe it could work, but it seems to hinge on a lot of things going in your favor.

[TStoneMBD]

i think a good player will be calling this raise with king high a surprising amount of time and he will sometimes call a river follow through and sometimes fold.

[imported_ncray]

According to your range without the occasional random stuff:
A4+: 4 aces and 36 cards over 4 = 144
Any 2 over 9 (excluding 9x): 44 + 24 + 16 = 84
Any pair: 54 + 2 + 6 = 62
Total: 290

EV 84/290 = 29.0% of the time when he has any 2 over 9: +6.5BBs

Assumptions because I'm lazy: He always checks the river, and you always win when you spike a 9 or J. Oh yeah, he doesn't 3-bet the turn.

6 outs = 14.3%
14.3%*(+8.5BB) = 1.2155BB
85.7%*(-2BB) = 1.714
= - .4985BBs

So when he has any 2 over 9 29% of the time you make +6.5BBs . Otherwise, given the assumptions 71% of the time you lose .4985BBs, 1.885-0.353935 = +1.501065BBs. This estimate leaves out the times when he has something like AA and the river is a 9 and he checkraises you and you fold or calls your bet.

Note: I did this in a hurry, so there might be mistakes.

[NLSoldier]

The only thing you have going for you is the fact that he will probably think "theres no way this guy is retarded enough to try and bluff me on this board"

[ggbman]

[ QUOTE ]
The only thing you have going for you is the fact that he will probably think "theres no way this guy is retarded enough to try and bluff me on this board"

[/ QUOTE ]

Either you are joking or underestimating how i think this is given his hand range. (and i am stupid enough to do anything /images/graemlins/smile.gif)

[ClaytonN]

[ QUOTE ]
The SB in this hand is solid, and probably views me as over aggressive and a bit loose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then his range for getting to SD here is gonna be wider, no? Would it be unreasonable that he were to call you down with 33 or king high?

[tansoku]

I’ll take a stab at it:
Cheating a bit using Pokerstove, 36% of hands is about the range pflop you are talking about.
Any Axs, A4os+, any PP = 18.6%
So half the time he has a hand that calls your turn raise.
Board: 2s 7c 7d 2c
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 86.4601 % 83.18% 03.28% { 22+, A2s+, A4o+ }
Hand 2: 13.5399 % 10.26% 03.28% { Jd9h }

Pot is 5.5 BB + 1 (his bet) = 6.5 BB

.5 x 6.5 = +3.25 BB when he folds.

You gain 3 bets on the river when you improve (his turn call + river bet/raise call), lose your turn raise 2BB when you don’t:

.135 x 9.5 = +1.28 BB
.865 x 2 = -1.73 BB

EV = -.45 BB

But this only happens the 50% of the time he has a hand that calls the turn raise so:

.5 x .45 = -.23 BB

Net = 3.25 - .23 = +3BB

Note that if he folds the river UI (when you improve) your EV drops to 1 BB vs 1.28.
Getting him to fold is huge….

[Kuso]

If I were Villain, I would put you on an overpair or a bluff. If you actually had a deuce or seven or quads, why would you want to tip off your hand to an aggressor who you are most likely ahead of? A boat could probably get two more BBs out of him on the river (bet and call the raise).

As Villain, I would be tempted to call with two broadway cards and then reevaluate on the river. If I had a big PP, I would call down to the river believing that I was ahead.

There could be some reverse psychology ideas going, but that seems a bit risky to me.

Then again, I don't play 100/200. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[ggbman]

Then he makes a good play this time, although i think it would be tough. I would probably reem him on future hands though if i know he is capable of calling down with a K in this spot.

[cartman]

[ QUOTE ]
Lets say he never folds an ace, but he folds all other non pocket pair hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Gabe,

If this assumption is accurate, then your bluff raise is immensely +EV.

If we use a hand range of A4+, any two 9 or higher, 22+, K7s, K6s, Q8s, J8s, and T8s, then by my quick calculations there are 359 possible combinations that he could hold:

50 combinations that give him an overpair or better on the turn
24 combinations that give him a pocket pair 33-66
140 combinations that give him Ace high without a full house
145 other combinations that give him worse than Ace high


So if he folds all 145 in the "other" category, that means there is a 40.4% chance that he will fold immediately to your turn raise. His turn bet brings the pot to 6.5BB, so you are getting 6.5:2 or 3.25:1 on a proposition that will succeed 40% of the time. That means that even if you were drawing completely dead when he didn't fold, your raise would still be a great idea!

Cartman

[flawless_victory]

[ QUOTE ]
The only thing you have going for you is the fact that he will probably think "theres no way this guy is retarded enough to try and bluff me on this board"

[/ QUOTE ]
hysterical.

[kidcolin]

Cartman,

I'm usually a big fan of your mathematical analysis, but I think it's off here. When dealing with the "playing back" factor, any straight up math that doesn't include weightings is very unreliable. AA-55 is probably always 3-betting.. T8s, K7s, T9o are only "sometimes" and not necessarily a majority of the time.

[smurfitup]

has he seen you raise the turn on similar boards? would he call the turn w/ ace high and fold to a river club or k? i think you have to take these thoughts into consideration when making that raise... once you raise the turn, he'll probably put you on a range of hands (k high, clubs, air)... so i think if you are making this turn raise, you should be willing to follow through on the river if one of those scards hits, not only if it's just a j or 9. overall, though, i think this play is -ev in terms of the actual hand, but probably +ev for meta-game purposes since players will know they can't get to showdown cheaply against you and might not play back as much. interesting hand.

[baronzeus]

i dont like it...you're putting in 3BB to win a 6BB pot (assuming you are following through--which i think you have to since he might call with two overs here to try to hit a 6 outer given 9:1) and so he has to fold 1/3 of the time--which i dont think he does. he'll call with any pocket pair and he'll call with any A high hand, which are more than 2/3 of his range IMO.


edit: forgot to consider that sometimes you suck out by hitting a 6 outer. still think its somewhat -EV though.

[cartman]

[ QUOTE ]
Cartman,

I'm usually a big fan of your mathematical analysis, but I think it's off here. When dealing with the "playing back" factor, any straight up math that doesn't include weightings is very unreliable. AA-55 is probably always 3-betting.. T8s, K7s, T9o are only "sometimes" and not necessarily a majority of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

You'll have to talk to ggbman about the hand range because he is the one that provided it in the original post. The only influence I had was the "occasional random stuff like K7s" part. For that part I included A2s, A3s, K7s, K6s, Q8s, J8s, and T8s. It is always possible that my calculations are off, but given ggbman's estimate of his opponent's hand range, this is not really a close call. Which came as a real surprise to me because I never think to bluff here. Then again, I don't know if my typical opponent would fold even 98 to this turn raise.

Cartman

[kidcolin]

It's not really the range that bums me out, it's the non-weighting. Even if T8s is in his range, I doubt he's playing back with it 100% of the time.

[ggbman]

I suck at math. Obviously some of the things in his "other" range are not nearly as likely as some other holdings, they would comprise his hand only a small percentage of the time. However, the math cartman presented makes me believe there is a chance this is a good play. (But it still could suck) Thanks for the math Cartman, i am waaaay to dumb for that.

[cartman]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not really the range that bums me out, it's the non-weighting. Even if T8s is in his range, I doubt he's playing back with it 100% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand your concern, but those hands are really a minor factor here. Even if I went to the extreme of completely eliminate all the "occasional random stuff like K7s, etc" hands, thus weighting them as zero, that only knocks out 19 combinations from the "other" category that ggbman said he would fold but also knocks out 4 full house combinations. So now instead of the opponent folding 145/359 = 40.4% he is folding 126/336 = 37.5%. It is still hugely +EV. It is possible that ggbman didn't mean that all combinations in the core hand range that he provided--even without the "occasional stuff" part--were to be equally weighted, but if that is the case then I would need him to provide the appropriate weights. If you have a set of weighting parameters that you would like to test, I will be happy to provide you with some amended calculations.

Cartman

[Subfallen]

[ QUOTE ]
I suck at math. Obviously some of the things in his "other" range are not nearly as likely as some other holdings, they would comprise his hand only a small percentage of the time. However, the math cartman presented makes me believe there is a chance this is a good play. (But it still could suck) Thanks for the math Cartman, i am waaaay to dumb for that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wish I was as dumb as you. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[ggbman]

Hah, no you don't. I feel like such a dope everytime i see someone going "well lets see, there are x combos of this" and i'm sitting back here picking my nose life wtf?

[Drontier]

I'll trade you math skills for poker skills. deal?

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
Hah, no you don't. I feel like such a dope everytime i see someone going "well lets see, there are x combos of this" and i'm sitting back here picking my nose life wtf?

[/ QUOTE ]

Get someone to teach you how to apply baysian analysis. It would be worth it to you. Maybe is Josh comes up with a good spreadsheet you can use that.

You are more than bright enough to master this. (This isn't a complement. It's like 6th grade math) /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Krishan

[ggbman]

If i recall correctly, i am somewhat familiar with Bayes. It that theorum that Ed Miller discussed when he gave the analogy of that loaded gun right? I would probably benefit from a better mathamatical understanding of the game, i have some posts saved, i just need to take the time to examine/apply them.

[Surfbullet]

my biggest qualm with this:

Since he knows you're overaggro, I'd say he probably calls the turn raise with any hand he expects to be a 6-outer, hoping to pair up on the river. In that case, you'd have to bluff the river as well...which is mitigated somewhat by the fact that you hit YOUR 6-outer sometimes too...

If you can safely fold to a 3bet then this might actually be worth it, because when he flat-calls his hand range includes many hands that will fold to a river bet (because who bluffraises the turn on a 7722 board and puts in a river value bet without a hand?).

This is a tough one. I'm going to have to think about it some more.

Surf

[ggbman]

Everything you said here is correct, especially the fact that this is a tough one. In any event, villian called the turn raise and we checked through the river. He had AK and MHING.

I posted this because i thought it was a good example of when a bluff might be appropriate that people don't try too often. I could still be wrong about this play being +EV, but i liked the hand in general, particularly because my turn raise also is going to freeze hands that want to bet this river, and it has some immideiate folding equity. (It's difficult for this player to correctly 3 bet 77 on this turn) So there it is, take what you will from it.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
(It's difficult for this player to correctly 3 bet 77 on this turn) So there it is, take what you will from it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I should move up then. I could 3-bet quads in a heartbeat in this spot. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Krishan

[ggbman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(It's difficult for this player to correctly 3 bet 77 on this turn) So there it is, take what you will from it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I should move up then. I could 3-bet quads in a heartbeat in this spot. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

Not only do i suck at math, i suck at typing 66. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Surfbullet]

[ QUOTE ]

I posted this because i thought it was a good example of when a bluff might be appropriate that people don't try too often. I could still be wrong about this play being +EV, but i liked the hand in general, particularly because my turn raise also is going to freeze hands that want to bet this river, and it has some immideiate folding equity. (It's difficult for this player to correctly 3 bet 77 on this turn) So there it is, take what you will from it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I liked the hand too, and the general idea. Another thing to note is that it would have been better if the turn card didn't bring a flush draw....that almost certainly commits us to betting the river if we want a reasonable amount of FE - since he'll call A- and K-hi hands expecting you to take a free showdown with a FD and HHIG. If the turn was a complete blank I think this play would be more effective(surprisingly).

Surf