Inducing a bluff

[Jezebel]

3/6 empire game that has tightened up in the last orbit or so. Many pots being taken down on the flop uncontested. I'm dealt A /images/graemlins/heart.gifK /images/graemlins/diamond.gif on the button.

MP1 limps (fairly aggressive post-flop), MP2 limps and the CO limp. I raise and the blinds fold. Everyone calls.

Flop comes A /images/graemlins/diamond.gifJ /images/graemlins/diamond.gif4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

MP1 bets, folded to me and I raise, MP1 calls.

Turn 8 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif[A /images/graemlins/diamond.gifJ /images/graemlins/diamond.gif4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif], giving me the nut flush. MP1 checks and I check behind.

River is the A /images/graemlins/spade.gif and MP1 bets out and I raise. MP1 3 bets and I cap.

Your thoughts?

[LetsRock]

In my book you played this perfectly.

Bet the ace on the flop, "uh-oh four-flush" on the turn, and hammer the nut flush on the river.

Oddly enough the Ace on the river actually hurts you as a small set would have caught a boat, but what can you do about that except cry? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[lil']

You may not have induced a bluff. He could have Q /images/graemlins/diamond.gif and was trying to induce a bluff from you!

[slavic]

Since this is party I might cap the river, but the paird aces are a bad thing(tm).

[LetsRock]

River was capped.

[slavic]

yes but I'm not sure that was a good thing(tm)

[Louie Landale]

I'd be tempted to call the flop bet figuring to raise the turn. Fine, induce your bluff.

I'm not sure I like your 4-bet on the river. He's got to be pretty brain-dead to 3-bet without having you beat, since it sure looks like YOU filled up.

- Louie

[Jezebel]

[ QUOTE ]
He's got to be pretty brain-dead to 3-bet without having you beat, since it sure looks like YOU filled up.


[/ QUOTE ]

Thats a good point. I figured he had top pair on the flop, and he would fold when bet into on the turn. When the river pairs the Ace, I'm thinking he has trips and will overplay them since I checked through on the turn, subduing his fears of a flush. When he 3 bet the river, the good angel on my shoulder shouted "your in trouble", but the evil devil on the other shoulder said "what do you expect? You tried to get him to bluff at the river and now you want to whimp out?" Guess who I should have listened to?

He flips over AJ for the boat. My check through on the turn gave him a free shot at his 4 outer.

If a player will overplay his hand on the river (much like I did /images/graemlins/grin.gif) when they miss, is it worth giving a 4 outer a free shot to beat you occasionally?

[Nottom]

I really don't like it. I've never liked the slowplay the nuts on the turn and go off on the river play. Its stupid and end up costing you bets more often then it works. If he has a crappy diamond you might get an extra bet out of him, more often you just lose one when he would have called a turn and river bet, but checks to you on the river.

If he has two pair, grats you gave him a free card.

[Jezebel]

No doubt I actually outplayed myself on this one. As tight as the table was playing and this particular opponent seemed to bluff at the river when given an opportunity, I felt it was as good a spot to try it as any. My capping the river was pretty wreckless.

Lesson learned: When inducing a bluff, you will have no idea how you stand when they bet into you, if you no longer hold the nuts.

[LetsRock]

Well, guess what?

A bet on the turn wouldn't have chased him off so it would have cost YOU another big bet to make HIM pay for the river. If you bet the turn and he called, would you have not capped the river?

I think that putting him on having made a set on the river as a pretty good read. It's just a bad beat.

It's funny how this place is. One hand I'm seeing the monsters that others don't fear, and another (in this case for me) the monsters are barely considerable to me. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Maybe I need a new and improved monster detector. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

I'd still play the hand just like you did almost every time and yes I do make money playing this game. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that putting him on having made a set on the river as a pretty good read. It's just a bad beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you figure the opponent is on a set?

[LetsRock]

Aces?
(OK maybe it's not properly called a set when the pair is on the board) but TRIPS then.

[Jezebel]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, guess what?

A bet on the turn wouldn't have chased him off so it would have cost YOU another big bet to make HIM pay for the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

The funny thing is had I bet the turn knowing he held 2 pair, I would have been routing for him to call since he would not have had the odds to call correctly.

[ QUOTE ]
If you bet the turn and he called, would you have not capped the river?


[/ QUOTE ]

Probably not. If he raised me on the river after I had showed strength the whole way I would have just called the raise. Since I showed weakness on the turn, I couldn't determine if his aggression was legit or not.

[LetsRock]

Of course you would have wanted him to call. There was nothing he could have held at that time that should make you worry about the river. You were afraid he wouldn't, which is why you chose to slow-play it.

If you wouldn't have capped the river, given a turn call, you didn't lose any bets by going for the trap.

Some hands you play, others just turn out the way they were dealt. There was nothing you could have done differently to change the outcome of this hand. He hit a 4 outer - Poker Happens!

I flopped a K9 boat last night to get beaten by a KQ boat on the river! A 3-outer that would have happened no matter how many times I pumped the pot. A 26 BB pot in a 4 handed game! Ouch. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif I will play that hand exactly the same every single time and I will win it 43 times out of 46!

I think the same applies to your hand. I'm sticking by my guns on this one - I still say well played.

[Louie Landale]

"Maybe I need a new and improved monster detector.".

[1] There is a bridge over a stream that may or may not have a troll under it. The troll can see who's coming and will typically acost them. [A] A 5 year old, armed with a yoyo, approaches the bridge and a troll comes out. [B] The Govenor of California, armed to the teeth, approaches the bridge and a troll comes out. Statistically, the troll in [A] is probably much smaller than the troll in [B], since small trolls will probably let his Excellency go by.

[2] Another way is to observe the bridge ahead of time. Small trolls want to pretend like they are big trolls so people don't cross the bridge. Big trolls make the bridge look undefended.

Really, trolls do in fact behave this way.

So [1a] is a hand you've played weakly, and [1b] is a hand you've played strongly. [2] is a hand the opponent has slow-played.

The other thing to consider is this: if the opponent is either bluffing or has the nuts, there is no reason for you to bet or raise.

- Louie

[PassiveCaller]

Inducing a bluff or letting the dead resurrect?

I'm curious as to what you all think of my take here.
Maybe I'm wrong I've only been playing a few months and recently have gotten into reading the forum...
I'd like comments...


- Preflop
You raised and he called... Because he didn't raise or reraise I'd like to think he has Ax, 22-JJ
(Maybe he raises with some of those pocket pairs too) KQs QJs KJs ... something like that? Safe starting point.

- Flop Comes down.
He raises and you reraise. I think he raises and then calling (also knowing you hold the King of diamonds) reaks of Ax but who knows he could have JJ or 44 or even AJ and A4 which i doubt he'd slow play with 3 diamonds. The question is what is his x and does it have diamond. You know he is drawing dead in that respect though. He'd obviously just call too if he had a diamond of some sort of set.

- Turn card is the 8d.

Running A2-AK, JJ, 88 , 44 vs your hand. You have about 96% equity. He is a long shot. Let's milk it?

check, check on that turn diamonds. If he has a Queen of diamonds the aggressive player probably bets. Are you slow playing the queen of diamonds here... ? I suppose it's possible but I'd usually see that bet. I mean that's just one card! Now I didnt see how it played but he probably bets with the higher diamonds here and
checks with any of the other hands.

Now 96% equity goes both ways.. but I don't see the prospects of inducing a bluff since in this case a lot of his second best hands just suck and he would probably
just call your river reraise if all goes as planned. So hear this out. If he has a diamond he calls the bet here for sure with just two pair we don't know.

I bet here. You don't know for sure that he doesn't fold. If he has no diamonds it's possible he folds. I want to see what happens here.

If you bet and he calls here... then on the turn if the river doesnt help him in some way he probably checks and lets you bet. And if hes got that lower diamond he probably just calls. If you check and he bets on the river and you reraise... you get 2 bets from him. That's if he has exactly what you want.. and you dont let him catch up.

However if you bet on the turn and he calls...

- River card is the As

If he's going to bet out again when this card comes down, it reaks of full house and I just call. You bet out on the turn he's got to be scared of what your holding unless he has the damn boat. Especially if you raise on the turn I think you've made it easier.

Maybe you check in the 96% equity spot but realize that unless he's a horrible player you aren't really helping much here. Make him pay when he's such an underdog.
I doubt most of the hands you were hoping for would have reraised you on the river. I think it's a lot more difficult to put him on a specific hand if you dont bet on the turn.

Maybe he still calls, but maybe he doesnt and you take down the pot. Otherwise I'd just at least consider that a full house is highly probable given what party players would play and not cap that final round.

I think I'd prefer the more aggressive approach but ... I wouldnt have capped the final round for sure.. You arent off scott free with that card. Win pot, or lose the least
in a potentially harmful situation.

[Brian]

Hi Jez,

This isn't the sort of hand I would try to induce a bluff on. I induce bluffs with Ace high or with a small pair, not with the absolute nuts on the Turn. This is more of a slowplay than inducing a bluff. And I disagree with it. Bet the Turn and hope he calls.

-Brian

[LetsRock]

Trolls? I didn't say anything about trolls! That's a whole different subject. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

I guess my theory of "troll identification" is this:

There is a certain percentage of time when you can tell what kind of troll it really is. And yes, there is a certain percentage of time when you can alter the size of the troll by the way you approach the bridge. But, I beleive, that the majority of the time you can only guess at the size of troll and it doesn't matter how you approach the bridge - it'll be there regardless.

Now it's true that more advanced players have developed better re-con that will increase their chances of troll identification.

A beginner may "know" the size of the troll x% of the time. A more advanced player may "know" the size of the troll 3x% of the time. A winning pro may "know" the size of the troll 10x% of the time.

But at no time is it possible for any multiplier of x% to equal 100% unless you happen to hold the absolute nuts in which case the troll disappears. If there is a troll on the bridge, there's always a chance that it will defeat you.

Sometimes you can approach the troll you "know" to be small and stupid with an army only to find out that the river decides to help the otherwise defensless troll. Sometimes a yo-yo allows you to peek behind the large troll's "curtain" with less risk to your overall army.

My point is that a lot (if not most) of the time troll detection is just guess work and you don't really "know" if you can beat the troll until you meet. Sometimes it's to your army's advantage to risk fewer troops to investigate this troll, other times you can make the troll go away by throwing a whole division at it. But you don't always know which one will work.

[Jezebel]

Thats a pretty good read on the situation. I chose this route of action due to the texture of the table. It had been playing very tight. My read on this player was that he probably was betting top pair, so I raised him on the flop to see where I was at. When he checks on the turn, I am fairly certain he will fold unless he has a very big diamond. As I said I'm fairly certain he has an Ace, so he will probably bet out again on the river if I check it through. When the 2nd ace hits on the river and he bets out I figure him for trips, but consider a full-house. This is definetly not my default play in this situation, but it seemed like it would get the most money in the pot if my read was correct. I definetly should not have capped the river, but I was convinced the player was getting frisky with trips, since I checked through on the turn. Oh well, he hit his 4 outer and life goes on....

[Louie Landale]

Yes, you rarely know for sure and the Trolls size is whatever its size is. But that doesn't matter much. When you deduce its probably big you should probably fold. When you deduce its probably small you should probably call. And those are the correct strategies even if they turn out "wrong" part of the time: raising with 2nd set is clearly correct even if you run into top set once in a while.

- Louie