River Bluff Raises

I am interested in hearing from others as to criteria they have developed to determine when it might be appropriate to try a river bluff raise. This is a play that I have probably pulled off with success no more than 10 times in 6 years of playing hold ‘em. 2 such plays occurred on my recent trip to Vegas. Both occurred in the same Bellagio 15-30 session (graveyard shift). Here they are. Perhaps, you could critique these plays and as well provide examples of hands where you have managed to successfully pull off the ploy.


Hand No. 1


A clueless player who had been raising almost every hand made it $30 to go (as usual) from early position. I called on the button with Ts9s (that may have been an error but that’s not the point of the post). The small blind folds while the bb calls. 3 way action.


Flop: J83 of various suits.


Maniac bets. I raise. BB folds. Maniac 3 bets and I 4 bet. He calls.


Turn: King (can’t remember if that made it a 2 flush but it doesn’t matter).


We both check (I wasn’t particularly interested in bluffing on two consecutive big bet streets against a guy who could be holding any two cards and would likely call the turn with any two cards).


River: Jack


He bets. I raise and he folds.


Hand No. 2


The maniac has now moved to my immediate right. A seemingly solid playing Vegas local raises UTG. The maniac calls out of the sb and I call out of the bb with AsKd.


Flop: KhJhTs


I checkraise UTG. He 3 bets. Maniac calls all bets. It’s still 3 handed going into the turn.


Turn: 2d


We both checkcall the UTG’s bet.


River: Ad


Maniac bets. I raise figuring that (a) there is no way the maniac would play the hand so passively if he held a Queen and (b) a raise might knock off UTG in case he too held AK or had flopped a set. Of course, if he held QQ, I was dust but I didn’t think he would bet the turn with QQ after my flop checkraise. I also did not think he held AQ as I felt that he would not have 3 bet the flop with that hand i..e., he would slowplay a little to lower the boom on the turn.


It turned out very well. UTG mucks his JJ face-up in disgust. Maniac calls. I show my AK and win the pot. I have no idea what the maniac held. Of course, UTG then proceeded to mock the maniac for his ill-advised bet (BTW, there sure is a lot of ridiculing and mocking of other players by the Vegas locals...I can never quite figure out why they do that).


So anyway, are there criteria that we can draw from these examples and any other examples that you may be able to provide to show when it might pay to bluffraise the river.

2 very good plays.

I like reason (a) on hand #2.


Bob Ciaffone gives an example or two in his book.

From what I recall they are similiar to your first hand. They involved situations where it was likley both of you were on a draw.


His example may have even been to check-raise the

river. I believe some on this forum argued that

simply leading on the river may be more effective.

Skp,


I have read a thousand of your post and really respect the way you think and play. I too have played for about three years and have only made about four river raise bluffs. Lucky for me three worked! Anyway, in one of your earlier posts you suggested that someone would have a hard time representing a flush because they led into a preflop raiser immediately to their left signifying they didn't not have a hand that wanted to let people in. And I agree. However, in most cases I do not believe players in the middle limits are on that level. Thus, the play wouldn't work on you, but maybe them. Anyway, this brings me to my point about the hand where the J paired on the river and you raised the maniac.


I think its really hard to represent anything here because you would not have checked the turn behind with any pair. And definitely not a jack. So it is certain that you have no pair. But I guess if the maniac had nothing his only option was a re-raise river bluff. Interesting post.

I didn't realize that a king turned in that hand. I guess your check on the turn could have said that you were scared of the king. But since the player was a maniac who could be on any two cards, I am sure you would have bet a jack. But nonetheless that makes the play more believable.

"However, in most cases I do not believe players in the middle limits are on that level."


Absolutely. In my view, reading hands is much much easier than reading minds. The toughest thing in hold 'em is not trying to figure out your opponent's hand but trying to figure out how your opponent will react to your move be it a smoothcall, raise, checkraise what have you. Now, I did preface my comment in the other thread by saying "is your opponent a thinker? If so, it will be tough to represnt a flush here" (or words to that effect).


On my hand where the Jack paired, I agree that it would be a tough bluff to pull off against a thinking player because as you say, I would probably bet a pair of Jacks on the turn despite the overcard King. Fortunately, I knew here that the maniac opponent would not think at that level. Ironically, this was an instance where I could correctly put the maniac on his level of thought (or non-thought) but had no idea what his hand was...that's the way it generally is with maniacs.


Thanks for the kind words.


Now, do you remember your river bluff raises? If so, please post them and we can see if there are any common characteristics so that we can try and identify situations where this move (which I think is kinda neat) might work even before the situation has presented itself.

i dont think hand 1 was a bluff.


hand 2... nicely done, but UTG wasnt very aware was he?

On hand no. 2, I wouldn't fault UTG for folding. I probably would have done the same in his shoes (although I like to think I would have mucked the set more gracefully and if not gracefully, at least face down). I think it would be an extremely difficult call for him to make as he has to hope for a very unlikely parlay of the maniac bluffing and me bluff-raising. While he may have been able to figure out that the maniac ought not to have a Queen, he can't say the same about my hand the way I played it on earlier streets. In addition, he has to give me credit for reading the maniac correctly in order to call my raise. That's just too much to ask for in the heat of the moment.


I am not sure why you say that Hand No. 1 was not a bluff. While there is a possibility that my Ten high was the best hand, there simply is no way that I could merely call his bet; this was a raise or fold situation for sure.

It's possible you avoided a split on

hand #1 as well.


Well, at least you were suited.

I am not sure why you say that Hand No. 1 was not a bluff.


i read the post wrong. sorry.

You just need an opponent who likes to save bets and a constellation of events that suggests that it's a good spot to do that. The play needs to come with a ready answer the question: where were you on the turn?


Maybe two specific critieria: (1) a scarecard, preferable on the end, that fits with your previous play and tends to match what your opponent thinks you've got -- what sparked his action -- more than it wakes up his fear of your opportunism (i.e., an ace more often than a flush/straight card, unless you cold-called an earlier raise); and (2) some chance that he has little or nothing. If you want to throw in a third, look for boards that can provide you with more than one big hand, like a paired flops.


I think the play works either if (1) your opponent believes himself vulnerable as soon as he bets, thinking it might be a mistake, no sense in making it worse, or (2) your raise comes as such a surprise that the only thing that he'll be able to imagine during the five seconds he takes to consider it is your apparently better hand.


The typical example follows your preflop steal or preflop raise from the blind against a late limper. The flop is scattered middle/low cards, you bet and get raised or check-raised. You call on the strength of something like an overcard and a gutshot and a possibly best hand. You call on the turn because you either screwed up or your draw improved. An ace that misses you hits the river and your opponent bets. Particularly with the right accidental image (solid and a bit wimpy, a usually fit-or-fold type), I think a raise here against a slightly too-careful or too-aggressive opponent will usually be profitable, especially the type that like to jam with nothing but have welll-honed escape strategies.


I agree that it's a rare move, but I'm also sure that it's not attempted as often as it ought to be.


Here's a recent example that should have worked better than it did. 5-handed, two off the button (utg) limps, sb limps, I raise in the big blind. The flop comes AcAdKd. I bet and get called by the first limper only. The turn is an 8s and I check-call. The river is the 5s and I check-raise. He folds. Note that the play works as a bluff-raise because I'm looking at the chance of him both limping with an ace (rare for this guy) and flopping a set, as opposed to him having some kind of draw and trying to blow me off the pot with the scary board, and even if he's got a king it's a tough call on the end. I say that it "should" have worked better because in retrospect it seems like a waste of the four aces I held.

I river bluff-raise often. It works well enough for me to be rather profitable.


If i have a read/tell on the other player that he/she is bluffing, then i will do it when i have a hand that cannot beat a bluff. but i do not think that is your question.


as for river bluff-raising an opponent who apparently has a legitimate hand,I have no hard and fast rule as to when I do it, but it depends on my read of the other player (almost always heads up, of course), and the texture of the board.


Example from this past weekend:


15-30, typical game. MP, semi-tight limps in, i raise on the button with 88 to get it heads up. flop comes 10-x-x rainbow. MP checks, i bet, MP raises, i call. i figure he has a 10, and if an ace or a king falls, i can scare him off because of my pre-flop raise.


turn is a queen. not the ace/king i was looking for, but what the heck, i raise his bet. he just calls. I do not think he has a queen, maybe he really likes his 10? i dunno.


river is a queen. perfect bluffing card for me. now, he bets, i raise, he mucks while cursing my luck--now i know what he had--an overpair (KK, as it turns out). of course i accidently flip over my hand as i collect the pot, putting him full-out horizontal (he subsquently made it his whole goal in life to get me, constantly checked big hands to me which i never paid off and twice runner-runner flushed his hiney).


when the river brings a bluff-raise opportunity card, i quickly ask myself how would i play my cards if i actually had the goods. then i look at my play during the current hand up to the bluff-point to see if it was consistent with such a holding. And of course my opponent has to be a good enough player to figure out what i am representing, and lay his/her hand down.


hope this is worth what it cost you...

do it doGGy-style!

Skp, since your down this way, come on over here to Los Angeles, (hollywood park Casino, commerce)

and play. This is where the money is. Seeya

Actually, I was in Vegas between December 25th and 30th...back at work and sloggin' it again...sigh...but ya, my next poker trip will be to LA..hope to see you, Rick, Andy and the other LA 2+2'ers there...probably April.

It's funny you should bring this up, since I was about to post the following hand and pose the same question to the fourm. Anyway, here's my river bluff raise. 7 handed 15-30 hold'em, I have KJo on the button. An aggressive megafish who could have anything opens with a raise, it's folded to me, I reraise, blinds fold, and megafish calls. The flop comes Q9x rainbow, he bets, I call. The turn is a brick, he bets, I call. River is another brick, he bets, I raise, he folds. The factors that I think comes into play here are that I haven't challenged him at any point postflop, and he was quite capable of pushing with nothing to the end. In fact, I would have been more scared of his hand if he had checked the river than I was of his betting it.


Here's another situation where I raise on the river and my opponent folds, although I wasn't bluffing this time. I have A6s on the button, a part-time maniac and full-time drinker open raises, I reraise, and he is the only caller. We see the flop of K6x heads up, he bets, I raise, he calls. The turn is a rag that makes a flush draw possible, he bets, and I call. The river is another 6, he bets, I raise, he folds. Again, the situation was one where it was pretty likely my opponent could have nothing (I know this guy would often play a flush draw he picked up on the turn this way). Also, I have a history of playing many heads up hands against this particular opponent in the same manner (I am always happy to give a maniac some rope to hang himself with), so he can't necessarily put me off a decent hand, on the off chance he would pause long enough before tossing in his chips to give a thought to what I might have.


Anyway, I think the best spots to bluff raise the river are 1) against a maniac who has been driving the betting on a board where he is likely to have missed a draw and you can't beat a bluff, 2) against opponents who lay down on the river too much after some draw (that it was reasonable for you to have) hits on the river. More generally, I think you look for spots where your aggressive opponents might be bluffing themselves (but you can't beat a bluff), or where your thinking opponents can easily misread you for making a hand that you don't have. As someone else pointed out (I can't remember who), a good sign an opponent might be pushing with very little is when he bets consecutive scare cards on the turn and river, especially if they are overcards that don't complete any draws.

Good helpful guidelines.


BTW, I missed the boat on a river bluff raise just last night...groan


5 way action. I have T9d in late position.

No raise preflop.


Flop: 863 2 spades.


BB checks. Early position loose player bets. 2 folds. I raise. bb folds. He calls


Turn: offsuit Jack


We both check (it may have been better had I bet but at that particular time, I had no table image as I was getting spanked so I decided to take the free card).


River: Offsuit 5


He bets and I lamely fold.


I think the criteria existed for a bluff river raise. This fella (though loose) was not aggressive enough to bet the river with something like a pair of 8's. His bet on the end signifies that he made the straight or was betting a pair of Jacks (but he probably would have bet a pair of Jacks on the turn) or that he was bluffing having bet overcards or a flushdraw on the flop and missing. From a pot odds standpoint, I blew it by failing to raise the river. Damn! What is really ironic is that I blew it at the tables the same day that we discussed the concept of river bluff raises on this Forum.

I bluff-raise on the river regularly, perhaps once every five or six hours of play. The majority of the time I lose of course but I take the pot enough times to have positive expectation. I think so, anyway.


Here are some general situations:


I. Heads up, I'm in last position, a flush card comes on the river, and my opponent bets into me. If I think it's unlikely he has a flush, I often bluff-raise. (There are lots of reasons why I might think it's unlikely my opponent has a flush - use your imagination.) My logic is, if he had a decent hand like top pair or two pair, he'd probably check-call (fearing I have the flush, but also thinking I might bluff if I don't have it). When he bets the river, I put him on something like middle pair or top pair weak kicker - in other words, he's bluffing, hoping that I will fold top pair thinking that he has the flush. When I bluff-raise (without top pair, of course), he may fold.


II. Heads up, I'm in last position, this time a third suited board card came on the turn, and a blank comes on the river. If have the ace of the flush suit I might try a bluff-raise if my opponent bets into me. I do this when I have shown strength on the turn, semibluffing my nut-flush draw. I don't know whether my opponent has a flush, but if he does it can't be the nut flush. And since I've shown strength already, he should fear the nut flush. So when he bets into me, I put him on some sort of bluff - therefore I raise. (I certainly don't expect him to lay down a small flush here - I expect him to lay down some weak hand that still beats my ace-high-no-pair. Sometimes I will even do this when I have a relatively good hand like an ace-high straight. But in this case it's a value-bet where I think he might have a flush but I'm a slight favourite to have him beat. The reason is that since I hold the ace of the flush suit, he certainly won't reraise me if he does have the flush; he'll just call.)


III. Someone has bet and there are one or more other players left to act behind me. This is basically "Hand No. 2" in SKP's post. If the bettor might be bluffing, I often raise to make it difficult for someone behind me with a decent hand to call. A variation is where I have a pretty nice hand, which might be the best but probably isn't. I raise, thinking that the bettor might call with a worse hand than mine, but other players will fold a better hand than mine rather than calling two bets cold. (Is this still considered a bluff?) Of course, I take the pot size into account: Usually I make this play when the pot is medium-size, and in the smaller range of the medium size. If the pot is large, than the players behind me will be more inclined to call two bets cold with mediocre hands. If the pot is too small, then I figure I'm not getting the right odds to put in two big bets on a bluff. Sometimes I make this play with a monster pot if there's only one player to act behind me, who is capable of laying down a decent hand.


IV. This is a slight variation of situation III. Suppose one player goes all-in with a bet on the river and I am next to act, with one or two players behind me. If I think I'm beat but am still getting pot odds to call, I usually raise instead. Then I hope that the players after me will fold a better hand than mine. If I happen to have a better hand than the all-in player, I take the pot, but if I don't then it costs me the same as calling. The only trouble with this is that it looks like I'm colluding with the all-in player when I turn over a crappy hand and the all-in player wins because my raise forced out someone with a good hand.


I have a couple more comments, but this post is getting long, so I will post them separately.

SKP: I'm a Vancouver player. You can probably figure out who I am; if not I'll tell you in person. I sort of wish I hadn't shared all my secrets of river bluff-raising with you, since now you'll be able to read me better. However, I've learned a lot from your posts and essays, so I don't mind so much.


I have a question about your "Hand No. 1" and also a hand I played tonight where a river bluff-raise totally backfired.


In "Hand No. 1" you had an open-ender on the flop. The BB checked, the maniac bet, and you raised. Don't you get greater expectation by just calling, giving the BB a chance to stay around and pay you off if you hit your straight?


Now the hand from earlier tonight at the Holiday Inn in Vancouver (a 10-20 game), where my river bluff-raise backfired. Frankly, I played the hand badly from start to finish.


The player on my right, call him R, open-raises in the cutoff. I am on the button with QJo, and I three-bet. SB folds, and the BB cold-calls. R calls. (Both my opponents are good players.)


The flop comes J32 (suits don't matter). The BB bets out, R calls, and I call.


The turn is a 9. Again the BB bets out, R calls, and I call.


The river is another 9 (final board: J3299). I still have top pair. Now the BB checks, and R bets out. I bluff-raise, specifically because I think the BB might have AJ, KJ, or QJ and might fold rather than cold-call two bets. He does fold, but then R three-bets. Now I call, and he turns over K9 (suited), for trips. I overheard the BB say that he held a jack, but he didn't say what his kicker was.


As I said earlier, I believe I played the hand badly from start to finish. Here are my excuses for the bad play:


Preflop, R was in position to steal the blinds. My QJ offsuit was better than many of the hands with which R would raise. I wanted the blinds to fold, hence my three-bet. I probably should have folded.


On the flop, I should have raised to take control. I figured that with top pair I probably had the best hand, but I also knew that the BB might beat me with AJ, KJ, AA, KK, or QQ. I figured that I almost certainly had R beat, since he would have raised on the flop with any of these hands. (He might smoothcall with a set, however.) My plan was to bet out on the turn if it was checked to me, but just call the turn if the BB bet again. (And raise the turn if I made two-pair or trips, and someone bet.)


On the river, I thought it was pretty unlikely R was betting with the 9, since there was no 9 on the flop. As I mentioned earlier, I didn't put him on a jack or an overpair because I thought he would have raised the flop with that. I reasoned that from the action so far, he could easily put both me and the BB on a hand like AK or AQ (or even Ax suited), so he might try to bluff. Thus when I raised the river, I was pretty sure I had the bettor beat, and I raised to drive out the third player. When R reraised me I knew he probably did have me beat, but I still had to call because he might have, for example, JT or TT.


It turns out that I read the BB pretty well. He needed a decent hand to cold-call two bets preflop, but not necessarily a Group I hand since he knew that R could be stealing and I could be restealing.


If I had raised the flop, the BB might have reraised and R would have folded. Even if I had raised the flop and the BB just called, R might have folded either right then or on the turn. Either way, I might well have won the pot or split it.


If I had just called the river instead of bluff-raising, I would have saved two big bets. And if I had folded pre-flop, I would have saved even more.


Comments?