Game theory and bluffing

[BolliTrader]

I'm trying to develop a strategy on bluffing and I read chapter 19 in TOP tonight. After and evening of pacing and thinking I now grasp the concept. My question has to do with Game Theory and Bluffing (GTB) and this article:

web page

The article basically says only bluff scare cards. I would think that using both concepts would be a little overkill on bluffing. Is this assumption correct? Does anyone here have an opinion on which one is better?

Maybe this is overkill and I'm thinking about it too much. Any response is appreciated.

Thanks,

deke

[DcifrThs]

woah woah woah.

slow down there bucko. you're trying to tackle a concept as if there's one kind of way to go about it.

SKP was only referring situations in which a bluff is most likely to be successful. but he warns that they are not foolproof and a good or excellent player will know what you're doing if you always do the same thing.

the most important things are the size of the pot, your opponent and how he plays and whether a bluff is likely to show a profit.

but that article is a great start and SKP shows what you need to consider in these introductory situations.

reading chapter 19 in TOP and reading this article and combining them and concluding you have to bluff a lot is not a good idea. as a beginning player you should play like a snare drum. tiiiiiight!! concentrate on reading hands and try to determine an opponent's likely holdings given the way he's played his hand and what you know about how he's played his hands in the past. this excersize of doing it EVERY HAND whether you're in the pot or not will make it, eventually, as if the poor players are playing with their cards face up. its hard to make a mistake if you know exactly to the rank and suit your opponents hole cards. you need to practice more important stuff than coming up with a general theory of bluffing.

bluffing will be part of your earn and against the right opponents a lot of those bluffs that SKP references will show a decent profit. but in super loose games you should do virtually no bluffing. as the game tightens up you should slowly bluff at the correct frequency.

i know this is hard to grasp as i am still learning it myself. poker is a complex and demanding mistress vieled in a fine covering of simplicity. good luck and i hope this helps.

-Barron

[LetsRock]

FWIW, bluffing is not a part of my regular arsenal. The only time I even think about bluffing is when I'm running really hot and I'm getting too much respect from the table (they all fold when I get seriosly invloved with a hand.

Even then, I may try to run a bluff about once an hour and these are usually for small pots (blind steal, real estate bets on the flop, occasional c/r on a scare card).

I play a pretty tght game - 95% of the time if I'm betting/calling/raising, I can beat 2nd pair and every thinking opponent will realize that in about 30 minutes. The smart ones will just get out of the way if I start getting aggressive and they are the ones I will try to bluff. If the calling stations are involved, I don't go there.

BLuffing should be a very minute part of your game unless you're playing high stakes NL - then it is a much more important skill.

[PairTheBoard]

Could you explain "Game Theory and Bluffing"? I'm not sure what you're referring to.

PairTheBoard

[BolliTrader]

Thanks guys. The only reason I asked about this is there are 4 or 5 guys in my regular game that are pretty tough. They usually just get out of my way and give me no action unless there is a very good chance they have me beat already. I thought maybe bluffing was a way to get them to loosen up some...

That being said, I am really early in my poker career and will take your advise. I'm probably still playing to tight for ring games (spent my first 8 mos learning NL tourneys) and need to loosen up some in general. SLOWLY, VERY VERY SLOWLY and only at the right times. Doing that should loosen my image better than bluffing and not cost me as many bets.

Thanks again for your responses.

deke

[DcifrThs]

if you notice you are literally getting no action on your early raises from these guys its time to throw them a change up and not bluff.

what i mean is raise mason's 87s UTG and see what happens.

if one of them raised first in middle assuming you'd fold then 3bet with the same low card suited hands and get it heads up and hope for a showdown you win.

doing this ONE TIME AND ONLY ONE TIME is usually enough...two times may be necessary if they're not all scratching their heads and staring blankly at the pot they just lost to 65s and mr. tighty on whom they thought they had a rock solid read.

mess with 'em...
-Barron

[astroglide]

i think the "raise 87s up front" idea is terrible compared to raising out of your blinds with it (or some other trashy suited hand without many limpers). people seem to notice that more than other raises, it is less -ev, and it provides more cover for legit blind raises.

[BolliTrader]

Barron ~ You right, thanks for setting me straight...

[ QUOTE ]
Could you explain "Game Theory and Bluffing"?

[/ QUOTE ]

I wish I was a better writer… but here it goes…

Game theory is a branch of mathematics that can be applied to many competitive situations. From the limited reading I've done on this it says if your opponent is tough completely randomize your actions. If your opponent(s) know you only bet a made hand they have an advantage and you will never get calls on your value bets on the end. Therefore occasionally bluffing against tough opponents is a +ev. Of course if you bluff too much you will always get called and this a –ev. Using game theory we can get the appropriate ratio for bluffing (against tough opponents, the other guys were absolutely correct when playing weak / average opponents never at all is the best ratio).

The appropriate ratio to bluff would make what his call would be as a percentage of the pot equal to the percent of times you would bet. In other words if he has to call 1 bet to win 6 (has to call~17% of the pot) and you have 5 outs(wins approx 10%), you need to add 3 more random cards (will hit an additional 6% means you bet 16% of the time) that you will bluff with.

An expample:
It’s HU (very important, you should never bluff a multi-way pot on the end). There are 4 bets in the pot. The turn card is free and puts you 4 to the straight, meaning you have 8 outs. You are going to hit those 8 approximately 16% of the time and if you bet he has to call 20% of the pot. You should add random cards that you would bet even though they won’t help to make your % outs = to his % of pot call. In this case you would add 2 cards (the two red three’s, the two black 9, whatever).


~Disclaimer~ There is alot more to this than what I've written, but that should give you the general gist of it. I’m certainly no DS, so if doesn’t make sense and you still have interest in it buy The Theory of Poker. I highly recommend this book in any event.

deke

[DcifrThs]

astro,

in my short poker career i've never had an opportunity to excecute the deceptive raise with 87s from any position. therefore i was just relaying the concept.

you're refinement definately clears things up and is 100% true that blind raises are noticed much more and remembered than most other raises.
-Barron

[PairTheBoard]

Thanks for that explanation BolliTrader and also for that link. I guess I knew there was some Game Theoretic calculation for optimum bluffing frequency but I didn't know it worked like that. I've been going more on feel and estimation of whether my particular opponent is capable of laying down a better hand than I have. I think you can apply your Game Theory method against Players who have shown the capacity to fold with reasonable frequency. I think you should also take a shot at the bluffs mentioned in the link - once in a while. You should not be so tight as to be afraid to make a move. You should also be aware that other players may be making those moves. They are pretty standard and experienced players are aware of them.

Many Pros prefer to play against so called "Weak Tight" players. These are players who never bluff and usually just bet out their hands - check folding when they miss. Against such players you would want to do a lot of bluffing. You also don't want to become such a player.

PairTheBoard