[LearnedfromTV]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you reraise significantly

[/ QUOTE ]
... which is why HOH2 warns against CR-bluffs.

In this position you pretty much have to make a pot-size re-raise to get the OR off the pot.

Good for you you're 8 for 8, but don't count on it - especially not in low buy-in online MTT.

You are basically inflating the pot to stake a substantial part of your stack on one bluff, and against a lot of players it's not going to work if they have any part of the board, or any draw.

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

[/ QUOTE ]

You have to check-raise bluff occasionally. Some percentage of the time you check, you have to checkraise, or your checks will give too much information. Some percentage of the time you checkraise, you have to checkraise bluff, or your checkraises will give too much information.

Clearly, the time to do it is not when the stacks are shallow and you are against a guy who will call with any piece of the board.

I was disappointed that Harrington spent a decent amount of time talking about varying the meaning of your 1/2-3/4 pot bets, but basically (in the section you refer to) ignores the need to do the same with checkraises.

Edit: He essentially says - you are risking too much out of position on a move that needs to work a higher percentage of the time than a half pot bet bluff. Fine, but the checkraise bluff will be successful more often than the half pot bet, especially if employed in a spot where your opponent's betting pattern indicates he is more likely than average to fold. You are also much less likely to be rebluffed.

I realize that this post seems out of character with the rest of the thread, including my own earlier post. There is a big difference, however, between usually doing something and always doing it (and between rarely doing something and never doing it).