[ChipWisperer]

I do believe that effective semi-bluffing is an essential and highly-used tool of a great player; it is a cornerstone to the Brunson book and Sklansky, et al go to great lengths to explain it. Because we have so many opportunities to employ it - if we don't use it properly, it can be costly.

The same is true for laydown decisions. I agree that if I could change one or two per tourney or ring game decisions about laydowns, it would dramatically shift the outcome.

I believe that effective use of both tools result from a solid understanding of pot/implied odds. We all can remember times that we wished we would have made a laydown, but if it was the "correct" call from the odds we were getting, then those will even out over the long run and we will have a career higher EV. Some calls are mandatory, even if you are sure you are beaten at the moment.

Same is true for semi-bluffs. Some S-B situations are better than others, i.e., an open-ended draw w two overcards and a backdoor flush draw is a mathmatical favorite w two cards to come and much more effective than many other semi-bluff draws/opportunities. In addition to counting the outs of various S-B situations, it must be done in context of texture of flop, knowledge of opponents (many S-B situations are not profitable if opponents are calling stations - the chance of winning the pot immediately is a very important aspect of the S-B), etc. Reading SSHE, HOH, and Ciaffone's Middle Stakes drove that home for me and greatly improved my results.