[broadcrawford]

By no means was I attempting to reprimand the original poster. I just want to make sure we aren't confusing two different topics. Optimal bluffing frequency is a much different animal then "game theory". True, both surround when to call a bluff, and when to bluff an oponent. However, game theory discusses how to make your approach to bluffing/calling a bluff completely random. Optimal bluffing strategies have to do with reading your opponent and their tendancies to certains boards, position, and everything else.

My opinion on bluffing really comes down to the player(s) you are up against. In low limit games against fish bluffing is almost worthless. However, in higher to mid limits (or if you got a TAG, TPA at your table) bluffing, and semi-bluffing become more valuable.

In lower limit games .25/.50, .50/1.00, 1/2 I do very little bluffing. There are just to many fish and they call down with anything. It's more profitiable to capitilize on that mistake, then it is to make them fold when they actually have you beat. This makes bluffing and semi-bluffing less valuable, and value betting and check raising move valuable. You do get some people at this level who do fold to bluffs, but they are rare and usually drop after flop. So in that scenario you are spending 1sb into a 3sb pot. In my opinion, why do I care about such a small pot. If I got a damn good read, and I know he will fold once out of the three times I bluff 1sb into a 3sb pot, then I will do it.

Skalansky really makes it simple. If you feel/know it's profitable to bluff here (you are getting a +EV) then do it. It's no different then drawing when you get odds. You lose money by not bluffing when getting the right odds.