Semi Bluff Mastery is the Key Thing

[Victor]

value betting properly is far more important than semibluffing, for one thing.

semibluffing kinda sucks bc no one folds.

It's a very interesting question. What is the essential skill in poker that makes someone great.

First of all there are many pro's with different strengths/weaknesses but I think that there are two main skills that separate the men from the boys and they are;

1. Reading. The ability to read is so huge. It tell you when to make that great laydown. When to call that all in. When to semi-bluff and bluff and when not to. It also tell you when to change gears and timing is everything !!!

2. Calculation. This will give you a good understanding of starting hands (not just a good memory of the latest chart) and position. Also it will allow you to spot good +ev plays and avoid -ev plays.

I think these two skills in concert are very hard to pass up when discussing the essential skills of poker. If these two skills are strong then you will be a great semi-bluffer but you will be much more than that. The semi-bluff is just one play in your vast arsenal. And for me thats the big point semi-bluffing is just one play not hte defining skill of a great master of the game

Very intersting topic though [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
Weak-tights just tell you what they have. LAGs are out of line. Tight-Aggressives typically will (predictably) go too far with hands they choose to play, if they are not tough.

I assert that the best semi-bluffers are the best overall players.

I assert that mastery of the semi-bluff (including good laydowns after such a bet) is THE essential skill because by definition, THIS skill incorporates mastery of a great many other very important and often quite subtle poker skills such as

<ul type="square">
Solid starting standards (by position and number of players),

Reading hands,

Choosing your victim,

Isolating him,

Ability to make tough laydowns,

Changing gears etc.
[/list]
How do you defend against the sophisticated and tough (capable of big laydown) semi-bluffer?

Because a wide range of hands are semi-bluff candidates from a wide range of seats.

Don't be quick to answer. Think about it for awhile and come back and vote.

I'm eager to examine the poker insight and opinion you may choose to post on this thread.

...

[/ QUOTE ]

Quite frankly I disagree that the ability to semi-bluff well encompases mastery of all the elements you say.

Starting hand selection. Mostly irrelevant to whether you have a semi-bluffing hand post-flop.

Reading hands. More important if what you're talking about is semi-bluff raising. Less important if you are semi-bluff betting.

Choosing your victim...hmm, maybe. But I'm not getting into pots PF with people with the idea of semi-bluffing them later, so this is more of a choosing who to semi-bluff against idea. So, sometimes.

Isolating your victim. Certainly not PF, again you I'm not entering pots with people with the idea of semi-bluffing them later. Post flop, occaisionally, but this wouldn't be a regular part of the semi-bluff.

Ability to make tough laydowns. Generally I'm semi-bluffing on the turn. On the flop I'm either betting my draws for value, continuation betting, or outright bluffing. If its a semi-bluff on the turn there aren't very many tough laydown situations. You call one more bet with your draw (maybe lay down to two more bets) and then if you make your draw you aren't folding for a bet or single raise, and if you miss it you're either bluffing, checking down, or folding. Where are the tough laydowns? Only in the occaisional situations where it comes back multiple bets to you and even then its generally a simple pot odds calculation.

Changing gears. I suppose this might relate to whether to semi-bluff or not, but I suggest that you don't need to be a gear changing master to effectively employ the semi-bluff.

--Zetack

[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.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]


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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Given this comment and some of the others above I'm not sure everybody is on the same page here. The situation you describe is not a semi-bluff, its a value bet.

On the flop with an open-ender a backdoor and two overcards that I think are good when I bet it would be ok if I took the pot down but what I really want is to get all five of my opponents to come along with me and maybe the guy to my immediate right to put in a raise as well...

A semi-bluff has the word bluff in it because what you really want to happen is to win the pot right there...its semi because you have outs to the probable winner if you do get called.

Betting a draw is not necessarily a semi-bluff.

--Zetack

[Mackerel]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe that "reading hands" is by far the most important skill.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey! You stole my answer! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[phish]

The "key thing", as you call it changes as you progress as a player.
When you're first starting and playing against other newbies, you might have discovered that starting off with good hands makes all the difference in the world. (Today, with all these books teaching you these things, it's not such a eureka moment anymore)

As you develop, you may have found that playing a proper mathematical game is the key.

Then you discover that betting aggressive, especially against weak tight opposition, is "the key"

Now you're at the stage where you think proper 'semi-bluff' (only one of many strategy tools by the way) is the key.

Next you'll find that knowing your opponents' tendencies and exploiting them is the key.

Then you'll learn to target your opponents moods and what his image of you is.

Then you'll figure that being able to quit when you're losing and playing bad gives you the long-term edge against other great players who can't exercise such discipline.

Fact is, as you advance, the opposition becomes tougher. A "key" that beats one group of opponents will simply not be enough for the next group.

[Dan Mezick]

Z,

Thanks for your couple posts on this thread

[ QUOTE ]
Ability to make tough laydowns. Generally I'm semi-bluffing on the turn. On the flop I'm either betting my draws for value, continuation betting, or outright bluffing. If its a semi-bluff on the turn there aren't very many tough laydown situations. You call one more bet with your draw (maybe lay down to two more bets)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an insight from your expertise in Limit Play. I am talking no limit, and I apologize as I was not explicit in stating this.

In no limit, every street is a potential good-laydown opportunity.

Your point about starting hands I have a question on.

If you hold suited connectors in a middle seat, you may choose to play in part because others are in the pot that you know you can semi-bluff successfully. There are many other such play-the-player scenarios and positional plays that inform hand selection and thinking about possible post-flop play options for those starting hand selections.

Your reply seems absolute. Are you saying starting hands are pretty much a non-issue in all cases, in both Limit and NL with respect to the possible playing of semi-bluffs?

[ QUOTE ]
Starting hand selection. Mostly irrelevant to whether you have a semi-bluffing hand post-flop.


[/ QUOTE ]

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
Z,

Thanks for your couple posts on this thread

[ QUOTE ]
Ability to make tough laydowns. Generally I'm semi-bluffing on the turn. On the flop I'm either betting my draws for value, continuation betting, or outright bluffing. If its a semi-bluff on the turn there aren't very many tough laydown situations. You call one more bet with your draw (maybe lay down to two more bets)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an insight from your expertise in Limit Play. I am talking no limit, and I apologize as I was not explicit in stating this.

In no limit, every street is a potential good-laydown opportunity.

Your point about starting hands I have a question on.

If you hold suited connectors in a middle seat, you may choose to play in part because others are in the pot that you know you can semi-bluff successfully. There are many other such play-the-player scenarios and positional plays that inform hand selection and thinking about possible post-flop play options for those starting hand selections.

Your reply seems absolute. Are you saying starting hands are pretty much a non-issue in all cases, in both Limit and NL with respect to the possible playing of semi-bluffs?

[ QUOTE ]
Starting hand selection. Mostly irrelevant to whether you have a semi-bluffing hand post-flop.


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I'll buy that you have to laydown more often after a semi-bluff in NL. My point is, are these tough laydowns? If its a semi-bluff you don't think you have the best hand right? (Or you don't once you get raised.) Isn't it then just a simple pot odds question on your draw and thus a pretty easy call or laydown?

My tough laydons in NL tend to be of the I have a hand that I like but don't love and my opponents just come over the top of me for a lot of money, variety.

In your other question, I think you've confused your points about starting hand selection and opponent selection. To have a hand that is a semi-bluffing hand generally depends upon how the board has hit your hand and how it may have missed other people's hands. So if I play 7-4 off and the flop comes K-5-6 I may have picked up a pretty good semibluffing hand. I don't know that I'm crediting that to my superior hand selection skills. Anyway, I number that one as mostly irrelevant, not totally irrelevant. To the extent your hand selection influences what your opponents think you might have when you semi-bluff and thus whether they are more or less likely to lay down is relevant.

Your point about opponents is well taken, but I again, I'm not playing against opponents because I think I can semi-bluff them. I may play against opponents because I think I can outplay them post flop. And that includes a range of techniques and I would put the ability to straight-out bluff them ahead of semibluff them, because I'm much more likely to find myself in a bluffing than semi-bluffing position.

I hope that clarifies. I think the semi-bluff is an important tool, but it's simply a matter of recognizing the situations when they come, of utilizing the tool as appropriate. The factors you've listed, I just don't think are that directly relevant to mastery of the semi-bluff.

--Zetack