Pruitt's article on bluffing

I liked his second bluff (or really, semi-bluff) for all of the reasons he stated. Cold-calling a raise, then betting the flush card on 4th street, seems like a perfect time to run a bluff.

His first bluff, namely raising the river on a busted draw when the top card pairs, I'm not so much a fan of. Pruitt's read is that villain holds either a "strong Q, a set, an overpair, or perhaps QT." Additionally, he leaves open the possibility that villain was "pushing a drawing hand very hard (like KJ or AK)."

Given this read, the board pairing on the river isn't helpful. If the villain's 3-bet from the SB and 3-bet on the flop + leading the turn was bona fide strength, the board pairing the river isn't going to be particularly scary. Any set just made a boat, so did QT, and any queen made trips. Any overpair will call for a single bet.

The only hand hero can win against is a busted draw (AK or KJ). Both of these seem unlikely, since villain was described as "a fairly aggressive, solid opponent."

On balance, given this hand, I'd prefer to call the flop, semi-bluff raise the turn, and fold the river UI. I dont think it was a good time to bluff.

[MtDon]

I don't have much experience with this, but I do know it can work in the right situation. In fact, this was my first bluff-raise.

It was against two other players I knew quite well. In a 2-6 spread limit game, with 7 players. I was in last position after the flop. First player was a straight forward player. Second was a player who bluffed alot and was also a player who would fold a pretty good hand if he thought it wasn't good, and who I was pretty sure considered me to be a pretty straight forward player. Throughout the hand the first player had been checking and calling, the second player had raised preflop and bet on the flop, turn and river. The river paired the card that was high on the flop (a king). I had a busted draw, I raised, first player folded after saying he couldn't call with two pair, the second player thought for quite awhile and then folded.

I should add that the bettor had been raising alot preflop, so didn't have to have a premium hand.

[The Dude]

[ QUOTE ]
Any overpair will call for a single bet.


[/ QUOTE ]
If this were true, I would not have raised the river. I'm not sure what games you typically play, but as you begin to play against better opponents, you will find people who are able to lay down strong hands when all the evidence points toward them being beaten.

Going into the river, there are 10 BBs in the pot. After the bluff-raise, there are 13 BBs in the pot, so the pot is laying 13:1 for the SB to call. He needs to be good 7% of the time to make this call. Given that there were two busted draws after 4th street, AA and KK has to call for 1 bet. This is a pretty standard call in the 10/20 SH games, I think.

Beyond this, the author's read distinctly left open the possibility of hands like AQ or a boat. The previous action does not justify a bluff-raise on the river here, as your only win is to re-bluff somebody who has overplayed KJ or AK. Had the author left open the possibility of a sickeningly overplayed small pair like 55, I would agree with the bluff raise, but basically you can't make this move except against a maniac. It really makes no sense here against a TAG.

[The Dude]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a pretty standard call in the 10/20 SH games, I think.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying anything to the contrary at all. But you do realize that B&M mid-stakes games (especially in Vegas) play nothing at all like Party 6max games, right? I play Party 6max games for a living, and would not have played the hand this way if it were there.


[ QUOTE ]
Beyond this, the author's read distinctly left open the possibility of hands like AQ or a boat.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's right, because when analyzing whether or not a play like this is correct, you need to take into account all possible hands, and weigh their liklihood. He would play QQ and TT the same way here as AA, but AA is much more likely, given the board. And some other hands still beat me as well (QT, 22), they are less likely than an overpair because he's not as likely to 3-bet them preflop.

There will be times when I run this bluff and run into AQ or TT or something like that. And there will be times I run this bluff and AA calls the river. But, that fine. This doesn't need to work all the time in order to be profitable.

I'm not recommending you make this play in your 10-20 6max games. I'm not even recommending you make this play against 95% of the people who play in the Wynn's 15-30 game. I am recommending that you look out for players whom you can make these kinds of plays against. They exist, and not recognizing them costs you money.

BTW, in case it's not overly clear, I am the author of this article.

[fyodor]

I agree that Bluff 2 looks pretty good but Bluff 1 is thin.
Given your read on his range he has AA or KK aprox. 36% of the time. The other 64% looks like an autocall of your raise and in a lot of cases he will even reraise.

Of the 36% of the time he has AA or KK you need him to lay it down over 40% in order to pull a profit. Given he only needs to catch you bluffing about 7% I don't think you will find a lot of opponents willing to fold enough.

I'm sure they exist and I understand the point you are trying to make. Also even if you are wrong about how often he will fold an overpair, most good players will fold here at least some of the time, so you aren't losing a lot.

[The Dude]

[ QUOTE ]
The other 64% looks like an autocall of your raise and in a lot of cases he will even reraise.


[/ QUOTE ]
As I'm sure you're aware, him re-raising is the same as him calling (except that I don't get to advertise my bluff as much, which is worth mentioning).

[ QUOTE ]
Of the 36% of the time he has AA or KK you need him to lay it down over 40% in order to pull a profit.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, and while the opponents that will make this fold that often are indeed fairly rare, I thought this guy would over 50% of the time.

The other benefit would be that when he does call, I get to advertise my bluff. It is extremely rare when I don't want my opponents to call my river raise, and showing a bluff like this will help that cause later in the session.

Don't mistake my words, though. I ran this bluff because I thought it was profitable in this isolated instance. The meta-game consideration was a bonus.

[wonkadaddy]

the first bluff almost definitely gets AK and KJ to fold (the missed draws). considering the pot is 11 bets it doesn't have to work often to be profitable. also, smaller pocket pairs have some chance of folding, and AA or KK have an (admittedly) very small chance of folding. combine all those possibilites and this bluff easily succeeds more than the 15-16% it needs to to be breakeven.

[ QUOTE ]
you need to take into account all possible hands, and weigh their liklihood.

[/ QUOTE ]

AA (6), KK (6), AQ (8), QQ (1), KQ (8), QJ (6), QT (6), TT (3), AT (12). Total hands that will win = 56

AK (16), KJ (12) = 28

Plus, how often does a TAG 3 bet against the preflop raiser and flop raiser, while OOP, with AK unimproved (gutshot plus two overs = 7 outs assuming aces are tainted for reverse domination risk).

Not often. I just dont think AK is a realistic range. KJ I might grant you, but not AK. And even KJ, I dont see many TAGs 3 betting this hand preflop in a protected pot.

The flop play just screams made hand, and there are very few made hands that will fold for 1 bet on the river in this pot given the two busted draws after 4th street.

[wonkadaddy]

even if u consider every hand you listed as possible, give them all a zero % chance of folding, and don't consider any other hands that would fold as possible save KJ, the bluff still is +EV. 12 out of 68 combos, or 17.6% better than the 2/13 required