| Posted by: Odds_Freak at July 7, 2005, 3:17 pm | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
Let b=bet and p=pot
bluffling ratio=b/(p+b)
bluff percentage=bluffing ratio x 25%
Bet maximum up to pot
If no limit or pot limit bluff: 25 % x pot/(pot + pot)=25 % x 1/2=12.5%
The caller is indifferent. Your bet offers a 1 to 3 payoff on 1 to 3 odds
No matter what the callers' strategy, bettor gains in the long run.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: viking999 at July 6, 2005, 2:39 am | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
Let's not forget that late position helps in bluffing by letting you get a good read on your opponents. If everyone checks or there's only a ery weak bet on the board, you know that your bluff has a good chance of succeeding. However, if there's AAK down and people are betting heavily, you should sit it out.
One thing I have found from time to time is that if I'm the dealer, everyone checks, and I bet, a lot of the time I'll get called, because people assume I'm bluffing just because of my position. Has anyone else encountered this? It's not all the time, but sometimes there's just a player or two who is obsessed with calling out bluffers and will always call in this case. When I find this happening, I just turn it to my advantage by betting more with strong hands on the button, thus getting more return on those hands. Because of this, I sometimes prefer being one behind the dealer for bluffing.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Schatzdog at July 6, 2005, 12:23 am | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
I think the bluff needs to be placed more in a situational context.
What is your table image?
What is the bluffee's table image?
What heads up history do the two of you have so far in the game?
These are just a few questions.
Also the skill level of the bluffee needs to be high enough that they would lay down a good hand if they feared they were beaten. Lots of poor players simply call all the way to the end. Then lastly, you need to be playing at a table with big enough bets. Low limit or low NL tables are bad to bluff at cos' the fee for calling is usually affordable.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: -2222- at June 30, 2005, 3:53 pm | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
Lately, I have gotten away from bluffing to the River because in NL, the Pot grows exponentially (and therefore the expectation of a good size bet with each new card) as each card is dealt so the cost becomes too great to bluff on the turn and the River. If your opponent has called your post flop bluff & your turn bluff, the chances that he will fold at the River are ery low unless he was only on a draw. Players with top pair/high kicker will call you more times than not because they are so invested in the pot and if they get to the River, they are just that type of player.
If you are playing against a tight/weak opponent, a single bluff will either tell you he/she's got a hand or not. If your opponent thinks that you are bluffing, they will often come over the top - if you re-raise again, representing the nuts, you'll often find that you can take the pot right there.
It may end up being as expensive as bluffing all of the way to the River but in my limited experience, it improves ... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Bill_Hollorian at June 29, 2005, 9:08 pm | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
Thinking about when a bluff will work or not is sort of a tough question. in theory a bluff always works. Sklansky recommends using an external ariable to decide if you should bluff or not. Your thinking about it reduces randomization of attempts, and increase the likelyhood that your opponent can pick up information, and maybe re-bluff at you. This is my humble opinion, but when I see someone presented with a bluff opportunity, I must randomize my calls just as much as he randomizes his bluffs.
Just my humble opinion,
Bill
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Randy at June 26, 2005, 6:18 am | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
Wouldn't you bluff anytime you thought you had a mathematical edge? I would think you would have to consider pot odds and what you thought the likelihood of the "bluffee" folding would be. If you have one opponent, and you estimate that they're 50/50 going to fold, and you have a 25% chance of winning on top of that, it would seem like bluffing would almost always be a positive expectation bet.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Bill_Hollorian at June 26, 2005, 5:50 am | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
It is better to give your opponent CREDIT for having a good hand, than it is to give him MONEY to find out lol
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: diabloblanco at June 26, 2005, 12:40 am | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
I concour. The advantage I have is playing with the same people regularly. Unlike online where you get new batches of players constantly, I can maintain good reads on an opponents play and also maintain my table image.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: xdmanx007 at June 26, 2005, 12:37 am | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
The simple answer is if you don't know DON'T BLUFF! The bluff should be the LAST skill you try to master when money is on the line. Better to lose a couple bucks folding to a bluff then commit a bunch and get called! Now betting a draw is called semi-bluffing, semi-bluffing might be the most profitable skill to learn, also quite difficult to master still a work in progress for me but I have improved greatly at it.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: diabloblanco at June 26, 2005, 12:20 am | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
For what its worth, I think people aren't commited enough to their bluffs. Let me explain. When I have decided to bluff at a pot on the turn and I get called, I am representing a certain hand that I am sure is a winner against whatever hand I have placed my opponent on through my read. This may or may not be accurate or exact, but I am usually fairly confident in my read on someone at this point.
Having said that, if I don't chase them off after the flop, I will see the turn card and make another run at the pot. I think, too often, people don't follow through on their bluff with another attempt at the pot. For this to work, your read should be close to on, and the turn should have not helped whatever hand you placed them on. If this is the case, I continue to represent the hand I bluffed with on the flop and shoot again. I will even go to the river with a bluff provided that the final board card doesn't help the hand I have placed my opponent on. If I am called down, I will muck and move on. ... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Bill_Hollorian at June 25, 2005, 11:58 pm | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
Well, there is no "right" answer. I have picked up some logic to apply along the way. This is strictly a math question. In poker it is true there is a lot to consider, opponents previous play etc. Let me put out some more food for thought:
Let's say you bet the pot on the river 100% of the time, no matter if you make the hand or not.
It is correct for your opponents to always call, and you will lose 75 percent of the time.
Now, lets say I tell you, I will only bet when I make my hand, 100% percent of the time and when I miss, I will fold.
Now, when I bet you know to fold.
OK now lets say I told you when I make my hand I will bet, and when I miss I will still bet, but only 30% of the time.
Now, if you always fold I will win when I make the hand, but I will also win the 40% when Im bluffing, making it profitable, or 55%. If you always call, You can now only win 55% of the time...which reduce your original 75 percent edge. We are now at almost a coin fl... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: KK_Cowboy at June 25, 2005, 11:39 pm | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
Well first off Bill, a bluff should only be used in a spot where you are pretty sure it can work. You also have to know when to drop it. As far as bluffing when you miss a hand on the river, you might as well chuck it most of the time.
As for how much to bet when bluffing, well obviously the idea is to bet enough that a person will fold. How much that is depends on the situation.
And well for the last part of your question, that's the easiest one of all. Make more money than you lose, simple as that.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: MicheleW at June 25, 2005, 11:34 pm | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
Hi Bill - Never being good at math, you'll have to give me the answers. I bluff when I think I can bluff my opponent/s and I've usually watched him or them a while.
P.S. Like the new thread.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Grumbledook at June 25, 2005, 11:28 pm | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
Hard to answer with just that info.
Have to consider what cards came and how the previous rounds of betting went.
Information about your opponents play style and your image to the rest of the table.
Was the card on the river one that a good bluff could be made at?
Can't really give answers to the first 2 without complete information.
The last one though is down to the pot odds. If the amount you need to bet in relation to the amount of times it works, adds up to more than the amount of money you win when it does work. Then the bluff isn't worth doing and you should give up the pot.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Bill_Hollorian at June 25, 2005, 7:55 pm | | Topic: Bluffing theory Forum: Card Chat |
Lets say you have a drawing hand that will hit 25% of the time on the river.
The river hits, and 25% of the time you make your hand (the nuts), and 75% of the time you miss, meaning you have a loser.
Question one: How often should you bet at the pot, when you miss? (bluff)
Question two: How much should you bet when you choose to bluff?
Question three: How often does the first two answers have to work to show profit?
Bill
| | Static Link |
|