[Total: 9 Average: 8.3/5]
You must sign in to vote
MORE IN THIS SERIES : Part 1 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 7 | Part 6
TPE Theory: Evaluating Bluffs with Andrew Brokos (Part 2)
MORE IN THIS SERIES : Part 1 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 7 | Part 6
Jon_Allan
In the 77 hand you assume villain to 3 bet 88+, AJo+, AJs+, KQs. Slice shows this as 94 combinations. When the flop comes you assume she c-bets her entire range. You count out 8 combinations of AKs and 8 of AJs and therefore if the turn is a low spade she’ll have a flush 16/94 = 17% of the time. But there are only 4 of each making 8 combinations, 16 would be permutations in which case the result would be 16/188 = 8.511%. Also you are counting non spade combinations like AdJd really there are only 2 combinations. Furthermore the 94 count given by slice for combinations is only correct without the dead Qs or the, would-be-dead, turn. The Qs reduces the total combinations in her range from 94 to 86 (we can remove 3 pair combinations, 2 suited combinations, and 3 off-suit combinations). Of the 8 suited combinations in her range we can remove any with the Qs so AsQs and KsQs and any which are not in spades, 4, which leaves only 2 combinations namely AsKs and AsJs. So if a spade ranked 7 or less turns she has a flush 2/(86-0-0-0) = 2/86 = 2.326% of the time; if a T, 9, or 8 of spades turns she has a flush 2/(86-3-0-0) = 2/83 = 2.410% of the time; if a Js comes we can remove AsJs and she’s got the flush (2-1)/(86-3-1-3) = 1/79 = 1.266% of the time; a Ks and she has it (2-1)/(86-3-2-3) = 1/78 = 1.282% of the time; an As turns and she never has a flush as you said [ (2-2)/(86-3-3-9) = 0/71 = 0% ]. I think that’s right, please correct me if it’s wrong though.
Carlos
I understand that if a person’s range only contains broadway and QQ+ type hands, then the best they can have on small flops is one pair. What I dont understand is how we can use this information to bluff them off of that pair given that it is an over pair on those types of boards.
Seems like this would require us to be very deep stacked and it would take some monster sized barrels on all three streets and possibly a river shove. This makes me question if such a bluff is worth it.
Foucault
If you never try to bluff them off of an overpair, they can easily fold an overpair when you show strength. If you constantly try to bluff them off of an overpair, they can easily call you down. Finding the right in between is what poker is all about.
Foucault
Also, what does “worth it” mean?
Foucault
I’ll got back and have a look at this, but it sounds like the sort of thing I’d screw up. Thanks for the comment,
Andrew
Carlos
Why do I always get a mental image of Yoda when you answer my questions? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ4yd2W50No
Good point. I will only add that for now it’s probably more important to understand to which side of this continuum my more robotic opponents tend to be and act accordingly. Offensive poker if you will. This is assuming they are not balanced and are slow to adjust.
As I face better, more balanced players, I’ll need to find that balance myself as a defensive measure.
Carlos
I guess I am imagining a scenario early in a soft tourney with over 100bbs. If I think a guy has an over pair, but it would take my entire stack to “possibly” get him off of it, I may be better off letting him have the pot and picking up chips in more reliable spots.
redvulture61
Secret tip to successful bluffing. 3 barrell relentlessly every time your opponent check/calls flop. Don’t overdo it though.
redvulture61
Its all depends on the player. Dont try to bluff recreational players off these hands, it will just end badly.
Foucault
Yeah, that’s kind the rub. How do be relentless without overdoing it? That’s where all the stuff about finding the right ranges comes in.
Foucault
Yeah, I think you’re right. Pretty embarrassing mistake for me to make, sorry about that. This does suggest even more strongly that I should call the flop, sometimes hoping to go to showdown but turning my hand into a bluff if a spade comes.
redvulture61
That’s where GTO can help you out.
mike666
At 23.20 where you have Q9s you tell that you would barrel spade,J,K turns if you would cbet. How about an Ace as a barreling card? I expect that opponent’s range here may consist of some aces and he also can expect us to bluff an ace, but I still kinda want to barrel an ace cause it is usually in perceived preflop raiser’s range. What do you think?
Foucault
I actually don’t think an A is a great barreling card. Not all “preflop raiser vs preflop caller” spots are identical. In this case Hero is a button raiser and Villain a SB cold caller, so although Hero has plenty of strong Aces in his range he also has so much air that just barreling all of it when an Ace turns will result in an over-wide bluffing range. I’d consider an Ace on the turn to be a #3 bluffing spot, and I don’t think Q9 is a good enough bluffing candidate to make the cut.
This is the key point I want to make about bluffing. It isn’t just about whether or not an A is a good barreling card. The question is how good, and based on that which hands do and don’t belong in your bluffing range?