Joseph Goebbels, the famous Nazi progaganda "spin doctor" said something like:
Repeat a lie often enough and people will start to believe it.
I've had some bluffs called because I lost inertia. I quit telling the lie for one round of betting.
Normally I think taking a "sanity check" is a good idea. See if THEY'RE willing to bet big, or raise a small bet I place. Maybe they have a better hand than I think they do.
But if they're on the edge of believing I have a stronger hand than they do, and I quit lying for one round of betting, suddenly doubt appears in their mind.
On occasion I'll pretend to have a pocket pair of aces. I'll raise pre-flop, and provided the table cards don't undo me, I'll pretend that all the way to the river with an marching army -- a continuing, constantly increasing set of bets.
Only done once in awhile, it's lethally effective. Then again, once in awhile someone else "hides in the shadow" of my leading the betting and wipes me out.
Are you bluffing for fun, to make the game more interesting when lousy cards are all you have, or are you in it strictly to win. Bluff accordingly.
Friday, February 15, 2008
The $1000 Ace
If there was ever a time you needed to be good at bluffing, it's when you hold A-2 and are confident your opponent holds A-higher.
If they hold A-J or better, your battleship is probably sunk. They're gonna call.
Unless you've violated the $1000 Ace rule.
In the Monopoly-Money games I play online, someone pairs an ace on the flop, the "typical" bet is $1000. $400 means they hit something other than the ace on the flop. $2800 or more seems to indicate they hit two pair -- or at least, that's what they want other players to think.
At least that's the GENERAL idea. Its what a player being "honest" with the other players is GENERALLY trying to communicate about his or her hand. It's what most players are willing to RISK on a pair of aces, at that point.
Based on the betting, you can generally tell what level this particular hand is; a battle between pairs, a battle between two pairs, or is there a possible flush/straight showing.
The trick is to overbet; to bet AS IF you are playing the next higher level of game, when in fact you're stuck with the same Ace pair the other guy has.
Or to bet ambiguously, betting somewhere BETWEEN what an Ace pair is generally worth, and what two pair commands.
Now, someone slowplaying a set, two pair, or whatever may sink your battleship, since they may not feel a need to raise, and thereby communicate they're actually PLAYING at a higher level.
But if you've kept the other player, who also holds an Ace, wondering the hole, err, whole time whether you simply hold an Ace with a fabulous kicker, or two pair, you may be able to win this hand.
Soo, based on all your information, decide if you're in a high-pair win games, a two-pair wins game, or whatever, and make it appear you're in the "higher level" game when you suspect you're in a dead heat with a single opponent.
Once in a while, it'll work, and you won't have to toss away A-2.
If they hold A-J or better, your battleship is probably sunk. They're gonna call.
Unless you've violated the $1000 Ace rule.
In the Monopoly-Money games I play online, someone pairs an ace on the flop, the "typical" bet is $1000. $400 means they hit something other than the ace on the flop. $2800 or more seems to indicate they hit two pair -- or at least, that's what they want other players to think.
At least that's the GENERAL idea. Its what a player being "honest" with the other players is GENERALLY trying to communicate about his or her hand. It's what most players are willing to RISK on a pair of aces, at that point.
Based on the betting, you can generally tell what level this particular hand is; a battle between pairs, a battle between two pairs, or is there a possible flush/straight showing.
The trick is to overbet; to bet AS IF you are playing the next higher level of game, when in fact you're stuck with the same Ace pair the other guy has.
Or to bet ambiguously, betting somewhere BETWEEN what an Ace pair is generally worth, and what two pair commands.
Now, someone slowplaying a set, two pair, or whatever may sink your battleship, since they may not feel a need to raise, and thereby communicate they're actually PLAYING at a higher level.
But if you've kept the other player, who also holds an Ace, wondering the hole, err, whole time whether you simply hold an Ace with a fabulous kicker, or two pair, you may be able to win this hand.
Soo, based on all your information, decide if you're in a high-pair win games, a two-pair wins game, or whatever, and make it appear you're in the "higher level" game when you suspect you're in a dead heat with a single opponent.
Once in a while, it'll work, and you won't have to toss away A-2.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Bold or Terrified
Getting out of your own head is sooooo important.
You throw out a sizeable bluff. You're terrified.
Guess what. The other players can't see that terror. What they more likely to see is bold confidence!
They throw out a big bet, hoping YOU'RE terrified.
You're not, you're merely assessing the odds it's a bluff, or that their kicker is lower than yours, and they're hoping you'll fold in fear since their hand isn't likely to hold up.
Maybe the thing to do is, every time you feel a strong emotion, ask yourself what the opposite of that emotion would be. Or what emotion THEY are likely feeling.
You throw out a sizeable bluff. You're terrified.
Guess what. The other players can't see that terror. What they more likely to see is bold confidence!
They throw out a big bet, hoping YOU'RE terrified.
You're not, you're merely assessing the odds it's a bluff, or that their kicker is lower than yours, and they're hoping you'll fold in fear since their hand isn't likely to hold up.
Maybe the thing to do is, every time you feel a strong emotion, ask yourself what the opposite of that emotion would be. Or what emotion THEY are likely feeling.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Bluffing A Pair on the Flop
Like playing with dynamite? Try bluffing when the flop contains a pair.
40-60% of the time A player will have made trips.
Trying to bluff and win that other 40% of the time is a tough game to play.
A feel for the other players at the game is the key. Will all, 100% of them fold if you bet, and none of them have it?
Or is there some other joker (like yourself) at the table who will make a stab at stealing the pot. To bluff HIM or HER, you have to re-raise AS IF you are INCENSED that they would try and steal the pot with such a stupid bluff.
Is the person holding trips smart enough to slowplay them and clean you out? Gee!
And if a 3rd player stays in, quietly calling, invariably THEY'RE the one with trips.
Can you get an EV+ out of bluffing a pair on the board? Well isn't THAT the million dollar question.
You might be better off to 100% of the time fold anytime it's not YOU holding the trips.
One thing I find almost guaranteed is the person holding the trips won't let permit a checkaround. Even if its the minimum bet, they're trying to maximize THEIR EV. So if I can't get a checkaround pre-river, i'll usually fold, figuring someone's slowplaying the trips.
Or, as I discussed in an earlier blog, unless I hold a hand that can improve to beat trips.
Here's something else to consider. YOu're going to burn up a fair number of brain cells trying to bluff this situation. You'll win a few, and definitely lose a few. If your EV (expected value) is zero from the combined wins and losses, wouldn't you be btter off to save those brain cells for better-yielding bluffing opportunities? Just a thought.
40-60% of the time A player will have made trips.
Trying to bluff and win that other 40% of the time is a tough game to play.
A feel for the other players at the game is the key. Will all, 100% of them fold if you bet, and none of them have it?
Or is there some other joker (like yourself) at the table who will make a stab at stealing the pot. To bluff HIM or HER, you have to re-raise AS IF you are INCENSED that they would try and steal the pot with such a stupid bluff.
Is the person holding trips smart enough to slowplay them and clean you out? Gee!
And if a 3rd player stays in, quietly calling, invariably THEY'RE the one with trips.
Can you get an EV+ out of bluffing a pair on the board? Well isn't THAT the million dollar question.
You might be better off to 100% of the time fold anytime it's not YOU holding the trips.
One thing I find almost guaranteed is the person holding the trips won't let permit a checkaround. Even if its the minimum bet, they're trying to maximize THEIR EV. So if I can't get a checkaround pre-river, i'll usually fold, figuring someone's slowplaying the trips.
Or, as I discussed in an earlier blog, unless I hold a hand that can improve to beat trips.
Here's something else to consider. YOu're going to burn up a fair number of brain cells trying to bluff this situation. You'll win a few, and definitely lose a few. If your EV (expected value) is zero from the combined wins and losses, wouldn't you be btter off to save those brain cells for better-yielding bluffing opportunities? Just a thought.
Overbetting
Overbetting is a(nother) form of bluffing.
At the online games I play, the "gold standard" is $1000 for a pair of aces. An ace hits on the flop, someone holding one in their hole cards NORMALLY bets around $1000
So what happens when I first sit down at a table, an ace flops, and someone bets $4000?
Since I'm new at the table, I don't know if this means they hold pocket Aces, hit top two pair, or whatever. Or if this is just some wild-ass player. At that point in the game I have no "calibration" as to what is NORMAL.
There's one other possibility. Overbetting.
I've folded two pair plenty of times to people who were on straight draws and other hands who were simply overbetting.
If they had a pair of aces, they bet like they had two pair. And so on.
Since I'm normally pretty reluctant to bet anythings subtantial on a single pair, I'll typically fold.
If they do it often enough, they'll eventually face enough showdowns where their cards are exposed for people to see what they're doing, and the table will 'adjust." It becomes $2000 for a pair of aces.
One key to detecting overbetting is that they typically have to be in late position, (at least in a pot-limit game) in order to pull it off, since if everyone else checked or raised only a reasonable amount, there may not be enough in the pot to pull it off.
If they only do it once in awhile, they'll definitely convince someone new at the table, like myself, they have a better hand than they do, and I may fold a winning hand.
I'm always surprised how well it works, usually for a player with a big stack of chips. Often, they're a no-limit player, and as soon as they hit top pair, kaboom, it's off to the races, since 70% of the time or so top pair will hold up.
Think about it.
If the flop exposes three suited cards, a possible straight, or whatever, anyone holding a flush or straighti s going to slowplay it a bit to try and maximize their revenue (no everyone some idiots will....)
The only reasonable JUSTIFICATION for betting large at the flop is a fear that your top pair, pocket pair, or weak two pair will get beaten on the turn or river, and a desire to drive other players out.
Most players will hold their weakest hand (a pair or even less) at the river; their fear is the greatest, so its where overbetting will have its maximum effect.
At the online games I play, the "gold standard" is $1000 for a pair of aces. An ace hits on the flop, someone holding one in their hole cards NORMALLY bets around $1000
So what happens when I first sit down at a table, an ace flops, and someone bets $4000?
Since I'm new at the table, I don't know if this means they hold pocket Aces, hit top two pair, or whatever. Or if this is just some wild-ass player. At that point in the game I have no "calibration" as to what is NORMAL.
There's one other possibility. Overbetting.
I've folded two pair plenty of times to people who were on straight draws and other hands who were simply overbetting.
If they had a pair of aces, they bet like they had two pair. And so on.
Since I'm normally pretty reluctant to bet anythings subtantial on a single pair, I'll typically fold.
If they do it often enough, they'll eventually face enough showdowns where their cards are exposed for people to see what they're doing, and the table will 'adjust." It becomes $2000 for a pair of aces.
One key to detecting overbetting is that they typically have to be in late position, (at least in a pot-limit game) in order to pull it off, since if everyone else checked or raised only a reasonable amount, there may not be enough in the pot to pull it off.
If they only do it once in awhile, they'll definitely convince someone new at the table, like myself, they have a better hand than they do, and I may fold a winning hand.
I'm always surprised how well it works, usually for a player with a big stack of chips. Often, they're a no-limit player, and as soon as they hit top pair, kaboom, it's off to the races, since 70% of the time or so top pair will hold up.
Think about it.
If the flop exposes three suited cards, a possible straight, or whatever, anyone holding a flush or straighti s going to slowplay it a bit to try and maximize their revenue (no everyone some idiots will....)
The only reasonable JUSTIFICATION for betting large at the flop is a fear that your top pair, pocket pair, or weak two pair will get beaten on the turn or river, and a desire to drive other players out.
Most players will hold their weakest hand (a pair or even less) at the river; their fear is the greatest, so its where overbetting will have its maximum effect.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Short-Handed Tables
There are a few things you can be fairly sure of at a table with 8 or more players.
If there's a straight or a flush to be had, someone probably has it.
Even if it's just a pair on the flop, chances are 60% someone has trips.
All these calculations go out the window when there are only 4-5 players at the table.
There will be many flushes that don't get "made".
There will be hands where nobody has an Ace to match the inevitable one on the river.
Bluffing becomes even more powerful when there are fewer players, and less likelihood of anyone having these table winning hands.
You often bluff to narrow the field, and pray someone doesn't complete a flush.
In this game you're already starting with a narrow field.
I'm still learning how to play short-handed. More later.
If there's a straight or a flush to be had, someone probably has it.
Even if it's just a pair on the flop, chances are 60% someone has trips.
All these calculations go out the window when there are only 4-5 players at the table.
There will be many flushes that don't get "made".
There will be hands where nobody has an Ace to match the inevitable one on the river.
Bluffing becomes even more powerful when there are fewer players, and less likelihood of anyone having these table winning hands.
You often bluff to narrow the field, and pray someone doesn't complete a flush.
In this game you're already starting with a narrow field.
I'm still learning how to play short-handed. More later.
Don't Throw That Hand Away -- Yet!
the more online poker you play, the more you tend to multi-table.
the more you multi-table, the more often you tend to discard junk cards.
wait a minute!
they're only junk if somebody has a better hand!
If there's garbage on the flop, and a check around, shouldn't you be looking at this as a bluffing opportunity rather than simply mucking your cards?
Of course you should.
It's just that you don't have time to if you're multi-tabling. Bluffing requires that you actually be AT the table, notice that player who hesitates --- MIGHT have a pair -- but decides to check -- and so on.
The goal of poker is to win the maximum amount of money. When you fold, especially when you could check, you're tossing away opportunity. Sometimes it's the right thing to do. But not always.
the more you multi-table, the more often you tend to discard junk cards.
wait a minute!
they're only junk if somebody has a better hand!
If there's garbage on the flop, and a check around, shouldn't you be looking at this as a bluffing opportunity rather than simply mucking your cards?
Of course you should.
It's just that you don't have time to if you're multi-tabling. Bluffing requires that you actually be AT the table, notice that player who hesitates --- MIGHT have a pair -- but decides to check -- and so on.
The goal of poker is to win the maximum amount of money. When you fold, especially when you could check, you're tossing away opportunity. Sometimes it's the right thing to do. But not always.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Getting Bluffed Because You're playing Defensive Poker
Defensive poker is basically folding any hand whenever the board pairs, a possible straight or flush appears, and someone else bets AS IF they hold it.
And you don't.
Defensive poker is, I've found, the only way to play the game. Yet it opens me up to excessive bluffing. Anybody who knows that's how I play, if I check inthe face of a possible flush, they know all they have to do is raise and I'm outta there.
How can I defend against this?
One, I can occasionally slowplay when I have the possible flush or whatever.
Two, I can KNOW MY OPPONENTS and know which ones are likely to try this, based on the results of my slowplayed hands.
Three. I can call a hand now and then, fully expecting to lose, just to keep 'em honest.
Four, I can use my bluffing radar detector? Is the person who raised in late position? Obviously, they're later than I am. How big's their bet? Is it serious or a "hmm, I'll give this a try" bet. When they do it repeatedly, do they ever show their cards?
No answers, many questions.
And you don't.
Defensive poker is, I've found, the only way to play the game. Yet it opens me up to excessive bluffing. Anybody who knows that's how I play, if I check inthe face of a possible flush, they know all they have to do is raise and I'm outta there.
How can I defend against this?
One, I can occasionally slowplay when I have the possible flush or whatever.
Two, I can KNOW MY OPPONENTS and know which ones are likely to try this, based on the results of my slowplayed hands.
Three. I can call a hand now and then, fully expecting to lose, just to keep 'em honest.
Four, I can use my bluffing radar detector? Is the person who raised in late position? Obviously, they're later than I am. How big's their bet? Is it serious or a "hmm, I'll give this a try" bet. When they do it repeatedly, do they ever show their cards?
No answers, many questions.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Bluffing and Ego
Its easy to think of yourself as a good poker player when you're winning your share of hands and pulling off an occasional bluff.
In fact, you may be playing better poker when you struggle for 3 hours and manage not to lose every single penny. Every river goes against you, your opponent outranks you on every "tie" hand, and so on.
Don't try and use bluffing to boost your ego. Bluffing is strictly a way to raise your EV. It should be done when it's most likely to succeed.
Unfortunately, that's not when your'e on a downward spiral. It's almost "AS IF" other players can sense your desparation.
When you're struggling it's time to tighten up, tighten up some more, and turn OFF the bluff spigot.
Sure, if a compelling bluffing opportunity arises, you may not be able to resist.
But "I lost every hand except the one I bluffed" isn't a real compliment to your playing ability, is it?
Bluffing is an integral part of poker. Poker is a game. You're not a better player than the guy who sits there and grinds away and only plays nuts hands. At least not if his stack is bigger than yours.
Bluff or dont' bluff, but leave the ego somewhere else. Just like greed, it'll undo ya.
In fact, you may be playing better poker when you struggle for 3 hours and manage not to lose every single penny. Every river goes against you, your opponent outranks you on every "tie" hand, and so on.
Don't try and use bluffing to boost your ego. Bluffing is strictly a way to raise your EV. It should be done when it's most likely to succeed.
Unfortunately, that's not when your'e on a downward spiral. It's almost "AS IF" other players can sense your desparation.
When you're struggling it's time to tighten up, tighten up some more, and turn OFF the bluff spigot.
Sure, if a compelling bluffing opportunity arises, you may not be able to resist.
But "I lost every hand except the one I bluffed" isn't a real compliment to your playing ability, is it?
Bluffing is an integral part of poker. Poker is a game. You're not a better player than the guy who sits there and grinds away and only plays nuts hands. At least not if his stack is bigger than yours.
Bluff or dont' bluff, but leave the ego somewhere else. Just like greed, it'll undo ya.
Friday, February 1, 2008
There's Always One Who'll Call -- REPRINT
I couldn't have written it any better than this. This is why you bluff against one or two, and not an entire table. For some reason the author refers to it as "collusion," as in a collusion to keep the bluffer honest.
http://www.pokerdoctor.com/online-poker-resources/Poker-collusion.htm
Actually I can say it better, here's an edited version that's tighter.
http://www.pokerdoctor.com/online-poker-resources/Poker-collusion.htm
Actually I can say it better, here's an edited version that's tighter.
There's a powerful poker concept evident in only small stakes or low-limit games. It's the concept of implicit collusion.
I first became aware of this term from Lee Jones' book, Winning Low Limit Hold 'Em. Jones introduces us to a logic reserved for loose games.
The concept of implicit collusion is where stakes are so low or players are so loose that you can count on more players staying in the pot everytime, even when their hands are lousy. The importance of this is where bluffing is concerned, and it's two-fold.
Bluff less
A bluff that fails to fold every hand by showdown is a failed bluff and a waste of money. In your average home game, you'll be lucky to fold every player at the table. Your best bet is to be heads-up with one of the tight players at the table, and attempt to bluff him out. Up against two or more players and you're taking a huge chance.
The point is not to omit bluffing from your arsenal. If you never bluff, you'll never make money on your strong hands because everybody else will fold. The point is that you must limit your bluffing. When too many players stay in on too many hands, your odds are slim. Effectively, you're up against implicit collusion.
Be more inclined to fold to a potential bluff
Nobody likes to be in this spot. A tough player at the table throws a bet in. It could mean anything. He either has a strong hand and is betting for value, a mediocre hand and is semi-bluffing, or a weak hand and is pure-bluffing. You have to decide what's stronger: your pride or your bankroll. Here's a valuable piece of advice: if there are a few other players in the pot, be more inclined to fold a mediocre-to-trash hand.
This is what implicit collusion is all about. First of all, collusion means an agreement between players. Collusion of any other nature is cheating, such as exchanging signals, sandwiching, not betting into each other (see Pokercheat.com for much more information on collusion). But, implicit collusion is the great hidden agreement between players. It's the agreement that bluffers will be kept honest by at least one other player staying in the pot.
If the player to my immediate right bets first and bets big, I have a big decision to make with my mediocre hand. My hand is only strong enough to beat a bluff, and the other three players in the pot behind me have yet to act. What do I do? More times than not, I fold. Because of how loose the game is, I can count on one of these other players staying in the pot and keeping the potential bluffer honest. My mediocre hand would crumble to anything with strength, but I can count on one of my poker-playing brothers at the table to take this bettor to task.
Be aware though that it's not always as easy as that. If you are left in the pot with only tight players or few players, it's possible everybody will fold in which case the bluffer will have one of his stories to tell. The concept of implicit collusion is not foolproof. It's like check-raising; if nobody bets when you check, you can't raise and your plan failed.
Conclusion
It's in this way that the discussion comes full circle. You can count on somebody to keep the potential bluffer honest...therefore, when you are bluffing, you can count on at least one other player staying in the pot against you.
It's for this reason that you should bluff less. It's likely that you're throwing money away, barring those times where you get a miracle card to win the game. It's very easy to be tempted into bluffing more when you hear other players talk about their successful bluffing. Remember that these stories are like slot machine stories, and I can assure you that slot machines only make money for their owners.
This isn't to say that bluffing should be avoided, only minimized. The key is to ensure that other players know you are capable of bluffing. This is enough to keep them on the ropes. For what little bluffing I do, I'm usually sure to show the entire table that I was bluffing, whether it worked or not. It creates the perfect advertising that keeps my opponents curious the next time I bet out with a strong hand.
Anatomy of a Bad Bluff
I've made so many bad bluffs.
But here's one you can maybe learn something from.
I was on a flush draw. One or two opponents.
Missed the draw on the turn. It's a harmless "7," off suit.
Opponent#1 places a fairly good size (medium) sized bet.
That was the first CLUE I missed. I call.
Oppenent #2 folds. Hoping for a 1 out of 4 chance on the river, I call.
Missed the draw on the river. Rats. I immediately react, I shove a big stack of chips in, without really looking at the board. MISTAKE #2. There MIGHT have been a straight out there, otherwise, 2 pairs is best I could have been PRETENDING to have.
Opponent #1 calls and wins with a set. Pocket 7's.
So let's list all my mistakes. One, I didn't wait until opponents were all showing weakness. Two, I didn't wait till there were scare cards on the table. Three, when it was down to one-on-one, my opponent showed STRENGTH, not weakness. Number four, it was a gut reaction instead of a carefully planned bluff. Five. It was probably obvious I was on a flush draw since there wasn't much else out there to be had. Six, I didn't put my opponent on a hand, not even a strong two pairs, which would have only tied the strong two pairs I was pretending to have.
All in all, it was a bad bluff. Fortunately I learned from it.
But here's one you can maybe learn something from.
I was on a flush draw. One or two opponents.
Missed the draw on the turn. It's a harmless "7," off suit.
Opponent#1 places a fairly good size (medium) sized bet.
That was the first CLUE I missed. I call.
Oppenent #2 folds. Hoping for a 1 out of 4 chance on the river, I call.
Missed the draw on the river. Rats. I immediately react, I shove a big stack of chips in, without really looking at the board. MISTAKE #2. There MIGHT have been a straight out there, otherwise, 2 pairs is best I could have been PRETENDING to have.
Opponent #1 calls and wins with a set. Pocket 7's.
So let's list all my mistakes. One, I didn't wait until opponents were all showing weakness. Two, I didn't wait till there were scare cards on the table. Three, when it was down to one-on-one, my opponent showed STRENGTH, not weakness. Number four, it was a gut reaction instead of a carefully planned bluff. Five. It was probably obvious I was on a flush draw since there wasn't much else out there to be had. Six, I didn't put my opponent on a hand, not even a strong two pairs, which would have only tied the strong two pairs I was pretending to have.
All in all, it was a bad bluff. Fortunately I learned from it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
