So I Ran This Huge Bluff By Accident

[antistuff 0]

I misread the board or i would never have done this. Because I'm too tired to be playing poker i thought i had a low on the turn so I did this. But i thought I'd post it anyway. I ended up taking such a strange line. Is it believable that I have something that he should be folding to on that river?Button is laggy but before this hand went down I did feel like he would fold for enough money if it seemed like he was beat. Full Tilt PokerPot Limit Omaha Hi/Lo Ring gameBlinds: $0.50/$18 playersConverterStack sizes:UTG: $100UTG+1: $21.15MP1: $67.90MP2: $109.40Hero: $88.65Button: $133.65SB: $265.70BB: $110.40Pre-flop: (8 players) Hero is CO with 8 2 3 A 4 folds, Hero raises to $3.5, Button calls, SB folds, BB calls.Flop: 5 Q J ($11, 3 players)BB checks, Hero checks, Button bets $5.5, BB calls, Hero calls.Turn: 4 ($27.5, 3 players)BB checks, Hero checks, Button bets $21, BB folds, Hero calls.River: 4 ($69.5, 2 players)Hero is all-in $58.65, Button folds.Uncalled bets: $58.65 returned to Hero. Results:Final pot: $69.5

[dingas 0]

I actually quite like this play. Your line is believable as a passively played set (calling on the flop with the idea of betting any blank turn). Plus, he doesn't necessarily have much of a hand at all here, so you push him off all of his 1-pair and A-high hands that happen to beat you. No idea if it will work often enough, but an interesting play.

[waylander11 0]

"I actually quite like this play. Your line is believable as a passively played set (calling on the flop with the idea of betting any blank turn). Plus, he doesn't necessarily have much of a hand at all here, so you push him off all of his 1-pair and A-high hands that happen to beat you. No idea if it will work often enough, but an interesting play."I really don't think he has only a pair with ace high after his turn bet, why would he do that with 3 diamonds out there, i think he played it like a flush. Why do you think he doesn't have a strong hand when he bets 4/5 pot into two people after 2 diamonds come on the flop?As for your play, I think most people are going to raise with a set on that flop, especially after villain bets out. I think villain has a flush on the turn most of the time and when you called the flop and then checked the turn with no low out there he can't really put you on anything except maybe a small flush or the A high flush. After he bets big on turn and you don't raise him i don't know what he can put you on except a baby flush or maybe a loosely played 2 pair. I think your bet on the river is going to get called by flush a lot because i can't believe you have a set when you don't reraise on the flop. If the river wasn't a 4 than he might be able to put you on a boat unless he put you on 45, which i guess i somewhat reasonable. Either way i don't think its a good bluff if you really think it through. I think you get called by a flush higher than a 9.

[Cappy37 0]

As for your play, I think most people are going to raise with a set on that flop, especially after villain bets out. I think villain has a flush on the turn most of the time and when you called the flop and then checked the turn with no low out there he can't really put you on anything except maybe a small flush or the A high flush. After he bets big on turn and you don't raise him i don't know what he can put you on except a baby flush or maybe a loosely played 2 pair. I think your bet on the river is going to get called by flush a lot because i can't believe you have a set when you don't reraise on the flop. If the river wasn't a 4 than he might be able to put you on a boat unless he put you on 45, which i guess i somewhat reasonable. Either way i don't think its a good bluff if you really think it through. I think you get called by a flush higher than a 9.

crap, someone beat me to it. Well put. The river screams full house, you didn't rep 2 pair or a set, so umm.... you pushed the other wheel draw out of the pot by shoving the river. roughly 30-40% of our "bluffs" are made with the best (or in this case "equally crappy") hand, this may be one of those cases. I'm more interested in Villain's line. what is he betting into heavy traffic on that turn that can fold to a bet on the river? That's the part that's going to keep me up at night.

[rvrchsrhtr 0]

I guess villain had Ad2x

[antistuff 0]

I guess villain had Ad2x

you saying what i think you're saying? lol.i was just going to post a whole thing about how crazy this laggy son of a bitch having position on me drove me.

[dingas 0]

crap, someone beat me to it. Well put. The river screams full house, you didn't rep 2 pair or a set, so umm.... you pushed the other wheel draw out of the pot by shoving the river. roughly 30-40% of our "bluffs" are made with the best (or in this case "equally crappy") hand, this may be one of those cases. I'm more interested in Villain's line. what is he betting into heavy traffic on that turn that can fold to a bet on the river? That's the part that's going to keep me up at night.

The strange thing about this hand is that it's so hard to put hero on any hand that makes sense that villain is liable just to conclude that it must be a strangely played set or a random back-door full-house/quads with a hand like A34Q or AA44 or whatever. I mean, how can you even put the hero on a bluff here? I don't think anyone is crazy enough to check-call down with hoping that the board pairs so he can bluff. So there is almost no conceivable hand that hero would call the flop and turn with that he would decide to turn into a bluff on this river (aside from a misread hand, lol). If I were in villain's shoes here, and I had a flush, I would be totally confused. Usually in such situations I will just bite the bullet and call, but I can see myself deciding to fold here. I think if you make this bluff, you get called by a flush a lot of the time, and obviously by all full houses, but between the times villain folds his flushes and the times that he has weaker hands (and folds), maybe this play is +EV.An interesting question is whether you could achieve the same thing with a smaller river bet, say $30, making it look like a fullhouse trying to get paid off (even though if you really had a full-house, you would obviously move all-in to make it look like a bluff...)

[Cappy37 0]

The strange thing about this hand is that it's so hard to put hero on any hand that makes sense that villain is liable just to conclude that it must be a strangely played set or a random back-door full-house/quads with a hand like A34Q or AA44 or whatever. I mean, how can you even put the hero on a bluff here? I don't think anyone is crazy enough to check-call down with hoping that the board pairs so he can bluff. So there is almost no conceivable hand that hero would call the flop and turn with that he would decide to turn into a bluff on this river (aside from a misread hand, lol). If I were in villain's shoes here, and I had a flush, I would be totally confused. Usually in such situations I will just bite the bullet and call, but I can see myself deciding to fold here. I think if you make this bluff, you get called by a flush a lot of the time, and obviously by all full houses, but between the times villain folds his flushes and the times that he has weaker hands (and folds), maybe this play is +EV.An interesting question is whether you could achieve the same thing with a smaller river bet, say $30, making it look like a fullhouse trying to get paid off (even though if you really had a full-house, you would obviously move all-in to make it look like a bluff...)

I do like your reasoning, and you put it quite eloquently. But this is .50/1, so the flush calls here roughly 98.6% of the time. We are all guilty of the same thing at times: we don't believe our opponent is bluffing nearly as often as s/he is. Put this hand in the challenge thread, and see how many vote that you made villain lay down a flush here at .50/1. If you get 20% to agree, I'd be shocked. This is far more likely to be a wheel draw or 2-pair than even a Q-hi flush.There is no way this play is +EV.

[antistuff 0]

There is no way this play is +EV.

lets switch up the hand a little bit though. lets say the flop gets checked through. i check/call the turn to a pot size bet from the button that the BB folded to. blasting that river for the pot against this opponent might be good. especially if it puts me all in. actually i think against a lot of opponents that would be good.

[Cappy37 0]

lets switch up the hand a little bit though. lets say the flop gets checked through. i check/call the turn to a pot size bet from the button that the BB folded to. blasting that river for the pot against this opponent might be good. especially if it puts me all in. actually i think against a lot of opponents that would be good.

ok... We're risking $33 to win $33 in that instance, with your new line... That river pot sized bet doesn't push out any flush or boat, it only pushes out a busted draw (i.e. a bluff or a semi-bluff). You also are betting the river in the position that you can't call a raise anyways.Point being, it's just Fancy Play Syndrome. It may work, but not because your a mad genius, it works because your opponent (gasp!) doesn't have a hand that can call a pot-sized bet. You aren't making a +EV play, you are risking the maximum to win the minimum, and only if the villain doesn't have a flush or boat anyways. Hell, even AAxx might look this up, with the nut two-pair. God help you if he's got 4xxx in his range, too.The problem is your line, in both instances: betting tells a story. No one with a set checks that flop. Period. Not at .50/1. No one with a set calls a bet on the flop, they raise 90% of the time, especially with no low possible. Yeah, you can call and then push to a brick on the turn, but a brick didn't come on the turn. Factor in the second low card on the turn, and your opponent is going to have a hard time giving you credit for a high hand AND a low draw, since it would take all 4 of your cards working for you in the event of a set, or you better pray he doesn't have the ace of diamonds to wonder what the hell you are betting with.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^I lay that out on the line to illustrate this point: your rebuttal could easily be "But Cappy, .50/1 players aren't likely to think about "4 cards working together" or "my line in relation to my potential holdings" and so on. And I'll say "Exactly! You are confusing donkeys. And what do donkeys do when they are confused? They call."You risked the max and managed to push out the weakest of holdings by making a silly play. I'd love to give you a gold star for your effort, but I really can't.If you still don't believe me, please post this in the challenge thread, they'll give you some good feedback. Hell, I could be totally wrong here. But you confused *me* by changing up that line, and if you are confusing me, god help you with your typical .50/1 O8B'er. I'd love to see another 5 or 10 people chime in on this hand, and it's not likely to happen in this section of the forums.And I hope this doesn't come across as mean or angry or anything along those lines, I just feel kinda strongly about this

[antistuff 0]

ok... We're risking $33 to win $33 in that instance, with your new line... That river pot sized bet doesn't push out any flush or boat, it only pushes out a busted draw (i.e. a bluff or a semi-bluff). You also are betting the river in the position that you can't call a raise anyways.Point being, it's just Fancy Play Syndrome. It may work, but not because your a mad genius, it works because your opponent (gasp!) doesn't have a hand that can call a pot-sized bet. You aren't making a +EV play, you are risking the maximum to win the minimum, and only if the villain doesn't have a flush or boat anyways. Hell, even AAxx might look this up, with the nut two-pair. God help you if he's got 4xxx in his range, too.The problem is your line, in both instances: betting tells a story. No one with a set checks that flop. Period. Not at .50/1. No one with a set calls a bet on the flop, they raise 90% of the time, especially with no low possible. Yeah, you can call and then push to a brick on the turn, but a brick didn't come on the turn. Factor in the second low card on the turn, and your opponent is going to have a hard time giving you credit for a high hand AND a low draw, since it would take all 4 of your cards working for you in the event of a set, or you better pray he doesn't have the ace of diamonds to wonder what the hell you are betting with.

if the flop got checked he bets that turn with a hand that can't call a bet on that river way more than the 50% of the time you need to be profitable. in fact, against some players you can almost bet the river blind in that spot because if a flop gets checked and then the turn gets checked to them on the button they are betting any four cards. edit: in a raised pot when the raiser has checked both streets like this it becomes even more true.

I lay that out on the line to illustrate this point: your rebuttal could easily be "But Cappy, .50/1 players aren't likely to think about "4 cards working together" or "my line in relation to my potential holdings" and so on. And I'll say "Exactly! You are confusing donkeys. And what do donkeys do when they are confused? They call."

they can be confused all day. they can even strongly suspect what im up to. i still say in my adjusted scenario betting the river is usually right. i posted this hand even though it was a dumb mistake i made (i misread the board) because i hate when people lead the river at me from oop when i've been the aggressor. im trying to figure out exactly why so i can protect myself against and learn to use it against others.

And I hope this doesn't come across as mean or angry or anything along those lines, I just feel kinda strongly about this wink.gif

hell no. please, keep discussing if you have something further to add.

[Rocketwadster 0]

While I agree that the nut-flush would call here (and perhaps the second nut-flush), the other flushes won't be automatcially calling IMO (this isn't $0.05/0.10), depending on your image at the table. So if you tried this play "on purpose", it would have a higher chance of working against the non-nut flushes than some other people are posting above. Im personally wouldn't be trying this at all however, as my table image is always completely shot, regardless of whether I just sat down or have been playing for hours...lol

[Cappy37 0]

they can be confused all day. they can even strongly suspect what im up to. i still say in my adjusted scenario betting the river is usually right.

aww crap.. I didn't even think of this until you just said that, but (once again) you are right, and for the wrong reason: This play is largely -EV, but I think you can actually root to get called here, because showing down xxxA8 high is going to get you paid tenfold down the line if they are paying attention. The kicker, of course, is they need to hang around in the game long enough and pay attention for this to work, but it's relatively cheap advertising. getting raised and having to fold the river would also likely accomplish this feat, albeit to a lesser degree.

i posted this hand even though it was a dumb mistake i made (i misread the board) because i hate when people lead the river at me from oop when i've been the aggressor. im trying to figure out exactly why so i can protect myself against and learn to use it against others.

Just like in all forms of poker, it pays to be the aggressor in the right spots. The only time aggression really comes back to bite you is in fixed-limit mixed games, where you can let the pot get so out of control big needlessly (thx dark tunnel!) that you force your opponent to call with any-two/any seven/any four and suddenly *have* to show down the hand.I'm sure you've probably guessed right now that I'm a pretty straight-forward player once I've advertised sufficiently

[dingas 0]

When the flop gets checked around, I really don't like calling the turn and bluffing the 4 on the river. This bluff is just too obvious to be good, and I think you get called by any pair if villain is half-way decent. A more realistic bluffing line would be to make a pot-sized turn check-raise.

[navybuttons 15]

The only time aggression really comes back to bite you is in fixed-limit mixed games, where you can let the pot get so out of control big needlessly (thx dark tunnel!) that you force your opponent to call with any-two/any seven/any four and suddenly *have* to show down the hand.

your a little off here IMO. TD is a perfect example of how after you get looked up light, in the right spots you can value bet so beautifully its like poetry. you just have to be aware.if i was villain, QJ has the same amount of value as any flush (including the A high one) and i'd call you super light here. i don't like the bluff. flop overcall is spew.

[Cappy37 0]

your a little off here IMO. TD is a perfect example of how after you get looked up light, in the right spots you can value bet so beautifully its like poetry. you just have to be aware.if i was villain, QJ has the same amount of value as any flush (including the A high one) and i'd call you super light here. i don't like the bluff. flop overcall is spew.

I like how you took the only snippet of my 5 posts in this thread where I am not downright hating on the "move" made in the hand and decided to scold me ;)obv. I agree with what you and checky are saying for the "long run".

I'm more interested in Villain's line. what is he betting into heavy traffic on that turn that can fold to a bet on the river? That's the part that's going to keep me up at night.

^^^^^ my first response.

[navybuttons 15]

I like how you took the only snippet of my 5 posts in this thread where I am not downright hating on the "move" made in the hand and decided to scold me

scold? huh.

[Cappy37 0]

scold? huh.

I dunno, I'm still confused at my stance vs. his stane vs. your stance vs. checkys stance.I can't believe anyone thinks shoving that river is a winning play based on the preceding action leading up to the river. I understand the logic of advertising to get paid off later, but this is an awfully expensive advertise.

[checkymcfold 0]

don't know why i missed this hand.this bluff is a good one in a HU spot, but kinda a whoopsie in a pot that started out 3way, since you're much more likely to run into the sort of hand you're trying to represent. it'd probably work most of the time against an average thinking player, but not very many others. a better-than-average thinking player would know more about how you would play a set in this spot, too. if you do this with a set on a one-low, draw heavy board, then it would probably work on him, too.not sure why you overcalled the flop--is this the point at which you misread the board?

[antistuff 0]

don't know why i missed this hand.this bluff is a good one in a HU spot, but kinda a whoopsie in a pot that started out 3way, since you're much more likely to run into the sort of hand you're trying to represent. it'd probably work most of the time against an average thinking player, but not very many others. a better-than-average thinking player would know more about how you would play a set in this spot, too. if you do this with a set on a one-low, draw heavy board, then it would probably work on him, too.not sure why you overcalled the flop--is this the point at which you misread the board?

yea.when i modified this a little bit and said lets pretend the flop when check check check and the turn went check check bet fold call. i'm saying against a villain who is even moderately aggressive leading out most rivers is a pretty solid play since he will pot the turn in that situation with any four cards. is my thinking off here?and in a similar vein something that i've been thinking about doing lately is when i limp and somebody raises and the flop gets checked through and the turn card is something that is unlikey to help the kind of hand he would raise preflop. if i check to him on the turn he will bet almost all the time, i think i should be check raising here very lightly, along with an occasional monster against a regular. im posting this from my hotel room in new orleans, a block from bourbon street. im gonna go out and get some good food and get trashed now (obvious brag).

[navybuttons 15]

when i modified this a little bit and said lets pretend the flop when check check check and the turn went check check bet fold call. i'm saying against a villain who is even moderately aggressive leading out most rivers is a pretty solid play since he will pot the turn in that situation with any four cards. is my thinking off here?

the problem is that you can't successfully represent anything here. i would demoralize you with how light i would call you here.