Originally Posted by Pokie
The 50% and 75% values were arbitrary that I just inserted in there to make my post read better, I wasn't doing it to put words in your mouth, the key thing is that you mentioned that we should bet more for value than as a bluff, whether this is 50%/75% or 44%/66% or 62%/68%.
This is so ridiculous. Anytime you now post all I hear is the Antoine Dodson song (the chorus specifically, since I know you'll probably be like "what? I don't get it") going off the background.
Reread the first post, I never said you should bet more for value than as a bluff. I just said "why do you only bet 50% for value in 3-bet pots?"
Then you replied about how 50% was fine when you were betting for value and then I replied how sometimes the board can rrun out bad before you get stacks in, in a 3bet pot. Then you brought up out of nowhere that I said you should bet 50% for bluffs and 75% for value, outrageously different numbers, that yes, would be highly exploitative.
So you're wrong about any notion that I said you should bet more values than bluffs (until my last post which was in response to you).
ADDITIONALLY- betting around 2/3rds pot whether your bluffing or not is not nearly as exploitative as betting 50% when bluffing and 75% when for value. Are you kidding me pokie? Obviously that's a huge difference, if you're betting 50% more when you're betting for value than bluffing. I just siad I bet around 2/3rds regardless, although it is slightly less when bluffing and slightly more when for value. THat's going to be pretty hard to notice unless you're willing to do the math on the spot. Given that most regs are multitabling, they can't, and the bet size looks pretty much identical. The difference between 62% and 68% is pretty hard to notice, and you implying that this is the same as the differnece between 50% and 75% is so unbelievable.
So once again nice try.