but betting AK on A72 vs a set miner is not value, if he won't ever show up with AQ, and it's not a bluff since no one folds a flopped set. So what is it?

Yes. That's the idea of charging a draw: Charge so much that he can't continue profitably, forcing him to forfeit his pot equity.

If he's really a pure set miner who won't put in another cent without a set then I think the optimal lines are minbet-fold flop or cf three streets, depending on the pot size (cf for smaller pots, although I haven't determined the threshold yet). I know that this looks counterintuitive.

how isn't it a bluff? your hand has no value (given the assumptions you've made), and thus AK = nothing = a bluff = take the bet if it is +EV (assuming no other line would show more profit). you are thinking in absolute value terms ("omg, toppest pear AND toppest kicker!")...rather than thinking about what factors make a hand valuable

if you are judging the definition of a bluff as "get better hands to fold", then correct, this is neither...and thus a bet to clean up equity, fight for the pot, w/e rationale you use. if you are using the definition of a bluff as "a profitable bet made with a hand that isn't value"...then this is a classic bluff

Or, for the computer scientists:

yeah a good way to think of bluffing and collecting dead money

"Betting to get your villain to surrender their expected value"......

This. AK=38 here. VS a pure set miner (which don't actually exist, except for in math land, bet 1bb into the 9bb (or so) pot otf) - this forces the set miner to fold incorrectly when looking at pure pot equity

But if you min bet the flop here, he may call with JJ so it becomes a value bet too!!!!

Betting is a spectrum, with pure value and pure bluffing being the two poles of this continuous spectrum. Most bets (including to collect dead money) are actually just variations on semibluffing.

Pure bluff-----------------------------------Pure value

Everything in between is something between or a semibluff of sorts.

What determines profitability in these semibluffs (amongst other things) is fold equity (linked to bluffing) and equity when called (linked to value).

In the pure set miner case, we have low (virtually 0) equity when called and high fold equity - so essentially we are turning our hand into a bluff. (Btw pure set miners don't actually exist).

We seemed to have gotten off topic. I'm very interested in continuing but I can not, in good conscience, continue this discussion in this thread

EDIT: please continue the discussion here.

Do you know what I've just noticed? That there has yet to be cotws on the following:

Multiway play (otf, ott and otr)
Restealing
Overbetting

I would be willing to do multiway play as a 3 part series (or someone could share it with me i.e. I do one street as a cotw and then others do the streets as cotws)
I would also be able to do restealing (even though this has been pretty much covered to death in different forms)
Overbetting is something I could also do, but I'm certain that someone else would be more qualified to do it.

There we have it, 5 cotws for the new year!

I more than willing to do all, some or none of them.

good ideas. im sure i can take one of them...but well make some executive decisions after the new year

This is a thin value bet, IMO. You're doing it with the thought that you have a better hand than villain and is hoping he will call with worse. He might not do it, but that is the intent. I'm not saying this is the most +EV way to play, but when you are betting with the thought of your hand being better than the villain's, you are betting for value. It's just that the intent and outcome will rarely coincide.

OK, I did the math on the following scenario:

50NL, 100bb stacks ($50)


Hero is in MP with AKs,AKo opens to 1.75, villain is in BB with 22-TT and calls.

The flop comes A 9 3

Villain's strategy is to check/raise his sets and fold to any flop bet with less than a set (a common variant of a pure set mine).

I looked at 2 hero strategies:

1. hero bets some amount, and villain folds with less than a set
2. hero checks behind and folds to any bet on a later street (these always mean villain hit a set)

for #1, if hero bets the pot, then villain's check/raise sets strategy is worth $0.88. If hero bets $1.75 (slightly less than 1/2 the pot), villains EV for check/raising is $0.65. If hero bets 3/4 pot ($2.81) then villain's EV is $0.77.

for #2, villains EV is $0.77.

So, hero betting

• 1p loses money vs checking it down / folding to a bet (villain has a set).
• 3/4p give the same result as checking down
• making a small bet to fold the setminer is better EV than checking the hand down.

Naturally, if villain will call hero's flop bet when villain has TT, then hero's EV goes up and villain's down (assuming hero folds to future aggression and otherwise checks the hand down) because villain is putting in money way behind.

Sorry in interupt your discussion

A few of the articles are no longer there. One in particular that I really want to read is , "releasing your inner lag" Anyway there's an old link of it? Searching did nothing..... Great threads btw

i dont believe that one ever happened. but the COTW i wrote on LAG play should get you where you need to be

I bet if my check do not reach better action later streets(If my check never get 66 to bluff the turn).If not I dont' want give him catch his two outs.

its to collect the dead money IMO.

Hey guys, first of all thanks for all the hard work you put on this serie of articles.
I'm currently translating those articles for the french section of the forum. I wanted to let you know about this in order to avoid any problem. I do put a link to the original articles and acknowledge the author of the article. If you guys think i need to do something else to protect your work please let me know what you see appropriate. you can contact me by PM or through this thread. I'll start translating the second COTW but will only post it once i got a green light from your side.

You can find the first one here

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/88...-table-948744/

Great job again lads.

+1 to this. Just played my first sessions of Rush this weekend & would love to hear some strat talk on it.

I noticed a COTW on overbetting was never made. Would really be interested in reading something on it.

i'll just go ahead and post the second one i've finished. i'll take it down or add anything you judge necessary.

so long as links are in the OP and credit is given to the author(s), i don't there are any problems =)

We need to sort this out for the new year

We had an interesting discussion in a thread regarding donking out with air or weak pairs in limped pots from the blinds. I checked my HEM stats for the thread and got some surprisingly good results doing this. I would be willing to whip this up as a COTW.

(Wish i could find the thread now)

COTW - What is (and What is NOT) Dead Money

Sweet! I'm available by PM if any of the author want to contact me in any case.

C'est une idée excellente