I posted in a different thread but looking for some input…

2/3

V - TAGGy Older Asian guy. Usually comes in for a raise when he plays and c-bets nearly 100% of the time. ~$500.

H - Probably tight image but not overly aggressive because have been very card dead and haven't played many hands. ~$350.

V raises in MP to $15, Hero calls on the button w 87. Loose call I know but he's been raising pretty often so he's either opening light or getting a lot of good cards. I have position and decide to call.

Flop ~ $30. Jxx. V c-bets $20, H raises to $50 and V folds.

So, sounds ******ed but this was not a typical play for me and this hand is lead me to some thinking. If a PFR has 2 unpaired cards, he's going to miss the flop 2/3 times. If he has a pair, an overcard is going to come the majority of the time. So...

It made me wonder if I've been playing too fit or fold and if I'm missing out on more opportunities to make plays to win pots in position without showdown. Basically, bluff more in position. I almost never bluff w air, it's usually a c-bet or semi-bluff, and very occasionally float a raiser to see if he gives up on the turn. That HAS to be a leak, right?

I've had several sessions where I'm totally card dead and I was wondering if adding more of these types of plays in position will be profitable and if so, what are our guidelines? Obviously, better to bluff less players (HU). Obviously not bluffing someone that never folds so we have to target middle of the road to better players. Look for spots w any playable hand in the BTN or HJ?

So basically, do we need to "make moves" or add bluffs w air to be less predictable? I'd also lean towards showing my bluffs for deception because bluffing is rare and I'd like my opponents to THINK I'm bluffing a lot more than I really am.

We've all gone through periods where we're card dead and we start to think maybe we should add some trickier plays or bluffs to our arsenal. Unfortunately when we're card dead, our opponents will play better against us and call us down more often. Basically, our image is weaker. In my experience, this has definitely cost me some money and usually the beginning of some downswing.

In LLNLH, players are generally bad because they don't know when to fold....essentially they call too often. These type of players are the wrong ones to try and bluff off hands. Lag players I don't think are the best marks for exercising this type of play. Simply practice patience, wait to hit a hand, and value bet to death.

Once you find the players that are capable of folding, it's important to read situations correctly where your play makes sense. You want to make sure that the story your trying to tell doesn't only make sense to you....but more importantly MAKES SENSE TO THE VILLAIN.

In general though, the best strategy at LLNLH is a solid ABC game. Might not be as fun, but in my belief, is the most profitable.

Oh yeah, NEVER show your hand. Just keep them guessing for the rest of their lives....you can add to your deception simply with table talk.

Oh yeah...the hand above...I hate it....it's simply spew. "Never leave yourself without any outs....in poker and in life."

If villain is loose preflop and c-betting every time when heads up but isn't sticky, then bluff raising occasionally is right. Few low stakes villains fit that profile. Most of the LAGs who are raising wide preflop and c-betting all the time are too sticky to be raising without some equity in the hand.

So you want to take one example where a poorly thought out play worked and apply it to a style of play in LLSNL?

Just play 95% value oriented at 1/2, bet a bit thinner than everyone else at the table, etc. and profit.

Semi-bluffing is fine....cold bluff on flop is spew in LLNLH and without much better reads on villains....

If this guy is that LAG he's gonna get callers and not leave u with spots to do this. Additionally I feel like it's just trying too hard to win when u r card dead and puts u in bad spots cuz I think he is gonna be stubborn and call more than u think. I might take this line with him with A10 type hands as u probably have the best hand a lot and if he calls u still have outs to hit in later streets. Being card dead sucks and I've been in ur exact spot and thinking but found that against these types of players it's better to just play straight forward. They just aren't aware enough to notice ur doing so.

It's ONE example because it's the only hand I played that wasn't ABC/straight forward. I had position/the button on one player and made a play one hand for 20BB. Not saying it was a great play or anything, just made me consider whether it's something I should look for good spots to do more often. Not looking to reinvent my game or anything.

I definitely agree on betting thinner. I'm getting much better at this since I've been reading here.

Thanks for taking the time to give advice. As I said, 99% of the time the only bluffing I do is c-bets or semi-bluffs and this play was rare and that's why I thought about it so much.

No worries....I think you'll find in the long run, you'll be more profitable if you just completely take it out of your bag of tricks. C-bets and semi-bluffs are enough...a lot of times in poker, saving money is making money. We just have to cope with being card dead as part of the game.

In theory you have to bluff to win at poker.

In real life, you have to consider who you are up against. You have to bluff to win against tight players. You cannot win by bluffing calling stations.

Given that most of your money at 1/2 comes from calling stations, indiscriminate bluffing tends to lose money.

In this hand you have a villain who is too lose and aggressive pre, positionally unaware, and too tight post flop (flop-or-drop). You can make a ton of money off people like this but you have to pick your spots.

Next step for you is to work on your hand reading skills. You're on the path of righteousness. Baby steps.

You don't *need* to bluff at a $1/2 table to win. Most villains call too often with weak ranges and when they're clearly crushed, so just value bet them to death.

But adding in a few bluffs in the right places can greatly increase your win-rate. The problem is that many players pick the wrong spots for these bluffs and simply spew off to calling stations or suspicious donkeys (or they try to bluff a strong player with a line that doesn't make any sense). Then it doesn't take many bad plays to destroy their WR.

The spot in OP isn't really a very good one. Repping a J or other PP only works if V is smart enough to think that the J high board hit our calling range, but also not thing "why would he bet me out when he has the best hand?". There are better spots.


Either way, I don't show hands. At all. Ever. Let them wonder what you have. They'll usually guess too, which gives you some insight into how they view you and how they think about the game.
(Although I will fastroll at showdown sometimes when I think I'm good.)

Agree 1000% this is V-dependent. I'm not dumb enough to bluff a calling station, ever. The V is pretty tight and raises big cards (AT+, KQ, all PP) and c-bets nearly 100% of the time. He will fold to a raise on the flop any time he misses his big cards or overcards come to his PP. He's not thinking about OUR range; he's thinking he either missed and has nothing or there's an overcard to his pair so it's just so likely he's beaten if his opponent is raising.

In my opinion, even the better V's I'm playing don't put me on ranges, they just play their cards and don't start worrying about what we have until they get raised. I'm about 100% the V never considered what my calling range was, just that I raised and he missed or there was an overcard, so he folded. We all obviously study and think about things to try to get better but I think it's a mistake to give most of our V's credit for thinking like we do.

So let's say I have a medium pair instead of unpaired cards in the same hand (J high flop). Am I still bluffing if I raise flop? Should I just fold to the c-bet w an overcard OTF or call and keep guessing? What if another overcard comes? If I raise and he calls, I'm obviously done w the hand without some major improvement.

There miiiiiight be a few opponents that I play that will wonder why I don't "want to keep worse hands in", but they are not many that use that line of thinking, IMO.

If he'll blindly fold PP under the JJ, and whiffed AK/AQ here then we're not too bad off bluffing him. Most of the V's I play with won't, not for only another $30 at least. It would take a little larger bet to get them out.

I'm not saying that we should give V's credit for thinking like we do, far FAR from it. But a lot of them do start thinking about what they're up against. Sometimes it's "he raised, he must haz AK!", other times it's "that board is bad for me" as an implicit "that hit him". The trick is to figure out what they *are* thinking.

I look out for the ones that say "why so much?" when someone bets. They are the ones that'll make light calls when they smell bull****.

.........

Say your have 99 on that board ... raising fold out all of the hands that you beat. It gets calls from all the hands you beat. Neither of these are good things. It's not really a bluff, and not really a value bet.

I'd probably flat the flop.

Then we need to evaluate the turn. Is he the type to keep firing with an overpair here? We don't want to call three streets and get shown QQ. What about AK? Will he c-bet again if a 6 falls? What kinds of hands will he check blank turns with?

If he's the type to shut down with a whiffed AK type hand, then we can flat, check the turn, and fire a safe river if he has a tendency to pay off, or bet the turn ourselves and charge him to catch up. Provided that the turn is a low card.

In that case we can fold pretty easily to any turn bet, especially if an AKQ falls and he fires.
I'd consider betting myself on an A turn if he checks though ... mostly if we think we can fold out KK/QQ.


BUT, If he's betting whiffed hands or lower PP again we can call him down, and may be crushed some times when he shows up huge.

I think that flatting and seeing another card with 99 in that spot gives us just as much information about where we're at as raising, gets us just as much value from hands we currently beat, and saves us $30 when we're beat on the flop (with the small added possibility of hitting our set and stacking him OTT).

Grunch. So tables are so loose that it doesn't matter how tight you play, they will pay off three streets. However, in general, yes never bluffing is a leak. Money saved is the same as money earned in the long run. So give you give up an +ev marginal bluffing spot because you are afraid of high variance and getting called, yes you are throwing away money.
Check out fpppro.com for a fold equity calculator. It should open your eyes. Here's a simplified example. You're heads up in position with air. Villain checks to you. If you Cbet bluff 1/2 pot, you only need to win 33% of the time to breakeven (not taking into account into equity you have). If you expect your bet to win 34% of the time, checking to avoid marginal spots is giving up money. Yes your bet will get called more often than not but its +ev in the long run because of risk:reward ratio and pot odds

Bluffing also gives you a looser image and can get you paid in big pots. If your bluffs work the vast majority of the time, unless you're up against a bunch of nits, you are not bluffing nearly often enough. You're supposed to get called a decent amount of the time if you are bluffing often enough for reasons mentioned above in my first post. Playing tight also gives your bluffs more credit. Don't show your bluffs. It's hard to make a hand in Holdem which is a big reason why bluffing is key to maximizing winrate

Op is from a 2/3 game and there are responses about just sticking to fat value at 1/2 perhaps these are relevant I dunno.

My room spreads 1/2, 1/3 and 2/5.

There is a perceptible difference in the play at each these stakes. But at all of them there is value in bluffing the right players in the right spots.

The targets at 1/2 for bluffing are primarily the better players. These are the guys opening a bit wider and capable of bet folding.

The 100% cbettors are prime candidates to float.

But incorporating some bluffs into your game requires paying close attention to player tendencies. Random bluffs at stakes where the average player calls too much will not be profitable.

If we can range our villains fairly well we can find spots to draw to straights on 2 flush boards and rep flushes when they come in. Even bad players frequently can fold one pair when the flush comes in. This gives our straight draws 7 more effective outs.

Can we do this all the time? Of course not. But there is additional profit to be made if we observe our villains and think outside of the box labeled "fat value".

Having said all that I'm not sure id call not bluffing a leak though. And bluffing too much or in the wrong spots is a leak.

For your hand: I'd 3bet or fold pre. If you think he folds a lot pre or is fit or fold post flop then sometimes 3bet bluff. Flatting puts you on the defensive, lets other people in for cheap, and gives villain a chance to hit flop. As played call flop to float and steal on turn if he checks and to fold if he bets turn. Raising risks too much unnessarily

I agree with this (and most responders here); bluffing too rarely is not much of a "leak" at these stakes. I don't know the optimal bluffing ratio at $1-2, but I would estimate that the average semi-decent LLSNLer does it 2x-3x as much as he should.

In general, I think these kinds of players pay way too much attention to picking the right spots to bluff, and way too little to picking the right opponents to bluff.

There was a HH posted here in the past couple of days where, in a prior hand, our V limped in with QQ, flatted Hero's button raise, then check-folded an A-high flop ... and yet in the hand in question, most respondents advocated giving up on the river with 9-high rather than bluff at an $82 pot. Are you kidding? If you told me before I sat down that I was only allowed to bluff one time all night ... that's exactly the kind of villain I'm running it against. My cards and the board are totally secondary; he's looking for an excuse to fold, so let's give him one.

Instead, at least once an hour in real life, I see a wannabe TAG spew off $50 or $100 against a station because "OMG, the board paired on the turn, I can represent trips" or "OMG, the turn checked through and the river brought in the flush, I can represent teh nutz!" ... without ever stopping to think that it doesn't matter what they're "representing". Stations call ... because that's what they do.

The other thing I keep needing to remind myself about bluffing is that against a semi-mindful opponent, it doesn't matter that the story I tell with my bluff would make sense to me. What matters is that it makes sense to him.

One example that comes to mind: if you've led out or raised the flop, there's absolutely no point in a bluff that represents a flopped set / straight / flush, even if your action on every other street is perfectly congruent with one. You'll get called down 80-90% of the time, because "everyone slowplays big hands on the flop".

In general I don't show, but I don't believe it's as black and white as this. In fact, the rare times I show voluntarily, it's almost always a bluff (because most of my overall EV will come from value bets), and preferably one as big as possible. If I raised 75s from the button, made a big semi-bluff raise on the turn, tried to steal the pot OTR and got called down? Heck, yeah, I want to advertise that. I want them to still be talking about it an hour from now - in fact it's not uncommon for my opponents to even give a free heads-up to someone who just sat down. "Hey, keep an eye on that guy, he bet three streets with 7-high!" Why, thank you very much for that free ad time, sir, and I welcome you both aboard the 8:30 train to Valuetown.

It is one of the smaller leaks people can have. The problem most LLSNL players have is they bluff too much which creates a huge leak.

I feel like I must be missing something here. The common wisdom here is that villain won't fold to this flop raise with AK/AQ/lower pocket pairs/etc. I assume that he's not going to showdown with those hands, so doesn't that just mean we have a super profitable two barrel bluff here?

Like, normally the problem with a two street bluff is that after our flop bluff, villains range is skewed towards value hands that are getting to showdown. If he calls with his entire, relatively weak, flop cbetting range, then we should be raising flop and betting the turn liberally.

People who cbet 100% of the time are the perfect people to do this against, Jxx boards are decent boards to do it on, and if you're going to be flatting 89 preflop you need to be doing this (or floating). But I'd fold preflop, or 3bet.

So, I'm glad I got some opinions for both sides. I think, at least in theory, never bluffing HAS to be a leak. I do play 2/3, not 1/2 so not sure how much of a difference that is. I do intend to move up to 2/5 or 5/10 when I've built up sufficient buyins from my winnings at 2/3 so I'd imagine it'll be a good tool when I get to that level.

I play in a smaller room (3 tables) so there are lots of regs (not grinders, just same, smallish player pool) so I think that adds a bit to my need to mix it up a little bit.

I do understand trying to "out maneuver" opponents could easily get out of hand if you use your ego instead of really understanding your opponents and the spots you're are attempting to do this or try it too frequently. I will continue to work on my hand reading to make sure I'm picking the best spots vs. the right players.

I think I would prefer to show my rare bluffs to maximize value on my big hands. I realize I'm giving away free information but I'm giving away misinformation. I've had several hands recently that I should have gotten paid off/stacked my opponents but didn't and I think it's reasonable to say that if I had showed even one small bluff it would have put enough doubt in my opponents heads to call in both spots.

Thanks for all the thoughts and input so far.

If you have a tight image, you can make do with what ya get. If you have a loose image, you need cards at some point.

Sucks to show down a big, unsuccessful bluff and then go card-dead for the next hour. Which is what usually happens, because you just don't get good cards all that often in this game.

From experience big crazy bluffs are rarely worth it. Im all for firing cbets and even second barrell, but I like what one of the posters wrote, be value orientated 95 percent of the time.