You don't give any reads on SB. I'll assume he's an unknown. If so, I'm folding 5s6s, 67 (other than diamonds) 66 and 44 to his donk. Probably raising all the overpairs and AdKd but sometimes would flat JJ. flatting a lot of the flush draws that don't have two overs. Flatting two overs some as well, esp without the Ad. If I don't have the Ad more likely V has a flush draw and I'm still ahead. Could be convinced I should fold two overs without a draw though.

Main difference between my range and yours is that I'm less aggressive with draws that aren't combo draws and more aggressive with made hands that can beat top pair. I also clearly care less about back door equity than you do but am more interested in drawing to top pair.

On turn, once a guy who is tight post flop calls I'm almost never bluffing turn without equity. I'm pretty much only bluffing flush draws. I don't like bluffing turns multiway without some outs, especially if I just called the flop.

SB is fairly loose preflop, and don't have much on him postflop, though he has folded top pair decent kicker after bet/calling flop and facing a huge turn bet from a tight player.

The issue with your range is that when you raise flop, your range is too strong and villain can exploit you by folding 10-X. Also, it could easily be -EV to get all in with even pocket aces, since the stacks are pretty deep. Do you plan to raise say QQ on the flop and bet/call turn, or bet turn and call if he shoves river?

With my range, the value hands I raise flop can easily stack off with +EV, and with the weak draws, it allows me to keep a bluffing range on later streets, where's your range has few to no bluffs on the turn and river.

I agree about not bluffing turn when we have no equity, but there aren't enough hands that fit that category which is why I had to add 66 to my range. This might indicate my range might need some improvement, since you're right we want to have probably at least a 4 out draw when bluffing turn.

Having a bluff range for the sake of it is a horrible way of playing poker.

You do not have to have bluffing range in every spot.

We have a bluff range in spots where it is higher EV to bluff than to check/fold or fold. EV of a bluff depends on how often the opponent folds, and is +EV when they fold more often than:

1-(Size of bluff)/(size of bluff + size of pot before bluff)

Percent of the time.

That means we bluff half pot on the river if we estimate they fold more than 66% of the time. If they don't and call too often, we don't bluff which is what I already said...

Also, if we bluff at the right frequency, it's impossible to lose long term.

How does V know how strong my range is? This isn't online, he doesn't have thousands of hands on me. Moreover, the leak most players have is calling too much and bluffing too little. Until proven otherwise I assume that all players fall into this leak. So I play exploitatively by betting strong hands and not bluffing much other than on dynamic boards or standard c-bets (and I've even cut back on my c-betting with air). May not always be true that someone calls too much, but much more likely than assuming that all players are leak-free, playing perfectly balanced or able to range based on the very short history he has on me.

Most players are loose-passive, some are maniacs and some are nits. Very few are balanced.

Exactly. Saying not to play hands in early streets for the principal purpose of having a bluffing range on later streets is different than saying never bluff.

You cannot be serious with this.

You may not lose but you'll sacrifice EV.

If everyone is playing a GTO strategy, it's also impossible for anyone to win long term. We win at poker because our opponents make mistakes, in general, calling too much. We exploit that by bluffing less and value betting more. Yeah, if you don't have a bluffing range in a particular spot, your opponent can exploit that by folding everything that's not ahead of your value range. But almost no opponents at LLSNL are going to be aware enough to realize that and exploit it.

Certainly, but now you're just moving goalposts.

Clearly, but still doesn't mean you need to have a bluff range in every spot.

Great, another attempt at GTO argument.

GTO is not the most profitable way of playing poker.

If your opponents are never folding, why would you ever bluff?

If your opponents are never calling, why would you stop betting?

At end of the day, you think you are playing a level above your opponents, but in reality, you are playing a level below because you skipped a level when you do not account for your opponents' tendencies.

No...we take the line with the highest EV every single time...

Also, typo in my last post. If the opponent folds river more than 33%, not 66%, then we want to bluff half pot with any two cards (i.e. 100% of the time), on the river.

And for streets before the river, they don't even half to fold as much as 33% to profitably bet any two cards if those any two cards aren't drawing dead when he calls.

Also, I'd be surprised if you even know what EV means...I've never seen you post EV calcs in threads. You didn't even notice that I made a typo of 66% rather than 33%, indicating you don't know.

Hmm, too strong was the wrong term to use because in some ways its too weak. After all, I'm just flatting with AA on the flop while you raise it. A better term would be "induces the opponent to make perfect decisions against you", even IF he is a fish and has no idea what your range is.

raise the flop.

Bigger ott

Check raise river

/thread

What's your range for SB when he donks flop here? I range him on mainly top pair and (fewer) flush draw, a few sets and some random spaz. With that range, I assume he's calling a raise to $175 with all flush draws, some top pair and either calls or jams sets, while folding some top pairs and air. How is that making perfect decisions? Raising flop also would generally get us position for the rest of the hand.

I'd give him the same range.

If you're raising all sets and JJ+, and A10 on the flop,

If villain has top pair, you indicate villain mostly folds top pair. Folding top pair is a perfect decision against your raising range.

If villain has flush draws, you're most likely to have him make a mistake in this situation, but it's close. He'd getting almost 3-1 and is 4.2-1 against to hit on the turn. Calling would only be a small mistake, but if he's got a combo flush draw, any implied odds, or a FD where an overcard is an out, he's not making a mistake by calling.

If villain has sets your range will force him to make the perfect decision.

If villain has air, you said he folds so it forces him to make the perfect decision.

So in all parts of his range except the FDs, you allow him to make perfect decisions.

GTO is by definition the most profitable way to play poker. It includes the word "optimal"...If the opponent never folds, GTO says to never bluff. And if they never call, it says to always bluff.

Did you read my OP where I posted villain's description? His mistake is not calling too much, therefore we want to bluff at the normal rate or possibly increase it to bluff even more frequently.

In this spot, how often would you say villain folds to a river shove? If it's 55%, then we want to bluff shove river every time.

You don't seem to get it...

If opponents folds 100% of the time, we bet 100% of the times.

If opponents fold 0% of the time, we bluff 0% of the times.

You are arguing that H should create an arbitrary % of bluffing range in both cases for the sake of GTO.

You think you know what EV means, but you're just blabbering concepts with inconsistent thinking.

Now we see the problem here. You don't actually understand what GTO means.

Quality Inn includes the word "quality," does it mean that it's quality?

No.

GTO doesn't account for your opponents' changing behavior, hence it's always optimal. GTO will still bluff x% of the times when opponent never fold, and GTO will still check y% of the times when opponents never call.

Please stop this non-sense. Read this: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/17...heory-1478991/

No, you clearly don't get it. Your quote (though true) is missing the fact the following quotes are also true:

If the opponent folds 51% of the time to a pot sized bet, we bet 100% of the times.

If the opponent folds 35% of the time to a half pot sized bet, we bet 100% of the time.

If the opponent folds 70% of the time to a 2x pot sized bet, we bet 100% of the time.

My quote that you said is wrong accounts for all these true statements.

You also proved you don't know what EV means by saying my 33% and 66% I posted were arbitrary. Here's an EV calc that proves you're wrong:

EV of river bluff for half pot sized bet if opponent folds 33% of the time = .333*(1PSB) - .666*(.5PSB) = .333PSB - .333PSB = $0

33% is the exact cutoff and isn't arbitrary...

See how you are moving the goalposts?

First of all, how do you know whether opponent is folding 51%, 35% or 70% of the times?

If you bet 100% of the times at 2x pot and opponents folds 51% of the times, is it still most optimal?

Second, what about a simple case in which opponent never folds? Your argument is that you should still bluff because "we should always have a bluffing range."

Lastly, you don't seem to understand that GTO means you have the same bet sizing at the same frequency, not a moving number.

@The last few posts: Do the full EV then get back to us.

Semi Grunch:

I like the line, bet half stack and pray for a raise. I can't imagine many people calling a PSB (shove) on the river with worse.

I did not "indicate villain mostly folds top pair". I specifically said he calls with some top pairs and folds with some top pairs. I don't know how often he folds top pair to a flop raise to $175, but I assume he's calling at least half the time.

For his flush draws, his best draw is 7d6d and that has 12 outs. So he's 3:1 to improve on turn. He's has to call $125 to call 300, so he's not getting the right odds. Even if he were, I assume we both agree that against his flush draws we'd much rather raise and get called as at worse a 3:1 favorite than just call his bet.

On the rare times he has a set, obviously calling is better than raising. That said, if my bet induces him to 3-bet flop, he's not playing perfectly since I'm almost certainly folding to a 3-bet here.

On the rare times he has air, raising is worse than calling in that I eliminate the possibility he'll double barrel (though people rarely double barrel with air). However, raising also cleans up our equity against bluffs with A-high or a wheel draw, which is a plus. So this one is close, but say calling is slightly better.

Against the hands that make up the vast bulk of his range, raising is clearly superior against the flush draws and probably superior against top pair hands. That outweighs the fact that raising is clearly inferior against sets and slightly inferior against air, which I think is a significant minority of his range.

GTO has default frequencies of bluff x% of the time, assuming they call your bet at the correct default call frequency, since that's the highest EV line for the bettor. GTO also says to deviate from the default bluff frequency if they deviate from the default calling frequency, so the bettor takes the highest EV line.

Which is why we might want to bluff this river 100% of the time.

Only first part is correct. You don't assume anything of your opponent, because it doesn't matter.

Nope, that's not what GTO means. GTO by definition means you'll never be exploited.

Why don't you read the link?