Assume I'm 100% sure there was no collusion here.

I'm not even dealt cards in the hand as I'm returning from the restroom. V1 Raises to $15, V2 calls as does V3.

Flop is J 6 8 dd, action checks around.

Turn is a 2 or 3 non diamond. V1 bets $45, V2 calls, V3 shoves his remaining $60 which gets called by both V1 and V2.

Remaining action goes to a side pot.

River is a 6. V1 Checks and V2 shoves for $180 ish. V1 tanks for a little bit and finally folds. V2 shows A high and V3 wins the main pot with Jx. V1 is pissed because he had AJ and would have won the main pot.

Forget how well or poorly the hand was played, was it a jerk move to bluff the empty side pot with A high? I don't believe for one second V2 thinks V1 is calling with worse.


V2 claims he thought V1 bet $40 into the side pot and he knew he couldn't win the main pot so he was trying to limit his losses by bluffing the $40 (that wasn't really there).

1. Jerk move to bluff the empty side pot?
2. IF he thought there was $40 in the side pot was it OK to bluff that?

If you start with the premise it is not collusion ... How can it be a jerk move. Assume it wasn't a mistake .... It's bad play. The player put his money at risk for no reward. You are not a jerk for doing that. In fact you are my favorite player in the game

If we Assume it was a mistake and he thought there was a side pot how could it wrong for him to try to win the side pot. It might or might not be good strategy but he is supposed to be trying to benefit himself.

How is it a jerk move to try and win a pot that doesn't belong to you?
Isn't this what we're all trying to do?

V2 could have lied and thought that he would win the main pot a decent percentage of the time against V3s missed draws.

Doesn't matter, it's just a (probably bad) poker play, certainly not a jerk move.

You haven't been playing low stakes NL that long if this is the first time you've seen someone bluff into an empty side pot. It's dumb, happens a lot, and often tilts the person who folded the winning hand. The bluffer usually has no idea what he just did.

1. It's not a jerk move to bluff into an empty side pot.

2. I'm not even sure bluffing into an empty side pot is the strategic mistake that everyone seems to think it is, but that's probably for LLSNL.

3. Based on the fact that V2 had to explain that he thought there was $40 bet, I assume that he got **** for playing bad after the hand ended. Hopefully you had no part in that discussion.

He's just dumb

No matter what all gets discussed in this thread, the part above that I've added bolding to is going to be the piece of information closest to the truth.

All of the above, but especially #2. It's not like he shoved the nut low. A-high beats all the whiffed draws (and there are a lot), so getting AJ to fold is a huge coup. If V3 has T9/97/75/diamonds/etc then V2 looks like a genius.

If V2 & V3 are colluding, that's obviously cheating, but assuming they're not, V1 is just mad at himself for folding the best hand and he's finding someone else to blame.

The 8 on the board plays unless your X in Ax beats it. So a blank statement of A-high beating all whiffed draws is certainly not correct because it might lose to lots of missed A-high draws.

Besides that, he ships $180 into ~$225. You need to find two pretty non-standard ranges / tendencies to make that shove +EV. [/derail]

I don't disagree that there are times a bluff may be good strategy. I just don't think this particular one seems to one ... Of course if you know something more about the players perhaps you can justify it ....

this is a common move by many at 1-2
after all if you fold out the other players you only have to beat one
it costs you nothing if you get the fold you want
only difference is who rakes in the pot
either way its not you

How does someone think there's $40 in a side pot? Were there two piles of chips?

Jerk move? No.

And I'm not laying down AJ here.

i've bluffed into a dry or basically dry side pot knowing it would perceived as extreme strength when i had nothing and a mega fish was all in for the main to keep the mega fish in the game. these mega fish were never my friends nor did we have any kind of agreement. once i got caught but it's worked about ten times and was well worth it.


as for it being a jerk move-the guy made a terrible fold with aj. he has nobody to blame but himself.

Hey! It feels good to be back to agreeing with you on stuff again!

In this case it's pretty bad.

Is it a jerk move to raise with 72o otb over 4 limpers get it heads up and cbet on a king high flop folding out pocket 8's

There are bad players everywhere. They don't all play like they should.

Some people are auto bettors that will always bet when they get checked to, especially on the river. Obv the guy isn't a thinking player.

This. 100%. I see it daily and never once by a guy being a jerk. Just a straight up idiotic play.

This seems kind of sketchy to me, even if he doesn't know you're doing it for him.

Also, this is one spot in poker where I actually would like other players to play better. Bluffing into a dry side pot really only benefits the short-stack, and I'm hardly ever the short-stack. I don't think it's a bad think for us EV-wise to educate fish about dry side pots.

It benefits the player who calls your bluff.

Perhaps getting lost in this talk about how you gotta be pretty confident in a fold is that V2 found someone who gave him one Of course, he then opened his mouth to kill all doubt, but J86dd appeals to a lot of drawing hands that don't include an Ace, and the delayed shortstack shove is nothing we aren't familiar with.

It might not be a good play here, but I love that it happened. It totally changes the energy of the table. You also have to factor in tilt equity from V1 and the aforementioned fish retention equity from V3. I've definitely bluffed at dry side pots for similar reasons and with decent results.

Standard poker actions i.e. fold/check/call/raise, are not and never can be 'jerk moves' in and of themselves. Slowrolling, angling, cheating etc. sure, but what poker actions someone makes is entirely up to them and anyone who doesn't like what they do should get over it.

I like the last couple of posts .. and a few before that. The 'game play', if pulled off, can be tremendous to change the table dynamic.

Remember that V2 didn't have to show here ... perhaps he really did think he was good? It certainly would be something in my mind as well to keep chips from going to a Black Hole if I could prevent them from doing so.

Collusion takes two to tango ... What about the big stack that 3/4 bets light to isolate a short stack? That would have to be collusion as well under what I deem similar circumstances. GL

1. it lets people know you dont have to have a big hand in this spot. next time when you bet into a side pot you more likely get called.
2. many times you want the other player to win as you may have good position on him and maybe he is the fish and you can get more money from him later on.
3. sometimes you do win it with almost nothing. then its a big payday
4. if you play well you may know that he wont call without close to the nuts and you know he doesnt have that.
5. sometimes you dont like that person and forcing him out makes you feel good.