A situation occurred yesterday, where I had flopped an open-ended straight draw out of position.

Next, i thought a nice semi-bluff would do. I bet about 1/3x pot.

Then, I was re-raised about 1/3x pot.

Do I call? I was getting the right odds it seemed like, but on the other hand I thought, "this pot is getting too big for my hand strength."

Then I thought, "well that's the point of implied odds; because you're hand might be big by the turn or river."

So what is your opinions on semi-bluffs getting raised, and you still having the odds?

Stack sizes and ratio to the pot size are pretty important here. Calling small raises with a draw is horrible when you have 10bb and awesome when you have 1000.

for a bluff to work, your bet has to be scary - nearer 70% of the pot. you do understand that a bluff means making a better hand fold right? cause like, no better hand is going to fold in a $10 pot to a $3 bet - ya get me?

Was this a live or online game? Online, you should almost never be betting less than half pot on the flop or turn.
With an open ended straight draw, you want to be raising to 3 times villain's first bet, (roughly a "pot-sized raise") as this means you (usually) have some fold equity. A proportion of the time, villain will fold, so you win the pot without ever making the hand. Another proportion of the time, he calls and you make the straight and win his stack. The rest of the time, you miss the straight, and have to fold on a later street. Semi-bluff raises like this are high variance: you can win or lose big. Against certain players, it's often better to simply check/call and see if you can draw out cheaply. You might not win a whole stack, but you also won't lose yours.
If you only bet small on the flop and got raised small, you sometimes have the pot odds to continue (or shove over the top), but often a fold is in order. If you bet bigger on the flop, and you're relatively short-stacked, you're often committed to calling a re-raise.
Without knowing the exact board, your cards, stack sizes and villain tendencies, it's impossible to tell you what is (probably) the best way to play this situation.

Sorry, I didn't feel the need to post the hand. It was just sort of a general question about pot size and pot odds. We both had ~100 BB FYI

general answer: depends

post the hand.

But that's not neccesarily the whole point of a blocking bet...

Anyway, here is my hand (note that it wasn't exactly how i remembered but the same point):

Merge - $0.04 NL - Holdem - 8 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 3

UTG+1: $4.09
MP: $4.00
Hero (MP+1): $4.70
CO: $9.92
BTN: $3.91
SB: $4.02
BB: $4.00
UTG: $2.86

SB posts SB $0.02, BB posts BB $0.04

Pre Flop: ($0.06) Hero has J T

UTG raises to $0.10, fold, fold, Hero calls $0.10, fold, fold, fold, fold

Flop: ($0.26, 2 players) 8 9 6
UTG checks, Hero bets $0.20, UTG raises to $0.53, Hero calls $0.33

Turn: ($1.32, 2 players) 8
UTG bets $0.31, Hero calls $0.31

River: ($1.94, 2 players) 3
UTG bets $1.01, fold

UTG wins $1.85

NOTE: Looking back on it, I should have taken the free card. But my question is still whether I should have called the raise post-flop.

Pre: fine
Flop: fine. good bet. PFR is c/fing a lot of his AK/AQ/AJ/KQ type stuff on this flop. when he raises, you have to call. your implied odds are absolutely massive because if a 7 comes off you'll have the uber nuts. you also have a back door flush draw and overcards (which are sometimes good when you pair). his play is pretty weird, as UTG raisers don't often c/r like that, but he almost certainly has a piece of it - a lot of pair+draw combos like 67, 77, 78, so don't even think about reraising (whether you were thinking it in the first place)
Turn: bad card. if he makes a normal bet you have to fold as you could already be drawing dead, but the bet is so small you have to call.
River: obv

So yea, well played. No idea what villain had. Badly played whatever it is.

Thanks for the replies. It just seems like my biggest losses come from very confusing villains. Then I try to bluff and confuse them sometimes, and lose more. After reading so much material from pros, it is hard to take anything to the micros.

+1

Pros are playing against thinking players.

Difficult to rep stuff against guys who don't 'hear' what you're trying to 'say'.

You bet 20 cents into a 26 cent pot. That is not 1/3 of the pot. Then villain raised 33 more cents into a 66 cent pot (after his call). That's also not 1/3 of the pot. The amounts really matter here, since they determine, along with effective stacks, your immediate pot odds and your implied odds.

In general, there's no great shame in taking free cards with draws. Certainly semi-bluffing is sometimes good, but not always - checking is certainly a lot better than betting out only to get blown off the hand by a big raise. As for calling villain's raise here, you almost have immediate pot odds, with a draw to the nuts, just to take one more card, and with implied odds - villain is betting, so you'll win more if you hit - it's a patently obvious call.

It's hard to say what villain has here without more info. It does seem like how a donk might play a set - sees you're interested on the flop, so raises, gets worried the board is kind of crippled when the 8 pairs on the turn so bets small not to chase out a draw, then tries to get big value on the river when he should be letting you bluff at it if he knows what you have. But it could also be hands like A7 or A9 or an overpair that get scared of the 8 and bet small because of it. There don't seem to be many hands you're going to chase away with a big bluff.

If you take the hand you posted as an example, villain took a "confusing" line that was just plain bad. You played straightforwardly, and you way got the better of him, despite the fact you didn't win the hand. He let you draw for minimum, and had you hit, you probably would've gotten paid for maximum. Sure we don't know what he had, but if he knew what you had would he have played it the same way? Because if every time he doesn't do that, you win money.

True that. Great point.

I know, read all my posts! But you're probably right about the set or TPTK.

Yeah I guess it all comes down to EV and Theory of Poker.

Thanks for the replies.

It wasnt a blocking bet. You said it was a semi-bluff.

Maybe I'm stupid, but a blocking bet is a type of semi-bluff. Correct? #DavidSklansky

no a blocking bet is to deter future betting in order to ensure you get to showdown with a made hand.

Indeed. Making a blocking bet is a way of saying "I have something here, so don't try bluffing me off my hand".