When you bluff in microstakes games, does there always need to be a plausible hand you can represent, or is it sometimes okay to bet/raise just because it's unlikely that your opponent has anything? Examples might be raising the flop against somebody who cbets way too much or betting the turn after opponent has checked two streets.
Its like any other game...it is player dependent. There are some competent players even at those stakes, so you need to know who they are. Against someone who is playing ABC and only betting and calling when they have something and checking when they don't, then bet away and take all the pots that wont fight over.
At the micros you can get away with a lot of simple bluffs because your opponents are very transparent and unbalanced. For example if they always bet strong hands and always check weak hands then you can stab at the pot because if they check you know they are almost always weak. On the flip side don't try to get elaborate with your plays, if for example they will always check-fold but this time they check-called don't then fire the turn and river trying to represent something, the fact they called means they will call again and again regardless of what you are trying to rep in relation to their hand.
Pick your opponents and situations. The ideal micros villain to bluff is the multi-tabling reg because they have learned that bet-fold is how to beat up on passive fish which is the standard fare.
So for example, you can x/r a dry flop when they raised from CO or BTN. Their range is wide, therefore weak. They probably missed the flop. They will definitely bet the flop because it's dry. When you raise, they will usually shrug/fold.
Don't think you should have a raising range on dry flops. It means you're either raising a lot of air that has little equity when called (i.e. you don't have any decent draws) or your raising range is sets, sets, and more sets. Both scenarios are trivially easy to play against.
He wasn't talking about doing it as standard just as an exploitative play vs weak regs who cbet too much with a wide range and give up vs aggression if the have nothing. It doesn't matter if it's easy to play against if they are going to do nothing about it.
You don't have to have a plausible hand, but you'll be more successful with bluffs if villain also doesn't have a plausible hand (i.e. if his range misses the board too), and if you have a hand that blocks the hands he continues with.
Against absolute callfish, you dont bluff either way because they will call anyways.
Against decent players you need to make sure your bets make sense.
Against fishy players who like to fold (for example 100% cbet, but usually give up when they face resistance) you can bluff even if it doesnt make sense.
