04-29-2013 , 03:27 PM
Sklansky does an analysis of a multi-street bluff from the point of view of an opponent who either calls or folds:

http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/i...f-catching.php

Quote:
In our example, the bettor was bluffing on the first round more than twice as often as he was value betting yet there was little the other guy could do about it. In fact, it should be noted that if the possible monster was 30% rather than 20%, he should bet EVERYTHING on the first round. Not only that, but the other player should fold every time. This in spite of the fact that he is getting two to one with a hand that is 70% to be best.
Did I miss something? Cannot the opponent raise the possible bluff bettor? Sklansky writes that "there was little the other guy could do about it". Would not raising be a reasonable play? He is the favorite, after all.
04-30-2013 , 05:26 AM
"In the real world, the upshot of these calculations is, as Janda shows in detail, that you should very often bluff or raise bluff on the flop in pot limit or no limit hold ’em if stacks are deep and it is very likely that the other guy’s hand isn’t great"
04-30-2013 , 07:21 AM
True Dat
04-30-2013 , 04:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Handsumm
"In the real world, the upshot of these calculations is, as Janda shows in detail, that you should very often bluff or raise bluff on the flop in pot limit or no limit hold ’em if stacks are deep and it is very likely that the other guy’s hand isn’t great"
He is talking about betting into or raising the "mediocre" hand, which is actually the favorite in this example.

I was talking about the "mediocre" hand doing the raising.
05-07-2013 , 08:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesfarnando
can some one point me to the direction, where i can learn to play this game.
twoplustwo publishes books, you could start there.
05-09-2013 , 03:40 PM
Nice article by DS as usual . One part was a little confusing to me:

"In the real world, the upshot of these calculations is, as Janda shows in detail, that you should very often bluff or raise bluff on the flop in pot limit or no limit hold ’em if stacks are deep and it is very likely that the other guy’s hand isn’t great (i.e. better than a bluff catcher). I"

What does the bolded mean?

a hand that isn't that great but is a little better than a bluff catcher?
a hand that isn't that great about similar to a bluff catcher?
05-18-2013 , 12:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaywill
He is talking about betting into or raising the "mediocre" hand, which is actually the favorite in this example.

I was talking about the "mediocre" hand doing the raising.
Right, you're suggesting that the "mediocre" hand just raise the original bet as a counter strategy if he knows that he's an equity favorite based on the villain's strategy. Just remember there are a couple key constraints to Sklansky's contrived example: all bets are pot sized and effective stacks are deep enough for this to continue for 3 betting rounds. If stacks are shallow enough that the "mediocre" hand can get all-in before the last round then your suggestion has merit, but this is already a common play in no-limit where these constraints don't exist.
05-30-2013 , 05:14 AM
Quote:
Say there is a 20% chance the bettor has the monster. With one round of pot sized betting he can essentially turn his hand into a 30% shot. But, you would still rather be the other guy. Does that change if the possible monster has three rounds to keep the pressure on? Might he even have the better hand?
what is the meaning of the last sentence? Does he mean after three betting rounds, the bettor may have the best hand?

m