tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36880087.post5679971899110520191..comments2024-03-05T08:25:01.029-05:00Comments on Poker Grump: Bluffing Rob, a reconsiderationRakewellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15873391354585352712noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36880087.post-56730063517630606442013-01-05T11:32:47.128-05:002013-01-05T11:32:47.128-05:00First of all, to answer the pressing question, I&#...First of all, to answer the pressing question, I'm pretty sure my preflop raise was to $10 there.<br /><br />Now, PM, I see Grump has not responded to your inquiries, but in reality, he has already answered it in the first post. He was recalling the post I did on playing scared--which was somewhat inspired by reading one of his own posts, so of course he remembered it--and seeking a place to take advantage of his insider knowledge.<br /><br />So basically, I was throwing a hanging curve right into his wheelhouse. He had two ways to win there, 1) The miracle flop 2)the bluff.<br /><br />It only took me so long to fold there because I knew Grump too. Most other players make the same play he does, it's an easy fold with just an overpair to such a scary board. Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05767080296489122846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36880087.post-77845921064284788222013-01-04T09:00:00.242-05:002013-01-04T09:00:00.242-05:00@Michael M. - I understand exactly what you're...@Michael M. - I understand exactly what you're saying. In other words, the implied odds are great even though the immediate odds are awful. I get that fact, no doubt. However, given Grumps prior knowledge of Rob, the only way he can get Rob to commit those sizes of stacks is only by coolering him. Like I pointed out, he needs a flop of 66x or 88x (both no Ace), or 5 7 9 - K turn, etc. Rob's a capable board reader; he knows the nuts for the given board. Heads-up against Grump, he may not be a good hand reader; from my understanding, Grump is a very very difficult read.<br /><br />All of that said, yes - 6 8 is a calling hand with a multi-way pot, but generally, 6 8 should be an auto-fold heads-up. Again, it's simply not profitable to call that spot (out of position) unless the idea is to turn your hand into a bluff at some point in the hand when the odds say that you will miss most every flop against his expected range.The Poker Meisterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18289059101454598371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36880087.post-65905812575202858172013-01-04T00:22:19.079-05:002013-01-04T00:22:19.079-05:00@ Poker Meister: Your analysis of the preflop bet...@ Poker Meister: Your analysis of the preflop betting shows a common myopia in NLHE players. We aren't told what the preflop raise was, but let's assume it was a standard $10-$12 (5-6 BB). Sure Grump was likely a 60-40 to 65-35 dog <i>preflop</i>. So he was giving up equity on a 5-6 BB bet. But knowing his opponent, he had a shot at 100-200 BBs <i>postflop</i> where he was likely to be a major favorite either getting paid off on his big hands when Rob is stubborn or stealing when Rob sees ghosts under the bed. I'd gladly trade a -EV spot preflop for a large +EV spot postflop every hand.Grange95https://www.blogger.com/profile/01857460215043659894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36880087.post-5616812646803512282013-01-03T13:03:23.347-05:002013-01-03T13:03:23.347-05:00I meant to reply to your original telling of the h...I meant to reply to your original telling of the hand vs. Rob, but life got the better of me and other priorities took over.<br /><br />First, excellent playing. I think this is a very creative move, against a player who you not only know you can outplay, but also likely have a lopsided amount of data against (he posts far more detailed information about his own mental mindset and play than you do). You also know that he is good enough to lay down an overpair, and is uncomfortable with his stack size. Great, creative playing - no doubt.<br /><br />Compliments aside, I question why you call 6-8o in the first place. You explain your view of Rob's mindset, which is fine. However, unless you plan on bluffing almost all of the flops, it seems that it's a very very questionable PF call when you're calling a raise as first in and what turns out to be heads-up with 6-8o (neither of you gave details of other players involved nor the PF raise sizing). There simply aren't many flops that you smash compared to his much tighter (and late because position is important here) range due to his increased stack size. You've effectively taken a flop with a virtual guarantee to turn your hand into a bluff in order to win the pot. From a value perspective, the only way you can really get paid in the spot seems to be from a cooler of sorts; i.e. the flop comes 666 or 888 or [primarily] 68x or the obvious 5 7 9. There simply aren't many value ways that will make you money, given his defined range.<br /><br />So that leads me to my question: are you typically first in calling with a marginally speculative hand such as 6-8o against many late position raises of weak / tight players? How profitable is that hand in that situation for you?<br /><br />As an aside, I've seen a numerous times where situations like the hand you described have occurred (both online and live); 2 friends playing at the same table and one ... what I can only describe as "isolation calls" ... the other's raise with a totally speculative hand and unprofitable hand, knowing full well that he/she is percentages behind. When / if that hand gets to show down, it invariably feels very much like a targeted call from the get-go, especially when both parties know the call to be an unprofitable call. In fact, it may be worse when one party is a pro and the other party is a casual player.<br /><br />I'm not saying that the above paragraph is describing you; I have incomplete information about the PF details (raise amounts, other players, etc.), your relationship with Rob and/or the other players at the table, etc., but for me, as a rule, I only play home games with friends so that it is clear that the stakes are low and the fun can ensue (I avoid the feeling of "taking candy from a baby / my friends") and realize that when a poker friend / "work colleague" / fellow poker pro is opposing me at the table, we're both trying to go to war and there are no holds barred, whether I'm purposefully targeting a player or not (for a profitable move or not). The Poker Meisterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18289059101454598371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36880087.post-57150008733103912232013-01-03T09:25:09.791-05:002013-01-03T09:25:09.791-05:00Poker Grump,
I think you have to take your oppone...Poker Grump,<br /><br />I think you have to take your opponent into account when making your decision of your action. When I commented to Rob, that I would have checked the turn, it was because you were the opponent. If the opponent would have been an ABC player that is also a calling station, then by all means bet for value. I should have been more descriptive in my reasoning in Rob's comments.<br /><br />ohcowboy12goAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36880087.post-81988811031945678052013-01-03T01:53:30.322-05:002013-01-03T01:53:30.322-05:00Wow, that was a great analysis and a fascinating r...Wow, that was a great analysis and a fascinating re-thinking of your original position. An excellent example of why poker is such a tough game.<br /><br />Yeah, I made the mistake of not thinking through what I was going to do if you check-raised me there when I bet. That's something I'm going to remember going forward. <br /><br />For some reason, I seem to plan more for what cards I'm going to be happy--or unhappy--to see hit the board next, rather than what I'm going do in response to a bet or a raise. <br /><br />I think the lessons I've learned from this one hand are worth the money I lost. Considered your winnings there your fee for the lesson.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05767080296489122846noreply@blogger.com