Quote:
So, is a bluff:
(1) BetterHandFold > WorseHandCall + WorseHandBet
or
(2) BetterHandCall + BetterHandBet > WorseHandCall + WorseHandBet
A subtle difference I know, but, for example, I'm looking at a hand where the bot is betting 3rd pair against a monkey on the turn on a very wet board. 2 flush draws + 2 OESD + a gutshot with no flop bet, so the villains calling range is very wide. Formula (1) says it's a value bet, formula (2) says it's a bluff. Which one do you think is more correct, or are neither of them correct?
And a second point, do you think the bot should be betting it at all? (We do also have an OESD)
I see a bluff as making a better hand fold. The problem with betting 3rd pair is that your never going to to get a worse hand to call so it will always be a bluff. With third pair your never going to get more then 1 street of value generally too. This is where things get complicated. So..can you lead with third pair on a wet board. The answer is maybe. If the guy folds to 50%+ of turn barrels then yes. If no then your going to have to pot control as you have showdown value. The problem with pot control is you make your hand transparent. On the river and you have position and guy checks again only then could you technically bet for value on a blank. Since he is not betting for value all you have to generally worry about is his bluffcatching range which has a higher chance of folding. You might want to take a look at my thread on representing to help with this.
if you have an OESD on the turn then I would definitely bet. You have third pair and probably more outs then the villain does. So you might as well use any fold equity you have. I would bet any gutter, flush draw (except for the nut flush draw) and OESD on the turn.Statistics: Posted by shalako — Thu Sep 26, 2013 5:35 pm
]]>