Value "bluff" ?

    • nooni2k
      nooni2k
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.04.2012 Posts: 206
      Purely an academic question here about situations where you make a bet on one street, knowing that you can make a bluff on a later street that will succeed close to 100% of the time.

      Does the first bet count as a "value" bet given that you are building money for a pot that you know you will later win? Even though only better hands will call.

      Obviously this assumes you have solid reads on villain.

      Example: you raise a hand like KJ from the button and get a caller from the BB.

      Flop is AA2.

      He checks and you check.

      Turn is a 6 or other blank.

      He checks again. You bet as a bluff and he just calls. You know that this player would have donkbet or checkraised the turn with an ace or set here every time. At this point you know he has a mid-strength hand like 88/99 and will fold to another bet on the river. Is this turn "bluff" actually a value bet? You're getting "value" into the pot from his mid strength hand that you know will check/fold almost every river.
  • 15 replies
    • Saren113
      Saren113
      Bronze
      Joined: 06.03.2009 Posts: 2,867
      It's just a bluff over more then one street.
    • nooni2k
      nooni2k
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.04.2012 Posts: 206
      Yeah I get that, but just wondering.

      I mean even though you fully expect to get called on the first bet, you still consider the first bet a bluff?
    • Farmarchist
      Farmarchist
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.12.2010 Posts: 14,640
      I think you could call it a valuebet but looking at handstrength it's a bluff... :P
    • maheepsangari
      maheepsangari
      Gold
      Joined: 08.06.2010 Posts: 2,163
      I don't think its really a value bluff or anything paradoxical like that cause when you bet the turn you still had him on some sort of range, for example in this case you expect him to call the turn with those PPs you mentioned, you wanted to bluff out on the river, and you expect him to fold all trash anyway so its not really like you're getting any value from his weak hands anyway.

      So bluff all the way.

      And isn't something like value bluff that triple range merging thing where your range is merged with everything from air to value, not sure about the whole triple range merging joke though would be grateful if someone clarifies.
    • nooni2k
      nooni2k
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.04.2012 Posts: 206
      Yeah look I'm not trying to re-invent the wheel or anything here :rolleyes:

      It was just the paradoxical element that made me think well, the value in this hand comes from the first bet, so it's the size of that bet which determines the size of the pot we win on the later street.

      It doesn't apply to all bluffs, only where you think you can get value from a player's range by building a pot now and bluffing him off it later.

      It's weirdly interesting to think of a value bet as being = any bet designed to get money into a pot that you think you can win >50% of the time on a later street. Rather than = any bet that will get called by a worse hand >50% of the time. Like a "pot-centric" view of betting.

      Anyway I won't insist upon it, just an idea
    • maheepsangari
      maheepsangari
      Gold
      Joined: 08.06.2010 Posts: 2,163
      Originally posted by nooni2k
      It was just the paradoxical element that made me think well, the value in this hand comes from the first bet, so it's the size of that bet which determines the size of the pot we win on the later street.

      It doesn't apply to all bluffs, only where you think you can get value from a player's range by building a pot now and bluffing him off it later.

      This is what I have a problem with the belief that you are building a pot that you will win later by bluffing him out and I think its a serious problem cause normally you have him on a range which is consisting of some value hands+bluff. When you only expect him to call with hands that he'll fold later means you aren't putting him on a very complete range and can get you in trouble.

      The way I would think in that spot would be, ok I'll bet the turn and expect to win the pot instantly mostly, if he does call he'll do that with floats, medium strength hands like PPs and sometimes even slowplayed hands.

      So in that spot I don't really know for sure if I will take the pot down on the river by just betting, I'll reassess the river and look at his range again and then decide if I can bluff him off or not, obv other stuff also matters like his perception of your range, levelling etc.

      What you are saying is bet the turn cause he calls with medium strength hands ONLY and bet the river to bluff him off. If he is even slightly decent he'll also know that you think he'll give up on river and could easily bluff catch you and etc. etc.

      My point is, opponents range has a lot of stuff not just a certain set of hands and if theoretically you bet the turn to get a call and bluff him off on the river then you are just trying to get value from his floats but floats are calls in spots where the person floating calls cause his perceived range also has value hands however your logic completely left out his value hands, hence the paradox.
    • staktas
      staktas
      Bronze
      Joined: 28.03.2011 Posts: 1,346
      I think, value bet is when you are betting when you have at least 51% of equity.
    • nooni2k
      nooni2k
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.04.2012 Posts: 206
      maheepsangari - Yes my logic left that out because of the assumptions I made e.g. we have a read that villain will have never slow play a big hand in this spot, so that river bluff works a high percentage of the time. It's a pretty big assumption but this is a theoretical discussion so it's okay to make assumptions.

      It's a theory rather than a strategy for actually playing.
    • maheepsangari
      maheepsangari
      Gold
      Joined: 08.06.2010 Posts: 2,163
      Originally posted by nooni2k
      maheepsangari - Yes my logic left that out because of the assumptions I made e.g. we have a read that villain will have never slow play a big hand in this spot, so that river bluff works a high percentage of the time. It's a pretty big assumption but this is a theoretical discussion so it's okay to make assumptions.

      It's a theory rather than a strategy for actually playing.
      Well in that case you are just exploiting a read, a weakness he has so yeah you can say you are getting value out of the read, not from your hand but from your read on him.

      So bluff from hand strength point of view and value from exploiting the read point of view.

      I'll give you an example, on many European sites people min bet donk the flop "to know where they are at". The classic way of beating them is raise the flop, if they call they x/f the turn almost always.

      So I am exploiting a leak that they have, doesn't matter what my hand strength is, so from my hand strength perspective its a bluff and I did exactly what you mentioned, build the pot to win more money as they call the raise and then fold the turn however I was getting value from a read that I have.
    • NightFrostaSS
      NightFrostaSS
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.10.2008 Posts: 5,255
      I'd say it's just a pot builder bet for a double barrel bluff.
    • nooni2k
      nooni2k
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.04.2012 Posts: 206
      maheepsangari - Yeah absolutely agree, my hand strength/range is never the issue here, it's always been about using the read to get value.

      Fair comments =)
    • nooni2k
      nooni2k
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.04.2012 Posts: 206
      Originally posted by NightFrostaSS
      I'd say it's just a pot builder bet for a double barrel bluff.
      Okay, so the textbook says all bets are bluffs or value bets.
      Are you saying a "pot builder bet" is neither a value bet or a bluff?

      (I'm not trying to aggravate - I'm genuinely interested.)
    • NightFrostaSS
      NightFrostaSS
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.10.2008 Posts: 5,255
      Originally posted by nooni2k
      Originally posted by NightFrostaSS
      I'd say it's just a pot builder bet for a double barrel bluff.
      Okay, so the textbook says all bets are bluffs or value bets.
      Are you saying a "pot builder bet" is neither a value bet or a bluff?

      (I'm not trying to aggravate - I'm genuinely interested.)
      I'd say it can be both as you can be building the pot for value since you expect to get called down by worse hands or as a bluff since you expect a lot of folds on later streets.

      Idk, that's just a random name I thought of that seem to me to apply better in the described situation. Overall I'd just call it double barrel bluff.
    • tommygecko
      tommygecko
      Bronze
      Joined: 11.08.2012 Posts: 1,229
      Originally posted by nooni2k
      Originally posted by NightFrostaSS
      I'd say it's just a pot builder bet for a double barrel bluff.
      Okay, so the textbook says all bets are bluffs or value bets.
      Are you saying a "pot builder bet" is neither a value bet or a bluff?

      (I'm not trying to aggravate - I'm genuinely interested.)
      Flop bet is a bluff bet, with a plan to bluff the turn again if it fails.

      Saying you want to build the pot/value bluff to make him fold only on the turn seems like you will be unhappy if he folds the flop. But of course we are fine with him folding the flop too :D So the flop bet is still a bluff.

      No way will I ever be happier if I have total air and my bluff gets called on the flop.
    • thazar
      thazar
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.09.2009 Posts: 6,560
      Originally posted by staktas
      I think, value bet is when you are betting when you have at least 51% of equity.
      A value bet is when you bet and the range of your opponent includes enough hands that you beat and will call.