Is this ever profitable? I have made a few attempts, usually in blind vs blind or my button raise vs BB 3-bet vs guys with 3-bet percentages of 12-18 and it never works. I get 5 bet on every occasion.
Basically I was wondering if it is profitable to even start thinking about a 4bet bluffing ranges at the micros?
Originally posted by Meemawuk
Is this ever profitable? I have made a few attempts, usually in blind vs blind or my button raise vs BB 3-bet vs guys with 3-bet percentages of 12-18 and it never works. I get 5 bet on every occasion.Basically I was wondering if it is profitable to even start thinking about a 4bet bluffing ranges at the micros?
The only hand I 4-bet bluff with is KQ\s... It blocks some KK\QQ\AK\AQ combos and leaves you with easy decisions. I think as long as you pick your spots well then it's ok with other hands I guess. If villain 3-bets more than like 5% over a decent sample then obviously you can widen your 3bet calling range and 4bet value range profitably anyway. If villain is 3betting loads and folding loads to 4bets then obviously it is profitable to 4bet with practically any two. All villain dependant rather than what limit you're at.
you need one good read to do so. I do that mostly vs regs with who I have some history
By the time this could become a profitable play you and your opponents will have left the microstakes behind.
The people that are still playing the micros after 3-4 years have no clue what a "balanced range" is nor any means to respond to one.
Originally posted by tokyoaces
By the time this could become a profitable play you and your opponents will have left the microstakes behind.The people that are still playing the micros after 3-4 years have no clue what a "balanced range" is nor any means to respond to one.
This is basically my line of thinking here. I honestly think this has been damaging my winrate significantly.
Sure it can be profitable like anywhere else, but especially for micros try to have a good sample on villain, look up his positional 3bet stats instead of overall 3b before deciding to bluff or not to and make sure he's 3betting polarized range instead of 3b/shipping AQ/Aj low pockets and stuff. having him fold to 4b stat be above zero would help too obv. 
Originally posted by NightFrostaSS
Sure it can be profitable like anywhere else, but especially for micros try to have a good sample on villain, look up his positional 3bet stats instead of overall 3b before deciding to bluff or not to and make sure he's 3betting polarized range instead of 3b/shipping AQ/Aj low pockets and stuff. having him fold to 4b stat be above zero would help too obv.
My small sample has determined that people are not 3-betting polarized at all at these stakes. I feel like they are simply thinking "he raised from the button, so i'm willing to be all in here with AJo/KQ/77 etc no matter what his action is after I 3-bet him". Most of the times that I 3-bet from the BB vs steal (unless it's a value raise), I'm folding to a 4-bet, this doesnt seem to be the case for most villans I've come up against.
This raises an interesting point though. I now think most micros players (certainly at NL10 6-max on stars) don't have a 3-bet bluffing range from the blinds vs steals. This says to me that they are either flatting or folding too often with martinal holdings which is why I seem to see so many guys playing either ~35/10 or ~17/14 respectively. Or that they are value 3-betting (with the intention of getting it all in) marginal hands vs my positional opening range and specifically NOT considering my 4-betting range. Guys who call a lot and fold a lot are both fantastic to play against. It's significantly more spendy to build a sample of hands that is reliable enough to assess whether or not a player can be profitably 4-bet bluffed.
I always look to see what his BB vs steal and resteal 3bet stats are in these situations and not just the overall 3-bet stat, and have only tried 4-bet bluffing guys whom I have a reasonable sample on.
In fairness, my 4-bet bluff sample size is relatively small, but when its costing ~25-30BB a time, and I'm getting 5bet shoved on 8/10 times, its not going to be profitable.
For the immediate future I'm going to stop 4-bet bluffing entirely, and vs guys who are habitually 3-betting light frequently from the blinds, I'm going to widen my 4bet/shipping value range. I'll see how that works out.
So when you're talking four bet-bluffs, are you talking pre-flop or post?
At micro stakes, I've found so far:
Pre-flop: most who 3-bet will hate to fold their hands, as a result, any hand they 3-bet is a hand they will go all in with, and because of this, they can have a range of pretty much anything. I've seen people go all in with tiny pocket pairs or suited connectors, when they are a coinflip at best against the over-cards.
This means 4-bet bluffs have tiny equity at microstakes level, the only way they will work is if you're the first one to ship, and even then be prepared to be called by a lot of 3-betters, and hope to hit your cards.
Post-flop:
Again not a good idea to 4-bet bluff, you will often get shoved on, especially HU
Players at micro levels tend mostly to play their cards post-flop. If they hit anything slightly above marginal, you wont get rid of them unless you are repping a big hand both pre and post-flop. They are not concerned with your range mostly, just what they have. As a result, i'd try some 3-bet bluffs post-flop on a c-bet, but if you encounter resistence and you don't have much, aim for a cheap showdown or fold
Originally posted by Wurble
Originally posted by Meemawuk
Is this ever profitable? I have made a few attempts, usually in blind vs blind or my button raise vs BB 3-bet vs guys with 3-bet percentages of 12-18 and it never works. I get 5 bet on every occasion.Basically I was wondering if it is profitable to even start thinking about a 4bet bluffing ranges at the micros?
The only hand I 4-bet bluff with is KQ\s... It blocks some KK\QQ\AK\AQ combos and leaves you with easy decisions. I think as long as you pick your spots well then it's ok with other hands I guess. If villain 3-bets more than like 5% over a decent sample then obviously you can widen your 3bet calling range and 4bet value range profitably anyway. If villain is 3betting loads and folding loads to 4bets then obviously it is profitable to 4bet with practically any two. All villain dependant rather than what limit you're at.
why are u 4bet bluffing with a hand that plays very well post flop? If i were going to 4bet bluff i take my strongest hands and the crap hands prolly
Originally posted by Heffron89
Originally posted by Wurble
Originally posted by Meemawuk
Is this ever profitable? I have made a few attempts, usually in blind vs blind or my button raise vs BB 3-bet vs guys with 3-bet percentages of 12-18 and it never works. I get 5 bet on every occasion.Basically I was wondering if it is profitable to even start thinking about a 4bet bluffing ranges at the micros?
The only hand I 4-bet bluff with is KQ\s... It blocks some KK\QQ\AK\AQ combos and leaves you with easy decisions. I think as long as you pick your spots well then it's ok with other hands I guess. If villain 3-bets more than like 5% over a decent sample then obviously you can widen your 3bet calling range and 4bet value range profitably anyway. If villain is 3betting loads and folding loads to 4bets then obviously it is profitable to 4bet with practically any two. All villain dependant rather than what limit you're at.
why are u 4bet bluffing with a hand that plays very well post flop? If i were going to 4bet bluff i take my strongest hands and the crap hands prolly
You 4bet bluff with your strongest hands? This is stupid, you 4bet them for value. And 4bet bluff with trash? OK, fair enough but do it too much at the micro's and it's just spew so I choose one hand and that hand is KQ. It blocks a tonne of KK\QQ\AK\AQ combo's so less chance of villain having one of those, if villain shoves I know I'm beat practically every time and if villain calls I have a hand I can play well post flop.
Originally posted by bennisboy
So when you're talking four bet-bluffs, are you talking pre-flop or post?At micro stakes, I've found so far:
Pre-flop: most who 3-bet will hate to fold their hands, as a result, any hand they 3-bet is a hand they will go all in with, and because of this, they can have a range of pretty much anything. I've seen people go all in with tiny pocket pairs or suited connectors, when they are a coinflip at best against the over-cards.
This means 4-bet bluffs have tiny equity at microstakes level, the only way they will work is if you're the first one to ship, and even then be prepared to be called by a lot of 3-betters, and hope to hit your cards.
Post-flop:
Again not a good idea to 4-bet bluff, you will often get shoved on, especially HUPlayers at micro levels tend mostly to play their cards post-flop. If they hit anything slightly above marginal, you wont get rid of them unless you are repping a big hand both pre and post-flop. They are not concerned with your range mostly, just what they have. As a result, i'd try some 3-bet bluffs post-flop on a c-bet, but if you encounter resistence and you don't have much, aim for a cheap showdown or fold
One word pretty much gives a solution to all of these points: reads. Without them, don't do it. There are several nl5 regs that 3-bet too light and fold to 4-bets unless they have QQ+, AK so they are easy money. Obviously random fish are the wrong targets for any kind of bluff most of the time.
Originally posted by TobyCS
If you are asking the question then you shouldn't be doing it
This is an idiotic contribution to the discussion. The reason I posted this thread was to see if people generally thought it was profitable or not. If they did I wanted to know what am I doing wrong/what spots should I be looking for etc.
What is the function of your post?
I would say its not profitable, usually if a microstakes reg or fish w/e 3bets you its clear that they like their hand and would like for you to call and build a big pot, ofc the regs might 3bet ligheter and fold to 4 bet, u still need to actually see them doing this so you dont do this blindly.An example( of a 4 bet bluff that i encountered which made no sense) would be :
I was steaming once and at NL5 ( 5$ buy-in , 6 max ) and had 89 suited ( dont remember positions ).Preflop : I bet, someone 3-bet, the dude after him 4-bets, I go all in ( retard ) , the one who 3-bet folds , and the one who 4 bet had 1$ left from 5, so he was basically forced to call my all-in but he folded.So he basically tried to steal a pot from a situation like this where someone would raise with connectors, one 3bets with AQs or sth like that or some midde-ish pocket pairs and thinks that he can get them off of those kind of hands.
At micros ABC is best, though not too exciting, if you play good and not try fancy stuff , you will reach the limits where a squeeze play actually work, or a 4bet bluff.
good luck:)
Originally posted by Meemawuk
Originally posted by TobyCS
If you are asking the question then you shouldn't be doing itThis is an idiotic contribution to the discussion. The reason I posted this thread was to see if people generally thought it was profitable or not. If they did I wanted to know what am I doing wrong/what spots should I be looking for etc.
What is the function of your post?
Actually, unlike 90% of tobys posts he has a point (:f_p: ♠_o: 
). The answer to your question is... if it's good to 4bet bluff, do it 
Basically, on any stake, the only reason you would 4bet bluff is because it is profitable, right? And this depends on the opponent.
There will be opponents you should 4bet bluff against at the micros. They probably aren't as many as at higher stakes. But if you just learn the reasons for 4bet bluffing, just like with everything else, you will do it right no matter on which stakes you play.
Good luck 
4bet bluff at miscros = lol wtf nearly 100% of the time. I am however, not talking about higher than nl25, as I have very little experience of nl50+.
Question always is when you bet ot not bet; 'Why am I doing this?'; 'How do I extract the most profit fromthis situation?' And all the other good stuff the coaches try to drum (forlornly, too often) into us on here.
I've played micros below nl50 for 4 years and have not seen a need to worry about 4bet bluffing for goodness sake. Doesn't mean I don't do it on occasion, both pre and post-flop, just means it has much less significance at these levels.
Oh and you really need some history here and a lot of hands on villain, otherwise you're gambling as much as they usually are.
yeah 4bet bluffs,
Some annoying regs likes to call it....
Sometimes to slow play.... some are players who cant fold AK/AQ and even JJ...
Anyone have the same problem?
Originally posted by Evante
yeah 4bet bluffs,Some annoying regs likes to call it....
Sometimes to slow play.... some are players who cant fold AK/AQ and even JJ...
Anyone have the same problem?
STATS lol if they 3bet a lot and fold nearly all the time to 4bets then 4bet bluff away. If they 3bet a lot and call a lot of 4bets then widen your 4bet value range.
If they 3bet a lot and fold nearly all the time to 4bets but this time they call your 4bet then you've more than likely just ran into AQ\AK\QQ\JJ & KQ sometimes. If they shove then you've mostly run in to AA\KK. Obv. these hands depend on actual %'s you have in stats but as a general guide this works for me.
Quite clearly, if a player 3bets a wide enough range and folds to a 4bet with all hands apart from the very top of his 3bet range then it is profitable to 4bet bluff them with any two cards until they adjust.
It seems to me that the theoretical optimal strategy (best against best opposition, better against imperfect opponents) has to have the property of being indifferent to 4-bet bluffing and 5-bet bluffing in some sense. This is much more complicated than the classic showdown unexploitable bluffing frequency. Firstly, hands do not have an absolute ranking (like they do at showdown once the board is known), they have different probabilities of winning at showdown. Secondly, and possibly more importantly, it is the return with optimal play in the following streets, averaged across all possible boards, that matters, rather than something simple like the EV. Despite this difficulty, I believe this ideal type of unexploitability is something to aim for in very strong games. In the micros, it's not going to be worth it, since the opposition has various faults to exploit. If they are calling too much preflop, do you think you want to be bluffing?
