Bluff catching series part 2
CO: 139.16 BB (VPIP: 25.39, PFR: 19.35, 3Bet Preflop: 8.76, Hands: 1,187)
Hero (SB): 195.06 BB
Hero posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB
Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has Kd Ks
CO raises to 2.5 BB, fold, Hero raises to 11 BB, fold, CO calls 8.5 BB
Flop : (23 BB, 2 players) Ad 2s 9h
Hero bets 7.59 BB, CO calls 7.59 BB
Turn : (38.18 BB, 2 players) 5c
Hero checks, CO checks
River : (38.18 BB, 2 players) 3s
Hero bets 12.59 BB, CO raises to 38.18 BB, fold
CO wins 60.19 BB
4 Replies
I think you played your hand face up, but it doesn't have to be face up. I think I like betting the river small here if we have a whole strategy for this line. If we are going to bet river here, we need to be balanced with bluffs and hands that can 3-bet over opps raise. At the micros this seems like a line that might be misconsidered by our opposition because their line of thinking might fall into one of two buckets, thinking that you're overbluffing or that you're only betting pairs less than Aces. Therefore this could be an overbluffed line by the opps. This can lead us to exploit them with more 3-betting of our own, and calling in spots like this. I think if we are ever going to try and value bet KK here we are going to need to bluff in a balanced way (hands like KJs that bluff flop then brick when our backdoor draw doesn't come in can check turn then start bluffing river again), and turn check monsters with some frequency then lead river small to allow us to 3-bet when a raise gets put in. If we cultivate a balanced strategy for this line going forward, then we can remain unexploitable and disprove whether or not our opps are overbluffing this line as a population. Once we see what population is doing, we can tweak to exploit. In essence, I think this could be a goldmine of a line because opps at the micros probably aren't considering it with enough depth and forethought.
I don’t have a lot of data but so far think
That River raises, especially in position and especially not all-in, are bluffed rarely in my games.
Why do I need monsters here as well, as opposed to only having decent value like an ace for bluff-catching? Such a rare line in my games anyway, do I really need to habe 3-bets?
Maybe in this case maybe your opponent puts you on the type of hand you have : high pocket pair, but (in my opinion) bluff catching river raises = bleeding money @ microstakes.
Anyway KK is not a good hand to catch, you block AK but they would almost never play AK like this and you block KQ which might go for a sick bluff.
CO is supposed to have quite some A's in their range (AQs, AJs, ATs, a bit of A5s, AKo, AQo). It's a bit sad but once you cbet KK and get called, you want to go to showdown as cheaply as possible, you should just check river and hope you don't face a bet. KK is a frequent check on the flop (as well as AA)
I don’t have a lot of data but so far think
That River raises, especially in position and especially not all-in, are bluffed rarely in my games.
Why do I need monsters here as well, as opposed to only having decent value like an ace for bluff-catching? Such a rare line in my games anyway, do I really need to habe 3-bets?
I think it’s better to think about the river raise here in a very specific way. Instead of saying “river raises are under bluffed in general” check data on the specific line (oop 3-b/call, A hi flop, bet-call, check-check, bet-raise). The more specific we are the more valuable our insights. I believe this specific river would be overbluffed because your hand looks like it was played a bit face up. And my general point is that this specific line (along with many lines) will not be investigated by micro players and therefore will never be balanced. If we balance here we can ensure we are not leaking money, then we can accumulate both player specific and population data in order to make an informed decision about any potential exploits we can implement to make more money with this line in the game tree.
As far as having monsters some of the time, if we don’t show up with a monster some percentage of the time our range is capped, giving our opponent an edge and making us exploitable. Imagine you were in his shoes. Your opponent can only ever call or fold to your raise. He will never 3-bet bluff or 3-bet for value. It makes it easier for us to decide if opp is over folding or over calling, and easier to either exploitatively over bluff or value bet hard. Plus, let’s imagine we accumulate some good data on opp when these roles are reversed. Right off the bat, if we know for a fact he never has sets (because he has never shown up with them before), he therefore has a weakened range. So we can bluff more often.
