Dear all,
I wonder if there is a place for using “optimal bluffing ratios” at lower limits of NL?
Assuming you only know the first round raiser will always bet any flop if first to act, and that the other caller (if any) is a decent player.
Example – you call or overcall a raiser with a small PP, if you call it’s in POS (say 55 in MP – hoping to get more callers in), if you overcall it may be OOP (limp + overcall with 88 in EP).
Pot-size after first round is P1.
Case 1:
I’m player B calling in POS with PP after opener A.
A bets the pot on every flop (pot=2P1) (so no info there).
I can now choose between reraising pot (to total pot= 4P1) with
a) trips or
b) trips + 50% bluffs (1:2 ratio = pot odds for A)
Is this kind of thinking with 1:2 bluff ratios overkill when playing lower limits? Is it applicable at higher limits?
Also, as it happens – a 50% bluff ratio could involve any OE-draw (less bottom-end) that you flop (88 vs 679 flop) which is just about 6% (vs 12% made sets).
Would those OE’s be perfect candidates for “bluffs”? Or would any flop containing an Ace with some extra criteria (such as Ace+one suited flop) be better? (Scary for A if holding JJ-KK, and not risking thaht A holds AKs with 4-flush)
? Thoughts appreciated!
Case 2:
I’m first to act in three way pot. I’m player A; preflop raiser is B and first caller is C.
Either I can choose to check-raise any made trips or better (knowing that Raisor will bet flop), or I can bet into raiser.
One advantage of CR is that I’ll also get info on player C.
One advantage of betting out is that I can bluff the raisor out of more pots using player C as a boogieman.
Any thoughts on this one along the lines of Case 1?
Happy and eating icecream
rush