Tremendous Bluff? Or Not?

[MANTIS01]

The result was J-J Vs 8-8 after the 1,600 had been invested. Paul has already stated that his mistake was not following through after check-check and that is a different issue. The 1,600 was risked to outflop your oppo and you did...what happens after that is up to you. Folding the best hand doesn't detract from the fact that you had the best hand.

I don't really get why we are thinking that 1,600 chips is going to change somebody's decision to call an all-in though. What hand folds pre-flop for 12,400 but calls for 10,800?

Half-decent players will be wary of the UTG limp and will only raise with a hand that would have called your all-in and is why I suggest limping is reasonable. And although you don't have the stack to outplay your oppos check-check-push is a better scenario than UTG limp then push pre-flop imo.

[JungleCat03]

If you are going to be results orientated, which pretty much every great poker player I've ever listened to suggests you should not be, then you can't conveniently ignore the bits of the results that don't fit in with your analysis.

Ok, so you want to have your cake, eat it and regurgitate it for the masses to swallow too. By now, no one wants the cake, let it go and flush it down the toilet where it belongs!

Shakespeare once said "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." That's far too highbrow and pretentious to be used in poker hand analysis. I prefer to tell a different story.

Once there was a man in a village who had a turd. People turned their nose up at his turd, but he thought he could turn them round. So he spent all day dressing up the turd. He put a white shirt on it, crisply pressed trousers, a neat, smart tie, a small turd-sized tuxedo, a small pair of glistening black shoes. He carefully placed a little wig on its little turd head, did the shiny little buttons up on its jacket and stood back to marvel at how well dressed, dapper and debonair it now looked.

He invited people round to see the transformation. People flocked from near and far. Many were impressed and liked the shininess of the buttons and the sartorial elegance he had brought about in his creation.

 Eventually the wisest man in the village appeared.

"What do you think!" asked the man eagerly!

"Looks like a turd in a suit to me" answered the wise old man.

[Bongo]

It really is ok to knowingly step outside the maths because your unique tournament situation dictates this is a neccessary risk...get the result you need...then retreat back to the safety of the numbers game.

No, all that shows is that you don't understand the maths.

[MANTIS01]

Great story JungleCat.

The result for ME in this hand would have been a double through, the result for other players would be different. Whilst I have an interest in how others play this hand with regard to strategy I am primarily concerned with what would happen to me in this example...and as such I am satisfied that the limp with 10-J would have been...well perfect.

So, if we leave the result aside for a second and just look at the strategy instead. I have read how many players think pushing pre-flop is the right move e.g.

Posted by: JungleCat03

You have a stack that can put people to a decision preflop - just about...use that now, rather than weakly limping off chips that can be used as a weapon.

Now I must be missing a trick. Because in this thread 10-J has been categorized as a "weak" and an "over-rated" starting hand that will "loose" most of the time...and putting 1,600 in with this hand is just downright weak. So you know what...let's put ALL our chips in with it....real lol factor about that strategy right there. Just close your eyes and put all your chips in the middle in blind hope. Yes, that's right, putting 1,600 with this hand is ridiculous but putting EVERYTHING in with it is pure genius.

My way, I get to gamble with the hand for 1,600 and what's more I am giving myself an opportunity to use some semblance of poker skill as the hand progresses e.g. assessing the texture of the flop, watching how my oppos re-act to the flop, judging how they behave when betting or checking before using my position I secured pre-flop to make an informed decision about what to do next. In this particular example after the check-check I would then use this information to rule out UTG holding a monster and commit.

The alternative strategy I have been presented with in this thread is close your eyes and push because your stack is still quite big. Forgive me for not falling in love with this profound alternative just yet. It is based on nothing but hope...particularly that UTG is going to fold. What are you going to do if you get called...hope to flop something...a hope you wouldn't even pay 1,600 for a moment ago....real lol factor once again.

The push strategy is pure irony through and through. Why not just push blind every hand from now on...hey you've got enough chips to put people to a decision. Don't try and use your poker skill from now on, just push, just push when you don't have to, because risking your tournament life with "weak" hands when you really don't have to is fun...and simple too.

So while the poo story was funny JungleCat give me something a bit better than close your eyes and hope and I will take it on board, but quote Shakespeare if you want, I did an English Literature Degree and know a thing or two about the great man.

There are different types of poker player, back to the left-right brain stuff. So I appreciate where the maths guys come from when they say the things they do and I think that's ok but we are never going to see eye to eye.

A firm characteristic of maths guys is this....

No, all that shows is that you don't understand the maths.

It's called inflexibility of thought. Maths guys always do this...because maths is their crutch. So when you get into a tournament situation when flexibility of thought and creativity is required the maths guys stumble. This is why good cash game players generally struggle in tournament play. Bongo I learnt the maths inside and out during my first year...but in this tournament example the creative limp works and the other options don't....show me an equation that proves otherwise.

[Bongo]

I used some creativity and came up with this:

limp = wrong

Actually I've not really thought about the hand too much, more the concept that ev doesn't apply.

The point is that you can apply maths to the situation, and if you apply the right maths, with the right values for the variables (UTG's range, Other's calling ranges), you can start to calculate EV for the situation. This would be a different calculation than you would use for cash, for sure, but you could still apply maths and make an estimate for the EV of each play

[celtic]

This thread has gone of track a little bit here. Paul's original question was Good spot to bluff or not?, almost every post has given a view that doesnt provide the answer Paul is looking for i.e why is leknave limping with 88 and why is Paul limping with 10 j etc.

My view is that its not a great play by either. (Post flop) Leknave has made a move on Paul without really considering that Paul has more than half of his stack in the pot and cant fold leaving himself less than 4BB, And for Paul he SHOULD NOT have folded in this spot, as he has acknowledged as he was getting 6-1 and had top pair and passing here he is more or less out of the comp with such a short stack.

So in answer to your question Paul IMO it was a bad spot to Bluff.

Also a bad spot to fold

[Longy]

Great story JungleCat.

The result for ME in this hand would have been a double through, the result for other players would be different. Whilst I have an interest in how others play this hand with regard to strategy I am primarily concerned with what would happen to me in this example...and as such I am satisfied that the limp with 10-J would have been...well perfect.

So, if we leave the result aside for a second and just look at the strategy instead. I have read how many players think pushing pre-flop is the right move e.g.

Posted by: JungleCat03

You have a stack that can put people to a decision preflop - just about...use that now, rather than weakly limping off chips that can be used as a weapon.

Now I must be missing a trick. Because in this thread 10-J has been categorized as a "weak" and an "over-rated" starting hand that will "loose" most of the time...and putting 1,600 in with this hand is just downright weak. So you know what...let's put ALL our chips in with it....real lol factor about that strategy right there. Just close your eyes and put all your chips in the middle in blind hope. Yes, that's right, putting 1,600 with this hand is ridiculous but putting EVERYTHING in with it is pure genius. My way, I get to gamble with the hand for 1,600 and what's more I am giving myself an opportunity to use some semblance of poker skill as the hand progresses e.g. assessing the texture of the flop, watching how my oppos re-act to the flop, judging how they behave when betting or checking before using my position I secured pre-flop to make an informed decision about what to do next. In this particular example after the check-check I would then use this information to rule out UTG holding a monster and commit.

The alternative strategy I have been presented with in this thread is close your eyes and push because your stack is still quite big. Forgive me for not falling in love with this profound alternative just yet. It is based on nothing but hope...particularly that UTG is going to fold. What are you going to do if you get called...hope to flop something...a hope you wouldn't even pay 1,600 for a moment ago....real lol factor once again.

The push strategy is pure irony through and through. Why not just push blind every hand from now on...hey you've got enough chips to put people to a decision. Don't try and use your poker skill from now on, just push, just push when you don't have to, because risking your tournament life with "weak" hands when you really don't have to is fun...and simple too.

So while the poo story was funny JungleCat give me something a bit better than close your eyes and hope and I will take it on board, but quote Shakespeare if you want, I did an English Literature Degree and know a thing or two about the great man.

There are different types of poker player, back to the left-right brain stuff. So I appreciate where the maths guys come from when they say the things they do and I think that's ok but we are never going to see eye to eye.

A firm characteristic of maths guys is this....

No, all that shows is that you don't understand the maths.

It's called inflexibility of thought. Maths guys always do this...because maths is their crutch. So when you get into a tournament situation when flexibility of thought and creativity is required the maths guys stumble. This is why good cash game players generally struggle in tournament play. Bongo I learnt the maths inside and out during my first year...but in this tournament example the creative limp works and the other options don't....show me an equation that proves otherwise.

Wow, you can be crossed off the list for people i would stake to play sng's (a good test of shortstack play). Seriously some of your comments in here are mixture of bizarre arrogance in your own opinion of how to play the hand and a complete lack of understanding of what push/fold strategy is about.

I actually advocate folding here given the read that UTG has a hand and we have little fold equity against Le Knave. Well alas you are right cos we win the hand right, oh wait pushing probably wins the hand as well, as our j10 wins the race against 88 and we are dodging 2 outs on the river.

The bolded paragraph is nothing short of ridiculous nonesense, pushing/folding here is an ICM calculation and nothing like preying while pushing our chips in. Guess what I and many others have made a wage out of poker based on ICM calculations, you sound like one of those players who has a go in the internet chat box that I don't know how to play poker cos i correctly pushed a marginal hand.

[totalise]

It's called inflexibility of thought. Maths guys always do this...because maths is their crutch. So when you get into a tournament situation when flexibility of thought and creativity is required the maths guys stumble. This is why good cash game players generally struggle in tournament play. Bongo I learnt the maths inside and out during my first year...but in this tournament example the creative limp works and the other options don't....show me an equation that proves otherwise.

good cash game players dont struggle in tournament play,  tournament players struggle in cash game play. I will offer the opinion that you have no idea about the math in poker, I dont mean pot odds and other 1st tier math, I mean proper math, because if you had any idea about the proper math/logic in poker, theres zero chance you would make the statement above. This isn't debatable. Its fact.

but in this tournament example the creative limp works and the other options don't....show me an equation that proves otherwise

how about this one, instead of the guy having 88, he has AA and you go broke... thats a pretty good equation. Poker is sickeningly easy to analyse when you know the results of the hand, and it just so happens that this hand has all the components of a longshot parlay that "justify" the limp with 10J in this spot. thats luck, not judgement. Theres so much luck involved in poker, you should be trying to mimize the luck factor, not hop on its coat-tails and hope that one time it spins up into a big stack.

[Paullie_D]

Jesus....Paul...see what you started?

No-one better have an opinion different from anyone else here! "Conform to my way of thinking or be flamed"

"Resistance is Futile"
[/ducks for cover]

[MANTIS01]

One of the funniest things I see in poker is....

Posted by: JungleCat03

If you are going to be results orientated, which pretty much every great poker player I've ever listened to suggests you should not be

....so being results orientated is ridiculous.

Posted by: totalise

how about this one, instead of the guy having 88, he has AA and you go broke

....but being potential results orientated carries much more credibility....lol to that. And anyhow, the players that push pre-flop are the ones that go broke, I however, can get away on the flop for a mere 1,600...sweet.

There seems to be a lot of speculation about my arrogance, my ability in science-based subjects, what I type in chat-box's etc...which is ok I suppose although it is based on nothing of real substance. But why don't you guys post YOUR thoughts about strategy rather than just responding to mine....and if you do want to respond then tell me WHY you think that way. Please be aware that projected insults are a sign that the argument is being lost.

I'm sorry totalise but your post is just plain infantile. How can someone of your standing post something that basically reads...I'm right, you're wrong, you can't count, so there. The reality is cash game grinders despise luck for obvious reasons...but when you become short in tournaments it is necessary to look for spots where you can get lucky...because you have no "play" left in your stack. And by the way, when people object to my thoughts it fuels my belief that I have a real edge...what would I do if everyone thought the same as me...I would have no fun.

[tikay]

Wow. What a great thread.

[TheChipPrince]

BEST.DEBATE.EVER

[kinboshi]

Wow. What a great thread.

'Tis that, and from such a bad play from Paul (and LeKnave)! 

We were at the bar during the break soon after the hand happened.  Paul was funny.  Don't know if he was angrier that he made the laydown or that LeKnave actually thought he was ahead.

I must admit though, one of my major faults is that I give opponents too much credit. 

[bobby1]

great hand and great posts.

I think some good points have been made by both sides of the argument, in truth I think calling with j 10 here if you think the guy has a big hand is a great play IF you are deepish stacked, you might just bust him for very little risk. With ten BB it is pretty marginal.

Thewwy once told me to get into pots cheap when people flat call in early position as you might get a chance to bust a big hand.This is prob the reason he does bust so many big hands with rags but you prob wont find that in many of the popular poker books.

The prob with calling in this hand is exactly what happened, if you think he has a big hand and you flop enough to make you want to proceed in most pots what do you do? Was your read right, can you win the pot here, are you being slow played? but that is why it is ok when you have enough chips to make a bet, find out where you are and then pass if re raised by the player you originally thought might have a big hand. Move on to the next hand.

In this hand having that much of my stack in the middle I would have to call to the all in on the flop.

Interestingly I think the 88 utg has played the hand far worse than Paul(fold apart) but we aren't dissecting the value of pushing utg with 88 with 10 bb. Poker really is a great game innit, both players have made pretty big mistakes in the hand yet both could have won the pot.

[dazzaster]

One of the funniest things I see in poker is....

Posted by: JungleCat03

If you are going to be results orientated, which pretty much every great poker player I've ever listened to suggests you should not be

....so being results orientated is ridiculous.

Posted by: totalise

how about this one, instead of the guy having 88, he has AA and you go broke

....but being potential results orientated carries much more credibility....lol to that. And anyhow, the players that push pre-flop are the ones that go broke, I however, can get away on the flop for a mere 1,600...sweet.

There seems to be a lot of speculation about my arrogance, my ability in science-based subjects, what I type in chat-box's etc...which is ok I suppose although it is based on nothing of real substance. But why don't you guys post YOUR thoughts about strategy rather than just responding to mine....and if you do want to respond then tell me WHY you think that way. Please be aware that projected insults are a sign that the argument is being lost.

I'm sorry totalise but your post is just plain infantile. How can someone of your standing post something that basically reads...I'm right, you're wrong, you can't count, so there. The reality is cash game grinders despise luck for obvious reasons...but when you become short in tournaments it is necessary to look for spots where you can get lucky...because you have no "play" left in your stack. And by the way, when people object to my thoughts it fuels my belief that I have a real edge...what would I do if everyone thought the same as me...I would have no fun.

I really can't get my head around your views Mantis.
Yes you can get away for 1600 and you will have to most of the time, this is an unprofitable play in the long run .
You can obviously look to win individual pots rather than making good decisions and am sure you have got lucky in the past but you are I'm afraid being short sighted, if these are the kind of decisions you make in a tournaments you really are going to require luck.
To say Cash game players struggle in Tournys is a strange one too? based on your theories I guess you don't play cash, certainly not profitably.
You seem to me ( I may be wrong ) that you are the kind of player that I come across all the time in tourny's, you win the pot but don't see the mistakes because you think rakeing the chips in and stacking them up means you played the hand well. Poker as they say is about opinion though so you just continue with your theories mate I hope it works out for you.

Regarding the opening post I think it obvious that it wasn't a good bluff, Le Knave thought he had the best hand and it was bad play all round. We are all guilty of that.