Long term +EV from a serial bluffer

[Highstack]

Convinced that you hold the best hand, you are up against a serial bluffer. I know that it is each situation on its own merits, but as a general rule, do you prefer to:

a) lead into them with a small bet for them to come over the top, thus gaining more chips long term even if they sometimes pass.

OR

b) check to them and let them hang themselves or pot commit with an overbet (chance that they may check behind you).

[lynx5.0]

think i would use opion B in this case why risk a fold if u know hes a serial bluffer just check then hope for a bet, if he checks i would check again then only on river throw out small bet half the pot maybe 40% if i still get no call ive won pot any way


ps do u know where i can find any serial bluffers

[snoopy1239]

For me, it depends on the flop and how your action will be perceived by the bluffer in relation to the flop.

Overall, I'd probably rather lead.

[TightEnd]

both are valid but it depends on what type of player you are perceived to be


do you make continuation bets and then fold to heavy action? if so your lead out could be perceived as weak and habe the desired effect

are you a trapper, habitually checking or check raising strong hands?

I would do the opposite of what the table has seen me do so far if you think you have the best  hand, if you are playing a game where others notice your playing pattern