PLO - To bluff or not to bluff...

[mulhuzz]

Typed a long reply, confused myself, but basically:

Laggy gamblers don't bet fold nearly often enough to raise here.

so, if we raise we rep very narrow as hard to have straight and also have hearts, lots easier for us to have a blocker.

Even laggy gamblers have learned about naked Ace bluffs and they overestimate the frequency with which they occur.

It's player dependent on whether to call here but without info I probably just squirm a little and muck.

[pleno1]

Seems like easy call and hope to fade sf's.

[SuuPRlim]

yh.

I'd call.

[BangBang]

In all seriousness, do live full ring PLO players really value-bet the river here with a J high flush? Pretty much 95% of generic players would bluff catch with those hands here every time, it's PLO people are scared of the nuts everytime.

BTW, i'd never bluff the river when checked to here, and I still think the C-Bet is a big mistake.

Yeah was pretty bad.. But does this bet make the bluff more believable...?

[GreekStein]

I'm calling here usually. I think all options are totally valid and I don't hate any depending on your read of him and his tendencies.

[SuuPRlim]

In all seriousness, do live full ring PLO players really value-bet the river here with a J high flush? Pretty much 95% of generic players would bluff catch with those hands here every time, it's PLO people are scared of the nuts everytime.

BTW, i'd never bluff the river when checked to here, and I still think the C-Bet is a big mistake.

Yeah was pretty bad.. But does this bet make the bluff more believable...?

no, I think it makes it either indifferent, or less believable depending on what cards he has in his hand, if he has and of the stright/wrap cards in hearts then your credibility is going to be reduced slightly and there is no way for you to know.

You have the blockers OTF, which is useful but this flop texture is SO wet, and smashes everyone's range way harder then yours it's not like you need specifically a straight to continue here, the big advantage to to blockers is that you can barrell off as well but the problem is the nuts is v likely to change on turns/rivers so you'd need to be quite lucky for the flopped straight to still be a legit value betting hand by the river, coupled with the fact we're only pretending to have it.

Had 3 pretty stndg hands today actually which made me think of this hand.

Hand (1) I open AA97 single with a bare and got 1caller, flop comes J93hhc he c/c turn he chk I check river he bet 1/3 pot and i raised big he folded instantly.

Hand (2) Called an open with J864ds ( ) flop came 4 handed im 3rd to act chk chk chk - turn is a offsuit 3 chk chk I chked again as there was a few trappy trevor's in the hand, river bricks chk chk i bet last player tanks for a bit and calls with .

Hand (3) I opened 4689sng in the CO and the btn calls, flops 57Kr (1 spade) i bet big he calls, turn is i bet big he calls, river is i chk he chks back

[wazz]

I think bluffing is pretty bad here; if he's backed into a flush, it's pretty difficult to believe you have one too, and you've put money in on the flop and turn, making the backdoor flush less believable. He could easily talk himself into a call on the basis that you could be trying to fold out a chop; also more believable because you've made your hand look like a straight. He's probably also thinking to himself that he's not backed into a flush just to bet-fold it.

We should also remember that people tend to pigeonhole their opponents on the basis of what they would do, and a bluffy, laggy player will be thinking that you're on the same level as him. It's just what people do, how people justify their plays, why people moan that low stakes players don't know how to fold.

He can be bluffing here too, but it doesn't seem likely enough to justify a call. I generally fold here but it's the sort of situation where feel and timing come into it, and I certainly couldn't fault you for a call.

Why are you the only guy not straddling? I hate being that guy.

Flop I don't hate the c-bet with blockers and outs but I certainly wouldn't do it everytime. Might do it most times with a bdfd.

[BangBang]

I think bluffing is pretty bad here; if he's backed into a flush, it's pretty difficult to believe you have one too, and you've put money in on the flop and turn, making the backdoor flush less believable. He could easily talk himself into a call on the basis that you could be trying to fold out a chop; also more believable because you've made your hand look like a straight. He's probably also thinking to himself that he's not backed into a flush just to bet-fold it.

We should also remember that people tend to pigeonhole their opponents on the basis of what they would do, and a bluffy, laggy player will be thinking that you're on the same level as him. It's just what people do, how people justify their plays, why people moan that low stakes players don't know how to fold.

He can be bluffing here too, but it doesn't seem likely enough to justify a call. I generally fold here but it's the sort of situation where feel and timing come into it, and I certainly couldn't fault you for a call.

Why are you the only guy not straddling? I hate being that guy.





Flop I don't hate the c-bet with blockers and outs but I certainly wouldn't do it everytime. Might do it most times with a bdfd.

Not straddling because because there's only 3 decent stacks on the table, the rest are just trying to get there money in, so didn't really want to accommodate tbh

Yeah was pretty bad thinking, the guy was another WAZZ (To run like Piper = to hit everything against people that will pay you off) who actually did have a straight flush so my raise was 1450, he quickly put the rest of his chips in and I was inclined to call based on the size of the pot.  Aaarrggghhh

But on the river I didn't even consider him having the straight flush..