Originally Posted by Xandit
I understand what Sklansky is saying here, but it seems to fly in the face of the Semibluff as a whole. Not raising because the possiblity of a checkraise you would then never semibluff. You could raise from UTG and get checkraised from the BB in the same situation. would the play then be incorrect also?
Not quite contradictory; the very important distinction is that since you were in position you decided to rob yourself of a free card by betting
. You could have seen the river (in this case) for free, but you instead tried taking it down right then and there. If you're not last to act, the situation changes, because if you bet, everyone else may fold, but if you don't bet, someone else still might.
Originally Posted by Xandit
We knew going into the turn and river against 3 opponets that we needed to make our flush to win. If we don't semibluff this turn, there is no way we take a shot at the river. This seems like our best chance to thin the field/build the pot. Without a bet on the turn we are surrendering our hand, there is a chance with a bet that we could get a couple folds and take a shot at the river against one opponet. Which we could not do if we check and face a river with 3 oppoents.
Good point; Our bluffing prospect in the face of checking with 3 opponents still in, in position, on the turn, makes bluffing the river highly unlikely. I'm not sure where I was going with that, but you're definitely correct.
My overall point still stands: Semibluffing in position with plenty of outs is not a good idea, if you run the risk of being checkraised. Another reason it's bad is because with plenty of outs, you can actually gain some value with it if you get many callers (e.g. flushdraw on the flop in Hold 'em - two or more callers, and you're showing an equity surplus), but if the first player after you raises (or you get checkraised when on the button) that checkraise may drive others out and again you've managed to get plenty of money in with the worst of it. This is actually a fairly common mistake that I saw as recently as 20 hands ago on a $3/$6 6-max table. It looked something like this:
Completely loose (calls everything - yes, everything - preflop, for one bet) player calls UTG. I had ATo in middle position and raise. Semi-loose player calls from the BB, meaning that his range is fairly big. Not 72o, but big. The flop comes A-6-4, where 6-4 are diamonds, and both BB and UTG check to me.
I bet. BB checkraises, loose idiot folds. I call.
Turn comes another 6. BB checks. I don't like the look of middle pair, but my kicker is still alive, and this guy hadn't been CR:ing middle pair that I had seen earlier, and had been pretty good about betting his big hands, so I decided he either had a weaker ace and was testing me, or he was on a flushdraw and tried to take control. I bet. He called.
River is another 6. He donkbets. I call. He has a busted flushdraw, and decided to give the river a go.
His biggest mistake here was checkraising the flop. If he had bet out, the loose maniac might have called. If he had checked, and then called my bet, the loose maniac might have called. Both scenarios would have meant that he'd have gotten money in with an equity surplus (I'd like a better way of putting that, but I've come up short so far), but now he decided to scare the other player off. Not smart, if he wanted to play his flushdraw. It's possible he was running a more advanced semibluff, but in that case I think waiting until the turn to pop me would have been smarter. But oh well.