Empty side pot

PoKeRFoRNiA

PoKeRFoRNiA

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Total posts
1,319
Awards
1
Chips
35
People who bluff or bet with weak hand into an empty side pot, is this standard and ok to do or is it complete stupidity and moronic? Is this stupid only in tournaments but ok in cash games, or vice versa, or etc?

Tonight, I went to the casino and here's the full hand history.

UTG+1 ($210~ stack)
MP+2 ( $130~ stack)
Button ($7 stack) this person just got donked hard by utg+1 and is on tilt, very good player imo. plays solid, aggressive game.
I'm BB(Hero with $170~ stack)

UTG+1 raises to $5, mp+2 calls, button goes all-in for $7, I'm in the big blind and it was just $5 more to call with 5h5s. UTG+1 and MP+2 calls $2 more.

Pot is $23(it's supposed to be $29 but $1 jackpot collection, $5 rake since it hit the flop)
Flop comes out 5d 6c Ks

it's a rainbow board, there's an all-in, let's see what my villains do. So I checked.

UTG+1 comes raising in for $20. mp2 folds. I flat-called. Pot is now $63

Turn comes out ANOTHER 5c. I HAVE QUADS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I wanna see what my villain does. He's been playing like a pos. He comes out betting $50. I was hollywood acting, looking at him, and saying, "you do realize, he's all-in, right? you still have to beat this guy to win." he tells me "well, you do what you gotta do." I "reluctantly"flat-called as if I look weak and just in doubt about my villain's hand. So pot is now $163.

River came out 8s or clubs, it was a black 8. Even though it's tempting to shove all-in or bet out, because if he checks behind, I would regret it so much, but knowing his dumb aggression and what kind of donkey pos he is, I just checked. He shoves all-in. I instantly called but I didn't roll over my quads immediately. I REALLY wanted to know wtf he's been betting into an empty side pot with. He rolls over A2o. WTF?????!!!!!!!!! I don't understand these type of people. A2o, NOTHING on the flop/turn/river, with the all-in and he's bluffing into an empty side pot? Is it just me who think that these are people with no common sense or is it ok to bluff into an empty side pot? I don't see ANY value of bluffing into an empty side pot since if your villain folds, you STILL have to beat the value of ss all-in's hand value to win the pot.

I've seen so many of these plays, live AND online that I have to ask about this. Is it just me who thinks that bluffing into an empty side pot is stupid or am I the wrong one and it's ok to bluff into an empty side pot and that it's standard?

After few hands, I walked out with $350stack($250 profit). Table was down to 6 players bcz short-stack left, donkey lost his remaining stack to another player, so the table went down from 8 players to 6 players). As I left, table broke and 5 players were getting put into different tables. I'm running really hot this past month. I know this streak is gonna end sometime and hopefully when I hit the downswing, I will have the discipline to follow brm like I used to when I played online. I am just flabbergasted imo with people who have no common sense with side pots.
 
Last edited:
W

WizardRubic

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Total posts
125
Awards
1
Chips
0
Depends.

Maybe he thought the ace high was good enough to beat the guy who was all in but wasn't good enough to take your hand out.

Or maybe he wanted to show an empty bluff so people would call him down lighter.

Or... he heard good players play aggressively and wanted to try it :s
 
PoKeRFoRNiA

PoKeRFoRNiA

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Total posts
1,319
Awards
1
Chips
35
Depends.

Maybe he thought the ace high was good enough to beat the guy who was all in but wasn't good enough to take your hand out.

Or maybe he wanted to show an empty bluff so people would call him down lighter.

Or... he heard good players play aggressively and wanted to try it :s

I don't know if it's just me but it's completely stupid to bluff into an empty side pot. There's not a SINGLE value of bluffing into it. Even if you bluffed people out successfully, you STILL have to beat the hand ranking of all-in player, which then only increases all-in's equity. Maybe it's just me or maybe I'm just missing what "real" poker is about and that he was just bluffing that failed. But lot of times, bluffs are made to take down the pot uncontested. But in this case, it STILL needs to be contested even if you successfully bluff.
 
loafes

loafes

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Total posts
1,049
Chips
0
Bluffing into dry pots is one of the most retarded things to do. Very rarely is it a good play. When I see people do it, often with horrible hands that probably can't even beat an extremely wide ss range, I just want to face palm so bad.

Just recently I saw someone do this on the bubble in a double or nothing, they thought it would be a good idea to bluff my weak pair out of the pot.... when they had 10 high with no draws. Of course because of this the all in player ended up winning with K high and even went on to KO the donkey.
 
A

aznman08

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Total posts
357
Chips
0
Maybe he was just trying to build a side pot to take just in case the all-in guy wins? Is this $1/$2 live? $5 Opening raise seems small.

Just recently I saw someone do this on the bubble in a double or nothing, they thought it would be a good idea to bluff my weak pair out of the pot.... when they had 10 high with no draws. Of course because of this the all in player ended up winning with K high and even went on to KO the donkey.

Well in a tournament its a different scenario, because in the end he's putting pressure back on you to determine if you're willing to gamble with your small pair to double your chip stack or bust short of the money.
 
loafes

loafes

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Total posts
1,049
Chips
0
Well in a tournament its a different scenario, because in the end he's putting pressure back on you to determine if you're willing to gamble with your small pair to double your chip stack or bust short of the money.

Are you kidding, it was a double or noting and on the bubble. If the short stack player busts as he would have had he checked down, then everyone at the table would win the same amount. by getting me off my hand he just increases the all in players equity whilst lowering his equity in the prize pool since increasing his stack doesn't necessary increase his chance at a payout since all payouts are the same. it's basic ICM. put it this way.
 
PoKeRFoRNiA

PoKeRFoRNiA

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Total posts
1,319
Awards
1
Chips
35
Maybe he was just trying to build a side pot to take just in case the all-in guy wins? Is this $1/$2 live? $5 Opening raise seems small.



Well in a tournament its a different scenario, because in the end he's putting pressure back on you to determine if you're willing to gamble with your small pair to double your chip stack or bust short of the money.

In the double-or-nothing, tournament, if there's a short-stacker all-in and several callers, you dont' bluff into an empty side pot. YOU ONLY GET CALLED BY HANDS THAT BEAT YOU AND EVEN IF YOU SUCCESSFULLY BLUFF, YOU STILL NEED TO BEAT AN ALL-IN PLAYER. As loafes explained, when payouts are the same and you're not playing for the first, the whole objective is to knock out a player and all qualify.

Best thing to do is to knock out the short-stacker by diluting his chance to win. More callers and more players in the pot while checking it down to the river to improve many players hands, higher chance that short-stacker will get eliminated by one of the players who are in the pot.

Purpose of bluffing is to take down the pot uncontested. If there's an empty side pot, there's no value of bluffing because even if you are lucky to successfully bluff, you won't win the main pot if you cannot beat the all-in player.

Is it just me who thinks this is a common sense or am I being narrow minded with empty side pots? What's the point of "building the pot" on empty side pot with a weak hand that has no potential? Your thought process is VERY similar to the guy I took the stack off of in Hollywood Park Casino. Can you elaborate the purpose of bluffing into an empty side pot? I'm just very curious and flabbergasted. Maybe I can even learn something about the reason why people bluff into an empty side pot. To me, it makes no sense to bluff into it. This has nothing to do with poker skills either. Even from business perspective, bluffing money into the side pot, where if everyone folds, you don't win anything unless you beat the all-in player.
 
T

TexasBoy13

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Total posts
41
Chips
0
I run into this alot in tournament play, and I never understood the concept. Makes me even madder when we are deep in a tourney and a small stack is all in with 3 callers checking it thru, and you have that ONE idiot that bets into it so everyone folds and the small stack wins the pot anyway!!!! Whhhhy!?!
 
A

aznman08

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Total posts
357
Chips
0
Is it just me who thinks this is a common sense or am I being narrow minded with empty side pots? What's the point of "building the pot" on empty side pot with a weak hand that has no potential? Your thought process is VERY similar to the guy I took the stack off of in Hollywood Park Casino. Can you elaborate the purpose of bluffing into an empty side pot? I'm just very curious and flabbergasted. Maybe I can even learn something about the reason why people bluff into an empty side pot. To me, it makes no sense to bluff into it. This has nothing to do with poker skills either. Even from business perspective, bluffing money into the side pot, where if everyone folds, you don't win anything unless you beat the all-in player.

Well in the games I play at Foxwoods or in the charity games, while most of the table are fit-or-fold or nits, some of the players are just raise ATC pf. Its these people that are your ATMs in a live casino that are more than happily willing to give their stacks to you.

In the double or nothing tournament its the scenario that TexasBoy pointed out, that these players are the ones you may have to call off lighter than normal. Its just how these people play their hands.
 
W

WizardRubic

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Total posts
125
Awards
1
Chips
0
The player was doing one of two things:
1) He was trying to look like a donk
2) He was a donk

That math behind the reasoning:
We can find the percent you’d need to fold given that his ace will beat out the opponent’s hand 2/3 times using 23-20(3-2n)=0 where n is the percent of times you fold. N in this case is equal to 92.5%

You’d need to fold 92.5% of the times in this situation to his flop bluff to make his bluff profitable. This is already assuming we’re given the fact that his all-in opponent didn’t have a pocket pair.

Therefore, we know he’s either a donk or he was trying to look like a donk. The math isn’t sound since no one folds that often.
 
Top