betting into a dry side pot

OK there is something that irritates me more than anything and it' when a player tries bluffing into a dry side.
This happened again tonight and I would have taken a player out of the game but folded to the big stack betting large.....with zip!!! grrrrrrrrrrrr
Oh....they had A4os A high with nothing to match it.

The only time I can see betting a dry side is if you have the "absolute nuts"
Why would someone try bluffing there??????

What are your ideas on this?

Yep you're absolutely right that it's pointless to bluff into a dry side pot. That said, depending on the situation, he could have made a good play. If the all-in is doing it with basically any two cards, he is a favorite over him with just A high. Against you however he is not. So he bluffs you off your pair and is either ahead or has outs against the all-in player.

Now he probably didn't think that through and was just an idiot who wasn't thinking, but another factor is that in some spots a big stack would rather a small stack be in. Note that you are not callin without a very good hand here (because theoretically he should have a very good hand to bet) so it will be a very high-success bluff. So even though he doesn't always make any money, the shortstack wins it, stays in, and allows the big stack to continue to steal rather than you winning the pot and breaking the bubble or w/e.

Again, it all depends on the situation, but you're right in that at least 90% of the time you should not be betting into a dry side pot without a very strong hand. One minor exception is on drawy boards (ie bet 2nd pair to charge flush draw), but there it's for protection/value rather than a bluff.

If you're in a tournament more than halfway through then definitely there's no reason to do it. Early in a tournament there's some advantage to getting the player out, but not as much so if you think you can get some chips out of it then I say it's fair game. In a cash game I say go for it.

I've seen this strategy work very effectively for people who are good readers. You have to know where you stand in the hand and how the other player will react. Some players will always call the first bet even when they have a weak or medium hand, then fold to the second bet because they assume you have a monster. Some will fold immediately, raising your odds of winning if the all in didn't hit either.

It can also be a good way to bleed chips if you try it in the wrong situation. It has to be used selectively or as part of an overall strategy of manipulating your table image and putting people on tilt.

If it is in a tourney and in everyones best interest to get another person out , you should never bet at a dry pot unless you have the nuts. I would say it differs a bit in a cash game but still should have something and not just a bluff.

Something funny happened to me with this situation.

I hit top pair, K kicker on the flop on the bubble after shortie had pushed.

Other guy, real fool, bet into a dry pot. I called. The turn gave me the nuts (top set), so I raised 1/4 pot, the fool came over me I called.

He was pushing with his ace rag. What was funny was that the river gave shortie the nut flush,I took down the side pot, the nutta was bubble boy

im with you on this one....one of my biggest pet peeves. Hate it hate, and it makes no sense unless you have a huge hand and want to protect it

Betting into a dry sidepot is a play. Just like any other bluffs, this one in particular is very powerful. very difficult to call w/ marginal hand. btw....always sucks when you get bluffed out of a pot, in this case you get to see it.

I posted a thread just like this.
Happens to me all the time.
Gets frustraiting especially late in a tourney were you have a good chance at knocking out a player and would have if you didnt get bet out of the pot,then they wind up winning the pot to double up.
never will understand it in tourney play,no matter what anyone says about strategy.

There's nothing worse than that happening when you have a half hand after the flop but the other person reckons with you in the pot he's going to loose so he would rather get rid of you and double his chance of winning with nothing rather than you take the pot and the short stack.

If i was brave enough i'd re-raise the git for the cheek!!

I really dont understand how you can bluff with the nuts.

That doesnt make any sense to me. But while im here Bluffing to get someone off the pot is always good. My cards vs 2 ppl is less likely to win then heads up

zachvac said:

another factor is that in some spots a big stack would rather a small stack be in. Note that you are not callin without a very good hand here (because theoretically he should have a very good hand to bet) so it will be a very high-success bluff. So even though he doesn't always make any money, the shortstack wins it, stays in, and allows the big stack to continue to steal rather than you winning the pot and breaking the bubble or w/e.

Click to expand...

^ this.

That it's always in everyone's best interest to bust the short stack isn't a fact - it's a myth. Maybe it's in your best interests, but it's not in everyone's.

As Zach points out above, if a player is making a killing by stealing from all the players who are too scared to play a pot on the bubble... why would they want the bubble to end?!? It's in their interests to prolong the bubble as much as possible, keep the short stacks in and keep stealing from all the weak-tight players. Often I find myself rooting for the short stack in those spots.

But even if that's not you, with a proper read you should be prepared to bet with less than the absolute nuts in these spots. Some players will call you with pretty much any pair, in the vain hope that they'll at least ensure the short stack gets knocked out if you don't have a hand. Dunno about anyone else, but that spells valuetown to me.

I would only do it with the stone cold nuts. No other time.

silverslugger33 said:

I would only do it with the stone cold nuts. No other time.

Click to expand...

OK. Why is that?

There is a long thread in the Golden Archive Section on this topic.
Zach & Oz have summed it up well.

Sometimes it's just the stupid mentaltity of what I call Donks.

Situation last night 13 peeps left in a satellite ...11 get ticket to next level 12th gets a little cash, Short stack is all in 3000 ish chips sb and bb call and I call and button calls ss small raise as we all do.

Flop comes and 3 checks ,SS already all in and button puts in big raise, 3 folds and SS fops 2 pair to button A/J.

SS quads up and has more chips than most of us...2 of us try to ask politely why he did this ,,, His reply I want to win this ( he is 3rd in chips)

I wasn't so polite in my questions.

He had no comprehension of what a dry side pot is..

There are times when you should bet into a dry pot...

I just wanted to get this off my chest

OzExorcist said:

OK. Why is that?

Click to expand...

Well, this doesn't necessarily account for if it's the very beginning of a huge MTT, but it absolutely applies near or in the money of any tournament and here's why:

With every player that gets eliminated, you get closer to the money (if near the bubble), or you get more money even if you're the next player eliminated (if already in the money). Other than that, I think it's more of an etiquette thing.

However, even early on in a tournament, you won't get callers into a dry side pot unless they have a huge hand or a good draw. Since there's an all in and at least 2 callers, the pot itself is already pretty big, and unless you have a monster, you aren't going to want to bet enough to take away the equity of someone calling with a draw. Therefore, if you are betting w/o a huge hand, then you'll either be giving someone equity to call with a draw or you'll get called by a huge hand. In the long run, neither of these are profitable plays. As a result, the only bet that makes sense no matter what hand you have is a huge bet that takes away the equity of someone with a good draw (keep in mind, this has to be calculated for the entire pot) and the only hand you'd want to make such a bet with is the stone cold nuts.

I would bet into a dry side pot to protect a vunrable hand sometimes. For example, I flop set and there is a flushdraw. I would bet say 1/2 pot. If someone wants to come along for the ride they obviously have a hand so the side pot then becomes an opportunity for me.

However, in the main I will check down and fold to a bet.

silverslugger33 said:

However, even early on in a tournament, you won't get callers into a dry side pot unless they have a huge hand or a good draw. Since there's an all in and at least 2 callers, the pot itself is already pretty big, and unless you have a monster, you aren't going to want to bet enough to take away the equity of someone calling with a draw. Therefore, if you are betting w/o a huge hand, then you'll either be giving someone equity to call with a draw or you'll get called by a huge hand. In the long run, neither of these are profitable plays. As a result, the only bet that makes sense no matter what hand you have is a huge bet that takes away the equity of someone with a good draw (keep in mind, this has to be calculated for the entire pot) and the only hand you'd want to make such a bet with is the stone cold nuts.

Click to expand...

I'll grant that you're usually only getting called by good hands when you bet into a dry side pot.

The question is though, how often is the villain holding a hand that's good enough to call?

I suggest that it's not very often, and you fold out massive portions of your opponent's range even with small bets. Thanks to the myth that only the nuts or near to it can bet into a dry side pot, your opponents typically give you credit for at least a TPTK type hand, and fold a lot of lesser hands.

The proof is in the existence of threads just like this one. If people called with draws or medium pairs more often, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Anyway - long story short, there's not nescessarily anything wrong with checking these hands down. I'm certainly not suggesting we should be bluffing every single dry side pot: often, it really is in our best interests to check down and maximise the chances of the all in player getting busted.

But "always" is a very dangerous word to be using in poker.

This is something that drives me nuts too. I got to read the OP but I'll have to come back and finish the other posts.

So make 'em good! LOL

my olny piece to add maybe that it would also depend on the tourney your in or is it a ring game???..still bluffing into a dry side does seem ridiculous,,but it has worked for me in the past..and it has also handed me my tush once or twice....i guess you just have to recognize the circumstances at the time..idk ....

OzExorcist said:

I'll grant that you're usually only getting called by good hands when you bet into a dry side pot.

The question is though, how often is the villain holding a hand that's good enough to call?

I suggest that it's not very often, and you fold out massive portions of your opponent's range even with small bets. Thanks to the myth that only the nuts or near to it can bet into a dry side pot, your opponents typically give you credit for at least a TPTK type hand, and fold a lot of lesser hands.

The proof is in the existence of threads just like this one. If people called with draws or medium pairs more often, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Anyway - long story short, there's not nescessarily anything wrong with checking these hands down. I'm certainly not suggesting we should be bluffing every single dry side pot: often, it really is in our best interests to check down and maximise the chances of the all in player getting busted.

But "always" is a very dangerous word to be using in poker.

Click to expand...

You're right, I shouldn't have used the word always. That being said, even if players don't call with draws into a dry side pot, it doesn't mean they shouldn't. If you are playing with players who are good enough to figure this out, which most high level players are, then you will start getting called with draws that have equity, which is a profitable play for them, but not for you.

I feel like we are in agreement at least that a bluff is stupid (not saying you need a huge hand, but you at least need SOMETHING), because the player who is all in obviously can't fold, and so you have to at least be able to beat their hand. So, value bets are pretty much the only things that make sense. The issue with that is that your opponent knows this as well, which makes you reasonably easy to read. Also, you don't want to bet out with a draw, because if you miss, the all in player will win the pot, and if you hit the draw, you'd rather have the other player in the pot, so you can bet your flush, straight, or whatever you just hit for value and maybe win a bit more.

marble said:

Betting into a dry sidepot is a play. Just like any other bluffs, this one in particular is very powerful. very difficult to call w/ marginal hand. btw....always sucks when you get bluffed out of a pot, in this case you get to see it.

Click to expand...

You have more FE, but there's no pot to win. So when the bluff works, you only gain the equity in having a trash hand fold. When it doesn't work you lose money. The only time I would "bluff" is if I had like bottom pair. I was likely to be ahead of the all-in but possibly behind the other bigger stack. But that's not exactly a bluff.

nomasburros said:

my olny piece to add maybe that it would also depend on the tourney your in or is it a ring game???..still bluffing into a dry side does seem ridiculous,,but it has worked for me in the past..and it has also handed me my tush once or twice....i guess you just have to recognize the circumstances at the time..idk ....

Click to expand...

you're right, in a tourney there are many more times to do it. As long as it's not a satellite, you should be playing for 1st place, not for the money. So you punish all the people playing for money by keeping the shortstack in and continuing to steal from the medium stacks. In a cash game there's no point where that's a viable strategy.

In tournament bubble there might be another reason to bet a dry pot. Say there is an all-in guy (AI), small stack (SS) and big stack (BS, us) in the pot. All odds and everything aside, there will be one of us 3 who will win. So if SS wins, then, depending on pot size, SS remaining stack size etc he might become average stack or big stack. For us it is better to have as many small stacks around as possible, they get knocked out faster. So in this case we are making sure one guy is not becoming a threat to us. Any sense in such thinking?