$5 NL HE 6-max: River Bluffing Rules of Thumb

[Mercurius]

Game

Hold'em

Game Format

No Limit

Stakes

$.02/$.05

Table Format

6-max (6 seats)

Currency

$

pokerstars Zoom, Hold'em No Limit - $0.02/$0.05 - 6 players
Replay this hand on CardsChat

UTG: $6.57 (131 bb)
MP: $2.01 (40 bb)
CO: $6.67 (133 bb)
BU (Hero): $4.81 (96 bb)
SB: $13.06 (261 bb)
BB: $2.50 (50 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.07) Hero is BTN with J♥ Q♣
2 players fold, CO calls $0.05, Hero raises to $0.17, SB calls $0.15, BB calls $0.12, 1 fold

Flop: ($0.56) T♦ 6♣ 4♦ (3 players)
SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets $0.16, SB calls $0.16, BB folds

Turn: ($0.88) 5♣ (2 players)
SB checks, Hero checks

River: ($0.88) K♦ (2 players)
SB bets $0.84, BU (Hero) folds

Interested in any rules of thumb for best holdings to bluff with on the river.

This hand was a clear fold for me, but given his range is so polar having donked the river for large size I wanted to think about what my bluffing range could be here or if I should even have a bluffing range here (notionally should be defending half my range vs pot sizing)? My value raises are the best flushes, I think weaker flushes, straights and sets call - 2 pair is marginal and worse probably folds given how connected the board is.

I think that leaves me needing some bluffs - the obvious one being hands with the A♦, but what about hands with 7's which block Villains likely straights e.g. 67/79s)? If bluffing with these types of blockers do we prefer them to include a diamond (lowering odds of facing a flush) or exclude diamonds and clubs to keep missed flushes in Villains range?

 

[wavetune]

I don't see any other bluff except the A ♦ x hand, as you wrote above, maybe an experienced player will tell you, but I would also reset J Q

 

[John A]

I think this is one of those example hands of how GTO play is warping the minds of micro players and losing them lots of money.

1) At micro levels, if you're c-betting this small multi-way with Q high, you're just burning money. Either check or bet larger. You're not setting yourself up for a clever c-betting range by betting just over 1/4th pot, you're betting SIXTEEN CENTS into a pot with two players who will call w/ any range of hands.

2) If you want to play the GTO range game and bet that amount on the flop, then you should be over betting that turn, otherwise your 1/4th c-bet was pointless. But you don't, you check.

3) On the river, you don't need to be thinking about a bluffing range. A micro player called a draw heavy flop multi-way and then donk potted when one of them came in. He's not thinking about your clever GTO balanced ranges, he's thinking... "I hit my flush, I hope he has a K!"

You guys are taking an approach to the game that is needed against high level players, and applying it to players who are still level 1 and maybe sometimes level 2 thinkers. You're going to lose money by doing that, and you may never win enough to build a role to be able to properly apply GTO play to players that need it. It's fine to learn GTO if it makes you more thoughtful, but you should be learning exploitative play first (no you don't need GTO as a baseline), and taking advantage of all the HUGE mistakes your opponents are making constantly.

 

[Mercurius]

I think this is one of those example hands of how GTO play is warping the minds of micro players and losing them lots of money.

1) At micro levels, if you're c-betting this small multi-way with Q high, you're just burning money. Either check or bet larger. You're not setting yourself up for a clever c-betting range by betting just over 1/4th pot, you're betting SIXTEEN CENTS into a pot with two players who will call w/ any range of hands.

2) If you want to play the GTO range game and bet that amount on the flop, then you should be over betting that turn, otherwise your 1/4th c-bet was pointless. But you don't, you check.

3) On the river, you don't need to be thinking about a bluffing range. A micro player called a draw heavy flop multi-way and then donk potted when one of them came in. He's not thinking about your clever GTO balanced ranges, he's thinking... "I hit my flush, I hope he has a K!"

You guys are taking an approach to the game that is needed against high level players, and applying it to players who are still level 1 and maybe sometimes level 2 thinkers. You're going to lose money by doing that, and you may never win enough to build a role to be able to properly apply GTO play to players that need it. It's fine to learn GTO if it makes you more thoughtful, but you should be learning exploitative play first (no you don't need GTO as a baseline), and taking advantage of all the HUGE mistakes your opponents are making constantly.

All very valid!! I quite enjoy the theory side of the game however so was a thought experiment more than anything.

In terms of the hand as played, I wouldn't say I necessarily try to play GTO, but the smaller flop C-bets are more designed to help me C-bet a high frequency of flops (which generates a tonne of folds at 5NL) and get called down by worse hands given I tend to target and isolate players with higher VPIP. On this one my holding was trash vs the board so I just checked down and folded river.

I find the exploitative "bet high when you have premium holdings" hard to execute at these low stakes tbh - you either fold everyone out if you hit on flop, or if you get called tend to be behind unless you have a disguised holding like sets and 2 pairs. What is your typical bet sizing for low stakes? 2/3rd to pot sized C-bets when you connect and check when you don't largely?

Given I use the low flop sizing I tend to 2/3 to 3/4 pot sized turn bet, again at a high frequency as long as i've hit or have draws. I will mix in some turn checks on draws so I can pot bet river and get called when people assume it's a bluff. Do I need to be betting even larger and mixing in a lot of overbetting if I'm using lower flop C-bet sizing?

 

[Hermus]

Ignoring this hand and just answering your question at face value, there are a couple of heuristics players use to determine what cards to bluff with on the river. In the end, the most important principles in my opinion are: 1) What's your range. 2) How likely are you to get called. And 3) How much showdown value does your hand have.

• What's your range?

Think about how the prior action shaped your range. What hands do you realistically end up with in this position? Is your strong or weak? Capped or polar? A good rule is to bluff less with a weak or capped range and bluff more with a strong polar range into a capped range. Just for the sake of completion, bet-sizing, range and how much you can bluff all go hand in hand, but unless you're really refining your strategy I wouldn't bother.

• How likely are you to get called?

Hand reading and reading your opponent. Pretty straightforward, but never easy. If you struggle with reading players, start by grouping your opponents based on tendencies or HUD stats and play accordingly (e.g. decrease bluffing frequency against loose passive players, increase bluffing frequency against tight passive players, try to play balanced against good regs).

• How much showdown value does your hand have?​

Whether you subscribe to GTO or not, it's a fact of life that the best bluff combos are the ones with the lowest showdown EV. Unless we range bet we need to eliminate some combos from our range and the best combo's to check/call are the ones that have some chance to win at showdown --> when we bluff, we want to bluff with the lowest EV cards. You can work out how much to bluff in step 1 and 2 and pick your best candidates here.

What that most commonly translates to, for river bluffs at least, are missed draws from suited connectors with low card value (think 98s or worse for LP single raised pots and QJ, maybe JT for EP or 3-bet pots.) or in the case when draws do complete Jx Qx or sometimes even better. Ax combos are almost never good bluff combo's because the A represents some showdown value. Obviously, marginal made hands like bottom pair+ are also bad bluff combo's. Naturally, edge cases exist, where ranges are so narrow and strong that your worst possible hand is a made hand. You'll "just" have to work out the specifics of each hand by yourself during hand analysis or together with people on the forum.

 

[Hermus]

I think this is one of those example hands of how GTO play is warping the minds of micro players and losing them lots of money.

1) At micro levels, if you're c-betting this small multi-way with Q high, you're just burning money. Either check or bet larger. You're not setting yourself up for a clever c-betting range by betting just over 1/4th pot, you're betting SIXTEEN CENTS into a pot with two players who will call w/ any range of hands.

2) If you want to play the GTO range game and bet that amount on the flop, then you should be over betting that turn, otherwise your 1/4th c-bet was pointless. But you don't, you check.

3) On the river, you don't need to be thinking about a bluffing range. A micro player called a draw heavy flop multi-way and then donk potted when one of them came in. He's not thinking about your clever GTO balanced ranges, he's thinking... "I hit my flush, I hope he has a K!"

You guys are taking an approach to the game that is needed against high level players, and applying it to players who are still level 1 and maybe sometimes level 2 thinkers. You're going to lose money by doing that, and you may never win enough to build a role to be able to properly apply GTO play to players that need it. It's fine to learn GTO if it makes you more thoughtful, but you should be learning exploitative play first (no you don't need GTO as a baseline), and taking advantage of all the HUGE mistakes your opponents are making constantly.

While I agree with your point, especially the third one, a solver would never rangebet into two opponents on this board. So to be more exact, generalizing GTO flop c-bet strategies is lighting money on fire.

 

[loafaBREAD]

While I agree with your point, especially the third one, a solver would never rangebet into two opponents on this board. So to be more exact, generalizing GTO flop c-bet strategies is lighting money on fire.

This exactly. I think you can and should use GTO material as a baseline... GTO is a defensive strategy designed to prevent you from being exploited.

At 5nl you will never be exploited in a meaningful way.

To answer your question, you'd bluff the river if V would lead/fold on a flush card completing. He leads with a pot size bet.

You can go ahead and never bluff here and you will never be exploited. If V is capable of folding a flush on the river, then you can bluff Ace of diamonds only, but I'd wait until you get reads on that.

I agree with others that the most important street is the flop. Even GTO solves start to bluff way less in 3 way pots, even in position like this.

Your down bet says that you have a greater proportion of strong hands here, but I doubt that's true. Cold callers are often pocket pair heavy, so they have greater combos of 44 and 66 proportionally, which you may not even have in your iso range.

BTN vs BB flat SRP I like a 33% pot bet with 100% frequency on this board. 3 way iso pot changes a lot!

 

[blueskies]

Don't overthink it at 5NL. QJ is no good.

Just fold and move on.

If you look to rep a flush and bluff raise here, chances are you are gonna get called.

 

[Luvepoker]

The problem of thinking of bluffs you could make on the river could be a problem. You raised and that King is really good for you. Yes his bet could be a bluff but if it was me in his spot I would be concerned you could and should have a strong chance of having it so bluffing would be bad but if I had the flush or 2 pair I would bet here large as well banking on your likly call with that king.

 

[John A]

This exactly. I think you can and should use GTO material as a baseline... GTO is a defensive strategy designed to prevent you from being exploited.

At 5nl you will never be exploited in a meaningful way.

Respectfully disagree, and this is the misnomer that a lof of micro/small stakes players fall into. And it's mainly because they are being sold products they don't need, because high stakes players are using them, and they think they need them as well. I've watched these kinds of accepted theories happen over the years many times.

GTO is not going to provide the correct baseline that you need to be the most profitable poker player possible at these stakes. It will actually have the opposite effect, because you need to understand the MAX EV play in any situation as your baseline, rather than the neutral EV play as your baseline.

I know, I know... you're told that if you punch in a situation into a solver, the magic button will tell you the highest EV play, but it's NOT true. I wish poker was that simple. Solver's sound more data/ science driven, and hence they must be the best way forward and the future of poker right? Well they are... for very high stakes players that understand exploitative play fully. But for you guys... no. No, no, no, no, no... not if you want to crush at poker.

Your baseline needs to be, what's the MAX I can bet for value with good hands on this board texture, what the min I need to bet to bluff in X situation, etc... You learn this by playing tons of poker and believe it or not, you will actually figure out a baseline to maximize your EV.

I'm not saying to not learn a theory about poker... I'm just saying, GTO play is not the baseline. If you make it the baseline at these stakes, you'll be leaving a TON of money on the table.

 

[blueskies]

Yeah at microstakes don't worry about advanced poker theories. That's like trying to discuss calculus with first graders.

Just play solid abc poker. If you notice the opponent is better than your typical microstakes player, and abc poker is not working, then add some trickery, otherwise just fold garbage hands and play good hands aggressively.

You just need to get an idea of who is aggressive and who is passive. Who folds too much and who is too sticky. Things like that. A basic HUD is all you need if you wanna improve results.