Harrington's Law of Bluffing

zinzir

zinzir

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2019
Total posts
1,225
Awards
3
Chips
0
Harrington's Law of Bluffing: the probability that your opponent is bluffing when he shoves a big bet in the pot is always at least 10 percent. It may be higher, depending on the opponent, but it won't be lower.

It makes sense to me. What do you think? :ciao:
 
P

ph_il

...
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Total posts
10,128
Awards
1
Chips
25
its actually 50% because your opponent either is or isnt bluffing.
 
zinzir

zinzir

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2019
Total posts
1,225
Awards
3
Chips
0
its actually 50% because your opponent either is or isnt bluffing.


If you take one piece out of a Skittles pack without looking, what is the probability of it being green? According to your theory it should be 50%, because it either is green or isn't.
In reality, the probability is 20% because only 1 in every 5 pieces is green, the rest having different colors.
 
NWPatriot

NWPatriot

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Total posts
480
Awards
1
Chips
1
Harrington's Law of Bluffing: the probability that your opponent is bluffing when he shoves a big bet in the pot is always at least 10 percent. It may be higher, depending on the opponent, but it won't be lower.

Boy, I don't know that I would make this leap. How long ago did Harrington write this? 10+ years ago? The game is constantly changing and we have to know our opponents better than this. Maybe he is saying that he assumes that an overbet is a bluff 10% of the time, and that is how he plays.

If a player is playing a GTO style in today's poker world, the player needs some overbet bluffs in his repertoire so that when he has a great hand he can overbet that, without getting a fold. When I see a large overbet, I become immediately suspicious about why the player isn't trying to get a call with his great hand, rather than seemingly asking for a fold.

Balance is key in today's poker. Is 10/90 enough for balance? Of course Dan says 10% is the minimum value, not an absolute value. So if this is true, what is more important is how to determine the usable value.

Good luck and God Bless.
 
vinnie

vinnie

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Total posts
1,208
Awards
1
US
Chips
50
It would be really difficult for someone playing a GTO strategy to have a bluffing range less than 10%. Consider what the bet size must be for your opponent to be indifferent to calling/folding. You would need to be betting less than 1/8th of the pot for your bluffing range to be less than 10%. Would that be considered a big bet? No. If anything, GTO makes this point even more clear.

And, although it has been a while, I am pretty sure that was part of the point he was making. It is almost certainly true that people do not bluff enough with big bets, but 10% is pretty far from enough.
 
marvinsytan

marvinsytan

I'm going to win The PokerStars Sunday Million
Loyaler
Joined
Apr 22, 2020
Total posts
3,903
Awards
28
PH
Chips
137
in today's world just make it 20%, but definitely it can't be more than that, right
 
Poker_Mike

Poker_Mike

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Total posts
4,778
Awards
2
Chips
393
Harrington's Law of Bluffing: the probability that your opponent is bluffing when he shoves a big bet in the pot is always at least 10 percent. It may be higher, depending on the opponent, but it won't be lower.

It makes sense to me. What do you think? :ciao:


So, most of the time when your opponent shoves a big bet in the pot - they have a good hand.

But why couldn't you have a tight player that bluffs only 5% of the time? 1 in 20?

Not sure where Harrington got the 10% number. Seems too rigid.
 
1

1nsomn1a

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
May 24, 2020
Total posts
797
Chips
2
Knowing the approximate probability is of course good, but each case must be considered separately.it may happen that the opponent may bluff three times in a row, so the statistics do not give accurate information at this time.
 
vinnie

vinnie

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Total posts
1,208
Awards
1
US
Chips
50
So, most of the time when your opponent shoves a big bet in the pot - they have a good hand.

But why couldn't you have a tight player that bluffs only 5% of the time? 1 in 20?

Not sure where Harrington got the 10% number. Seems too rigid.

I am pretty sure I first came across this in his tournament books. You can read most of his logic and understanding there. The main point is that people, even conservative players, know they need to bluff and do. The probability that they could be bluffing in a big spot should always be considered at least 10%. This is because there is a tendency for people to not assign bluffing ranges. Against certain players, this chance is almost certainly higher. It should not be lower. There is an assumption that your opponent plays reasonably well. When you are considering the range of hands an opponent would make a big bet with, and your equity against that range, the 10% bluffs will basically give you a little bit of an equity boost that can shift you from a fold to a call, if it's close. Really, if it's that close that 5% bluffs would be a fold and 10% bluffs is a call, then you could probably flip a coin to make the decision.

Now, I am primarily a cash game person. In those games, the 10% minimum rule is almost certainly important to remember. There are spots where people do not bluff nearly enough. But, even in most of those spots there are some bluffs. Against good players, there will be more than 10% bluffs in most spots. The reason for this is because then you can always fold to his big bets and he will never get paid off on the big bets, if they aren't bluffing. The better you and your opponents are, the more you need to get to the optimal bluffing amount for your bets which is usually higher than 10%. If you're betting 1/2 pot on the end, you need to be bluffing 25% of the time to make it so your opponent can't just fold all the time profitably,

In most games people aren't not bluffing nearly enough, or they are bluffing way too much. You just need to watch what they are doing and use that to make your decision. In a lot of spots, 10% chance of it being a bluff doesn't change the fact that you're folding.

Anyway, 10% is really, really low for the odds someone is bluffing. You need to draw a line somewhere for a minimum and that's as good a spot as any.
 
Phoenix Wright

Phoenix Wright

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Total posts
2,921
Awards
4
Chips
423
I think this is true in many cases, but I can also think of certain scenarios (especially with pros playing high stakes on tv) where x-player is almost never bluffing based on how they played the hand. In this case, you will usually see the good players just give them credit for the hand and move on.

Generally speaking though, I think most players will bluff 10% or more and this is exponentially true in micro-stakes and freerolls for sure.
 
Zvezda kz

Zvezda kz

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Nov 7, 2018
Total posts
1,479
Awards
2
Chips
33
Hey.
Based on its little experience of freerolls and micro-limits, this statement has a right to exist. For other limits, this may not be the case.
 
marcopero14

marcopero14

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
May 7, 2020
Total posts
85
Chips
0
Depends of the position and reputation on the table i think
 
Top