anatomy of a failed bluff

aliengenius

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite
pokerstars GAME #12475512662: TOURNAMENT #58458655, $10+$1 HOLD'EM NO LIMIT - LEVEL III (25/50) - 2007/10/06 - 17:41:04 (ET)
Table '58458655 2' 9-max Seat #6 is the button
Seat 1: L.Schumner (1225 in chips)
Seat 2: vanquish331 (1180 in chips)
Seat 3: pN.Boogie (1975 in chips)
Seat 4: goforlowonly (2162 in chips)
Seat 6: beardyian (815 in chips)
Seat 8: rob5775 (1178 in chips)
Seat 9: Pigpen02 (1965 in chips)
rob5775: posts small blind 25
Pigpen02: posts big blind 50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to L.Schumner 10♦ K♣
vanquish331 said, "just once"
L.Schumner: calls 50
vanquish331: raises 100 to 150
pN.Boogie: folds
goforlowonly: folds
beardyian: folds
rob5775: folds
Pigpen02: folds
L.Schumner: calls 100
*** FLOP *** 5♥ Q♥ A♣
L.Schumner: checks
L.Schumner said, "lets play a flop"
vanquish331: bets 225
L.Schumner: calls 225
*** TURN *** 5♥ Q♥ A♣ 7♥
pN.Boogie said, "haha"
L.Schumner: bets 850 and is all-in
vanquish331 said, "god"
vanquish331 said, "WHY"
rob5775 said, "flop play over"
rob5775 said, "fold"
vanquish331 said, "i need to know how to play this"
vanquish331 said, "in the future"
pN.Boogie said, "he saw you're tight"
vanquish331 said, "im posting this in HA"
vanquish331 said, "after i lose"
vanquish331: calls 805 and is all-in
*** RIVER *** [5h] [Qh] [Ac] [7h] 5♣
*** SHOW DOWN ***
L.Schumner: shows [10d] [Kc] (a pair of Fives)
vanquish331: shows [As] [Kd] (two pair, Aces and Fives)
L.Schumner said, "wow"
vanquish331 collected 2435 from pot
rob5775 said, "oh"
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 2435 | Rake 0
Board 5♥ Q♥ A♣ 7♥ 5♣
Seat 1: L.Schumner showed 10♦ K♣ and lost with a pair of Fives
Seat 2: vanquish331 showed A♠ K♦ and won (2435) with two pair, Aces and Fives
Seat 3: pN.Boogie folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: goforlowonly folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: beardyian (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: rob5775 (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 9: Pigpen02 (big blind) folded before Flop

Please note that when attempting the "phantom outs" bluff in this situation (these stack sizes) it is important to be "out of position" and first to act after the turn card. My remaining chips were about the amount of the pot. Also, it's nice if you are not drawing totally dead (I have the gut shot here).

I really thought this was a perfect spot to make this move. I played the hand exactly like a flush would (open limp w suited cards, trying to see a cheap flop, check call out of position with the draw).
Vanquish: you're supposed to fold, that's how you play it ;):D! To quote Sammy Farha, "Why draw if you are not going to get paid?" You punish the flush draw by taking away their implied odds-- if they calculate they will make sufficient money by hitting, then it's correct to call your 2/3-3/4-pot bet.

Just to be clear for all the kids at home: you are almost always incorrect to CALL OFF all your money in a tournament! Trust me, it's exceedingly rare not to be beat if your hand is something like top pair top kicker. Of course this doesn't apply when you are holding a monster or the nuts and some aggro-donk is betting into you, but if you never called off your stack again I don't think you would be making a very big error.

A few reasons why I think this failed:

1. earlier in the tournament V. folded a big hand to me preflop, possibly as big as QQ (as I told him in no uncertain terms that he was beat by ReReReraising). Opponents do not like that feeling, and will be more inclined to call you later. You can't repeatedly keep asking someone to make "big" laydowns. Note too that it isn't just me that he is unlikely to make a big fold to, but anyone. Be aware of who had made the big folds, and be careful with trying to bluff them later. This is different from figuring out who is weak-tight and can be run over. We are talking about folds that would seem to 'torture' the opponent, and were very painful to make.

2. observer comments. It's not shown here, but combu said "CALL" (yes all caps) from the rail, and then of course the "he saw you're tight" comment (nice work on using "you're" instead of "your," but stfu next time. also, V. had the highest vp$ip at the table at the time, so your comment isn't exactly correct either).

V. claims that these were not a factor, but I have to disagree. Even if it's only subconsciously, it has an effect. Consider that you are much more likely to fold if you are just out there by yourself, knowing you are going to look foolish by calling off all your money for your tournament life; big difference between that, and knowing that others around you would make the same decision-- it gives you that social cushion that allows for the action (call).

It's one player to a hand guys, please. This isn't just unethical, it's against the rules.

Anyway, I have been early out of the last two events, in very similar circumstances: big bluffs in almost perfect spots, that just barely failed. You can be certain I will look to avoid a similar fate in todays FT buy in.
GL everyone!
 
dj11

dj11

Legend
Awards
9
''It's one player to a hand guys, please. This isn't just unethical, it's against the rules.''

Gee AG, seems I remember it wasn't but maybe 3 weeks ago you railing for (I think) BBB, doing almost the exact same thing!
 
aliengenius

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite
''It's one player to a hand guys, please. This isn't just unethical, it's against the rules.''

Gee AG, seems I remember it wasn't but maybe 3 weeks ago you railing for (I think) BBB, doing almost the exact same thing!

No way. Saying "go bbb, kill, kill" isn't giving her advice on playing a specific situation/taking a specific action like here.

Also, there is a distinction to be made between a situation like this, and general advice on overall strategy. No one complains about players going over to the rail and asking their mentors for advice in between hands, and rightly so, I think. But here we have several players offering specific advice for the hand currently being played, as well as giving their "read" to another player.
 
A

alan1983

Visionary
I really disagree with this being a clear laydown. Betting out allin when you hit your draw is an exception to the general play you see.

Often, and i think most of the times, its a semi-bluff, ace of hearts isnt out there, or ace+high heart,...

Granted, you werent deep enough to be able to checkraise on a bluff so you had to bet out.

I dont think this was right spot to bluff. If V has the high heart hes not going anywhere, and he only has 800 left so hes not in that great a position should he fold.

I dont think hes beat often enough, given the pot, and the stacks, and the bets, to justify a laydown here.
 
aliengenius

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite
I really disagree with this being a clear laydown. Betting out allin when you hit your draw is an exception to the general play you see.

Often, and i think most of the times, its a semi-bluff, ace of hearts isnt out there, or ace+high heart,...

Granted, you werent deep enough to be able to checkraise on a bluff so you had to bet out.

I dont think this was right spot to bluff. If V has the high heart hes not going anywhere, and he only has 800 left so hes not in that great a position should he fold.

I dont think hes beat often enough, given the pot, and the stacks, and the bets, to justify a laydown here.


I can buy that.
 
Kenzie 96

Kenzie 96

Legend
Awards
9
[quote=aliengenius;

It's one player to a hand guys, please. This isn't just unethical, it's against the rules.




This is something i rarely see in our CC games,( at least since Misch left), but we are adding new players to our regular games so a gentle reminder is in order. :joyman: :)
 
L

lottomode777

Guest
Stack to pot size, Villain has a hand that does well heads up, most players are not easily bluffable, which is why I value bet the **** out of set's, straights, and flushes, without going over the top.
 
jaketrevvor

jaketrevvor

Legend
BOT

(But very interesting hand, I guess I can see the strange betting out of the flush as being some sort of calling incentive here, but still I can't see a call there at all, especially without the A or K of hearts (I get the feeling that the main incentive for calling was so he could see your cards...))
 
vanquish

vanquish

Legend
I get the feeling that the main incentive for calling was so he could see your cards

stop assuming imo. i've played quite a few hands with AG and some things that seem 'standard' by general players are not so standard for him.

ie: him limping UTG, his table talk, his instashoving scare card etc

sometimes it feels like people assume that i just don't think when i make decisions...
 
jaymfc

jaymfc

R.I.P DJ & Buck
Awards
71
lol at BOT , then bot by regulars on two month old post. :p

Ag is always a relative subject so I'll bite. :)

standard and AG do not go in the same sentence :D
I read this thread because I thought AG was still steaming over a bluff he made in ub buy in and I made a donk call that worked out and sent him to the rail . :rolleyes:
 
jaketrevvor

jaketrevvor

Legend
stop assuming imo. i've played quite a few hands with AG and some things that seem 'standard' by general players are not so standard for him.

ie: him limping UTG, his table talk, his instashoving scare card etc

I point you to:

I guess I can see the strange betting out of the flush as being some sort of calling incentive here
AND apologise for questioning your awesome ftw call :):love:
 
aliengenius

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite
I thought the most interesting discussion was about whether the c/r or the lead looked more like the flush.

From the other thread:
I'm really surprised that everyone thinks a flush would check raise. Guess what, you can only check raise if your opponent bets! Do you really think tptk bets the turn when the scare card comes, or is it more likely he checks to control the pot size, looking to get to showdown as cheaply as possible?
Interesting that Rex thought the check raise was NOT the flush, and several others thought the lead bet was NOT the flush. Looks like the lead bet is more suspect to more players?

Nice to see I'm mixing up the way I play my failed bluffs though :p.
 
jaketrevvor

jaketrevvor

Legend
Quote AG: "you can only check raise if your opponent bets!"

Indeedy, but if vanq were to read you as an average cc player then your thought process would be more like "if I lead out he could fold :eek: and I've got a FLUSHSHSHSHYY YAY!!!"

And
don't look at him like that ur AG's ho . :p

What have I become?!?! Just a general cc ho it appears :(. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I am far too liberal with my use of the love emoticon (I just felt bad coz I'd been slightly critical of a good call (don't ask me why))
 
jaymfc

jaymfc

R.I.P DJ & Buck
Awards
71
Quote AG: "you can only check raise if your opponent bets!"

Indeedy, but if vanq were to read you as an average cc player then your thought process would be more like "if I lead out he could fold :eek: and I've got a FLUSHSHSHSHYY YAY!!!"

And


What have I become?!?! Just a general cc ho it appears :(. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I am far too liberal with my use of the love emoticon (I just felt bad coz I'd been slightly critical of a good call (don't ask me why))


I KID I KID , totally dude. I'll quit playing if it's gettin old. :p
it's just we have no cc ho's and need some . :)


I thought the most interesting discussion was about whether the c/r or the lead looked more like the flush.

From the other thread:

yes AG , sorry about the highjack but the thread was two months old and I did read both threads . I fear a strong lead the most . a small lead just looks like a bluff to me . C/R usually works on me too , if a flush is on board I'm usually very cautious and may fold a good hand . I'm to tight and need help there.
 
Top