eetenor
Legend
Loyaler
Thank you for posting
The standard ratio for value/bluff on the river is 66%/34%
Nits play a tighter range and often payoff on rivers with top pair or over pair so we would bluff less as we can make more from our value hands than our bluff hands.
If you are playing against (Nits)-Tight range weak player that fold top pair on river we increase our bluffs on the river to 80/20 easily often only having to bet small river sizing to get that fold. This was a common player type -it is not so common anymore so we need to experiment to see how weak the table is.
Nits who are weak tight often fold 2nd pair or worse -weak draw- over cards etc on turn so our bluffing strategy for these players is an increased bluff % on turns not rivers.
We would small bet flop- small relative to the players at the table- some players think half pot is small- then we can bet 75%-1.2x pot turn again dependent on reactions of villain type
Hope this helps
Last edited:
Collin Moshman
Poker Expert
Silver Level
If you're playing exploitively, there's no max bluff % -- any number you can get away with works very well.
If you're playing unexploitably, your ratio depends on your sizing with the higher the sizing requiring more bluffs and lower sizings being more weighted toward value.
As an example, even if you're overbetting you would never have 50% bluffs in your range playing unexploitably. But if players are folding way too much and you want to capitalize on that, you might have well over 50% bluffs in a lot of spots.
If you're playing unexploitably, your ratio depends on your sizing with the higher the sizing requiring more bluffs and lower sizings being more weighted toward value.
As an example, even if you're overbetting you would never have 50% bluffs in your range playing unexploitably. But if players are folding way too much and you want to capitalize on that, you might have well over 50% bluffs in a lot of spots.
S
suehtam05
Enthusiast
Bronze Level
I think it depends on so many things. Your stack, other people's stacks, blinds, is it a cash game or tournment, if it is a tournment which stage you are, and how the people are responding to big bets? are they paying with pairs, are they only paying with huge hands, are they reraising? You have to weight all that information
killing_random
Rock Star
Silver Level
:hmmmm2: I'm not sure what is wrong here, particular word or number, but if you placing "value" first, then 80/20 should be decrease instead increase.
To be clear I ask my question in low limits mtt context, I'm feeling terms of cash discipline in the answers. Sorry I didn't clarify earlier.
Personally I'm not a fan of bets above pots. I don't think that extra 0.2 pot size would make opponent fold more often than one pot size. Also that may make your bet unintentionally suspicious: "If he beting for value, why he's risking of me folding? Maybe I should try to 3bet him and see what happens..."
I would only play overbet in two cases:
1. Prepearing to shove with good pot-odds for my opponent
2. Pressure opponent with a bank too big for his stack
How long I would get away with it? Mtt is a long way to go. I saw ppl get caught eventually, intentionally or by a bad beat - doesn't matter.
Lol, I assume this is about super high roller level of play. At low limits I'm pretty sure it works quite the opposite way, where no one really look at your bet sizing or think about pot-odds. If you bluffing against air, just like eetenor said: often only having to bet small river sizing to get that fold. Same goes for the flop and turn against fish as far I can tell from my experience. Simplistically, you checking (not check) with a small c-bet if they catch anything and then play value only, cos they never fold.
Last edited:
V
valetgll
Visionary
Bronze Level
But it depends on many factors. Although I have been playing not so long ago, I have a clue. The more responsible the tournament, the more you need to pay attention to the riskiness of bluffing. I don’t play at cash tables and I’ll not say anything.
eetenor
Legend
Loyaler
Thank you for posting
The standard ratio for value/bluff on the river is 66%/34%
Nits play a tighter range and often payoff on rivers with top pair or over pair so we would bluff less as we can make more from our value hands than our bluff hands.
If you are playing against (Nits)-Tight range weak player that fold top pair on river we increase our bluffs on the river to 80/20 easily often only having to bet small river sizing to get that fold. This was a common player type -it is not so common anymore so we need to experiment to see how weak the table is.
Nits who are weak tight often fold 2nd pair or worse -weak draw- over cards etc on turn so our bluffing strategy for these players is an increased bluff % on turns not rivers.
We would small bet flop- small relative to the players at the table- some players think half pot is small- then we can bet 75%-1.2x pot turn again dependent on reactions of villain type
Hope this helps
whoops 20/80 is correct not 80/20 but yes this was cash game advice
venycyos
Legend
Bronze Level
killing_random
Rock Star
Silver Level
I guess 80/20 or 4to1 make sense as the max bluff ratio limit, since TT+ range VS random range have 78.98%/20.02%
But it possible to bluff against TT+ on postflop, so in theory you could go for all 100% in some bizarre cases.
NWPatriot
Rock Star
Silver Level
I have seen the following cash game guidance from James "Splitsuit" Sweeney before (I think it was him).
Flop 33:66 value:bluff ratio
Turn 50:50 value:bluff ratio
River 66:33 value:bluff ratio
As already stated, this all depends on your opponents. But these ratios seem fairly logical, especially if we consider a c-bet a bluff.
The river is the only ratio that has any math behind it and the ratio changes depending on your bet size. Look for "Indifference" from other authors. This 66:33 ratio works for a pot sized bet on the river - if we will win showdown 2 out of three times, then we are indifferent to what our opponent does. We have the same EV no matter what. This indifference is quite difficult to apply on the flop and turn because we have no absolute information regarding our showdown equity. The needed river ratio from Indifference does shift with bet size. For example, a half pot bet now needs a 75:25 value:bluff ratio instead.
Good luck and God bless
Flop 33:66 value:bluff ratio
Turn 50:50 value:bluff ratio
River 66:33 value:bluff ratio
As already stated, this all depends on your opponents. But these ratios seem fairly logical, especially if we consider a c-bet a bluff.
The river is the only ratio that has any math behind it and the ratio changes depending on your bet size. Look for "Indifference" from other authors. This 66:33 ratio works for a pot sized bet on the river - if we will win showdown 2 out of three times, then we are indifferent to what our opponent does. We have the same EV no matter what. This indifference is quite difficult to apply on the flop and turn because we have no absolute information regarding our showdown equity. The needed river ratio from Indifference does shift with bet size. For example, a half pot bet now needs a 75:25 value:bluff ratio instead.
Good luck and God bless
perrypip
Rock Star
Silver Level
It depends on your bet sizing.
If you bet the pot your opponent gets 2 to 1 odds to call. Your value to bluff ratio should be to 2 to 1. If you bet half pot your opponent gets 3 to 1 odds. Your value to bluff ratio should be 3 to 1.
This way you create a situation where your opponent is indifferent to calling or folding.
If you bet the pot your opponent gets 2 to 1 odds to call. Your value to bluff ratio should be to 2 to 1. If you bet half pot your opponent gets 3 to 1 odds. Your value to bluff ratio should be 3 to 1.
This way you create a situation where your opponent is indifferent to calling or folding.
NWPatriot
Rock Star
Silver Level
One last observation I have made about this subject, is that these value:bluff ratios actually need to be stated as win:loss ratios for the math to work. We may assume a 75% equity hand is a value hand, but if it does not win, then it was actually a bluff, and we now must win 2 other hands to allow the math to work.
There are a number of ways to interpret all this. We can just let'er rip and blindly follow the guidance of 2:1. Or we could dig deeper into the theory and math and understand the implications of what it is telling us. In the end, I think it really does say that we need a win:loss ratio of 2:1, not necessarily a value:bluff ratio of 2:1.
This may sound like english semantics, but you must admit that there is an implementation difference between these two perspectives. A win:loss ratio could care less about how much equity we have and whether we call it value or bluff - we must win. The truth is that on the river, we may perceive an equity value for our hand, but our actual equity is either 0% or 100% (except for the few times we tie). We either win it or we lose it.
Good luck and God bless.
S
silversun87
Enthusiast
Silver Level
This seems quite advanced for the category and I'm not fully grasping the ratios but nonetheless I feel I'm learning something so thank you!
It's hard for me to be so precise but what I've noticed from playing low stakes MTTs is that half pot usually does it for bluffing on the flop for NIT/average table. If he is still in the hand I will increase my bet size on the turn somewhere between 0.7 pot and up to pot. On the river I usually don't continue bluffing because if he is still in the hand, there's a higher chance I misread him and I won't be able to throw him off the hand.
For me personally it was never the value of the bluff that I was struggling with but how often I should do it. How do you make that decision? Only when you feel weakness or do you do it whenever you feel you've not been participating in play for a while and feel entitled to represent a good hand?
It's hard for me to be so precise but what I've noticed from playing low stakes MTTs is that half pot usually does it for bluffing on the flop for NIT/average table. If he is still in the hand I will increase my bet size on the turn somewhere between 0.7 pot and up to pot. On the river I usually don't continue bluffing because if he is still in the hand, there's a higher chance I misread him and I won't be able to throw him off the hand.
For me personally it was never the value of the bluff that I was struggling with but how often I should do it. How do you make that decision? Only when you feel weakness or do you do it whenever you feel you've not been participating in play for a while and feel entitled to represent a good hand?
killing_random
Rock Star
Silver Level
Besides pressuring a weakness, it's depends on a board and your hand equity, also yours and villain's range.
To bluff successfully you looking for the hand, that blocks his value range. And he must have a lot of hands in his range, that he could easily fold to your bluff.
GL
killing_random
Rock Star
Silver Level
Unless you doesn't have maniac reputation.
S
silversun87
Enthusiast
Silver Level
I think frequency is also another ratio you should consider besides the value of the bluff and that will be correlated to your opponents fold equity. The less often you will bluff the more they will fold when you do even with very low bets.
Collin Moshman
Poker Expert
Silver Level
It's just a fact about unexploitable play. That doesn't mean you should try to play this way in most low stakes games. But if you're trying to construct a ratio of bluffs to value bets, it will help you to understand the theory before deciding how to deviate based on your specific games.
Edit: Since I didn't do a good job using the quote feature haha -- The quote in this post from OP references me saying: "If you're playing unexploitably, your ratio depends on your sizing with the higher the sizing requiring more bluffs and lower sizings being more weighted toward value."
killing_random
Rock Star
Silver Level
Let me say it out loud, before it slips away again from me :icon_scra
High sizing usually mean tight-aggressive style, which means we don't play to much boards and have more respect to our bets from other players. In such cases, it is optimal to have a higher bluff ratio.
Lower sizings means more simple straight forward poker with less mind games. We can afford to see more flops, opponents will call our smaller bets more frequently. Which means less bluffs in our contbet range.
Is it that simple as I said?
High sizing usually mean tight-aggressive style, which means we don't play to much boards and have more respect to our bets from other players. In such cases, it is optimal to have a higher bluff ratio.
Lower sizings means more simple straight forward poker with less mind games. We can afford to see more flops, opponents will call our smaller bets more frequently. Which means less bluffs in our contbet range.
Is it that simple as I said?