Bluffing into dry sidepots...when dumb people get dumber

[Defendant]

PokerStars Game #2280443097: Tournament #10995705, Hold'em No Limit - Level IV (50/100) - 2005/08/06 - 23:48:51 (ET)
Table '10995705 1' Seat #6 is the button
Seat 1: tonystarks11 (1455 in chips)
Seat 2: bldollars (3520 in chips)
Seat 5: Mithlondor (3880 in chips)
Seat 6: MAYS24-47 (2265 in chips)
Seat 7: The CJ (450 in chips)
Seat 9: davecdva (1930 in chips)

The CJ: posts small blind 50
davecdva: posts big blind 100

*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Mithlondor [Ad 5d]
tonystarks11: folds
bldollars: calls 100
Mithlondor: calls 100
MAYS24-47: calls 100
The CJ: raises 350 to 450 and is all-in
davecdva: folds
bldollars: folds
Mithlondor: calls 350
MAYS24-47: calls 350

*** FLOP *** [Qc Jc 4c]
Mithlondor: checks
MAYS24-47: bets 200
Mithlondor: folds

*** TURN *** [Qc Jc 4c] [8s]

*** RIVER *** [Qc Jc 4c 8s] [Qh]

*** SHOW DOWN ***
The CJ: shows [Qs 9s] (three of a kind, Queens)
MAYS24-47: shows [Ts As] (a pair of Queens)
The CJ collected 1550 from pot



Why are people this fucking dumb? WHY would he bluff into a fucking dry sidepot here? I mean yeah it wouldnt have made a difference, but this play has to be the single most idiotic one out there, by far...

Defendant

[stussy2k]

i don't get it. i would push with q9 suited if i was low stacked.

[Zybomb]

hes talking about the side pot , where the guy bet with A10 (ace high) into an empty side pot... he now eliminates the chance to knock a player out who has a pair bc all this guy has is A high

[stussy2k]

ohhh. Yea, people really don't get that winning tiny pots isn't important compared to checking down and knocking someone out.

[Zybomb]

or in this case winning a pot of zero chips!

[ChipFish]

I disagree.
There are definitely times to "bluff" into a "dry" sidepot.

Think about the logic behind it before flaming.

[Zybomb]

they are few and far between, but there are times -- actually I brought this point up fairly recently in another thread -- I'll paste it here for others to discuss

"For example blinds are 100/200 average stack is 5000, you have 6000 and Player As all in is 1800 (not unreasonable 9x BB means almost any raise is a push). You call with AKs as does another player with ??. There is now 27 BBs (5400 chips) in this pot, you figure your all in opponent to have 2 big cards (obviously not as big as yours), however you feel that your other opponent who called this all in may have a mid PP. A bet may get your opponent who isnt all in to fold a PP below the board (bc *obviously* he must be beat if you bet), and then have you winning the showdown with the all in player with a high card (or if you hit on a later street)

While taking this risk of not eliminating the player, you also take a chance of getting the 3rd opponent with a better hand out and giving you a 5400 pot, almost doubling your stack and making you amoungst the chip leaders now."


More times then not however it is foolish. especially when on the bubble

In the instance that Defendant mentioned, this was definately NOT one of those times that it was smart (although it wound up that it didnt matter)

[Penguinfan]

If you bluff into a dry side pot you have probably already made a mistake somewhere in the hand, or you have absolulte certainty that you have exactly second best hand of the three and you are risking chips without the possiblitly to win anything.

Daniel Negreanu wrote an excellent article about this a while back. He's a pretty good authority on the subject and I am pretty sure the article ended with something about you deserving a chair broken over your head if you do it.

I still think you are in a hopeless spot and only getting called if you are beat, on top of that it probably doesn't do you much good because the main pot won't be yours anyway.

[Talking Poker]

This is one of my biggest poker pet peeves..... If someone feels like digging up the Negreanu article, I'd love to read it.

(BTW - I realize there are sometimes when this is acceptable, but as has been said, they are few and far between).

[nflchad]

Part 1:

Part 2:

[Windbreaker]

When people are on the bubble and push all in with two other callers is an instance where bluffing into a dry sidepot is almost NEVER correct. That is one of the worse plays I see in poker...

[Zybomb]

You do stand to win something in these cases though: A big main pot, that you would of otherwise lost! If you have Ace high OBVIOUSLY you are only going to get called when your beat -- but you can get a fold when you're beat too. In the example I gave earlier in this thread, I would not have issue with bluffing into this dry side pot

Again, more times than not its foolish, especially on the bubble

[kkirk1329]

i see people do this ALL the time in the limits i play, and id agree this has got to be the most annoying thing people do in poker.

[kkirk1329]

PokerStars Game #2287131864: Tournament #11031971, Hold'em No Limit - Level III (25/50) - 2005/08/07 - 21:13:10 (ET)
Table '11031971 1' Seat #9 is the button
Seat 1: Flynnman (2320 in chips)
Seat 2: kkirk1329 (3337 in chips)
Seat 3: drew0314 (1640 in chips)
Seat 4: DlANA (1710 in chips)
Seat 6: chapsdugout2 (2930 in chips)
Seat 7: cblack (1275 in chips)
Seat 9: Rigel (288 in chips)
Flynnman: posts small blind 25
kkirk1329: posts big blind 50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to kkirk1329 [6s 4s]
drew0314: folds
DlANA: calls 50
chapsdugout2: folds
cblack: calls 50
Rigel: calls 50
Flynnman: folds
kkirk1329: checks
*** FLOP *** [6d 2s Kd]
kkirk1329: bets 50
DlANA: calls 50
cblack: calls 50
Rigel: raises 188 to 238 and is all-in
kkirk1329: calls 188
DlANA: folds
cblack: calls 188
*** TURN *** [6d 2s Kd] [9s]
kkirk1329: checks
cblack: bets 200
kkirk1329: calls 200
*** RIVER *** [6d 2s Kd 9s] [Ts]
kkirk1329: bets 2150
cblack: calls 787 and is all-in
*** SHOW DOWN ***
kkirk1329: shows [6s 4s] (a flush, Ten high)
cblack: shows [Ks 8h] (a pair of Kings)
kkirk1329 collected 1974 from side pot
Rigel: shows [Kc 9c] (two pair, Kings and Nines)
kkirk1329 collected 989 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 2963 Main pot 989. Side pot 1974. | Rake 0
Board [6d 2s Kd 9s Ts]
Seat 1: Flynnman (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 2: kkirk1329 (big blind) showed [6s 4s] and won (2963) with a flush, Ten high
Seat 3: drew0314 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: DlANA folded on the Flop
Seat 6: chapsdugout2 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: cblack showed [Ks 8h] and lost with a pair of Kings
Seat 9: Rigel (button) showed [Kc 9c] and lost with two pair, Kings and Nines

would cblacks bet have annoyed you if you were in my position? i called the all in because i had a large stack and a chance to eliminate the guy for not much more. when he bet on the turn, there is a chance he has the best hand, even though he didnt but would you have checked it down and try to eliminate the all in player?

[bdawg31]

Take this for example:

Say a short stack goes all-in. You (BB) and the SB call. You both have semi-big stacks. The short stack went all-in for about 4 BBs - so the pot is semi-significant in size. You have pocket 5s. Flop comes 10,8,6 - two clubs. SB checks to you - do you bet? That SB could have a flush draw, str8 draw, A6 (bottom pair - which you can probably get him off of). Are you going to let him get the free turn and river?

I just think to blindly say "Never bluff into a dry pot" is a pretty broad statement. Although i guess in my example, that is not really a 'bluff' - but i am guessing that someone betting his/her 5s in that situation after the flop would get a rise/tirade out of some of you just the same.

edit here: I just read the Danny N articles after posting this, and I think his example he gives in #5 of his second article is what i was trying to bring up - although he does a much better job of making that point.

[bdawg31]

Do you think its ever worthwhile to consider where the chips will go? Say you are at a final table - a weak player who lucked his way to this point goes all-in from the button for about 5x BB. You are chip leader - but the player you fear the most has about an average stack. He is on SB and you are on BB. SB calls. You call with AJo. Flop comes three rags - but two suits. SB checks. I assume most of you would check as well. But what if you bet and force the SB player (who you are worried about) to fold? So, now we have a situation where maybe you forced the SB strong player out and that allows you to win the hand. (i.e. the weak player went all-in with A10o or whatever and your AJ holds up - where the SB might have threw away bottom pair or thrown away a draw he could have hit). But, say that you do this and the all-in short-stack wins a hand that the SB would have won if he stayed in. The SB rants and raves - but look what happened. You kept chips away from the strong player - it cost you nothing extra - and the chips went to the WEAK player who is close to your right.

I am not saying this is a good or bad way of thinkng - just putting it out there for discussion. I guess part of it depends on how important it is to a player to gain an extra money spot vs. playing more for the win.

[Talking Poker]

We need more information. Is this the 5th hand of the tournament, with 1000 out of 1000 players left? Are we on the bubble with 51 players left and 50 making it into the money? Are we at the final table with 4 players left and the prize money increasing significantly with each player eliminated?

These are all very different situations, obviously. People usually don't get upset about bluffing into dry side pots until the bubble (which is not always correct, btw) or later on..... It is a huge mistake at the final table though, IMO.

My favorite example of this was at a home game, when we were down to 3 players (on the bubble). Another guy and I had the third player all in. We checked the flop. On the turn he bet into the dry side pot, I folded, and he showed FIVE HIGH. He had 45o with no draw. The all in player survived, instead of me eliminating her with my pair of 7s or so, and I ended up finishing on the bubble.

This caused a huge discussion that ended up never being resolved, because the bluffer simply wasn't a good enough (competant enough) player to understand how bad of a play this was. His logic, that he insisted was correct and I wasn't intelligent enough to understand, was that he could win the main pot by: 1. Betting and 2. Having me fold my hand and 3. Catching a 4 or a 5 on the river and 4. Having his Pair of 4s or 5s be good against the all in person.

Obviously, that's ridiculous. The odds of all off that happening are astronomical. Had he checked it down instead, he would have been guaranteed at least second place prize money when I would have eliminated the other player. If he really though his pair of 4s or 5s would be good (*if* he "made his hand" on the river), he should have waited until then to bet. This would still be a bad play, of course, but the play he made on the turn was simply one of the worst I have ever seen. A 5 high bluff at a dry side pot. Gotta love it.

[bdawg31]

Yeah, i needed more info. I added an edit to the orignal post stating that Danny N did a much better job of setting up a scenario where it might be okay to bet into a dry pot.

Regarding the 'huge mistake at the final table' - i am not so sure i agree that you can say that. First, if i dont care about finishing 7th vs 8th - but i just really want to win - i dont care about slithering up a money spot. If i am playing to win - and i think that making a bet at a dry pot gives me a better chance to take it down (like in the example i tried to give) - why not make that play, even if it is the final table?

[Penguinfan]

Keep in mind the intent of the thread, you are not technically bluffing into the side pot here, you are finding out where you are in the hand. I think we are talking about a stone cold bluff into a pot where you stand to win nothing with that A high.

In your example if you bet and get played back at then you can fold knowing you don't have the live player beat anyway, and if you don't have him beat you get no piece of the main pot anyway.

[Quint]

Here is a good article on just this subject posted in the 2+2 magazine for August. It is the best attempt I've seen to try to quantify if/when you should fire away when someone is all in.