The Overbet Bluff

Full Tilt Poker, $2/$4 NL Hold’em Cash Game, 4 Players
LeggoPoker.com – Hand History Converter

Hero (BB): $807
UTG: $400
BTN: $599.40
SB: $415.50

Pre-Flop: 5 4 dealt to Hero (BB)
UTG folds, BTN calls $4, SB raises to $17, Hero calls $13, BTN calls $13

Flop: ($51) 9 3 J (3 Players)
SB checks, Hero checks, BTN checks

Turn: ($51) 2 (3 Players)
SB bets $36, Hero raises to $90, BTN folds, SB calls $54

River: ($231) 7 (2 Players)
SB checks, Hero bets $700 and is All-In, SB calls $308.50 and is All-In

Results: $848 Pot ($2 Rake)
Hero showed 5 4 (Jack Nine high) and LOST (-$415.50 NET)
SB showed Q Q (a pair of Queens) and WON $846 (+$430.50 NET)

I didn’t expect him to check a hand as strong as QQ on the flop, but I was much more confident he didn’t have anything stronger than one pair on the turn. I thought that something like TT was more likely. The thing is that with this line my range is pretty clearly polarized between bluffs and big hands, and the former are certainly more likely. I think he was correctly going to call a pot bet with something like TT, which is what I put him on.

But even I’m much more likely to get to the river with a hand that needs to bluff than with a set, when I overbet, my range is weighted much more heavily towards the strong hands. More importantly, I think he’s more likely to think I would only do that for value. He tanked for a while and told me he nearly folded. I’m almost sure he would have dropped TT or AJ, even though it’s functionally the same hand, simply because of the OMGOVERPAIR principle. People get attached to their overpairs, and they decide even before the flop that they deserve to win the pot, and then all other things being equal they are less likely to fold them than to fold a hand of equal strength that isn’t an OMGOVERPAIR.

That’s why he called. My bluff was solid.