Triple Barrel Bet Sizing

A triple barrel bluff will by definition involve at least three bets. Especially when dealing with a player who can read hands well, sizing these bets will often be the difference between success and failure.

As I discussed in a previous post, your objective on early streets may actually be to get called. Since you are going to be bluffing later anyway, it behooves you to build a bigger pot to steal. Your other objective on early streets is to lay the groundwork that will enable you to represent a monster by the river. That means your betsizing must be consistent with the hand(s) you want to represent.

On the river, your objective is to make the most +EV bluff that you can. Remember that this is not always the bluff that succeeds most often. Tripling your bet size to double your fold equity is not a winning proposition.

Let’s start by looking at how not to do that. I played this hand against a very good player, one of the best at these stakes:

Full Tilt Poker, $5/$10 NL Hold’em Cash Game, 6 Players
LeggoPoker.com – Hand History Converter

CO: $1,022
Hero (BTN): $2,349.75
SB: $2,169
BB: $3,128
UTG: $779.75
MP: $1,309

Pre-Flop: 8 T dealt to Hero (BTN)
3 folds, Hero raises to $35, SB folds, BB raises to $130, Hero calls $95

Flop: ($265) 4 K 6 (2 Players)
BB checks, Hero bets $111, BB calls $111

Turn: ($487) 4 (2 Players)
BB checks, Hero bets $333, BB calls $333

River: ($1,153) 2 (2 Players)
BB checks, Hero bets $1,275, BB calls $1,275

Results: $3,703 Pot ($3 Rake)
Hero showed 8 T (a pair of Fours) and LOST (-$1,849 NET)
BB showed K Q (two pair, Kings and Fours) and WON $3,700 (+$1,851 NET)

First off, this isn’t the greatest spot for a triple barrel bluff. My opponent is announcing that he has a medium-strength hand, but he’s also playing it in a way that will invite bluffs. And this particular opponent definitely has the hand-reading skills and the stomach to call down.

Since there aren’t any plausible two pair combinations, the river overbet represents either a full house or air (or 53 for a straight, I suppose). And Villain probably expects me to 4-bet KK pre-flop often, so really I can only have three combinations of 66, one combination of 44, or the rare 22 that was bluffing and then backed into a boat. Since he’s played his hand to entice a bluff, he’s got an easy call with KQ.

I like this one better, even though it didn’t work:

Full Tilt Poker, $5/$10 NL Hold’em Cash Game, 2 Players
LeggoPoker.com – Hand History Converter

BB: $2,203.50
Hero (SB): $6,798

Pre-Flop: 7 9 dealt to Hero (SB)
Hero raises to $30, BB calls $20

Flop: ($60) 4 2 8 (2 Players)
BB checks, Hero bets $44, BB raises to $144, Hero raises to $366, BB calls $222

Turn: ($792) Q (2 Players)
BB checks, Hero bets $444, BB calls $444

River: ($1,680) J (2 Players)
BB checks, Hero bets $888, BB calls $888

Results: $3,456 Pot ($0.50 Rake)
BB showed 7 7 (a pair of Sevens) and WON $3,455.50 (+$1,727.50 NET)
Hero showed 7 9 (Queen Jack high) and LOST (-$1,728 NET)

First off, my range is intrinsically much wider because we are heads up. It’s not inconceivable that I have 84, 82, or 42 for two pair. My smallish bet sizing on future streets is consistent with this; by the river, 82 can expect to be best but can’t expect worse hands to call a big bet. I also felt this bet sizing would be consistent with air that turned or rivered a pair and is now making a thinnish value bet.

Unfortunately, this was another poorly chosen opponent. He wasn’t so much a good hand-reader as he was just plain old-fashioned stubborn. Oh well.