In Peter Clarke's From the Ground Up Course, he discusses Polarized Strategies. It is not clear to me how to decide the ratio of how much we bluff in these scenarios vs the the frequency in which we bet for value. Should we as a baseline, bluff at a frequency that combined with our bet size, would make the opponent indifferent to calling or folding based on our ratio of bluff to value, and then adjust based on the tendencies of the player or pool?
I also understand that many of our bluffs on early streets still have significant equity when called, so should we not consider these as pure bluffs and instead try to add some low equity hands that block value into our bluffing range instead?
Aug. 11, 2022 | 10:02 p.m.
Often, we are told to follow a polarized strategy when betting or raising. How should we decide what portion of our raising/betting range is composed of bluffs and what portion is value. It is obvious to me that the larger the bet size, the more bluffs we can add. Is this all we should consider. I am particularly interested in the Flop Raising section.
For instance, when we raise polarized, with a pot sized raise we are given the villain 2-1, so should my raising range be 33% bluffs and 67% value (adjusting this exploitively). How do we balance our linear raising ranges (what hands do we subtract to add medium strength hands)?