I've been watching some poker tournaments with Antonius, Negreanu and Cates lately. Most of the time the person with better combination actually wins, but there occur some great bluffs from time to time as well. Do you think it is better to fold if you don't have at least one high card in a pair or two cards of the same suit? Is it worth to try out overbetting tricks when you really have shitty cards? When I tried playing poker, overbetting usually made me fold, because it is a hard psychological attack for me and I am not the kind of a person that is willing to risk a lot. But I am bad at poker. What is your opinion on this matter?
In poker, you should have no predictable behavior. You have to establish to your opponents that you do bluffing so when you have really good cards and you raised high, your opponents will think that you're just bluffing and that you probably don't have good cards.
You can have really shitty cards and still be able to win by bluffing and making everyone fold.
This sounds very reasonable. Unpredictability is very important. It is also very good if you are able to predict the cards of your opponent. I saw one marvelous bluff by Negreanu when he got terrible cards but kept raising and then said to his opponent: 'You must have Ace King or two Aces". As we saw on the screen, he indeed had Ace King, so when he heard Negreanu saying that and raising more, he just folded.
But pretending you have awesome cards when they are just normal seems okay, while putting a lot of money in a game you can't win unless everyone folds looks too risky to me anyway.