Professor Richard A. Landes, noted historian at Boston University and director of the Center for Millennial Studies, has shown that much of what we accept as fact is often forgery. Landes is probably best known for coining the relevant term "Pallywood"-which stands for "Palestinian Hollywood"-describing staged photographic material that is presented as newsworthy fact when it is actually propaganda.
"Cognitive egocentrism," according to the professor, is projecting onto others what you want them to believe. The image you present influences their thinking and subsequent actions. Likewise, in poker, successful bluffing depends on how well you can project onto others the image of what it is you want them to believe, so they will act according to your desires.
Let's say you have been drawing to a flush but the board didn't cooperate. You have nothing more than queen-high on the river. You have a single opponent you suspect may have a small pair or A-x. He checks to you. If you follow suit and also check, it is almost certain his hand will beat yours. The only chance you have to take this pot is to bluff in hopes that he will fold.
Your Tactic Counts: What is important in this case is not just what you do, but how you do it. Your strategy was to bluff. Your tactic is the "how" of it. The Esther Bluff is an incredibly successful bluffing tactic and it's very much like Professor Landes' cognitive egocentrism .
It works for me more than two out of three tries in low-limit hold 'em, whereas, break-even on bluffing is if it works one out of four or five tries. Two years ago when my then 10-year-old granddaughter, Esther, pulled her bluffs on me, she did it in such a way that I was convinced that she had a strong hand. She bet out with utmost self-assurance
and confidence-as if she knew she had the best hand. There was no doubt of it in her mind. That's the picture she projected to me. Somehow my mind received that image. I accepted that impression-cognitive egocentrism. So I folded my ace-high flush draw.
Other Considerations: Of course, if you plan to bluff, it is wise to consider the type of opponent involved. You may never convince a "calling station" to fold, no matter how well you project the image. Some players just have to see your hand. And trying to bluff out more than two opponents at a time is considerably more difficult than bluffing a single opponent.
You're also more likely to succeed if you have an image of being a tight player. On the other hand, if you had been caught in a bluff attempt a few minutes earlier, your bluff is now much more likely to be suspect-no matter how well you present your image. Setting the stage for your bluff also can help. Suppose you made a semi-bluff bet on the turn. Now your opponent respects your hand. Unless he has a well-disguised monster hand, he will check to you on the river and probably fold when you make your Esther Bluff. So bet ...and project lots of confidence. Nothing in poker is completely fool-proof. You cannot get into another player's head with complete reliability. There is considerable guesswork and judgment. Still, the Esther Bluff can go a long way to make your bluffs all the more likely to succeed. It's cognitive egocentrism at work.
So, readers, what's your opinion?
George "The Engineer" Epstein is the author of The Greatest Book of Poker for Winners! and Hold'em or Fold'em?-An Algorithm for Making the Key Decision and teaches poker at the Claude Pepper Sr. Citizen Center in Los Angeles. Contact George at geps222@msn.com.
