I think I kind of get how that second hand river reraise makes sense but can someone more knowledgable explain why that would be the appropriate response?
It's amazing how it makes sense when you see it but if I (granted total amateur) saw it I'd think the player was bonkers just looking to gamble.
What I am still working on myself is making a credible line to base a specific later bluff on, or, deciding if I have made a credible line when considering to bluff late in a hand.
--
The third hand was a better example where the bot simply picked up a barely credible story told by that player villain and feasted on it. A very vigilant and experienced poker player could have made the same decisions at the poker table, without resorting to any real statistics or other tedious number crunching.
Player showed strength with his reraise preflop, but then only called the re-reraise instead of outright going all in. Hence player can't have a high pocket pair in most cases but would most likely have two court cards, perhaps suited, probably an ace among them. AKs would be the most probable hand that would lead to this behavior. A ten or lower would only be found in his bluff hands, and given how costly that play is, the chance that player actually bluffs here should be very, very low.
On the flop, there was nothing player could possibly have hit with aforementioned range, except for a very high flush draw (or having a pocket pair of TT or below that was played in a ballsy way, which is unlikely, although not extremely). Player's check could be interpreted as reinforcing that suspicion, but on the other hand the high chance of the flush arriving by the river, together with the overcards that could also give him a suckout by making the higher pair - assuming bot held QQ or, far more likely, KK - would also very much warrant a large bet followed by an all-in reraise if raised, which he did not do. Both those points could nearly cancel each other out meaning the bot wouldn't really change his assumptions of villain's hand just because of that flop check. Since he only has a pair of sevens and no draw at this point, checking behind is absolutely reasonable, given the possibility of player sucking out by hitting one of his court cards. However a 1/2 to 2/3 pot bet in an attempt to semibluff steal the pot early when the bluffs don't cost that much yet must have ranked fairly high on bot's decision table as well. Perhaps it got downranked a bit because of the wild raising preflop inflating the pot above average for a flop pot.
Turn brings a nearly complete blank for player and bot knows it, holding the ace of spades himself and even another spade so he could potentially get a backdoor flush on the river. It is simply extremely unlikely player holds J9, 96 or 65 given his actions preflop. At this point, bot can be nearly absolutely sure player is bluffing with that turn bet, and doesn't have the worst chances for a very strong hand himself. However not yet having a strong made hand, a call instead of a raise seems like the far better choice.
River is a total blank as well which changes absolutely nothing in bot's assumptions. Player bluff bets, player gets called. Since bot reasonably assumes player is completely bluffing with nothing but a pair of balls/high kicker, the pair of sevens is good enough against that.
--
The second hand which you referred to is the same but with much finer nuancing.
Preflop raise from button is most likely an outright steal, and the range for steal hands would most likely be two low face cards or one high face card and a rag. Occasionally player would raise with a legitimate hand that he simply happened to get while on the button. Suited connectors are very unlikely given the game is shorthanded and there are only two players who could potentially call and bring enough money into the pot to allow for profitable drawing to a straight or flush later. Holding QJo, bot finds its hand ranks roughly the same as the average player hand given that range, so he calls and sees what the flop brings.
Flop has both bot and player hit the Q, bot however not knowing that player also hit and vice versa. Bot checks, knowing player may well hold a slightly higher kicker or even having hit two pair with Q9, which is on the low end of the preflop button raise range. Player betting under 1/2 pot claims he has hit anything up to and including top pair (most likely the latter), bot did as well, so call is a no-brainer.
Turn brings a blank, but bot still doesn't know whether player's kicker to the Q is higher, equal or lower than his, so another check is a straightforward choice. Player checking as well increases the likelihood player's kicker is inferior.
River brings another complete blank. Bot knows player has hit something, most likely top pair, and is fairly sure his own kicker is slightly better, but only by a tiny margin tops. Betting now that all the cards are out, having been passive before, would send player an unmistakable tell that bot made a better hand at some earlier point, revealing bot's early-started trap. Traps set up early would likely make player assume bot has hit high two pair on the flop, something he absolutely cannot credibly claim to have beat, given the low turn and river blanks. Thus, player would not call or reraise a bet here unless he actually has the better hand, which is extremely unlikely. So bot checks again. Why needlessly risk money. With player's weak 1/2 pot bet considering his previous line, it is clear player has not improved and is merely placing a thin value bet in the hopes bot has the slightly lower kicker. Bot therefore reraises all-in, knowing his chances of holding the better hand is slightly over 50%.
Bot knows that if he played this situation with player a hundred times, bot would make a profit. Bot also knows (albeit likely doesn't consider) that he can play millions of hands without rest and hence gain the advantage of the law of big numbers with no "pain" for him. Bot of course doesn't know his master's priorities he was not told about, for example deception, not having the bot play 24/7 but giving him some credible rest time so he would stay under the radar, therefore reducing the amount of hands bot can potentially play. But not only does bot not know, he also does not care. Making the choice to go with the big balls play is straightforward with this background.
A human player might of course consider here that he maybe never gets to play such a hand against this very villain again, he might consider his current session's performance particularly in regards to how much longer he plans to play in this session (am I up so much that I can easily do this near coin flip and still walk away with satisfactory winnings?). And hence would be much more inclined to either merely call or even fold.
Had player bet pot or more straight up, I'd assume bot had ranked a fold much, much higher among his options, assuming player has sort of thinly slowplayed a higher kicker to the Q or hit an extremely unlikely but ultimately stronger hand.