I'm reading a really terrific novel right now called The Sisters Brothers by Patrick DeWitt which has not been published in Canada yet so don't go looking for it unless you are reading this post after May 2011. The book is a western of sorts (in much the same way Oakley Hall's Warlock is a western) but is really just a story that happens to be set in the western American frontier. It tells of Charlie and Eli Sisters, hired killers who head into California at the height of the gold rush with instructions to seek out and kill a man. Eli, the narrator of the book, feels a sort of electricity as they enter into the gold mining territory and describes it as follows:
This perhaps was what lay at the very root of the hysteria surrounding what came to be known as the Gold Rush: Men desiring a feeling of fortune; the unlucky masses hoping to skin or borrow the luck of others, or the luck of a destination. A seductive notion, and one I thought to be wary of. To me, luck was either something you earned or invented through strength of mind. You had to come by it honestly; you could not trick or bluff your way into it.
Which sums up as neatly as anything what I think the proper approach to luck should be. I am glad for the further evidence to support my argument that reading good fiction will make you a better poker player
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Saturday, December 25, 2010
No-Limit Chinese Pineapple
After a couple hours the guy on my left started talking and soon the whole table started chatting like we were old buddies. Lefty was new in town and wanted to know about the different casinos. There was talk about how the Elbow River was a limit hold 'em place and that you could play omaha high at the Deerfoot. People talked about their favourite card games. This one older guy said how he liked to play pineapple. I asked what that was.
"Pineapple is just like hold 'em, except everyone is dealt three cards and they discard one before the flop," he replied.
"And there's Chinese pineapple," added the dealer. "That's where you discard one of your three cards after the flop."
People were generally loose and having a good time. An Asian guy listening to music on his i-pod pulled an ear-bud out to hear what all the talk was about. Hearing that it was just chit-chat, he went back to his music.
A new hand was dealt and it folded around to i-pod man, who put in a raise. The guy on my right, an Arab in a Yankees cap, called and the two of them saw the flop. I-pod bet half the pot and Yankee Fan called. After the turn, I-pod bet half the pot and Yankee Fan calls again. The river comes and this time I-pod just checks. Yankee Fan thinks very hard about what he should do. After a minute Yankee Fans asks I-pod how many chips he has, but because he is listening to music I-pod doesn't hear the question. Instead I-pod assumes that Yankee fan has checked and that it's time to reveal his hole cards.
"I just have ace high," says I-pod and the table erupts in laughter. Yankee Fan moves all in and I-pod, realizing what he has done, folds.
And that is why it is good idea not to listen to music at the poker table.
"Pineapple is just like hold 'em, except everyone is dealt three cards and they discard one before the flop," he replied.
"And there's Chinese pineapple," added the dealer. "That's where you discard one of your three cards after the flop."
People were generally loose and having a good time. An Asian guy listening to music on his i-pod pulled an ear-bud out to hear what all the talk was about. Hearing that it was just chit-chat, he went back to his music.
A new hand was dealt and it folded around to i-pod man, who put in a raise. The guy on my right, an Arab in a Yankees cap, called and the two of them saw the flop. I-pod bet half the pot and Yankee Fan called. After the turn, I-pod bet half the pot and Yankee Fan calls again. The river comes and this time I-pod just checks. Yankee Fan thinks very hard about what he should do. After a minute Yankee Fans asks I-pod how many chips he has, but because he is listening to music I-pod doesn't hear the question. Instead I-pod assumes that Yankee fan has checked and that it's time to reveal his hole cards.
"I just have ace high," says I-pod and the table erupts in laughter. Yankee Fan moves all in and I-pod, realizing what he has done, folds.
And that is why it is good idea not to listen to music at the poker table.
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Tournament Strategy: Folding Your Way to Victory
It may sound silly but folding is sometimes the hardest thing to do, and this can be particularly true in tournaments.
I was playing an on-line free roll tournament yesterday with a massive 10,000 entrants. The top 250 players won entry into a tournament where real money could be won. This made the strategy interesting: whether you finished 1st or 250th, you got the same thing.
After a couple hours I was in 35th spot in a field with about 1,500 left. My strategy was just to try to keep my stack from shrinking and stay in the top 250 until the end. I picked on shorter stacks and avoided bigger stacks but the most important thing I did was that I folded. I folded a lot. As planned, by the time we got down to 250 players I was among them.
While I was folding my way to victory, I watched numerous others with much bigger stacks than mine play way too many hands and get knocked out. They played aggressively to build their stacks, but could not go into fold mode when doing so would guarantee they finish "in the money".
Although the tournament I'm describing is unique in it's pay out structure, I believe it illustrates an important point: In tournaments generally speaking, folding has power. Sure the all-in raise gets all the glory, but the humble fold is the move you need to perfect to become a great tournament player.
I was playing an on-line free roll tournament yesterday with a massive 10,000 entrants. The top 250 players won entry into a tournament where real money could be won. This made the strategy interesting: whether you finished 1st or 250th, you got the same thing.
After a couple hours I was in 35th spot in a field with about 1,500 left. My strategy was just to try to keep my stack from shrinking and stay in the top 250 until the end. I picked on shorter stacks and avoided bigger stacks but the most important thing I did was that I folded. I folded a lot. As planned, by the time we got down to 250 players I was among them.
While I was folding my way to victory, I watched numerous others with much bigger stacks than mine play way too many hands and get knocked out. They played aggressively to build their stacks, but could not go into fold mode when doing so would guarantee they finish "in the money".
Although the tournament I'm describing is unique in it's pay out structure, I believe it illustrates an important point: In tournaments generally speaking, folding has power. Sure the all-in raise gets all the glory, but the humble fold is the move you need to perfect to become a great tournament player.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Tournament Strategy: Pay Out Structure
If you are good enough and lucky enough to make it into the money, you will notice a dramatic shift in the play of your opponents. It's like somebody flipped a switch. Suddenly players who wouldn't call a raise without the absolute nuts are going all in with king queen off suit. What the heck is going on?
Most people make it a goal to get into the money, so they play really tight as that goal gets closer. You knew this and you exploited their overly conservative play (see Tournament Strategy: Getting Near the Money ) and it is hoped you built a nice stack grabbing all those pots everyone else was too afraid to contest. Now that everyone else has achieved their goal and made it into the money, they immediately start playing much, much more aggressively. Their thinking is that they have gotten their buy-in back, so everything above that is gravy. Guys who have been tight suddenly start playing very loose.
In my last post, we examined the blind structure of tournaments. From the same on-line tournament we looked at then, let's look at the pay out structure. This tournament had 348 entrants, each of whom paid $2.25 to play. The pay out structure was:
Place Prize
1. $174
2. $111.36
3. $83.52
4. $64.38
5. $48.72
6. $34.80
7. $22.62
8. $17.20
9. $13.92
10-12. $8.70
13-15. $6.96
16-18. $5.22
19-27. $3.83
28-36. $3.13
To make it into the money players had to finish in the top 11%. In addition to the entry fee participants also have to invest their time. In our example tournament over two hours had elapsed before the field was down to 36 players. So why are so many players content to make it their goal to just finish in the money? In our example, when you subtract the entry fee the fellow who finished in 28th place out of a field of 348 players made a profit of 88 cents.
It should never be your goal to just make it into the money. You need to set your sites much higher to make playing in tournaments profitable. That is why you should immediately tighten up when every one else starts gambling. Once you make it into the money, the goal is to move up positions. When much of the field is gambling, you can sit back and let the smaller stacks knock each other out. When you get a good hand, you are much more likely to get paid off by someone playing looser than you.
Most people make it a goal to get into the money, so they play really tight as that goal gets closer. You knew this and you exploited their overly conservative play (see Tournament Strategy: Getting Near the Money ) and it is hoped you built a nice stack grabbing all those pots everyone else was too afraid to contest. Now that everyone else has achieved their goal and made it into the money, they immediately start playing much, much more aggressively. Their thinking is that they have gotten their buy-in back, so everything above that is gravy. Guys who have been tight suddenly start playing very loose.
In my last post, we examined the blind structure of tournaments. From the same on-line tournament we looked at then, let's look at the pay out structure. This tournament had 348 entrants, each of whom paid $2.25 to play. The pay out structure was:
Place Prize
1. $174
2. $111.36
3. $83.52
4. $64.38
5. $48.72
6. $34.80
7. $22.62
8. $17.20
9. $13.92
10-12. $8.70
13-15. $6.96
16-18. $5.22
19-27. $3.83
28-36. $3.13
To make it into the money players had to finish in the top 11%. In addition to the entry fee participants also have to invest their time. In our example tournament over two hours had elapsed before the field was down to 36 players. So why are so many players content to make it their goal to just finish in the money? In our example, when you subtract the entry fee the fellow who finished in 28th place out of a field of 348 players made a profit of 88 cents.
It should never be your goal to just make it into the money. You need to set your sites much higher to make playing in tournaments profitable. That is why you should immediately tighten up when every one else starts gambling. Once you make it into the money, the goal is to move up positions. When much of the field is gambling, you can sit back and let the smaller stacks knock each other out. When you get a good hand, you are much more likely to get paid off by someone playing looser than you.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Tournament Strategy: Blind Structure
When the word structure is used in relation to a poker tournament, it is referring to two things: the blind structure and the pay out structure. Let's take a look at blind structure today.
Unlike ring games, the blinds in a tournament continually increase in order to force the action. If the blinds didn't rise then a tournament could go on forever. The blind structure simply defines how long each level will be and states how much the blinds are at each level. Here is an example of a blind structure for an on-line tournament in which participants start out with $15,000 in tournament chips. In this particular structure each level lasted for ten minutes, which is typical of on-line tournaments. Levels typically last longer in real-life tournaments .
Level--Blinds--(Antes)
1 10/20
2 15/30
3 20/40
4 25/50
5 30/60
6 40/80
7 50/100
8 60/120
9 80/160
10 100/200
11 120/240 (25)
12 150/300 (25)
13 200/400 (50)
14 250/500 (50)
15 300/600 (75)
16 400/800 (100)
17 500/1,000 (125)
18 600/1,200 (150)
19 800/1,600 (200)
20 1,000/2,000 (250)
This particular tournament actually lasted into the 25th level but I got tired of typing at 20. Anyway, you get the idea.
Knowing the structure is important because it allows you to plan your strategy optimally. You might like to wait for great hands but if the blinds are coming up quickly you might not have that luxury. Any time your stack falls below 10 times the big blind you enter the "all-in" zone where you are just looking for a hand to gamble on. As the blinds rise that important threshold can sneak up you, so be aware of it.
I play tight in the early stages because the name of the game is survival. I don't take unnecessary chances. But as the blinds come up, taking more chances becomes necessary to keep a healthy stack.
Note that at the eleventh level of our example the ante comes into play. At only $25, this might not seem like much but with nine players this adds up to an additional $225 in the pot before the cards are even dealt. At level 10 the blinds total $300, but at level 11 the blinds plus antes total almost doubles to $585. This makes the pot much more worthwhile to win. If you have been cultivating a tight image to this point, now is the time to exploit that and start attacking.
Unlike ring games, the blinds in a tournament continually increase in order to force the action. If the blinds didn't rise then a tournament could go on forever. The blind structure simply defines how long each level will be and states how much the blinds are at each level. Here is an example of a blind structure for an on-line tournament in which participants start out with $15,000 in tournament chips. In this particular structure each level lasted for ten minutes, which is typical of on-line tournaments. Levels typically last longer in real-life tournaments .
Level--Blinds--(Antes)
1 10/20
2 15/30
3 20/40
4 25/50
5 30/60
6 40/80
7 50/100
8 60/120
9 80/160
10 100/200
11 120/240 (25)
12 150/300 (25)
13 200/400 (50)
14 250/500 (50)
15 300/600 (75)
16 400/800 (100)
17 500/1,000 (125)
18 600/1,200 (150)
19 800/1,600 (200)
20 1,000/2,000 (250)
This particular tournament actually lasted into the 25th level but I got tired of typing at 20. Anyway, you get the idea.
Knowing the structure is important because it allows you to plan your strategy optimally. You might like to wait for great hands but if the blinds are coming up quickly you might not have that luxury. Any time your stack falls below 10 times the big blind you enter the "all-in" zone where you are just looking for a hand to gamble on. As the blinds rise that important threshold can sneak up you, so be aware of it.
I play tight in the early stages because the name of the game is survival. I don't take unnecessary chances. But as the blinds come up, taking more chances becomes necessary to keep a healthy stack.
Note that at the eleventh level of our example the ante comes into play. At only $25, this might not seem like much but with nine players this adds up to an additional $225 in the pot before the cards are even dealt. At level 10 the blinds total $300, but at level 11 the blinds plus antes total almost doubles to $585. This makes the pot much more worthwhile to win. If you have been cultivating a tight image to this point, now is the time to exploit that and start attacking.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Tournament Strategy: Getting Near the Money
In most tournaments the top ten percent of finishers are paid. These people are said to have finished "in the money." As you get closer to being in the money, play tends to tighten up considerably. People with small stacks are hoping they can hang on long enough and those with medium sized stacks don't want to make a big mistake with the money so near. This is the stage where if you have the courage to make some bold moves you can move up quite a few positions.
You have to be very careful when picking your spots. You do not want to tangle with a big stack here. You should have a good sense of who is desperate to make it into the money - these are the players who will be the easiest to bluff.
Because people are playing tighter than usual, a medium-sized raise here will have a similar effect that a large raise normally would, so this is a stage of the tournament where bluffing more is a good strategy. Don't be afraid of loosing your tight image - it is far more important to accumulate chips than to worry about image. In fact once you get in the money you want that maniac image.
If you do catch a big hand, play it exactly like you are running another bluff. If you change your betting pattern your opponents will notice and will know by the size of your bets if you are bluffing or not. Do the same thing whether you have A A or 7 2.
Don't be afraid to throw your hand away if someone plays back at you. Shrug it off. Forget about it. You only bet a modest amount anyway. If you are no longer getting any respect then it is more likely your legitimate hands will get paid off.
Pick your spots (your opponents) and attack.
You have to be very careful when picking your spots. You do not want to tangle with a big stack here. You should have a good sense of who is desperate to make it into the money - these are the players who will be the easiest to bluff.
Because people are playing tighter than usual, a medium-sized raise here will have a similar effect that a large raise normally would, so this is a stage of the tournament where bluffing more is a good strategy. Don't be afraid of loosing your tight image - it is far more important to accumulate chips than to worry about image. In fact once you get in the money you want that maniac image.
If you do catch a big hand, play it exactly like you are running another bluff. If you change your betting pattern your opponents will notice and will know by the size of your bets if you are bluffing or not. Do the same thing whether you have A A or 7 2.
Don't be afraid to throw your hand away if someone plays back at you. Shrug it off. Forget about it. You only bet a modest amount anyway. If you are no longer getting any respect then it is more likely your legitimate hands will get paid off.
Pick your spots (your opponents) and attack.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Tournament Stretegy: Bluffing
I don't write a lot about bluffing, mainly because in a ring game you can make money without ever having to bluff, so really why bother? Most players, particularly new players, bluff way too much and I don't want to encourage that kind of reckless play by writing posts on bluffing.
However if you are going to do well in tournaments, then you have to use every trick in the book and that includes well timed bluffs. I don't recommend bluffing in the early stages of tournaments when pots are small and you don't yet have a feel for your opponents. There is a saying in poker that you can bluff a good player but you can't bluff a bad one, and I think there is a lot of truth to this. Spend those early stages observing your opponents and try to discern which ones can be bluffed and which ones can't. Play very tight poker, so that your table image will work in your favour when you start running a few bluffs in the middle or late rounds.
By the middle stages, your focus begins to shift from protecting your stack at all costs to risking a bit to accumulate more chips. If you can steal the blinds every now and then you will keep your stack from getting eaten away. When and how depends on your read of your opponents. I'm sorry to say that there is nothing you can read on a blog or in a book that will prepare you for every situation, your own read on your opponents is the most important thing to guide you. All I can do is give you some tips.
Pre-Flop Bluffing Tips:
However if you are going to do well in tournaments, then you have to use every trick in the book and that includes well timed bluffs. I don't recommend bluffing in the early stages of tournaments when pots are small and you don't yet have a feel for your opponents. There is a saying in poker that you can bluff a good player but you can't bluff a bad one, and I think there is a lot of truth to this. Spend those early stages observing your opponents and try to discern which ones can be bluffed and which ones can't. Play very tight poker, so that your table image will work in your favour when you start running a few bluffs in the middle or late rounds.
By the middle stages, your focus begins to shift from protecting your stack at all costs to risking a bit to accumulate more chips. If you can steal the blinds every now and then you will keep your stack from getting eaten away. When and how depends on your read of your opponents. I'm sorry to say that there is nothing you can read on a blog or in a book that will prepare you for every situation, your own read on your opponents is the most important thing to guide you. All I can do is give you some tips.
Pre-Flop Bluffing Tips:
- Don't try a bluff if someone has raised the pot before you. Your goal is to either steal the blinds outright or to see the flop against a single opponent. The size of your bet should be calculated to achieve these goals. If someone has raised before you, it is more than likely they will call your re-raise and you may get other callers who feel "priced in". Suddenly you are in a multi-way pot with bad cards. Not good.
- Don't always try to steal the blinds with a raise from the button or the cut-off (right of the button) positions. People steal the blinds from these positions so frequently that doing so too often yourself will send signals that you are bluffing. If you fold when everyone has passed to you on the button from time to time, it will make your steals seem more legitimate. Once in a blue moon, try raising from early position. It goes against all poker wisdom to bluff from early position, so if you make even a modest bet from there you should get a lot of respect - if your opponents are good players.
Post-Flop Bluffing tips:
- Don't bluff against two or more opponents. It is more than twice as unlikely to run a successful bluff against two people than it is against one. It is foolish.
- Don't bet too much when you bluff. A small bet, particularly against a good opponent, is often just as effective as a big bet. This is counter to a lot of people who say "go big or go home". I think if you go big with nothing in your hand, then you probably will be going home. Remember the rule: don't risk a lot to win a little.
- Don't bluff an idiot. Bad players just don't lay their hands down very easily. Which makes them fun to play against when you have a great hand but bad targets for your bluffs.
Post-Turn Bluffing Tips:
- My favourite place to bluff is on the turn - after my opponent and I checked after the flop. If I get called, then I shut down and don't put any more chips into the pot. If I get raised, I fold.
Post-River Bluffing Tips:
- Assuming you don't have a hand, the only way you make it to the river is if you and your opponent have been checking it down all the way, so it's pretty unlikely your opponent has anything. Go ahead and bet half the pot, more often than not you will take it.
Tournament Strategy: Avoiding Coin-Flips
In my post about playing in a tournament with a short stack, I said that you should look for a spot to try to double up. In other words, you should be prepared to go all in before the flop with hands that stand up well in coin-flip situations. When you are short stacked this makes sense, but too many players with healthy stacks make the mistake of letting their tournament fate ride on coin-flips. The most common situation is pocket queens against big slick - two premium hands that many players seem willing to go all in with no matter what the stage of a tournament. I used to do it myself but I've wised up.
Before you make a move involving most or all of your chips, do a risk assessment. What is the upside? You double up. In the middle stages of a tournament doubling your chips is great, but it doesn't automatically put you in the money. You gain a slight advantage, but what do you risk? You risk everything.
Once you are in the money, moving up positions can greatly increase the money you make. It's then that the upside justifies the gamble. Or, as I have said, when you are short stacked the "down side" - being knocked out of the tournament - is what will happen if you don't act, so you might as well try it. In the middle of a tournament, with an average sized stack, its just a bad gamble.
If you believe in your own skill as a poker player, you should feel confident in playing QQ or AK without going all in pre-flop with them. By the middle stages of the tournament you should have enough information on your opponents to play against them. By going all in pre-flop you are saying you would rather give your fate over to chance than rely on your skill to play the hand out. You won't win tournaments if you don't have more confidence in yourself that that.
Before you make a move involving most or all of your chips, do a risk assessment. What is the upside? You double up. In the middle stages of a tournament doubling your chips is great, but it doesn't automatically put you in the money. You gain a slight advantage, but what do you risk? You risk everything.
Once you are in the money, moving up positions can greatly increase the money you make. It's then that the upside justifies the gamble. Or, as I have said, when you are short stacked the "down side" - being knocked out of the tournament - is what will happen if you don't act, so you might as well try it. In the middle of a tournament, with an average sized stack, its just a bad gamble.
If you believe in your own skill as a poker player, you should feel confident in playing QQ or AK without going all in pre-flop with them. By the middle stages of the tournament you should have enough information on your opponents to play against them. By going all in pre-flop you are saying you would rather give your fate over to chance than rely on your skill to play the hand out. You won't win tournaments if you don't have more confidence in yourself that that.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Tournament Strategy: The Early Stages
In my last post I talked about relative chip value in tournament play. In the first rounds of a tournament the blinds are small, so this is the time to play speculative hands hoping to build your stack early, right?
Wrong!
The early levels of a tournament are when you should be playing your tightest poker. Your goal in these early stages is to gather information on your opponents. You do not want to gamble away even small amounts of money. If the tournament goes well, you will win big pots to build your stack. Don't worry about contesting a lot of small pots at the start. Save those chips to double up with later.
Doyle Brunson advises playing tighter in tournaments than in ring games because if you get busted in a ring game you can buy more chips. True, there are some re-buy tournaments, where people can go nuts trying to build a stack early knowing they can buy back in. Personally I just don't understand that structure and I won't give any advice on re-buy tournaments. For normal tournaments, protecting your stack is your first priority and building your stack is a secondary concern.
T.J. Cloutier was an old school road gambler who for many years lived in Houston Texas. He used to play regularly in a big cash game in Dallas but often had only enough money for one buy in - if he lost that, he was broke. As you might imagine, this situation taught T.J. how to play very, very tight poker. For example, while other players think AK is a great hand, calling it "big slick", T.J.'s name for AK is "walking back to Houston". To T.J. every Dallas game was like a tournament, so it is not surprising that he became one of the great tournament players with six World Series of Poker bracelets.
Sure there is a time for looser, more aggressive play in a tournament. That time is when everybody else is playing scared - not in the early stages when the pots are small and nobody is afraid to play them.
Wrong!
The early levels of a tournament are when you should be playing your tightest poker. Your goal in these early stages is to gather information on your opponents. You do not want to gamble away even small amounts of money. If the tournament goes well, you will win big pots to build your stack. Don't worry about contesting a lot of small pots at the start. Save those chips to double up with later.
Doyle Brunson advises playing tighter in tournaments than in ring games because if you get busted in a ring game you can buy more chips. True, there are some re-buy tournaments, where people can go nuts trying to build a stack early knowing they can buy back in. Personally I just don't understand that structure and I won't give any advice on re-buy tournaments. For normal tournaments, protecting your stack is your first priority and building your stack is a secondary concern.
T.J. Cloutier was an old school road gambler who for many years lived in Houston Texas. He used to play regularly in a big cash game in Dallas but often had only enough money for one buy in - if he lost that, he was broke. As you might imagine, this situation taught T.J. how to play very, very tight poker. For example, while other players think AK is a great hand, calling it "big slick", T.J.'s name for AK is "walking back to Houston". To T.J. every Dallas game was like a tournament, so it is not surprising that he became one of the great tournament players with six World Series of Poker bracelets.
Sure there is a time for looser, more aggressive play in a tournament. That time is when everybody else is playing scared - not in the early stages when the pots are small and nobody is afraid to play them.
Monday, December 6, 2010
Tournament Strategy: Playing Short Stacked
If you have played much poker, you have probably heard the expression, "All you need is a chip and a chair." It is part of poker mythology that this expression was coined after the greatest comeback in the history of the World Series of Poker: The main event victory of Jack Strauss in 1982. It was early in the second day of the big game that year when Jack was dealt a hand he liked and pushed all his chips into the middle. He got one caller and lost the hand. As Jack got up to leave he discovered that hidden under his napkin was a $500 chip he missed, and since he had never actually said "all in" the tournament directors agreed he could continue to play with the single chip. Jack then went on an incredible rush and ended up winning the tournament.
Many tournament players just give up when they get far behind in their chip counts. It's like they no longer really believe they can win, so they just start playing mediocre cards hoping to get lucky. What you should do when you find yourself short stacked is conserve your chips because you are looking for a spot to double up. If you are down to $1000 and the big blind is $100, don't limp in with speculative hands like suited connectors or medium pairs because you will not want to go all-in with these hands if someone raises you. Even if you see the flop you most likely won't hit it and again you have to throw your hand away.
In ring games, chips have absolute value. A $100 chip is worth $100. In tournaments chips relative value. A $100 bet represents 10% of the stack of someone with only $1,000 in a tournament and should not be made with anything less than a premium hand, whereas to the tournament player with $20,000 a $100 bet is a threat to less than 1% of their stack, so it may be okay to take a chance with a range of speculative hands. As a short stack you can make this work to your favour by waiting to get a good hand to play, knowing a big stack might call you with a lesser hand because those chips are not worth as much to them.
The rule of thumb I've heard the professionals use is that once your stack is down to ten times the blinds (i.e. you have $1,500 and the blinds are 100/50) it is time to start looking for hands to go all in pre-flop with. By doing this one of three things will happen and two of them are good. (1) You get called and lose (bad). (2) You get called and win (good). (3) Everyone folds and you get the blinds (good).
What hands are good to go all-in with in this situation? Well, you can't be too picky but you definitely do not want to make your all in move with pocket 8's or lower. Even though your stack won't cripple anyone, in my experience people will only call a pre-flop all in with either a decent pocket pair or Ace with a face card. So by going in with small pairs you will either be called by a larger pair (which makes you a terrible underdog) or by the big ace, in which case it's a coin flip. So you will probably lose more often than you will win in this situation.
AK is the perfect hand to go all in with. If you get called by a weaker ace, then you are a big favourite. If you get called by a smaller pair, you still have nearly a 50% chance of hitting an ace or king by the river. The important point is that you will see all five board cards because you went all in. If you don't go all-in, then if you miss the flop (likely) you have a tough decision to make if you are raised. Better to just pot-commit yourself with the all-in.
Big pairs? Should the poker gods smile and deal you AA or KK, you may then want to play the odds that you will probably still be ahead after the flop. Do not go all in, but make the largest bet you think will be called. Then, depending on the texture of the flop and your opponents, you can decide to try to extract more money with a value bet or protect your lead and push them out.
QQ? JJ? 10-10? I'm usually all in pre-flop. I might not shove with 10-10 if I think I'll be up against two or more opponents because I'm probably up against three or more overcards, which makes me an underdog.
Of course this is very general advice. What you decide to play will depend a lot on your position, but what you must be thinking is that any hand good enough to play is good enough to go all in with at this point.
No matter how short stacked you are, never, never, never, never give up. I promise that if you commit yourself to being the best short-stack player you can possibly be you will achieve some amazing comebacks. Being a great short-stack player is the difference between being a losing tournament player over the course of your life and being a winner.
Many tournament players just give up when they get far behind in their chip counts. It's like they no longer really believe they can win, so they just start playing mediocre cards hoping to get lucky. What you should do when you find yourself short stacked is conserve your chips because you are looking for a spot to double up. If you are down to $1000 and the big blind is $100, don't limp in with speculative hands like suited connectors or medium pairs because you will not want to go all-in with these hands if someone raises you. Even if you see the flop you most likely won't hit it and again you have to throw your hand away.
In ring games, chips have absolute value. A $100 chip is worth $100. In tournaments chips relative value. A $100 bet represents 10% of the stack of someone with only $1,000 in a tournament and should not be made with anything less than a premium hand, whereas to the tournament player with $20,000 a $100 bet is a threat to less than 1% of their stack, so it may be okay to take a chance with a range of speculative hands. As a short stack you can make this work to your favour by waiting to get a good hand to play, knowing a big stack might call you with a lesser hand because those chips are not worth as much to them.
The rule of thumb I've heard the professionals use is that once your stack is down to ten times the blinds (i.e. you have $1,500 and the blinds are 100/50) it is time to start looking for hands to go all in pre-flop with. By doing this one of three things will happen and two of them are good. (1) You get called and lose (bad). (2) You get called and win (good). (3) Everyone folds and you get the blinds (good).
What hands are good to go all-in with in this situation? Well, you can't be too picky but you definitely do not want to make your all in move with pocket 8's or lower. Even though your stack won't cripple anyone, in my experience people will only call a pre-flop all in with either a decent pocket pair or Ace with a face card. So by going in with small pairs you will either be called by a larger pair (which makes you a terrible underdog) or by the big ace, in which case it's a coin flip. So you will probably lose more often than you will win in this situation.
AK is the perfect hand to go all in with. If you get called by a weaker ace, then you are a big favourite. If you get called by a smaller pair, you still have nearly a 50% chance of hitting an ace or king by the river. The important point is that you will see all five board cards because you went all in. If you don't go all-in, then if you miss the flop (likely) you have a tough decision to make if you are raised. Better to just pot-commit yourself with the all-in.
Big pairs? Should the poker gods smile and deal you AA or KK, you may then want to play the odds that you will probably still be ahead after the flop. Do not go all in, but make the largest bet you think will be called. Then, depending on the texture of the flop and your opponents, you can decide to try to extract more money with a value bet or protect your lead and push them out.
QQ? JJ? 10-10? I'm usually all in pre-flop. I might not shove with 10-10 if I think I'll be up against two or more opponents because I'm probably up against three or more overcards, which makes me an underdog.
Of course this is very general advice. What you decide to play will depend a lot on your position, but what you must be thinking is that any hand good enough to play is good enough to go all in with at this point.
No matter how short stacked you are, never, never, never, never give up. I promise that if you commit yourself to being the best short-stack player you can possibly be you will achieve some amazing comebacks. Being a great short-stack player is the difference between being a losing tournament player over the course of your life and being a winner.
Friday, December 3, 2010
In Praise of Low Variance
About twenty years ago I read a Kurt Vonnegut novel called Bluebeard. In the intervening years I have forgotten almost everything about the book except for a specific scene in which the protagonist, an abstract painter, is confronted by someone who thinks abstract art is a scam. The artist is asked something like "What makes your scribblings any more valuable than the random smatterings a monkey could make?" The artist replies by quickly and skillfully drawing a beautiful, realistic picture. "Because I can do this."
Okay, maybe the scene didn't go exactly like that, but that's roughly how I remember it. The point the artist makes is that good abstract art is grounded in mastering the fundamentals. One can think of Picasso who painted like a master when he was a child, then painted increasingly abstract works in his maturity.
What does all this have to do with poker? Well a lot of people watch poker on television and think it looks easy. They see guys making what look like crazy, even random moves, and they think that it is easy to play poker at the highest level. True, poker at it's highest level can resemble poker at it's lowest level in much the same way that, to an untrained eye, a Jackson Pollock looks like something their kindergarten kid could make. But it ain't that easy folks. As a friend of mine has pointed out, poker on television only shows you a small percentage of the hands that have been played. What you don't see are all the boring hands where not much happens. It is in all those hands you don't see that the good poker players gather information on each other and this information in turn leads to them making those random looking moves on the televised hands.
Too many jump into poker at a level they are not ready for, dreaming of final table glory and imagining what clothes they will wear when they beat Phil Ivey. Before you get in over your head, learn the fundamentals. Like an artist learning to draw, train yourself.
Good poker training should start with a low variance game. Low variance just means a game in which it is relatively clear who is ahead at any given point, and one in which it is less likely that one can "get lucky" in order to win (or unlucky and loose). Playing low variance games will instill a respect for the laws of probability in you - and you will need this as surely as a painter needs to know how to mix colours.
Razz is probably the lowest variance game. I will go into the rules of razz in a future post, but let me just say it is about as exciting as betting on coin tosses - which is exactly why it is a good game for the beginning poker player. It will drive out of your mind all those dreams of poker glory that lead to the destruction of bankrolls. It will teach you the most underrated poker skill: patience.
Limit hold 'em is also good, particularly when played for low stakes. The two biggest mistakes beginning poker players have is bluffing too much and playing too many hands. You can't really bluff in limit hold 'em because you can't place a really big bet that can scare opponents out of the pot. In limit hold 'em you have to think about playing sound poker, knowing when you are likely behind and folding. Knowing when you are likely ahead and raising. You have to concentrate on the fundamentals.
For more advanced poker players, low variance games are like what doing scales are to a musician. John Coltrane, the great jazz sax player who got increasingly abstract and experimental, was said to have played scales for two hours a day throughout his career. Even the most celebrated poker genius should play low variance games occasionally to keep themselves grounded in the fundamentals. By doing so you will have a much better chance of making the perfect, carefully calculated play that will look like a random move to the rubes watching you on television.
Okay, maybe the scene didn't go exactly like that, but that's roughly how I remember it. The point the artist makes is that good abstract art is grounded in mastering the fundamentals. One can think of Picasso who painted like a master when he was a child, then painted increasingly abstract works in his maturity.
What does all this have to do with poker? Well a lot of people watch poker on television and think it looks easy. They see guys making what look like crazy, even random moves, and they think that it is easy to play poker at the highest level. True, poker at it's highest level can resemble poker at it's lowest level in much the same way that, to an untrained eye, a Jackson Pollock looks like something their kindergarten kid could make. But it ain't that easy folks. As a friend of mine has pointed out, poker on television only shows you a small percentage of the hands that have been played. What you don't see are all the boring hands where not much happens. It is in all those hands you don't see that the good poker players gather information on each other and this information in turn leads to them making those random looking moves on the televised hands.
Too many jump into poker at a level they are not ready for, dreaming of final table glory and imagining what clothes they will wear when they beat Phil Ivey. Before you get in over your head, learn the fundamentals. Like an artist learning to draw, train yourself.
Good poker training should start with a low variance game. Low variance just means a game in which it is relatively clear who is ahead at any given point, and one in which it is less likely that one can "get lucky" in order to win (or unlucky and loose). Playing low variance games will instill a respect for the laws of probability in you - and you will need this as surely as a painter needs to know how to mix colours.
Razz is probably the lowest variance game. I will go into the rules of razz in a future post, but let me just say it is about as exciting as betting on coin tosses - which is exactly why it is a good game for the beginning poker player. It will drive out of your mind all those dreams of poker glory that lead to the destruction of bankrolls. It will teach you the most underrated poker skill: patience.
Limit hold 'em is also good, particularly when played for low stakes. The two biggest mistakes beginning poker players have is bluffing too much and playing too many hands. You can't really bluff in limit hold 'em because you can't place a really big bet that can scare opponents out of the pot. In limit hold 'em you have to think about playing sound poker, knowing when you are likely behind and folding. Knowing when you are likely ahead and raising. You have to concentrate on the fundamentals.
For more advanced poker players, low variance games are like what doing scales are to a musician. John Coltrane, the great jazz sax player who got increasingly abstract and experimental, was said to have played scales for two hours a day throughout his career. Even the most celebrated poker genius should play low variance games occasionally to keep themselves grounded in the fundamentals. By doing so you will have a much better chance of making the perfect, carefully calculated play that will look like a random move to the rubes watching you on television.
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Table Image: Second Thoughts
I have been feeling slightly anxious the last few days. I'm a bit worried that in my last post, Table Image, I recommend playing recklessly in order to achieve a profitable table image. I'm really not comfortable with the idea of people deliberately doing stupid things, because it is difficult to stop doing them once you've started. I don't recommend you try cultivating a loose/aggressive table image until you are an experienced enough player to do so without loosing all your chips in the process.
Some of you might also have noticed that this talk about loose play runs counter everything I've said about playing tight poker. It does. Again, 99% of the time tight is right and you can only appear to be loose if you are skilled enough to make it pay later on. I would not recommend the beginner player try this, as it is far more important that you use every bit of your concentration just to play strong, solid poker.
Also, you often don't have to deliberately do something crazy or stupid to make people believe you are crazy or stupid. Even a really good player makes a boneheaded move now and again, and when you do make a mistake you might be able to capitalize on it later.
A good example of this just happened to me yesterday. I was playing a one table sit-n-go tournament. I wasn't giving the game the attention I should have been. In fact I was writing a blog and playing poker simultaneously, which is a pretty dumb thing to do. Anyway, I got into a hand early in the tourney where I was in the big blind and every one kept checking. I would have folded my J 9 pre-flop but nobody raised me, so I saw a flop of 9 K 4 for free. I would have folded this pair of nines but nobody raised me, so I saw the turn (the Ace of diamonds) for free too. All this time I'm trying to write my blog, trying to fold, but nobody raises after the turn so I see the river for free too. The river is the nine of diamonds. Sweet! I've got three nines, which is very likely to be the best hand even with only a Jack as a kicker. So I make a pot sized bet and the moment I do I realize something: there are four diamonds on this board! How could I be so stupid? I see there are three players to act after me, so the odds that any one of them has hit the flush is very high (about 84% I think, but if you disagree let me know) high enough to make my betting here qualify for the bonehead move of the day. One guys calls and beats me with a lousy six of diamonds. Everyone sees what a doofus I am and one guy immediately starts ripping into me: "What F'cking Moron!" he writes in the chat box. You see constructive criticism like this a lot on internet poker.
So two things happen after that. Firstly, I forget about the blog and concentrate on the poker. Secondly, almost every time I make a hand from then on I get plenty of callers. I think looking so dumb really worked in my favour and I ended up winning the tourney.
When (not if, but when) you do something wrong, don't get mad at yourself and go on tilt. Think about who saw your mistake, what they think of you, and how to exploit that perception.
Some of you might also have noticed that this talk about loose play runs counter everything I've said about playing tight poker. It does. Again, 99% of the time tight is right and you can only appear to be loose if you are skilled enough to make it pay later on. I would not recommend the beginner player try this, as it is far more important that you use every bit of your concentration just to play strong, solid poker.
Also, you often don't have to deliberately do something crazy or stupid to make people believe you are crazy or stupid. Even a really good player makes a boneheaded move now and again, and when you do make a mistake you might be able to capitalize on it later.
A good example of this just happened to me yesterday. I was playing a one table sit-n-go tournament. I wasn't giving the game the attention I should have been. In fact I was writing a blog and playing poker simultaneously, which is a pretty dumb thing to do. Anyway, I got into a hand early in the tourney where I was in the big blind and every one kept checking. I would have folded my J 9 pre-flop but nobody raised me, so I saw a flop of 9 K 4 for free. I would have folded this pair of nines but nobody raised me, so I saw the turn (the Ace of diamonds) for free too. All this time I'm trying to write my blog, trying to fold, but nobody raises after the turn so I see the river for free too. The river is the nine of diamonds. Sweet! I've got three nines, which is very likely to be the best hand even with only a Jack as a kicker. So I make a pot sized bet and the moment I do I realize something: there are four diamonds on this board! How could I be so stupid? I see there are three players to act after me, so the odds that any one of them has hit the flush is very high (about 84% I think, but if you disagree let me know) high enough to make my betting here qualify for the bonehead move of the day. One guys calls and beats me with a lousy six of diamonds. Everyone sees what a doofus I am and one guy immediately starts ripping into me: "What F'cking Moron!" he writes in the chat box. You see constructive criticism like this a lot on internet poker.
So two things happen after that. Firstly, I forget about the blog and concentrate on the poker. Secondly, almost every time I make a hand from then on I get plenty of callers. I think looking so dumb really worked in my favour and I ended up winning the tourney.
When (not if, but when) you do something wrong, don't get mad at yourself and go on tilt. Think about who saw your mistake, what they think of you, and how to exploit that perception.
Thursday, November 25, 2010
Table Image
When most people think of table image, they think about being the dominant player at the table. They imagine the best image to have is one that intimidates their opponents and allows them to steamroll to pot after pot. If you will permit me to play amateur psychologist for a moment, I believe these players are using poker to play out their alpha-male fantasies and they care more about looking cool than about winning money. With all do respect, real sharks don't want to look like sharks.
Which of the two following scenarios is the most profitable to find your self in?
Scenario A: You have been running over your opponents for the last hour. Every move you've made has worked and now everyone knows you are a really tough, talented and smart poker player. With such a table image firmly established, you are certain you can now steal a few pots by bluffing. Your opponents are so scared of you that they will fold everything but the nuts. So you raise the pot five times the big blind pre-flop. It doesn't matter that you have 4 5 off-suit, because you expect everyone to fold to you. You do get caller though - the big blind, who rather nervously calls. That's ok - you will probably be able to bluff him off the pot later, right? The flop comes down 7h 2h Jh - a really good flop to bluff because it is very unlikely your opponent is holding two hearts, and the other hands he could have that hit this flop are JJ or AJ, again remote possibilities. Your opponent acts first and just checks. Good. Now, a big bet here would look like you are protecting your hand from the flush draw, so it wouldn't look like the bluff it is. Confident in your image as a strong player you make a pot sized bet.
Scenario B: You have been playing a lot of pots in the last hour. In addition to playing strong starting hands, you have been playing a lot of speculative hands as well and people at the table have started making jokes about how you don't know how to fold. You have won some big pots hitting your draws on the river, but you have lost about as much attempting some silly bluffs. You are sure everyone thinks you are crazy. You are dealt pocket kings in late position and someone bets 4 times the big blind in front of you. You make a raise that is 8 times the big blind. Everyone folds except the original bettor, who calls. The flop comes down 3 9 K, rainbow.
So. Would you rather find your self in Scenario A or Scenario B? I hope it is obvious to you that Scenario B is far and away the best situation to find yourself in.
In Scenario A, your dominate image will probably win you that pot that is only worth 10.5 bets. Probably. But there is still the risk your opponent does have two hearts or something else he simply will not fold: AJ, JJ, AA or KK for example. You run the risk of losing a minimum of 15.5 bets and maybe more if you "fire the second bullet" and bluff after the turn as well.
In Scenario B, you have established an image as a maniac, so that when you hit a monster hand you are very likely to be paid off. The trick is to make the same sized bets you've made up to this point - making a small bet here when you've been making pot-sized bets until this point will only set off alarm bells! If anything, a bigger than normal bet will likely convince your opponent that you are bluffing. Play this hand well, and you will make a lot more in this single pot than you have lost in the last hour by playing like a doofus.
Looking like an idiot can be profitable - if you can minimize the money you lose while establishing that table image. Sharks refer to money you lose in this manner as "advertising" - an expense that, hopefully, will lead to greater returns later.
And always remember: It's not how many pots you win, it's how big the pots are that matters.
Which of the two following scenarios is the most profitable to find your self in?
Scenario A: You have been running over your opponents for the last hour. Every move you've made has worked and now everyone knows you are a really tough, talented and smart poker player. With such a table image firmly established, you are certain you can now steal a few pots by bluffing. Your opponents are so scared of you that they will fold everything but the nuts. So you raise the pot five times the big blind pre-flop. It doesn't matter that you have 4 5 off-suit, because you expect everyone to fold to you. You do get caller though - the big blind, who rather nervously calls. That's ok - you will probably be able to bluff him off the pot later, right? The flop comes down 7h 2h Jh - a really good flop to bluff because it is very unlikely your opponent is holding two hearts, and the other hands he could have that hit this flop are JJ or AJ, again remote possibilities. Your opponent acts first and just checks. Good. Now, a big bet here would look like you are protecting your hand from the flush draw, so it wouldn't look like the bluff it is. Confident in your image as a strong player you make a pot sized bet.
Scenario B: You have been playing a lot of pots in the last hour. In addition to playing strong starting hands, you have been playing a lot of speculative hands as well and people at the table have started making jokes about how you don't know how to fold. You have won some big pots hitting your draws on the river, but you have lost about as much attempting some silly bluffs. You are sure everyone thinks you are crazy. You are dealt pocket kings in late position and someone bets 4 times the big blind in front of you. You make a raise that is 8 times the big blind. Everyone folds except the original bettor, who calls. The flop comes down 3 9 K, rainbow.
So. Would you rather find your self in Scenario A or Scenario B? I hope it is obvious to you that Scenario B is far and away the best situation to find yourself in.
In Scenario A, your dominate image will probably win you that pot that is only worth 10.5 bets. Probably. But there is still the risk your opponent does have two hearts or something else he simply will not fold: AJ, JJ, AA or KK for example. You run the risk of losing a minimum of 15.5 bets and maybe more if you "fire the second bullet" and bluff after the turn as well.
In Scenario B, you have established an image as a maniac, so that when you hit a monster hand you are very likely to be paid off. The trick is to make the same sized bets you've made up to this point - making a small bet here when you've been making pot-sized bets until this point will only set off alarm bells! If anything, a bigger than normal bet will likely convince your opponent that you are bluffing. Play this hand well, and you will make a lot more in this single pot than you have lost in the last hour by playing like a doofus.
Looking like an idiot can be profitable - if you can minimize the money you lose while establishing that table image. Sharks refer to money you lose in this manner as "advertising" - an expense that, hopefully, will lead to greater returns later.
And always remember: It's not how many pots you win, it's how big the pots are that matters.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Sneaky Cards
Let's pretend you are in late position at a game of no limit hold-em. Your opponents are playing tight and the pots have been small. You are dealt a 4 5 off-suit. Uncharacteristically, the player under the gun raises two times the big blind and remarkably there are three callers before the action gets to you. Obviously your 4 5 is not the best hand and is unlikely to become the best hand after the flop, so you should fold right? Maybe, maybe not. When four tight players all enter a raised pot it tells you something - that there are as many as eight high cards being shared among those four players. It is a safe bet that more than one of them has an ace and there are probably some kings and queens being held as well. Maybe a pocket pair in some body's hand too, but let's just think about those high cards for now.
With high cards being shared among several opponents, low cards like your 4 5 are not so bad. You are less likely to see an ace or king hit the flop when most of them are already in your opponents hands, so that increases the odds of seeing cards you will like. Any combination of 2 3 6 or 7 will give you a straight draw of some kind, but more importantly it will be difficult for your opponents to put you on this draw. Don't play a hand like 4 5 unless you are confident that you will be paid off.
In most cases the flop will not help you, but with a 4 5 in your hand it is easy to throw your hand away and not lose any more than your two bets.
If you do see a flop like 3 6 Q and someone makes a bet before you, you can throw your hand away or you can figure if it is worth it to call and hope to fill your straight. Your decision will be based on implied pot odds. You must ask yourself; "If I hit my straight, how much will this guy pay me off?" If you are sure that potential pay-off is enough to justify a call, then go ahead.
So much goes into trying to calculate implied pot odds that I can only mention a few of the things you have to consider. Obviously your opponent needs to have a lot of chips - best case scenario is that he has much more chips than you because you could potentially double up your stack. Almost as important is how "sneaky" you hand is. You entered a raised pot pre-flop, so he unlikely to be thinking you have something like 4 5, and if you call his bet here then he will certainly not be putting you on the straight draw.
The flop of 3 6 Q hides your draw a bit too. A flop like 2 3 Q would be worse for you, even though both flops give you exactly the same odds of hitting your straight, because the 2 3 makes the straight draw more noticeable. A flop like 3 6 Q hides your draw, and that increases the likelihood of a big pay-off if you get there.
If you do go on to win with a hand like this one, you will probably be seen as a lucky maniac by your opponents. That's great! The most profitable table image you can have is the lucky maniac. I'll discuss table image next time.
With high cards being shared among several opponents, low cards like your 4 5 are not so bad. You are less likely to see an ace or king hit the flop when most of them are already in your opponents hands, so that increases the odds of seeing cards you will like. Any combination of 2 3 6 or 7 will give you a straight draw of some kind, but more importantly it will be difficult for your opponents to put you on this draw. Don't play a hand like 4 5 unless you are confident that you will be paid off.
In most cases the flop will not help you, but with a 4 5 in your hand it is easy to throw your hand away and not lose any more than your two bets.
If you do see a flop like 3 6 Q and someone makes a bet before you, you can throw your hand away or you can figure if it is worth it to call and hope to fill your straight. Your decision will be based on implied pot odds. You must ask yourself; "If I hit my straight, how much will this guy pay me off?" If you are sure that potential pay-off is enough to justify a call, then go ahead.
So much goes into trying to calculate implied pot odds that I can only mention a few of the things you have to consider. Obviously your opponent needs to have a lot of chips - best case scenario is that he has much more chips than you because you could potentially double up your stack. Almost as important is how "sneaky" you hand is. You entered a raised pot pre-flop, so he unlikely to be thinking you have something like 4 5, and if you call his bet here then he will certainly not be putting you on the straight draw.
The flop of 3 6 Q hides your draw a bit too. A flop like 2 3 Q would be worse for you, even though both flops give you exactly the same odds of hitting your straight, because the 2 3 makes the straight draw more noticeable. A flop like 3 6 Q hides your draw, and that increases the likelihood of a big pay-off if you get there.
If you do go on to win with a hand like this one, you will probably be seen as a lucky maniac by your opponents. That's great! The most profitable table image you can have is the lucky maniac. I'll discuss table image next time.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Lessons From My Father
In his youth, my father was flying officer in the Canadian Air Force. He often told me stories of those days and tried to teach me some of the life lessons he learned as a pilot. I remember two things very distinctly and both are lessons that poker players would do well to heed.
My dad liked to give me riddles to solve or pose problems to test me. I liked the attention and tried hard to show how smart I was.
Once he said to me something like, "Tyler, imagine you are flying an airplane over the mountains. A sudden freak storm has come up - unbelievably strong winds that could quite likely tear your wings off. You know you can get below the storm if you drop you altitude 500 feet, but according to your instruments this would put you in danger of hitting a mountain. You are an experienced pilot, and all your instincts tell you not to trust you instruments - that they have been effected by the storm and if you drop 500 feet you will save the plane and your life. The instruments say that if you drop 500 feet you will crash into a mountain. What do you do?"
I thought about it. Being a child, I thought more about what answer my dad wanted me to give rather than what the right answer was. I was pretty sure that my dad wanted me to say that when the chips were down, I had to follow my gut instincts and trust in myself.
"I'd drop below the storm," I answered.
"Tyler, if you do that you will crash into a mountain, killing yourself and everyone else on the plane. Always trust your instruments. Trusting instinct and ignoring your instruments will get you killed."
Lesson learned. At the poker table, if all the evidence says your opponent has you beat, but a small voice inside you insists that he is bluffing (even though he has never bluffed before!), do NOT listen to that voice.
Lesson two is simply a saying my dad repeated frequently: Attitude is altitude.
My dad explained to me that in aviation, a plane's attitude referred to the degree of inclination. It doesn't matter how high you might be, a negative attitude would eventually crash you into the ground. Conversely you might be at a low altitude, but maintaining positive attitude will pull you up.
You are having a bad session at the poker table. You started with $1000 in chips two hours ago and are down to $300. Guess what? The fact that you have lost $700 has no bearing on whether or not you win or lose from this point forward. But if your attitude is bad, like "I've lost $700, what's losing another $300 to me?", then you are almost guaranteed to crash into the ground. Catch yourself mid-fall. If you feel you can't shake your negative attitude get up from the table.
You must approach each hand fresh, unburdened by the events of the past- even the last hand. It doesn't matter what happened before. Each timer the dealer gives you cards you have the opportunity to make the best or the worst of it.
My dad liked to give me riddles to solve or pose problems to test me. I liked the attention and tried hard to show how smart I was.
Once he said to me something like, "Tyler, imagine you are flying an airplane over the mountains. A sudden freak storm has come up - unbelievably strong winds that could quite likely tear your wings off. You know you can get below the storm if you drop you altitude 500 feet, but according to your instruments this would put you in danger of hitting a mountain. You are an experienced pilot, and all your instincts tell you not to trust you instruments - that they have been effected by the storm and if you drop 500 feet you will save the plane and your life. The instruments say that if you drop 500 feet you will crash into a mountain. What do you do?"
I thought about it. Being a child, I thought more about what answer my dad wanted me to give rather than what the right answer was. I was pretty sure that my dad wanted me to say that when the chips were down, I had to follow my gut instincts and trust in myself.
"I'd drop below the storm," I answered.
"Tyler, if you do that you will crash into a mountain, killing yourself and everyone else on the plane. Always trust your instruments. Trusting instinct and ignoring your instruments will get you killed."
Lesson learned. At the poker table, if all the evidence says your opponent has you beat, but a small voice inside you insists that he is bluffing (even though he has never bluffed before!), do NOT listen to that voice.
Lesson two is simply a saying my dad repeated frequently: Attitude is altitude.
My dad explained to me that in aviation, a plane's attitude referred to the degree of inclination. It doesn't matter how high you might be, a negative attitude would eventually crash you into the ground. Conversely you might be at a low altitude, but maintaining positive attitude will pull you up.
You are having a bad session at the poker table. You started with $1000 in chips two hours ago and are down to $300. Guess what? The fact that you have lost $700 has no bearing on whether or not you win or lose from this point forward. But if your attitude is bad, like "I've lost $700, what's losing another $300 to me?", then you are almost guaranteed to crash into the ground. Catch yourself mid-fall. If you feel you can't shake your negative attitude get up from the table.
You must approach each hand fresh, unburdened by the events of the past- even the last hand. It doesn't matter what happened before. Each timer the dealer gives you cards you have the opportunity to make the best or the worst of it.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
The Music of Chance
Book Review:
The Music of Chance
By Paul Auster
1990, Viking Press
A while ago my wife and I met up with some old friends and the topic of conversation eventually turned to books. I was asked what I had been reading lately and my wife replied, "Tyler reads mostly poker books now." This confused our friends, who in all the years that they had known us had never heard of me reading anything but fiction.
"Poker novels?" one of them asked.
"No. Books on how to play poker. And poker biographies. There are no poker novels," I replied.
But of course I was wrong. I had forgotten about Paul Auster's The Music of Chance as well as many other novels in which poker plays a large role. Thinking about this book now, I realize that it very successfully captures the paradox of gambling - the freedom one can feel by giving up control of ones life, and how destructive this impulse can be.
The novel tells the story of Jim Nashe, a Boston firefighter, who is as solid a guy as there is. But when he unexpectedly comes into a fair sized inheritance the routine of his life is overturned by the possibilities of what he can now do. He quits his job, buys a nice car and drives all over America, leaving his fate to chance and his decisions to the whim of the moment. When the money starts to run out however, Jim can't bring himself to return to his former life. Instead he falls in with a gambler who promises that, with Jim's backing, he can make them both a small fortune playing poker against a couple of rich suckers he knows. From this point onward the novel changes tone, moving from a gritty realism into the classic Auster blend of symbolism and wonderland mind games. This is good stuff and I won't spoil it for you.
For me, The Music of Chance is a cautionary tale. Poker people often talk about how the game is a metaphor for life, meaning that the discipline, intelligence and risk tolerance required to succeed at poker will also help you win at other endeavours. While true, the darker aspects of poker, such as it's appeal to our self-destructive nature, are reflections of yearnings that play themselves out away from the table as well. High marks to Auster for nailing the psychology that drives many to the game. I recommend everyone read it, and if you also play poker I hope you will recognize the Jim Nashe in you and keep his impulses in check.
I frequently repeat the saying that "fiction is the lie that tells the truth." If you are a poker player, I think you will be better at the game if you read great works of fiction. Poker is largely a psychological game and fiction more than any other art form concerns itself with understanding human behavior. It is no accident that many great players, such as Annie Duke, were literature majors. If you haven't read a novel in years and are wondering which book to start with, The Music of Chance is a great one.
The Music of Chance
By Paul Auster
1990, Viking Press
A while ago my wife and I met up with some old friends and the topic of conversation eventually turned to books. I was asked what I had been reading lately and my wife replied, "Tyler reads mostly poker books now." This confused our friends, who in all the years that they had known us had never heard of me reading anything but fiction.
"Poker novels?" one of them asked.
"No. Books on how to play poker. And poker biographies. There are no poker novels," I replied.
But of course I was wrong. I had forgotten about Paul Auster's The Music of Chance as well as many other novels in which poker plays a large role. Thinking about this book now, I realize that it very successfully captures the paradox of gambling - the freedom one can feel by giving up control of ones life, and how destructive this impulse can be.
The novel tells the story of Jim Nashe, a Boston firefighter, who is as solid a guy as there is. But when he unexpectedly comes into a fair sized inheritance the routine of his life is overturned by the possibilities of what he can now do. He quits his job, buys a nice car and drives all over America, leaving his fate to chance and his decisions to the whim of the moment. When the money starts to run out however, Jim can't bring himself to return to his former life. Instead he falls in with a gambler who promises that, with Jim's backing, he can make them both a small fortune playing poker against a couple of rich suckers he knows. From this point onward the novel changes tone, moving from a gritty realism into the classic Auster blend of symbolism and wonderland mind games. This is good stuff and I won't spoil it for you.
For me, The Music of Chance is a cautionary tale. Poker people often talk about how the game is a metaphor for life, meaning that the discipline, intelligence and risk tolerance required to succeed at poker will also help you win at other endeavours. While true, the darker aspects of poker, such as it's appeal to our self-destructive nature, are reflections of yearnings that play themselves out away from the table as well. High marks to Auster for nailing the psychology that drives many to the game. I recommend everyone read it, and if you also play poker I hope you will recognize the Jim Nashe in you and keep his impulses in check.
I frequently repeat the saying that "fiction is the lie that tells the truth." If you are a poker player, I think you will be better at the game if you read great works of fiction. Poker is largely a psychological game and fiction more than any other art form concerns itself with understanding human behavior. It is no accident that many great players, such as Annie Duke, were literature majors. If you haven't read a novel in years and are wondering which book to start with, The Music of Chance is a great one.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Talk to me
"Do you want me to call, or do you want me to fold?"
"Can you beat queens?"
"If I shove here, are you gonna call? Come on, buddy. Talk to me."
Believe it or not, you hear guys asking such questions at the poker table all the time. The askers of such questions are looking for information, obviously. They don't expect honest answers - they are just looking for clues. If you react to such queries, your reaction will be evaluated and you are giving information. Perhaps, you think, you can mislead your opponent with your answer, and maybe you can, but I think the best course of action is to do your best statue impersonation.
I was once in such a situation. I had pocket jacks and saw the flop against one opponent. The flop had a queen and two small cards. My opponent bet the pot, and I made a substantial re-raise. My opponent started peppering me with questions; "You got Kings?" "You got Ace Queen?" "You got Jacks, don't you?"
It dawned on me that if this guy was so desperate for information he must not have a very strong hand. So, rather stupidly, I said "If you have to ask, then I'm pretty sure I have you beat." Man that was a dumb thing to say. I might as well have just shown him my cards. Not surprisingly, he called bet. Even though I went on to win the hand, it was a mistake to give my opponent information. Now, if I had the nuts and said such a thing, maybe it would have been a brilliant move, but I think if you start getting into the psychological warfare stuff you are just asking for trouble.
My advice is until you have logged 10,000 hours of live poker, (I haven't) don't say anything. Pick a spot on the table and try to stare a hole in it. The temptation is to say something weak when you are strong and vice-versa, but if your opponent has logged more table time than you, no matter what you say or do will be giving him or her information.
And speaking of information, it has been drawn to my attention that some people are having trouble leaving comments on this blog. I really want to encourage dialogue here - I want to learn from you guys! I think it may be harder to leave a comment if you are not logged in as a blogger user, so please feel free to e-mail me your thoughts:
mondaywingnut@hotmail.com
Come on, buddy. Talk to me.
"Can you beat queens?"
"If I shove here, are you gonna call? Come on, buddy. Talk to me."
Believe it or not, you hear guys asking such questions at the poker table all the time. The askers of such questions are looking for information, obviously. They don't expect honest answers - they are just looking for clues. If you react to such queries, your reaction will be evaluated and you are giving information. Perhaps, you think, you can mislead your opponent with your answer, and maybe you can, but I think the best course of action is to do your best statue impersonation.
I was once in such a situation. I had pocket jacks and saw the flop against one opponent. The flop had a queen and two small cards. My opponent bet the pot, and I made a substantial re-raise. My opponent started peppering me with questions; "You got Kings?" "You got Ace Queen?" "You got Jacks, don't you?"
It dawned on me that if this guy was so desperate for information he must not have a very strong hand. So, rather stupidly, I said "If you have to ask, then I'm pretty sure I have you beat." Man that was a dumb thing to say. I might as well have just shown him my cards. Not surprisingly, he called bet. Even though I went on to win the hand, it was a mistake to give my opponent information. Now, if I had the nuts and said such a thing, maybe it would have been a brilliant move, but I think if you start getting into the psychological warfare stuff you are just asking for trouble.
My advice is until you have logged 10,000 hours of live poker, (I haven't) don't say anything. Pick a spot on the table and try to stare a hole in it. The temptation is to say something weak when you are strong and vice-versa, but if your opponent has logged more table time than you, no matter what you say or do will be giving him or her information.
And speaking of information, it has been drawn to my attention that some people are having trouble leaving comments on this blog. I really want to encourage dialogue here - I want to learn from you guys! I think it may be harder to leave a comment if you are not logged in as a blogger user, so please feel free to e-mail me your thoughts:
mondaywingnut@hotmail.com
Come on, buddy. Talk to me.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
CAN-A-DA! CAN-A-DA!
Last night Jonathan Duhamel, from Boucherville Quebec, became the first Canadian to win the main event at the World Series of Poker, pocketing a cool $8.9 million USD.
Previously Canadians had finished as high as second in both 1995 and 2007.
Previously Canadians had finished as high as second in both 1995 and 2007.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
The Joy of Poker
One of the great things about poker is that it doesn't matter who you are, what you know, what your bank account balance is, where you were born, or any thing else - once you sit down at the table you are just another person trying to take chips from other people who are trying to take chips from you. Poker is the great democratic game, where a millionaire investment banker has to sweat whether or not to call a massive re-raise from a little old lady from Moose Jaw. Poker is about people.
Yesterday the final table of the World Series of Poker got under way, but I wasn't following the action. My friend Wally had gotten me an invitation to play in a tournament that was being run out of a furniture warehouse out by the airport. Seriously, how cool is that?
I showed up at the appointed time and found a friendly bunch of guys, most of whom gave off the vibe of poker experience. These were not novices who weren't sure if a full house beat a flush, so I would have to be careful. Unlike the tournaments run by casinos, all of the money paid to enter was given back in prize money. That meant that the guys who put this together were getting nothing for all their trouble except the fun of it. In fact it seemed that everyone there was just in it for the love of the game, and this positive mood made it one of the most enjoyable poker experiences I've ever had.
There is always, it seems, one hyper-aggressive guy at the start of a tourney. Most people start tight and cautious, so the aggressive player usually can shoot out to an early lead. This happened at my table, although really two guys were contesting a lot of pots. True to form the most aggressive guy was the first to bust out, going all-in with 7 8 off suit and getting called by big slick.
I was getting an incredible amount of respect from my table mates, who seemed to think I was some kind of shark. Every time I made a raise I couldn't get a caller. I knew sooner or later someone would bet back at me, so I tried timing it so that a legitimate raise would look like a bluff. About an hour and a half in I was dealt pocket kings in the big blind. One guy limps and James, our amiable host for the evening, calls from the small blind. I check because everyone would just fold if I raised. The flop was Jack high with no real flush or straight draws. James makes a small bet, which I call and the original limper folds. I can't remember the turn card, but it doesn't really change the board. James makes his move, like I hoped he would, betting $1000 in tournament chips. I bet $4000 really quickly, which was the right amount to look like a bluff, but in retrospect I maybe should have pretended to give that decision a little more thought. Anyway this raise was enough to make James agonize over his decision, but he finally made the right choice and laid it down, showing me an ace. Good fold.
I got knocked out right in the middle of the pack. I was in early position with AQ off. The blinds were up to a massive $1000/$2000 and I had about $17,000 in chips, which had me somewhere near 8th place, I think. The guy under the gun was very short-stacked and went all-in with $2,350. I considered raising to isolate but I didn't like my hand so much that I could call a re-raise, so I just called. Everyone folded except the big blind, who had a massive amount of chips, and only had to put in another $350 to call. The flop was Qc 8s 4s, giving me top pair with an ace kicker. Playing out of the big blind, my opponent could be holding just about anything, but I was pretty sure I was in the lead. With such a massive amount of chips, I fully expected him to try to push me out right here, and sure enough he bet $2,000. I announce all in and he calls. I show my hand and he shows Qs 10s. I have him out kicked, but he has the flush draw - any spade will win it for him and he could also pair his ten. That's 12 outs, which makes me only a slight favourite to win this hand. Unfortunately for me my opponent paired his 10 on the turn, knocking me out. Perhaps I should have raised pre-flop to price out the big blind, but I got all my money in with the best hand, so I really don't feel like I made a mistake. If my hand held up I would have moved up to about fourth, which is where I needed to be to make some money.
As I left I I went by my friend Wally's table to say goodnight. He didn't have many chips in front of him so I assumed he was on the ropes, but I later heard he finished in third place. Way to go Wally!
All-in-all, it was a really fun night that captured the spirit of poker. Down in Vegas they have casinos that are themed like medievil castles, circuses and ancient Rome. That's all very nice, but I think if I were to design my own poker room in a casino, I'd make it look like a furniture warehouse. That's the kind of place where real poker is played.
Yesterday the final table of the World Series of Poker got under way, but I wasn't following the action. My friend Wally had gotten me an invitation to play in a tournament that was being run out of a furniture warehouse out by the airport. Seriously, how cool is that?
I showed up at the appointed time and found a friendly bunch of guys, most of whom gave off the vibe of poker experience. These were not novices who weren't sure if a full house beat a flush, so I would have to be careful. Unlike the tournaments run by casinos, all of the money paid to enter was given back in prize money. That meant that the guys who put this together were getting nothing for all their trouble except the fun of it. In fact it seemed that everyone there was just in it for the love of the game, and this positive mood made it one of the most enjoyable poker experiences I've ever had.
There is always, it seems, one hyper-aggressive guy at the start of a tourney. Most people start tight and cautious, so the aggressive player usually can shoot out to an early lead. This happened at my table, although really two guys were contesting a lot of pots. True to form the most aggressive guy was the first to bust out, going all-in with 7 8 off suit and getting called by big slick.
I was getting an incredible amount of respect from my table mates, who seemed to think I was some kind of shark. Every time I made a raise I couldn't get a caller. I knew sooner or later someone would bet back at me, so I tried timing it so that a legitimate raise would look like a bluff. About an hour and a half in I was dealt pocket kings in the big blind. One guy limps and James, our amiable host for the evening, calls from the small blind. I check because everyone would just fold if I raised. The flop was Jack high with no real flush or straight draws. James makes a small bet, which I call and the original limper folds. I can't remember the turn card, but it doesn't really change the board. James makes his move, like I hoped he would, betting $1000 in tournament chips. I bet $4000 really quickly, which was the right amount to look like a bluff, but in retrospect I maybe should have pretended to give that decision a little more thought. Anyway this raise was enough to make James agonize over his decision, but he finally made the right choice and laid it down, showing me an ace. Good fold.
I got knocked out right in the middle of the pack. I was in early position with AQ off. The blinds were up to a massive $1000/$2000 and I had about $17,000 in chips, which had me somewhere near 8th place, I think. The guy under the gun was very short-stacked and went all-in with $2,350. I considered raising to isolate but I didn't like my hand so much that I could call a re-raise, so I just called. Everyone folded except the big blind, who had a massive amount of chips, and only had to put in another $350 to call. The flop was Qc 8s 4s, giving me top pair with an ace kicker. Playing out of the big blind, my opponent could be holding just about anything, but I was pretty sure I was in the lead. With such a massive amount of chips, I fully expected him to try to push me out right here, and sure enough he bet $2,000. I announce all in and he calls. I show my hand and he shows Qs 10s. I have him out kicked, but he has the flush draw - any spade will win it for him and he could also pair his ten. That's 12 outs, which makes me only a slight favourite to win this hand. Unfortunately for me my opponent paired his 10 on the turn, knocking me out. Perhaps I should have raised pre-flop to price out the big blind, but I got all my money in with the best hand, so I really don't feel like I made a mistake. If my hand held up I would have moved up to about fourth, which is where I needed to be to make some money.
As I left I I went by my friend Wally's table to say goodnight. He didn't have many chips in front of him so I assumed he was on the ropes, but I later heard he finished in third place. Way to go Wally!
All-in-all, it was a really fun night that captured the spirit of poker. Down in Vegas they have casinos that are themed like medievil castles, circuses and ancient Rome. That's all very nice, but I think if I were to design my own poker room in a casino, I'd make it look like a furniture warehouse. That's the kind of place where real poker is played.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Range
You are playing against a particular fellow you know pretty well. You've played him many times and you know he tends to go all-in right after the flop if he catches anything as good as top-pair with an ace kicker, or better. Obviously I am outlining an example here to illustrate a lesson, and it's rare that you will ever have an opponent that is this predictable, still most people tend to do the same things over time and their actions can lead you to make educated guesses as to what they are holding.
So, getting back to our example, you know the range of hands this fellow is likely to be holding should he go all-in after a flop, and knowing this you would be foolish to call on a draw or with top pair king kicker. But what if you have top two pair? Or bottom trips?
Knowing an opponents range makes the decision to call or fold one of probability: does the hand you have beat most hands in his range? Remember that he is more likely to be holding the hands at the low end of his range than those at the top - simply because the lower a hand rank, the more common it is. Still it might take a mind-boggling amount of math to figure out all the possible odds of the different hands he could be holding.
A simple rule I use is once I am satisfied I know an opponents' range, I set my own range of hands that I would call with somewhat higher. So if I only call the guy in the example with two-pair or better, I'm likely to win most of those showdowns.
If I think my opponents are experienced, I might play loose at first to get them to believe my range is much broader than it is. The truth is most players start out a session playing tight, but gradually lower their standards as they go along. It seems to be a natural movement. You should try doing the opposite, starting out loose and then tightening up as you go. The problem is that it is much harder to do than it is to say! Everyone starts out trying to play their best, only to loose discipline over time. Fight this urge!
Watch all hands very carefully, even those you are not involved in. Pay attention to what hands your adversaries think are good enough to bet big on. This will give you good idea of what you'll need to beat them.
So, getting back to our example, you know the range of hands this fellow is likely to be holding should he go all-in after a flop, and knowing this you would be foolish to call on a draw or with top pair king kicker. But what if you have top two pair? Or bottom trips?
Knowing an opponents range makes the decision to call or fold one of probability: does the hand you have beat most hands in his range? Remember that he is more likely to be holding the hands at the low end of his range than those at the top - simply because the lower a hand rank, the more common it is. Still it might take a mind-boggling amount of math to figure out all the possible odds of the different hands he could be holding.
A simple rule I use is once I am satisfied I know an opponents' range, I set my own range of hands that I would call with somewhat higher. So if I only call the guy in the example with two-pair or better, I'm likely to win most of those showdowns.
If I think my opponents are experienced, I might play loose at first to get them to believe my range is much broader than it is. The truth is most players start out a session playing tight, but gradually lower their standards as they go along. It seems to be a natural movement. You should try doing the opposite, starting out loose and then tightening up as you go. The problem is that it is much harder to do than it is to say! Everyone starts out trying to play their best, only to loose discipline over time. Fight this urge!
Watch all hands very carefully, even those you are not involved in. Pay attention to what hands your adversaries think are good enough to bet big on. This will give you good idea of what you'll need to beat them.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Nice Call, Kid
Big Slick: Ace King. A very good hand, but still a slight underdog to any pocket pair.
I remember the first time I went in a real poker room in a casino. It was a very intimidating experience. I had no idea what to do. The kindly man at the desk informed me that I would have to put my name on the waiting list and that they would call me when a seat was available. I hung around, getting increasingly nervous, for about ten minutes until a voice came over the p.a. calling my name. Back at the desk I was told there was a seat open at table two for me. I had to ask which table was table two. I walked over to table two and sat down. I took out my money and asked the dealer for chips. The dealer, and everyone else, looked at me like I had just fallen off the turnip truck. "You don't buy chips from me. You get them from the cash cage," she said, motioning toward the barred cashier's window. Oh. I got up, got chips from the cashier, and returned.
It was $1/$2 no-limit hold-'em. But the chips I was given were all $5. This seemed like a problem to me - I needed to change some chips into $1 denominations, didn't I? I asked the dealer to change some of my chips and she actually let out a little exasperated sigh. "Don't worry sweetie, we make change as we go." After playing for a while, I figured out how it worked. Unless you announced a raise, the dealer assumed you were betting the minimum ($2), so if you put in a $5 chip she would give you three $1 chips back out of the pot, or four if you folded in the small blind. After a while everything made sense and I could see how it was faster and easier to have the dealer make change on the fly.
All this was just over a year ago. I have gone to poker rooms about twenty times now, and while not a grizzled vet of the green felt, I hardly ever get very nervous anymore. Well, not too much.
A couple days ago I was playing at the very casino where I first played live poker, when a kid who looked like about eighteen sat down. He was visibly nervous, his hands shaking as he took his chips out of his rack. After a few seconds he timidly asked the dealer to change a few of his $5 chips into $1's. All eyes turned to him. "Don't worry about that, " said the dealer, "We'll make change as we go." I, and everyone else, knew we had a poker virgin on our hands. The only question seemed to be which volcano would he be thrown into?
After maybe twenty minutes of mostly staying out of the action, the kid was under-the-gun and raised $25. I knew that this was a "please everybody fold to me" raise, meaning he probably had a medium pair, felt obliged to play it, but really didn't want to see the flop very badly. How did I know all this? Because a year ago I was that kid and I knew exactly what he was thinking and feeling. Knowing what I knew, I really could have called the kid with any two cards, but the fact I was dealt Ace-King made my decision to call even easier. I was in middle position, so a legitimate hand offered me some insurance should one of the sharks acting after me decided to call as well.
As it turned out it was just the kid and I who saw the flop: Qd Jh 4C. The kid looked very disappointed with this flop and dejectedly checked. In fact the kid looked absolutely miserable, like he was beating himself up for getting in this hand. I was certain this was not an act. The kid only had $50 left in chips, so I decided to push him out. I raised him $50. If he looked unhappy before, now he looked like the world had ended.
"I'm pretty sure you have me beat," he said after a while. I said nothing.
He thought and thought. I'm pretty sure he was mostly thinking "What the hell am I doing here?" He thought some more.
At last he said "I call," and put the last of his chips in. He turned over pocket eights.
"Nice call, kid" I said as I showed big slick. The rest of the players were amazed that the kid found the guts to make that call with an under pair. It was a heroic call. The turn and the river did not bring the Ace, King or 10 which would have won for me. The kid stood up as he raked in his chips, putting them directly back into the rack he brought them in. He ignored all the compliments he was getting from the other players. As soon as he had his chips racked he quickly walked over to the cage to cash them and get the hell out of there. He couldn't leave fast enough.
I've been thinking about that kid and the strange mix of relief and elation he must have felt. How he will never forget his first trip to the casino. How he called the old-timer's bluff and left with a profit.
That kid has been bit by the poker bug. Sooner or later, I'll see him again.
I remember the first time I went in a real poker room in a casino. It was a very intimidating experience. I had no idea what to do. The kindly man at the desk informed me that I would have to put my name on the waiting list and that they would call me when a seat was available. I hung around, getting increasingly nervous, for about ten minutes until a voice came over the p.a. calling my name. Back at the desk I was told there was a seat open at table two for me. I had to ask which table was table two. I walked over to table two and sat down. I took out my money and asked the dealer for chips. The dealer, and everyone else, looked at me like I had just fallen off the turnip truck. "You don't buy chips from me. You get them from the cash cage," she said, motioning toward the barred cashier's window. Oh. I got up, got chips from the cashier, and returned.
It was $1/$2 no-limit hold-'em. But the chips I was given were all $5. This seemed like a problem to me - I needed to change some chips into $1 denominations, didn't I? I asked the dealer to change some of my chips and she actually let out a little exasperated sigh. "Don't worry sweetie, we make change as we go." After playing for a while, I figured out how it worked. Unless you announced a raise, the dealer assumed you were betting the minimum ($2), so if you put in a $5 chip she would give you three $1 chips back out of the pot, or four if you folded in the small blind. After a while everything made sense and I could see how it was faster and easier to have the dealer make change on the fly.
All this was just over a year ago. I have gone to poker rooms about twenty times now, and while not a grizzled vet of the green felt, I hardly ever get very nervous anymore. Well, not too much.
A couple days ago I was playing at the very casino where I first played live poker, when a kid who looked like about eighteen sat down. He was visibly nervous, his hands shaking as he took his chips out of his rack. After a few seconds he timidly asked the dealer to change a few of his $5 chips into $1's. All eyes turned to him. "Don't worry about that, " said the dealer, "We'll make change as we go." I, and everyone else, knew we had a poker virgin on our hands. The only question seemed to be which volcano would he be thrown into?
After maybe twenty minutes of mostly staying out of the action, the kid was under-the-gun and raised $25. I knew that this was a "please everybody fold to me" raise, meaning he probably had a medium pair, felt obliged to play it, but really didn't want to see the flop very badly. How did I know all this? Because a year ago I was that kid and I knew exactly what he was thinking and feeling. Knowing what I knew, I really could have called the kid with any two cards, but the fact I was dealt Ace-King made my decision to call even easier. I was in middle position, so a legitimate hand offered me some insurance should one of the sharks acting after me decided to call as well.
As it turned out it was just the kid and I who saw the flop: Qd Jh 4C. The kid looked very disappointed with this flop and dejectedly checked. In fact the kid looked absolutely miserable, like he was beating himself up for getting in this hand. I was certain this was not an act. The kid only had $50 left in chips, so I decided to push him out. I raised him $50. If he looked unhappy before, now he looked like the world had ended.
"I'm pretty sure you have me beat," he said after a while. I said nothing.
He thought and thought. I'm pretty sure he was mostly thinking "What the hell am I doing here?" He thought some more.
At last he said "I call," and put the last of his chips in. He turned over pocket eights.
"Nice call, kid" I said as I showed big slick. The rest of the players were amazed that the kid found the guts to make that call with an under pair. It was a heroic call. The turn and the river did not bring the Ace, King or 10 which would have won for me. The kid stood up as he raked in his chips, putting them directly back into the rack he brought them in. He ignored all the compliments he was getting from the other players. As soon as he had his chips racked he quickly walked over to the cage to cash them and get the hell out of there. He couldn't leave fast enough.
I've been thinking about that kid and the strange mix of relief and elation he must have felt. How he will never forget his first trip to the casino. How he called the old-timer's bluff and left with a profit.
That kid has been bit by the poker bug. Sooner or later, I'll see him again.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
The Boring Truth
The first step to beating someone is understanding their motivation. Excitement draws people to the poker room. They come with what money they can spare (or can't spare) in anticipation of out-witting opponents and winning big pots. They act for the benefit of some invisible audience to whom they wish to gain approval from. As much as they dream of winning money, what they really all want is to be admired.
People are drawn to poker because they believe that courage and audacity are the most important skills a poker player can possess. They want to make a living being courageous and audacious. Is this what draws you to the game? Be honest. Of course it is. It's what draws everyone to the game.
Here is where I burst the bubble. The most important skill a poker player can possess is not keen psychological insight, or mathematical genius, or even courage. It is patience. But before you get discouraged and give up poker, let me tell you the beautiful secret: If you have the patience to find the still heart at the centre of the game, you will be successful. Poker is a game for Buddhists.
Yesterday I made $222 playing $1/$2 no-limit for five hours. I did nothing particularly brilliant, but I had the patience to wait until two very fortunate things happened to me. By not playing a lot of hands I allowed myself to be at the table when the cards fell the right way.
The session started badly. About twenty minutes in I lost half my stack when my pocket queens were beat by a guy who flopped a set of fives. I folded pretty much everything for the next two hours until the first lightning strike. I was in the small blind with pocket aces. A fellow in early position raised to $15 and there was one caller, so I was fairly confident if I re-raised I'd get called. I raised to $40. Then the heavens parted and the angels sang: the original better shoved his entire stack, about $200, into the middle - and the second guy calls! Of course I put all my chips in. I hit another ace on the flop and triple-up: my $150 in chips magically turning into $450.
The other nice pot I won also required no skill on my part. I was on the button with 5 7 off-suit and was going to throw it away when something strange happened. The first player limped in and every single player after him called the $2 bet! There was $15 in the pot, so even though my cards sucked I was getting fantastic pot odds. I threw in my $2 and joined the party. The small blind completed and the big blind checked. All nine players saw the flop. And guess what? I flopped the straight: 3 4 6 rainbow hit the board. Everyone checked. I bet $12 and a guy after me re-raised it $30. Huh? I call. The turn is a 7, which might have completed the straight for him, but I'm probably still good. I see my opponent has about $100 in chips, so I raise him all in....and because I can't believe how stupid this situation is I actually start giggling uncontrollably! Everyone looks at me like I'm nuts, and maybe the giggles get my opponent to think I'm bluffing because he calls. The river is a blank. I show my straight and he mucks his losing hand.
So there are two hands that it took no skill whatsoever to play, but made me a good deal of money. The reason I won those hands was because I had the patience to fold all the crap for hours and hours, until the money fell in my lap.
People are drawn to poker because they believe that courage and audacity are the most important skills a poker player can possess. They want to make a living being courageous and audacious. Is this what draws you to the game? Be honest. Of course it is. It's what draws everyone to the game.
Here is where I burst the bubble. The most important skill a poker player can possess is not keen psychological insight, or mathematical genius, or even courage. It is patience. But before you get discouraged and give up poker, let me tell you the beautiful secret: If you have the patience to find the still heart at the centre of the game, you will be successful. Poker is a game for Buddhists.
Yesterday I made $222 playing $1/$2 no-limit for five hours. I did nothing particularly brilliant, but I had the patience to wait until two very fortunate things happened to me. By not playing a lot of hands I allowed myself to be at the table when the cards fell the right way.
The session started badly. About twenty minutes in I lost half my stack when my pocket queens were beat by a guy who flopped a set of fives. I folded pretty much everything for the next two hours until the first lightning strike. I was in the small blind with pocket aces. A fellow in early position raised to $15 and there was one caller, so I was fairly confident if I re-raised I'd get called. I raised to $40. Then the heavens parted and the angels sang: the original better shoved his entire stack, about $200, into the middle - and the second guy calls! Of course I put all my chips in. I hit another ace on the flop and triple-up: my $150 in chips magically turning into $450.
The other nice pot I won also required no skill on my part. I was on the button with 5 7 off-suit and was going to throw it away when something strange happened. The first player limped in and every single player after him called the $2 bet! There was $15 in the pot, so even though my cards sucked I was getting fantastic pot odds. I threw in my $2 and joined the party. The small blind completed and the big blind checked. All nine players saw the flop. And guess what? I flopped the straight: 3 4 6 rainbow hit the board. Everyone checked. I bet $12 and a guy after me re-raised it $30. Huh? I call. The turn is a 7, which might have completed the straight for him, but I'm probably still good. I see my opponent has about $100 in chips, so I raise him all in....and because I can't believe how stupid this situation is I actually start giggling uncontrollably! Everyone looks at me like I'm nuts, and maybe the giggles get my opponent to think I'm bluffing because he calls. The river is a blank. I show my straight and he mucks his losing hand.
So there are two hands that it took no skill whatsoever to play, but made me a good deal of money. The reason I won those hands was because I had the patience to fold all the crap for hours and hours, until the money fell in my lap.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Back in the Saddle
Today's word: Tilt. A player is described as being "on tilt" when they start making reckless decisions. Often an otherwise solid player begins playing a little loose, and then before you know it is chasing draws with bad pot odds, or bluffing far too much. Usually tilt is a term applied to a single session, but a player can go on tilt for days or weeks. Usually tilt is caused by a bad beat. You'll see a guy go all in with pocket aces, lose to some fluky flush or straight, and then just fall apart for the rest of the night.
An essential skill of a successful poker player is avoiding tilt.
I suffered a very big loss ten days ago. It was a huge temptation to go back to the poker table as soon as possible, and to play at a higher limit than I normally do, in order to win back the money I lost as quickly as possible, but instead I took a week off from poker completely. I highly recommend this to any one who has suffered a big loss, or has just been running bad lately. Take a break. Get away from the game and come back with a fresh mind.
When I did hit the tables again yesterday, I deliberately choose to go to a casino where I had enjoyed success (positive feelings are important) and I deliberately played a limit, rather than no-limit, game. I wanted to force myself to think about the fundamentals of the game. When you are running bad, you tend to guess wrong in those big decisions that come up in no-limit, so take the pressure off yourself and play limit hold 'em until you get your mojo back.
So. Long story short, three hours of poker and I only had a $12 gain to show for it. But I feel like the monkey is off my back and I can go back to work again.
An essential skill of a successful poker player is avoiding tilt.
I suffered a very big loss ten days ago. It was a huge temptation to go back to the poker table as soon as possible, and to play at a higher limit than I normally do, in order to win back the money I lost as quickly as possible, but instead I took a week off from poker completely. I highly recommend this to any one who has suffered a big loss, or has just been running bad lately. Take a break. Get away from the game and come back with a fresh mind.
When I did hit the tables again yesterday, I deliberately choose to go to a casino where I had enjoyed success (positive feelings are important) and I deliberately played a limit, rather than no-limit, game. I wanted to force myself to think about the fundamentals of the game. When you are running bad, you tend to guess wrong in those big decisions that come up in no-limit, so take the pressure off yourself and play limit hold 'em until you get your mojo back.
So. Long story short, three hours of poker and I only had a $12 gain to show for it. But I feel like the monkey is off my back and I can go back to work again.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Quitting is for Quitters!
Not a full post, but just a clarification - I am not quitting poker or this blog! The crushing loss reported in the last post, plus a longer than normal silence, have had a few of you wondering. The truth is that my non-poker life has been taking up a lot more time lately.
Please be patient and don't give up on me.
Please be patient and don't give up on me.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
A Terrible, Horrible, No-Good Night
Today's poker words:
Raising Blind: Betting before the cards are dealt, or betting without looking at the cards that are dealt to you.
Rainbow: a flop with three different suits. There is no flush draw.
Felted: When you lose all your chips. You are down to the felt of the table top.
This is a hard post to write. It is fun writing a post after a winning session,but on Sunday night I suffered the worst poker night of my life and I really would rather not talk about it. I'd rather hide under a rock for a few days. Still, I started this blog with the intention of being open about my poker experience and I can't stop when things get ugly. And this was really ugly.
I lost $600 Sunday night and I still feel a little ill about it.
I arrived at the casino just before the hockey game ended. The plan was to fleece the hockey fans who flooded the casino post-game and it looked like the party had already started by the time I sat at a table of $1/$2 no limit. As is my habit, I took the maximum amount I was allowed, in this case $300.
The action was fast and loose. One guy in particular seemed very liberal with his bets, raising blind and calling and betting pretty much everything. What made it even better was that this guy had about $1,000 sitting in front of him. After only five hands I was dealt ace 10 off-suit - a marginal hand really, but Mr. Maniac had raised blind to $20. The two players between us folded. Normally I might fold this hand, but against a blind raise I am holding very good cards. I really want to isolate the maniac, so I raise to $40 hoping this will scare away everyone else. It does. Mr. Maniac and I are heads up to see the flop.
The flop: 10 7 3 rainbow.
This is very good for me. I have top pair with the best possible kicker. Odds are my opponent missed the flop completely, so I figure I am in great shape. Mr. Maniac is first to act. He looks at his cards for the first time and then raises $50, which stinks of bluff to me. I think he has a card (maybe two cards) higher than 10, and is just trying to push me out. Not today buddy.
I go all-in. He snap calls and turns over pocket aces. What!? Are you kidding me? I suddenly feel like the biggest idiot in the world, kissing my stack goodbye when the miracle 10 doesn't come on the turn or river.
I re-buy with the last $300 I have in my wallet. I swear I'm only going to play the nuts from now on.
The next three hours are like a nightmare. I get dealt complete garbage and have to fold, while my table mates are playing like drunken sailors. I watch as hundreds of dollars change hands. After two hours the maniac who had $1,300 (the $1,000, plus $300 from me) is completely broke and has lost another $600 on top of that. All that money flowing to everyone, it seems, but me.
Then I'm dealt pocket aces. Well, it's about *$^&ing time. I'm in late position and there are four limpers ahead of me. I want to thin the field, but I don't want everyone to fold, so I raise to $15. Everyone folds except one of the original limpers who re-raises me to $30. I consider calling, but I figure he'll call me if I re-raise him. I mean he'd look weak if he folded and at this point the table has become an all-in fest. So I raise to $60 and he pushes all in. I call of course.
He shows JJ. The fish hooks. He fell for over playing the fish hooks. I show my aces and he says a bad word.
And a jack hits on the flop.
And I don't find an ace on the turn or the river.
And I'm felted again.
So I stand up and walk out of the casino.
That, as they say, is poker.
Raising Blind: Betting before the cards are dealt, or betting without looking at the cards that are dealt to you.
Rainbow: a flop with three different suits. There is no flush draw.
Felted: When you lose all your chips. You are down to the felt of the table top.
This is a hard post to write. It is fun writing a post after a winning session,but on Sunday night I suffered the worst poker night of my life and I really would rather not talk about it. I'd rather hide under a rock for a few days. Still, I started this blog with the intention of being open about my poker experience and I can't stop when things get ugly. And this was really ugly.
I lost $600 Sunday night and I still feel a little ill about it.
I arrived at the casino just before the hockey game ended. The plan was to fleece the hockey fans who flooded the casino post-game and it looked like the party had already started by the time I sat at a table of $1/$2 no limit. As is my habit, I took the maximum amount I was allowed, in this case $300.
The action was fast and loose. One guy in particular seemed very liberal with his bets, raising blind and calling and betting pretty much everything. What made it even better was that this guy had about $1,000 sitting in front of him. After only five hands I was dealt ace 10 off-suit - a marginal hand really, but Mr. Maniac had raised blind to $20. The two players between us folded. Normally I might fold this hand, but against a blind raise I am holding very good cards. I really want to isolate the maniac, so I raise to $40 hoping this will scare away everyone else. It does. Mr. Maniac and I are heads up to see the flop.
The flop: 10 7 3 rainbow.
This is very good for me. I have top pair with the best possible kicker. Odds are my opponent missed the flop completely, so I figure I am in great shape. Mr. Maniac is first to act. He looks at his cards for the first time and then raises $50, which stinks of bluff to me. I think he has a card (maybe two cards) higher than 10, and is just trying to push me out. Not today buddy.
I go all-in. He snap calls and turns over pocket aces. What!? Are you kidding me? I suddenly feel like the biggest idiot in the world, kissing my stack goodbye when the miracle 10 doesn't come on the turn or river.
I re-buy with the last $300 I have in my wallet. I swear I'm only going to play the nuts from now on.
The next three hours are like a nightmare. I get dealt complete garbage and have to fold, while my table mates are playing like drunken sailors. I watch as hundreds of dollars change hands. After two hours the maniac who had $1,300 (the $1,000, plus $300 from me) is completely broke and has lost another $600 on top of that. All that money flowing to everyone, it seems, but me.
Then I'm dealt pocket aces. Well, it's about *$^&ing time. I'm in late position and there are four limpers ahead of me. I want to thin the field, but I don't want everyone to fold, so I raise to $15. Everyone folds except one of the original limpers who re-raises me to $30. I consider calling, but I figure he'll call me if I re-raise him. I mean he'd look weak if he folded and at this point the table has become an all-in fest. So I raise to $60 and he pushes all in. I call of course.
He shows JJ. The fish hooks. He fell for over playing the fish hooks. I show my aces and he says a bad word.
And a jack hits on the flop.
And I don't find an ace on the turn or the river.
And I'm felted again.
So I stand up and walk out of the casino.
That, as they say, is poker.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
For Richer, For Poorer
Book Review:
For Richer, For Poorer
By Victoria Coren
2009, Canongate Books
Published in Canada by McClelland & Stewart Ltd.
I have read a lot of poker books, and until now I have been most unsatisfied with the "personal memoir" style of poker book. Poker players are a slippery bunch, and getting one to truly open up in a book seems to be asking the impossible. As a result, there are dozens of biographies of poker personalities that are utterly forgettable. Victoria Coren's recent book, "For Richer, For Poorer" blows the doors off any other poker biography on the market. Coren is intelligent, eloquent and humorous. More importantly she holds nothing back, examining herself and her relationship to the game with amazing openness.
Coren has the advantage over her peers in that she is a highly capable writer. Most poker players can't write, and have to filter their experience through a ghost writer who just doesn't get it - and by "it" I mean the soul of the game of poker: why it is so wonderful and brutal and redemptive and devouring. Coren, more than any other writer I have yet to encounter, tries to express the soul of the game. She succeeds to a large degree because her approach is unflinchingly personal.
Following her introduction to the game as a teenager, through her forays into London's famous Vic, to celebrity matches with Stephen Fry and Ricky Gervais, the book is a romp. It delivers all the juicy stories one could hope for, and even someone unfamiliar with poker would be thoroughly entertained. Yet through it all Coren never lets herself, or her reader, get particularly starstruck. Sure it's neat to rub shoulders with Martin Amis or Toby McGuire, but the game itself is the star of the show.
I feel Coren has gotten as close to the heart of the matter as anyone. Even Al Alvarez, whom Coren constantly refers to as a God, maintained a cool detachment in his writing which kept the reader at arms-length. Coren, God bless her, puts all her cards on the table.
For Richer, For Poorer
By Victoria Coren
2009, Canongate Books
Published in Canada by McClelland & Stewart Ltd.
I have read a lot of poker books, and until now I have been most unsatisfied with the "personal memoir" style of poker book. Poker players are a slippery bunch, and getting one to truly open up in a book seems to be asking the impossible. As a result, there are dozens of biographies of poker personalities that are utterly forgettable. Victoria Coren's recent book, "For Richer, For Poorer" blows the doors off any other poker biography on the market. Coren is intelligent, eloquent and humorous. More importantly she holds nothing back, examining herself and her relationship to the game with amazing openness.
Coren has the advantage over her peers in that she is a highly capable writer. Most poker players can't write, and have to filter their experience through a ghost writer who just doesn't get it - and by "it" I mean the soul of the game of poker: why it is so wonderful and brutal and redemptive and devouring. Coren, more than any other writer I have yet to encounter, tries to express the soul of the game. She succeeds to a large degree because her approach is unflinchingly personal.
Following her introduction to the game as a teenager, through her forays into London's famous Vic, to celebrity matches with Stephen Fry and Ricky Gervais, the book is a romp. It delivers all the juicy stories one could hope for, and even someone unfamiliar with poker would be thoroughly entertained. Yet through it all Coren never lets herself, or her reader, get particularly starstruck. Sure it's neat to rub shoulders with Martin Amis or Toby McGuire, but the game itself is the star of the show.
I feel Coren has gotten as close to the heart of the matter as anyone. Even Al Alvarez, whom Coren constantly refers to as a God, maintained a cool detachment in his writing which kept the reader at arms-length. Coren, God bless her, puts all her cards on the table.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Location, location, location
Mike Caro, in his book "Caro's Most profitable Hold'em Advice", stresses the importance of treating poker like a business. Like any business, where you decide to set up shop is critical to your success or failure. Fortunately with poker, you get to pick your location every day and if you don't find one location very profitable, you can easily pick up and move to a different table, casino, or on-line site.
Last night I went to a casino while my wife went to the hockey game with a friend of ours. For convenience sake, I choose to go to the casino right beside the arena where the game was. For three hours I sat at a pretty tight table, played as well as I could, and ended up ahead by exactly $100.
The game let out. The home team had won and a swarm of happy fans came into the casino to celebrate. I met my wife and our friend, who informed me that another friend of ours would be meeting us there in about forty minutes. I could go back to the poker tables for another hour if I wanted to. The Little Angel on my shoulder said to be happy with my $100 win and not go back. The Little Devil on my other shoulder said "Poker! Poker! Poker!" Guess who I listened to?
The poker room had filled up with hyped-up hockey fans and there were twice as many tables going as when I left a few minutes earlier. I bought more chips and sat at a table that bore no resemblance to the tight, thoughtful group of players I had been matching wits with earlier. There were maniacs here betting nearly every hand, raising with nothing, drinking, laughing and having a good time gambling. Okay. My stack got eaten away as I let myself get pushed out of pot after pot, but eventually I was dealt a monster hand and was paid off. Basically that one hand was all I really needed to win. After my hour (okay, hour and a half) I had made another $140.
Location, location, location.
I have circled the home dates on the hockey schedule for the upcoming season.
Last night I went to a casino while my wife went to the hockey game with a friend of ours. For convenience sake, I choose to go to the casino right beside the arena where the game was. For three hours I sat at a pretty tight table, played as well as I could, and ended up ahead by exactly $100.
The game let out. The home team had won and a swarm of happy fans came into the casino to celebrate. I met my wife and our friend, who informed me that another friend of ours would be meeting us there in about forty minutes. I could go back to the poker tables for another hour if I wanted to. The Little Angel on my shoulder said to be happy with my $100 win and not go back. The Little Devil on my other shoulder said "Poker! Poker! Poker!" Guess who I listened to?
The poker room had filled up with hyped-up hockey fans and there were twice as many tables going as when I left a few minutes earlier. I bought more chips and sat at a table that bore no resemblance to the tight, thoughtful group of players I had been matching wits with earlier. There were maniacs here betting nearly every hand, raising with nothing, drinking, laughing and having a good time gambling. Okay. My stack got eaten away as I let myself get pushed out of pot after pot, but eventually I was dealt a monster hand and was paid off. Basically that one hand was all I really needed to win. After my hour (okay, hour and a half) I had made another $140.
Location, location, location.
I have circled the home dates on the hockey schedule for the upcoming season.
Friday, October 1, 2010
The Value Bet
If you watch poker on t.v., it seems like every minute a commentator uses the term "value bet". Just what is a value bet? The term has always confused me a little bit, so I thought writing a post about value betting would clear things up for me and you both.
After smurfing the interweb a bit, the consensus seems to be that a value bet is one you place when you are ahead (or at least you think you are ahead) and would like your opponent to call. The idea is to place a small enough bet to entice a call, making your opponents think that you have a weaker hand than you do. You might also value bet if you think it might make your opponent believe you are bluffing.
If you are considering making a value bet, the question you must ask yourself is, "what is the maximum bet I can make that my opponent will call?" You don't want to make your bet too large and scare off the call, but you don't want to make it too small and make less profit than you could have.
And this is were I have an issue with the underlying assumption of value betting: that the smaller the bet, the more likely you are to get a call. Poker is just so situational that there will be times when betting a large amount is more likely to get a call than a small amount. Some poker players see a small bet as a sign of weakness, and often it is. However a small bet can also mean "please call me", just as a very large bet might mean "please fold". Other players are aware of this and sometimes will be more likely to call the larger bet. It all depends on the situation.
My general advice? Place the traditional value bet against the grinders and the rocks. Against loose players and gamblers, bet your strong hands much heavier - gamblers are more likely to put you on an audacious bluff.
Generally speaking, if you always place small bets when you want a call, your opponents will catch on. So it's good to mix it up and occasionally disguise a bluff as a value bet and bet small with nothing. Occasionally you might make a big bet a very strong hand if you think your opponents will put you on a bluff.
While the term "value bet" may conjure images of you consistently winning pot after pot. I'd caution against sticking to any particular style of play too long. Always remember that your opponents are trying to figure you out, so don't be a stationary target.
After smurfing the interweb a bit, the consensus seems to be that a value bet is one you place when you are ahead (or at least you think you are ahead) and would like your opponent to call. The idea is to place a small enough bet to entice a call, making your opponents think that you have a weaker hand than you do. You might also value bet if you think it might make your opponent believe you are bluffing.
If you are considering making a value bet, the question you must ask yourself is, "what is the maximum bet I can make that my opponent will call?" You don't want to make your bet too large and scare off the call, but you don't want to make it too small and make less profit than you could have.
And this is were I have an issue with the underlying assumption of value betting: that the smaller the bet, the more likely you are to get a call. Poker is just so situational that there will be times when betting a large amount is more likely to get a call than a small amount. Some poker players see a small bet as a sign of weakness, and often it is. However a small bet can also mean "please call me", just as a very large bet might mean "please fold". Other players are aware of this and sometimes will be more likely to call the larger bet. It all depends on the situation.
My general advice? Place the traditional value bet against the grinders and the rocks. Against loose players and gamblers, bet your strong hands much heavier - gamblers are more likely to put you on an audacious bluff.
Generally speaking, if you always place small bets when you want a call, your opponents will catch on. So it's good to mix it up and occasionally disguise a bluff as a value bet and bet small with nothing. Occasionally you might make a big bet a very strong hand if you think your opponents will put you on a bluff.
While the term "value bet" may conjure images of you consistently winning pot after pot. I'd caution against sticking to any particular style of play too long. Always remember that your opponents are trying to figure you out, so don't be a stationary target.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Thinking is important.
It's a wonderful autumn day in Calgary, Alberta. Much too nice to go in to a casino, right? Ah, but I just feel so good that I know I'm going to play well...so it's off to play a little 4/8 limit hold'em!
Yes, I just got back from my 3 1/2 hour session and I'm feeling pretty good about making $145 today. I played really well, and by that I mean I only made a few mistakes, and the mistakes I made were not very costly.
I would like to relate one hand in particular because it illustrates the importance of always thinking about what cards your opponents may be holding.
This is limit hold'em, with a $4 big blind and a $2 small blind. I was in the small blind with QQ. The guy under the gun limps in and four guys call him. How sweet is this? It is very unlikely any one of them is holding AA or KK, and odds are also in my favor that neither an Ace or a King will flop. With $26 in the pot already, I know I will get callers if I raise here, so it's only costing me another $6 to build the pot up even more. So I raise it up to $8.
Now let's just stop and think about what I've done and what the other players must think about my hand. Raising in this position is showing a lot of strength - I'm saying I like my cards so much that I'm willing to bet they will still be ahead of five other guys (maybe six, if the big blind joins the party) after the flop. I had not made a single pre-flop raise up until this point and I had been playing very tight. A bet like this, with the tight table image I know I have established, can only mean I'm holding AA, KK, QQ or AK. Even if I had AQ or JJ I probably would not make such a move, and good poker players would probably know I'm most likely to be holding one of the four hands I've just named.
Back to the hand: the big blind folds, and every single one of the five remaining players calls my raise. There is now $52 in the pot, and I'm even more certain that nobody has AA. Anybody holding AA would re-raise to build the pot, confident of getting at least one caller (me) and probably a few more. KK is also very unlikely for the same reason. So everybody is just drooling over that $52 pot and hoping the poker gods will smile on them.
The flop: Jd 9h 6d
So, there are possible flush and straight draws. It's also possible that somebody has pocket Jacks, Nines or Sixes, so my over pair may not be good. I have to act first, so I decide to place the $4 bet (In limit hold 'em I am limited to betting or raising $4 at a time before the turn, and after the turn the bet has to be $8 - that's why they call it 4/8 limit.) My reasoning is that I am probably ahead, and if one of my opponents has the trips they will likely re-raise me. If nobody re-raises, then I'm probably good. I also think anybody who missed the flop completely will fold and I'm happy to narrow the field here.
What must my opponents think of my hand now? They must know that unless I've suddenly gone crazy, I've got a big pair. AK has just been eliminated from the likely cards I'm holding because it would be way too risky to raise against five guys without even a pair! Still I get two callers (no raise - so I think I'm okay) and the pot is now $62. What do my opponents have? Ace-something, probably. Maybe two diamonds and they hope to hit the flush. I hope the turn is not a diamond or an Ace.
The turn: Ace of Clubs.
Well, durn. I think I may have just fallen behind here. I don't think I'll bet because the chances are just too great one of these guys has an Ace. So I check.
And now I'm going to let you in on a little secret. One of my opponents is holding AQ. I don't know this yet, but I'm about to find out. So here is this guy holding AQ, which he pays $8 to see the flop with. He misses the flop but he pays another $4 to see the turn, and he hits his ace. Now if he had been thinking about my hand, he should think I've got AA, KK or QQ, so he should figure he is a 2/3 favourite to be ahead. What does he do? He checks. Now I don't want to say this was a stupid thing to do, but it was a stupid thing to do. Here is my advice to him (assuming he reads my blog) and to all of you: If you think you are ahead, but vulnerable, then for God's sake bet! By simply checking he is putting himself in a tough position if the river completes the flush draw or straight draw (If he hasn't been playing attention he might think I'm drawing to one of these). If he has been paying attention and has me on KK or QQ (If he thought I had AA he would have folded by now) , then by checking he'll have a tough decision to make if the river brings a King or a Queen.
And the other guy checks too. Sweet, I don't have to make a difficult decision with the Ace on the board.
And the river is a big, beautiful Queen of Hearts.
I don't even consider checking to "lay a trap". I might do that in no-limit, but in limit all that bluffing and trapping stuff is ineffective. I bet $8. My inattentive friend gleefully raises to $16 with his two-pair. The other guy can't fold fast enough. I announce raise, but I haven't been paying very close attention myself - I can't raise because my opponent has no chips left to call with, so I have to just call. He turns over his two pair and I show my set of Queens and rake in the $94 pot.
And he is very upset. Apparently I am just a lucky jackass who can't win a hand unless he rivers a set.
Am I? I think I played that hand perfectly. If he had been paying attention and figured out what cards I was probably holding (how many clues do I have to give him?) then he would have saved himself a big loss. And if I rivered a set, well he let me see the river for free didn't he?
(Yes, in poker "river" is a also a verb.)
Yes, I just got back from my 3 1/2 hour session and I'm feeling pretty good about making $145 today. I played really well, and by that I mean I only made a few mistakes, and the mistakes I made were not very costly.
I would like to relate one hand in particular because it illustrates the importance of always thinking about what cards your opponents may be holding.
This is limit hold'em, with a $4 big blind and a $2 small blind. I was in the small blind with QQ. The guy under the gun limps in and four guys call him. How sweet is this? It is very unlikely any one of them is holding AA or KK, and odds are also in my favor that neither an Ace or a King will flop. With $26 in the pot already, I know I will get callers if I raise here, so it's only costing me another $6 to build the pot up even more. So I raise it up to $8.
Now let's just stop and think about what I've done and what the other players must think about my hand. Raising in this position is showing a lot of strength - I'm saying I like my cards so much that I'm willing to bet they will still be ahead of five other guys (maybe six, if the big blind joins the party) after the flop. I had not made a single pre-flop raise up until this point and I had been playing very tight. A bet like this, with the tight table image I know I have established, can only mean I'm holding AA, KK, QQ or AK. Even if I had AQ or JJ I probably would not make such a move, and good poker players would probably know I'm most likely to be holding one of the four hands I've just named.
Back to the hand: the big blind folds, and every single one of the five remaining players calls my raise. There is now $52 in the pot, and I'm even more certain that nobody has AA. Anybody holding AA would re-raise to build the pot, confident of getting at least one caller (me) and probably a few more. KK is also very unlikely for the same reason. So everybody is just drooling over that $52 pot and hoping the poker gods will smile on them.
The flop: Jd 9h 6d
So, there are possible flush and straight draws. It's also possible that somebody has pocket Jacks, Nines or Sixes, so my over pair may not be good. I have to act first, so I decide to place the $4 bet (In limit hold 'em I am limited to betting or raising $4 at a time before the turn, and after the turn the bet has to be $8 - that's why they call it 4/8 limit.) My reasoning is that I am probably ahead, and if one of my opponents has the trips they will likely re-raise me. If nobody re-raises, then I'm probably good. I also think anybody who missed the flop completely will fold and I'm happy to narrow the field here.
What must my opponents think of my hand now? They must know that unless I've suddenly gone crazy, I've got a big pair. AK has just been eliminated from the likely cards I'm holding because it would be way too risky to raise against five guys without even a pair! Still I get two callers (no raise - so I think I'm okay) and the pot is now $62. What do my opponents have? Ace-something, probably. Maybe two diamonds and they hope to hit the flush. I hope the turn is not a diamond or an Ace.
The turn: Ace of Clubs.
Well, durn. I think I may have just fallen behind here. I don't think I'll bet because the chances are just too great one of these guys has an Ace. So I check.
And now I'm going to let you in on a little secret. One of my opponents is holding AQ. I don't know this yet, but I'm about to find out. So here is this guy holding AQ, which he pays $8 to see the flop with. He misses the flop but he pays another $4 to see the turn, and he hits his ace. Now if he had been thinking about my hand, he should think I've got AA, KK or QQ, so he should figure he is a 2/3 favourite to be ahead. What does he do? He checks. Now I don't want to say this was a stupid thing to do, but it was a stupid thing to do. Here is my advice to him (assuming he reads my blog) and to all of you: If you think you are ahead, but vulnerable, then for God's sake bet! By simply checking he is putting himself in a tough position if the river completes the flush draw or straight draw (If he hasn't been playing attention he might think I'm drawing to one of these). If he has been paying attention and has me on KK or QQ (If he thought I had AA he would have folded by now) , then by checking he'll have a tough decision to make if the river brings a King or a Queen.
And the other guy checks too. Sweet, I don't have to make a difficult decision with the Ace on the board.
And the river is a big, beautiful Queen of Hearts.
I don't even consider checking to "lay a trap". I might do that in no-limit, but in limit all that bluffing and trapping stuff is ineffective. I bet $8. My inattentive friend gleefully raises to $16 with his two-pair. The other guy can't fold fast enough. I announce raise, but I haven't been paying very close attention myself - I can't raise because my opponent has no chips left to call with, so I have to just call. He turns over his two pair and I show my set of Queens and rake in the $94 pot.
And he is very upset. Apparently I am just a lucky jackass who can't win a hand unless he rivers a set.
Am I? I think I played that hand perfectly. If he had been paying attention and figured out what cards I was probably holding (how many clues do I have to give him?) then he would have saved himself a big loss. And if I rivered a set, well he let me see the river for free didn't he?
(Yes, in poker "river" is a also a verb.)
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Luck revisited
I know I wrote a post called The Final Word on Luck and so you might expect I had said all I wanted to say on the topic. But I'm not sure I want to leave it there. I said I don't believe in luck, but that's not entirely true. Of course I believe in the existence of luck, I just think you should put your faith in your skill instead.
I have just finished the fantastic poker memoir For Richer, For Poorer by Victoria Coren. A passage in the book perfectly describes the proper relationship one should have with luck:
At the card table and off it, luck is a bucking mechanical bull, but you can learn to keep you bum in the seat. As soon as you start putting your faith in the bull, rather than the bum, you are sunk.
Exactly. I love that she points out that this this true away from the card table as well. Everyone please go purchase a copy of Victoria Corens' book. It is great.
What does it mean to put your faith in the bull? If you are play Q7 offsuit because you have a feeling you are going to hit a full house on the flop, then you are putting your faith in the bull.
Try to understand the motives for your actions - if you have a good reason, not just a hunch, for making a particular move, then you are putting your faith in the bum. Being able to discern the difference between the bull and the bum means being honest with yourself.
I have just finished the fantastic poker memoir For Richer, For Poorer by Victoria Coren. A passage in the book perfectly describes the proper relationship one should have with luck:
At the card table and off it, luck is a bucking mechanical bull, but you can learn to keep you bum in the seat. As soon as you start putting your faith in the bull, rather than the bum, you are sunk.
Exactly. I love that she points out that this this true away from the card table as well. Everyone please go purchase a copy of Victoria Corens' book. It is great.
What does it mean to put your faith in the bull? If you are play Q7 offsuit because you have a feeling you are going to hit a full house on the flop, then you are putting your faith in the bull.
Try to understand the motives for your actions - if you have a good reason, not just a hunch, for making a particular move, then you are putting your faith in the bum. Being able to discern the difference between the bull and the bum means being honest with yourself.
Sunday, September 26, 2010
The Power of Position - A New Experiment.
I knew when I started a poker blog that sooner or later I would have to address the issue of position. According to every poker book I've ever read, position - where you are sitting at the table in relation to the blinds - is vital. Some players even say its just as important as the cards themselves.
While I wish I could write with authority on the subject of position, I'm afraid I don't really understand why position is all that important. Sometimes when I'm playing poker and I've just won a big hand in a showdown, another player will say something like, "You must have been so happy to get pocket kings in the big blind! That's an awesome hand to play out of the big blind." I smile and nod sagely, but I'm thinking pocket kings are great in any position you dipshit, what does the big blind have to do with it?
I've never quite seen what all the fuss is about with position. As you may have guessed from the fact that I devoted four straight posts to the subject of continuation betting, I'm fairly comfortable with the notion of acting first - that is out of position. I believe in the old poker saying that it takes a better hand to call than to raise, and I'm happy to act first (provided I'm facing only one opponent after the flop) and force my opponents to make difficult decisions.
The time I like to act later than every one else is before the flop. Then if I'm dealt a drawing hand ( A5 suited say, or 55) I can better judge by the number of players who have already entered the pot the likelihood of a big payoff should I hit. But the gurus all say that position matters most after the flop - and that's just where I don't care too much about it.
I'm enough of a realist to know that it is likely I'm wrong and everybody else is right. So I'm going to embark on a new experiment to teach myself the power of position. In this experiment I will play the same range of starting hands I did in my Tight is Right experiment, only this time I am going to play these hands without restriction to where my position is. I will then measure how much I made or lost from early position, middle position, late position, and the blinds. I will also allow myself to play good drawing hands like suited aces, and even small pocket pairs. The point is to see how I do playing from each position. Again I'll play 1,000 hands of play-money ring games.
Results should be ready in about three weeks.
While I wish I could write with authority on the subject of position, I'm afraid I don't really understand why position is all that important. Sometimes when I'm playing poker and I've just won a big hand in a showdown, another player will say something like, "You must have been so happy to get pocket kings in the big blind! That's an awesome hand to play out of the big blind." I smile and nod sagely, but I'm thinking pocket kings are great in any position you dipshit, what does the big blind have to do with it?
I've never quite seen what all the fuss is about with position. As you may have guessed from the fact that I devoted four straight posts to the subject of continuation betting, I'm fairly comfortable with the notion of acting first - that is out of position. I believe in the old poker saying that it takes a better hand to call than to raise, and I'm happy to act first (provided I'm facing only one opponent after the flop) and force my opponents to make difficult decisions.
The time I like to act later than every one else is before the flop. Then if I'm dealt a drawing hand ( A5 suited say, or 55) I can better judge by the number of players who have already entered the pot the likelihood of a big payoff should I hit. But the gurus all say that position matters most after the flop - and that's just where I don't care too much about it.
I'm enough of a realist to know that it is likely I'm wrong and everybody else is right. So I'm going to embark on a new experiment to teach myself the power of position. In this experiment I will play the same range of starting hands I did in my Tight is Right experiment, only this time I am going to play these hands without restriction to where my position is. I will then measure how much I made or lost from early position, middle position, late position, and the blinds. I will also allow myself to play good drawing hands like suited aces, and even small pocket pairs. The point is to see how I do playing from each position. Again I'll play 1,000 hands of play-money ring games.
Results should be ready in about three weeks.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Tight is Right: The Conclusion
In my post Tight is Right, I outlined an experiment to only play certain cards in certain positions over 1,000 hands of play-money hold 'em. To review, my playable hands were as follows:
From Early Position: AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AKs, AQs, TT, and AKo
From Middle Position: all of the above hands, plus AJs, KQs, 99, A10s and AQo
From Late Position: all of the above hands, plus KJs, 88, QJs, K10s, A9s, AJo
It was really difficult at first to discipline myself to only playing these cards. Everyone folds to me on the button and I'm holding KQ off-suit? I guess I gotta fold. I have four players calling a limp ahead of me and I get dealt 77? I guess I gotta fold. This exercise was a great way to discipline myself to making tough folds pre-flop. I even folded some of the hands my rules would have allowed me to play when another player showed significant strength. You re-raised my big raise? Okay, I can fold QJs here.
The results? After 1,000 hands I finished ahead by 893 bets. In my $50 play-money game that comes to $44,650. Yes that's play money. People play better when it's real money, so you can't expect the same results but it still illustrates the general principal that playing tight poker is the foundation you should build your game around.
Once you have disciplined yourself to play tight, then you can start adding other weapons to your arsenal. You will learn the best times to steal the blinds, when and how to defend your blinds, when to raise with a strong hand and when to check with a strong hand. You will learn who you can bluff and who you can't and you will learn when someone is likely to be bluffing you. But as you learn all of these things you must never forget that tight poker is the foundation your game is built upon. You will not do silly or reckless things. You will be able to wait for as long as it takes to set a perfect trap, or to make the effective bluff. You will have more patience than those you play against and that will make you a great poker player.
From Early Position: AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AKs, AQs, TT, and AKo
From Middle Position: all of the above hands, plus AJs, KQs, 99, A10s and AQo
From Late Position: all of the above hands, plus KJs, 88, QJs, K10s, A9s, AJo
It was really difficult at first to discipline myself to only playing these cards. Everyone folds to me on the button and I'm holding KQ off-suit? I guess I gotta fold. I have four players calling a limp ahead of me and I get dealt 77? I guess I gotta fold. This exercise was a great way to discipline myself to making tough folds pre-flop. I even folded some of the hands my rules would have allowed me to play when another player showed significant strength. You re-raised my big raise? Okay, I can fold QJs here.
The results? After 1,000 hands I finished ahead by 893 bets. In my $50 play-money game that comes to $44,650. Yes that's play money. People play better when it's real money, so you can't expect the same results but it still illustrates the general principal that playing tight poker is the foundation you should build your game around.
Once you have disciplined yourself to play tight, then you can start adding other weapons to your arsenal. You will learn the best times to steal the blinds, when and how to defend your blinds, when to raise with a strong hand and when to check with a strong hand. You will learn who you can bluff and who you can't and you will learn when someone is likely to be bluffing you. But as you learn all of these things you must never forget that tight poker is the foundation your game is built upon. You will not do silly or reckless things. You will be able to wait for as long as it takes to set a perfect trap, or to make the effective bluff. You will have more patience than those you play against and that will make you a great poker player.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
The Case Against Limping
I never limp on the button, one off the button, in super high ante structures, with high cards, when it is my birthday, when I'm drunk and I could go on. Bottom line: I'm not a big fan of limping. - Gus Hansen.
In an earlier post (To limp, or not to limp?) I suggested limping was a bad idea. My anti-limping stance is getting stronger. I now have a little evidence to back up the idea that limping in and allowing the big blind a free look at the flop is a very bad habit.
Earlier this month I wrote a post (Tight is right) promoting the idea of playing tight poker. I committed myself to playing only certain hands in certain positions for 1,000 hands of poker to see how I would fair. As I started my experiment, I realized I had a problem - how would I count hands I played from the big blind when I got to see the flop for free? Obviously most of these would not be premium hands, so how did they fit into my experiment? I decided simply to track the number of times I got to see the flop for free and whether I made or lost money over-all from this situation.
Well folks, I've played the 1,000 hands and the results are in. 43 times while in the big blind I was allowed to see the flop for free with hands I normally would have folded. It is important to understand I am not counting the times I was dealt a playable hand in the big blind - I'm only talking about hands I definitely would have thrown away (because I forced myself to stick to my experiment) had I not been allowed to see the flop for free.
So how did I do in this situation? Obviously I ended up losing most of these hands, I had bad cards and was playing out of position after all, but almost all of these losses were folds right after the flop, so I only lost the one bet of the big blind and I would have lost this to any pre-flop raise anyway. Here's the interesting thing; the hands I won from this position had big enough pots to more than make up for all the hands I lost. In fact I came out ahead by 160 bets just because I got to see the flop for free. For my $50 big blind (play money, mind you) this came to a total profit of $8000. Okay, yes. It was play money. But still it illustrates a point - don't limp! You are just giving the big blind a free pass! Over time the big blind will profit every time he or she sees the flop for free, so do not let that profit come at your expense.
How many times has something like this happened to you: You are in the big blind with 4c 2d. Some guy limps, there are a couple callers and you just check, getting to see the flop for free. The flop come Kh 2h 4d. Sweet! The original limper bets half the pot, everyone folds except you. You call. The turn comes 4h. He bets. You raise. He goes all-in. You call. He shows Ah 8h - an Ace high flush. You turn over your full house and he goes nuts! He starts screaming "You played 4-2 off suit!?? Are you an idiot?" Then you remind him you were in the big blind and saw a free flop. Ha ha.
This happens a lot, particularly on the internet where so many hands come so fast people easily forget who was in the big blind. You can hit all sorts of weird hands that nobody will put you on, and you can win very big pots.
It happens. Just don't be the dumb sap on the other side of the story.
Never limp.If someone limps before you, and you have a hand worth playing, you should strongly consider raising.
In an earlier post (To limp, or not to limp?) I suggested limping was a bad idea. My anti-limping stance is getting stronger. I now have a little evidence to back up the idea that limping in and allowing the big blind a free look at the flop is a very bad habit.
Earlier this month I wrote a post (Tight is right) promoting the idea of playing tight poker. I committed myself to playing only certain hands in certain positions for 1,000 hands of poker to see how I would fair. As I started my experiment, I realized I had a problem - how would I count hands I played from the big blind when I got to see the flop for free? Obviously most of these would not be premium hands, so how did they fit into my experiment? I decided simply to track the number of times I got to see the flop for free and whether I made or lost money over-all from this situation.
Well folks, I've played the 1,000 hands and the results are in. 43 times while in the big blind I was allowed to see the flop for free with hands I normally would have folded. It is important to understand I am not counting the times I was dealt a playable hand in the big blind - I'm only talking about hands I definitely would have thrown away (because I forced myself to stick to my experiment) had I not been allowed to see the flop for free.
So how did I do in this situation? Obviously I ended up losing most of these hands, I had bad cards and was playing out of position after all, but almost all of these losses were folds right after the flop, so I only lost the one bet of the big blind and I would have lost this to any pre-flop raise anyway. Here's the interesting thing; the hands I won from this position had big enough pots to more than make up for all the hands I lost. In fact I came out ahead by 160 bets just because I got to see the flop for free. For my $50 big blind (play money, mind you) this came to a total profit of $8000. Okay, yes. It was play money. But still it illustrates a point - don't limp! You are just giving the big blind a free pass! Over time the big blind will profit every time he or she sees the flop for free, so do not let that profit come at your expense.
How many times has something like this happened to you: You are in the big blind with 4c 2d. Some guy limps, there are a couple callers and you just check, getting to see the flop for free. The flop come Kh 2h 4d. Sweet! The original limper bets half the pot, everyone folds except you. You call. The turn comes 4h. He bets. You raise. He goes all-in. You call. He shows Ah 8h - an Ace high flush. You turn over your full house and he goes nuts! He starts screaming "You played 4-2 off suit!?? Are you an idiot?" Then you remind him you were in the big blind and saw a free flop. Ha ha.
This happens a lot, particularly on the internet where so many hands come so fast people easily forget who was in the big blind. You can hit all sorts of weird hands that nobody will put you on, and you can win very big pots.
It happens. Just don't be the dumb sap on the other side of the story.
Never limp.If someone limps before you, and you have a hand worth playing, you should strongly consider raising.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)