Don't blame the fish hooks.

Todays words: Over bet, Pot committed, Fish hooks.

Most poker players have favourite hands and hands they just don't like that much. The hand that gets the most scorn seems to me to be JJ. All the time I hear people say things like "I hate fish hooks (JJ)! I never win with them." At first I didn't understand why, then I lost $400 in a single hand playing JJ - by far the biggest amount I have ever lost in a single pot. See my post Bankroll Management Part 2 to read that story if you like.

The second time JJ did me in was at the Mirage in Las Vegas. I took $300 to a $1/$2 no-limit table. I was down $50 after thirty minutes and was perhaps a little over anxious to get back on the winning side. I was sitting on the button when I was dealt JJ. The thought that went through my head was "I very likely have the best hand right now, but if a Ace, King or Queen flop I might be in trouble. I should make a big raise here. If anybody calls, then I just hope I don't see anything higher than a Jack on the flop."

So I raised $50.

Let me stop my story and say that my thoughts and actions are typical of people who get dealt JJ. They are comfortable with the idea that they have been dealt the best cards, but they think it is possible a higher card will hit the board, so they "protect" their hand by over-betting; forcing their opponents to fold or pay bad pot-odds to continue. This strategy - the one I followed at the Mirage - is really pretty bad because what you are doing is limiting yourself to a small win (picking up only the pre-flop bets) and exposing yourself to a big loss. How are you exposing yourself to a big loss? Well, if you are making a really big pre-flop raise (mine was 25 times the big blind!) the only hands that are going to call you are probably AA or KK, at least if you are playing with good opponents. Keep this in mind.

Back to the story. I raised $50. The big blind raises another $100. Everyone else folds. Now I'm thinking "Shit, shit, shit, shit, shit, shit." I know I'm in trouble, but I cling to the hope I might still be able to bluff him off pot later. Or that he's holding AK and is behind me. I make a stupid call.

The flop comes down small cards. He bets another $100. All I know is that I have put $150 into this pot and the thought of folding just doesn't seem like an option. I am, as they say, pot committed. In desperation I go all-in, and he actually thinks about it for almost three whole seconds before calling. I turn over my suddenly puny-looking Jacks and he turns over AA. Now I'm thinking "What the hell else could he have had, moron?". The turn and the river did not bring a miracle Jack, so I kissed my $250 good-bye and left the Mirage.

This was the second largest pot I have ever lost and like the largest, I was holding JJ. If I could have the $650 I lost on those two hands back, I would be a net winner at poker instead of the net loser I still am. Two hands, both JJ.

But the problem was the way I played, not the cards. I made the mistake so many people make by grossly over-betting, making it so that I was either going to get a small gain or a big loss.

Better to play with smaller raises pre-flop. Raise an amount that people holding 10 10, 9 9, or KQ will call. Statistics show that you are a favourite not to see an Ace, King or Queen on the flop and even if you do you might still be ahead.

Just don't go crazy with the massive pre-flop raises and you won't be one of those shlubs saying how much they hate fish hooks.

Tight is Right

The formula for making money playing poker is very simple but human nature is such that most people find it almost impossible to follow the very simple formula. In a way it is like losing weight. Most of us could lose weight if we followed the simple formula: eat less and exercise more - yet it is very difficult to actually make yourself do it. The formula for winning money at poker is playing "tight"- playing when it is likely that you are holding the best hand and making your opponents pay for holding worse hands. Only playing good starting hands, and only continuing to play when it is very unlikely someone has you beat, is to play tight. A tight player does not bluff frequently, and against certain opponents (maniacs) will never bluff at all.

Play tight. Wait for the good cards. Let others bluff at you when you have the monster hands.

Sounds boring, I know. Bluffing, chasing draws, going all-in with a chance of being second best - all these things are exciting. True. You know what else is fun? Winning. If you are playing poker because you are an adrenaline junky, go ahead and play as loose as you like. If you want to make money I suggest you play tight.

The key to playing tight is to establish before you even sit down at the table what hands you can play from which position. When I'm in tight mode, these are the only hands I will allow myself to play:


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, AJ

That's it. I will leave the blinds out of it for now. Playing from the blinds requires a separate discussion.

If believe you restrict yourself to these starting hands, you will improve your chances of winning dramatically, particularly if you are playing against weak opponents. To test my theory, I am going to play 1,000 hands on-line restricting myself to these hands. Okay, I'm going to be playing for play money, but it should be interesting to see what happens.

(Note: results of this experiment were posted Sept.22/10 in Tight is Right: The Conclusion )