|
Lesson: 69 |
| Have you ever found that you start some tournaments well, but in others you just can’t get “tuned in”? What should you do about it?
Let us consider a trained athlete just before he/she runs in the 100-meter final at the Olympics. What do they do? Are they in the bar having a beer or chatting with their friends in the crowd? Not usually. They’re typically going out of their way to block out all outside interferences. They may be sitting with their heads in their hands or standing with their heads bowed. What do they think about? Winning. Having that gold medal placed around their necks. How do they achieve the focus that everyone talks about? They probably mentally go through races that they’ve won. They pump themselves up by recalling past victories in their minds. Let’s apply this to poker. First though, go through all the hands that you’ve played badly (this will take some people longer than others). Think about hands that you’ve played that have knocked you out of tournaments at crucial stages. The time that you played A-Q (or even that lousy A-J) against a good player’s pre-flop raise, hit the Ace on the flop and then decimated your chip stack. The time that you called a raise for all your chips with pocket sevens or the time that you made an early position raise with pocket nines, fell in love with them and refused to pass for a re-raise on your left. Now that that’s out of the way, think about hands you’ve played well: The perfect reads that you’ve put on opponents because everything seemed so transparent, the final tables that you’ve made and the tournaments that you’ve won. Can you remember the way you played through those victories, how quickly the time seemed to pass, and how confident you felt? This is how you can gain the “poker focus” that you need and slip straight into your “A” game at the start of the next tournament that you play. Mike Caro once said that when you join a poker game, you should say to yourself, “I am a great poker player; a powerful winning force surrounds me.” I believe it’s a technique worth trying. In the Great British Poker Tour Grand Final in Bristol back in December 2007, I found myself up against several really good players at the TV final table. Roland de Wolfe and Barny Boatman were both there, as well as Neil Channing and “Bambos” Xanthos. It was a while since I had won an event and I wanted that feeling back. I tried to remember which victories had felt the best, and the one that came to mind was winning the Irish Open. I took myself back to that table in Dublin and before long found that I was playing with renewed confidence and using all my strengths to my best advantage. You know what’s kind of funny as well: When you get into that zone, you kind of seem luckier. That’s what players mean when they talk about making your own luck!
|
| I went pretty deep in the first event at the World Series of Poker, a $1,500 No-Limit Hold ’em tournament. While I wasn’t pleased with the outcome – I finished 45th in a 2,776 player field – I was happy with my play. For this tip, I’m going to share an interesting hand from the tournament – one where I made a mistake.
It was late in the first day of play, and things had been going well. My stack had grown to over 60,000 and I was among the chip leaders. The average stack was around 20,000 at that point, the blinds were 600-1,200 with a 200 ante, and I was fortunate enough to be at a timid table. I was stealing with impunity. I was meeting so little resistance that, at points, I was able to steal the blinds and antes four times per orbit. I’d raise pre-flop, everyone would fold, and I’d add valuable chips to my stack. After some time at this table, an under-the-gun player raised all-in pre-flop for a little over 20,000 in chips. It was folded to me on the button, and I found Ace-King off-suit. I decided to call. My opponent also had Ace-King, but he was suited with hearts. I lost the large pot when my opponent hit his flush. It would be easy to write off the hand as plain old bad luck. After all, we started with hands of almost identical strength. But, the truth is, I shouldn’t have played the hand at all. Sure, Ace-King is a strong hand, but it’s no better than a three to one favorite over something like Ace-Queen. Against other hands my opponent could have held, like pocket 10s or Jacks, it’s a slight underdog. There were also factors beyond the math that I should have considered. For instance, given the table dynamics, there was no need for me to risk one-third of my chips on this hand. If I had folded, I could have gone back to stealing, padding my stack while risking only a fraction of my chips. What’s more is that, after I lost, I had to become more conservative, as I no longer had a big chip advantage over the other players. Losing that pot had other consequences, as well. In this tournament, the blind-to-stack ratio didn’t allow for a lot of play. For much of the tournament, the average stack had no more than 12 or 13 big blinds. When I lost those chips, I could no longer re-raise pre-flop, then fold to an all-in if my move didn’t work out. If someone raised before the action got to me, I had only two choices: fold or move in. There are plenty more tournaments to come in the WSOP and I’m hopeful that, in the following weeks, I’ll win my first bracelet. To do that, of course, I’ll also have to do a better job of protecting my chips the next time I have a big stack.
|
|
Lesson: 67 |
| New players who want to be good students of the game often ask me for advice. In response, I often tell them about emotional stability, which I touched on in my last tip. The next point I’d like to make is that they need to be careful when assessing their own play. That’s because there are a couple of common mistakes new players make that lead them to draw faulty conclusions about the strength of their play.
After playing for a short period of time, say 100 hours, a player starts to develop an opinion about his or her play. They might think they’re playing very well or very poorly, but this conclusion might be far from the truth. The problem is that, in the short term, anything can happen. A player may get very lucky or unlucky and show results that are either far higher or lower than they could ever expect in the long-term. However, over a longer period – say 300 hours or more – a player is going to get a much more accurate view of their ability to beat the game. So what does this mean for you? In short, I recommend that you keep an eye on your long-term results no matter if you’re in the midst of a hot streak or a cold one. While taking the long view will help you more accurately assess your play, it can’t help you avoid every pitfall along the way. For example, assume that I’ve played the following games of No-Limit Hold ’em and have managed the following debts and profits: Game: $1/$2 Game: $2/$4 Game: $25/50 At first glance, it looks like I’m dong pretty well, right? I’ve make a handsome profit of $30,000. Look deeper though and you’ll see that I wouldn’t want to quit my day job because, in fact, I’m doing quite poorly. To better understand what I mean, don’t think about the actual dollar figures involved but, instead, think of each small blind as a unit. So, in a $1/$2 game, each unit is 1 and in a $25/$50 game each unit is 25. How have I done in terms of units won and lost? I’ve lost 2,000 units in the $1/$2 game, 2,000 units in the $2/$4 game and won 1,440 units in the $25/$50 game. Total everything up and you’ll see that after 430 hours of play, I’ve lost 2,560 units. This is bad news. As you keep records of your sessions, be sure to record the size of the game you’re playing and number of units you’ve won or lost. At the start of your poker career, put more emphasis on units won or lost than on your total profit. It’s a more accurate gauge as to whether you’re playing winning poker.
|
|
Lesson: 66 |
| A few weeks ago, I offered some pointers for playing fourth steet in Limit Seven-Card Stud. For this tip, I’m going and show how you might improve your play on seventh street.
My first suggestion for playing on seventh street is that you need to look at your pot odds when facing a final bet. When playing $5-$10 Stud, for example, you’ll often need to call a $10 river bet while looking at a pot of $70. In this spot, where you’re getting 7:1, if you have any suspicion that your hand is good, you really ought to call. The odds are so favorable that throwing away a lot of marginal hands would be a mistake. This is very different from no-limit poker, where you’ll need to make some big laydowns late in a hand. If you’re making the transition from No-Limit Hold ’em to Limit Stud, keep this very important point in mind. Some of the tougher decisions on seventh street arise when you’re holding one pair. Let’s say you start with a pair of 6s and your opponent open-raises with a King as his door card. He bet all the way, representing a pair of Kings, and you called. Neither of you seemed to improve on fourth, fifth or sixth streets, and he bet out on the river. At this point, you can be fairly certain that he doesn’t have a pair of Kings. Most people don’t have the heart to bet one pair on the river. So, in this case, you’re likely up against something like Kings up, some sort of hidden hand, or a total bluff. Given this range of hands – and knowing that a bluff is a possibility – you should make the final call. You’ll pick off a bluff enough of the time to make the call profitable. I want to point out here that, since it’s proper to call with a lot of marginal hands, betting with one solid pair on the river is often a good idea. If you start with something like a pair of Kings and your opponent doesn’t seem to catch anything, don’t be timid on the river. Oftentimes, you should bet, knowing that a lesser hand is likely to call. Now, let’s look at another river situation. Let’s say that after the river has been dealt, you have Q 10 9 8 with three clubs showing. You made a straight on the river after your opponent has been aggressively betting his hand the entire way, showing Ad Kd 9s 6h. After betting into your hand on sixth street, he again bets into your hand on seveth street. In this situation, you have to think about what your opponent is betting into. Most players will not bet into such a scary board with one pair or even two pair. We have to assume that our opponent is either bluffing with a weak hand and is unconcerned with our hand, or has a huge hidden hand and is hoping to get three bets on the river. This could be a situation where you might just call, especially if there is a third hand behind you who might over-call with a marginal hand that he would fold if you had raised. When playing Limit Stud, be sure that you’re making enough value bets and crying calls on the river. Keep the pot odds in mind and you’re likely to make the right play.
|
| In Limit Hold ’em, the big blind is one of the toughest position to play. You’re out of position, and that’s never a good thing, but usually, you’ll be getting excellent odds to continue with the hand. Against a single opponent who has raised, you’ll be getting better than 3 to 1 and, in most hands, you’re no more than a 2 to 1 dog. The problem is, you’ll often find yourself going into the flop with shaky cards and, at that point, you’re sure to face some tough decisions.
Before I talk about some tricky situations that develop in the big blind, I want to note that you can make your life a little easier by folding some hands pre-flop. If you’re holding a medium Ace and you’re facing an early position raise from a player who you know plays only good cards up front, then fold. It may seem like you’re getting a nice price to continue, but in this spot, you’re only going to get into trouble. When you miss the flop completely, it’s going to be tough to continue and, if you hit an Ace, you may lose a lot to a hand that has you dominated. I’d rather play 6-7 against an early position raise from a tight player than A-7. There are some hole cards that are just hopeless. If I’m facing a raise from any position and I find something like J-2, T-3, or 9-4. I’m going to surrender the hand. The really difficult situations arise when you hold a mediocre hand, something like A-8 or pocket 6s, and you face a raise from late position. Many players will raise with just about anything in the cutoff or on the button, so it’s tough to know where you stand with these medium strength hands. What should you do? Unfortunately, there are no easy answers. My best advice is to vary your play so as to take advantage of a particular opponent’s tendencies. For example, if you hold A-8 in the big blind and face a late-position raise from a player who tends to be a little weak after the flop, you should probably re-raise pre-flop and then follow up with a bet on the flop most of the time. Against this type of player, this kind of action will force a lot of folds. If the opponent who raises in late position is tricky and very aggressive post flop, I’ll often call the pre-flop raise and then check-raise on most flops, whether or not I got a piece of the board. Even if the check-raise doesn’t win the pot, this move helps keep a tough, aggressive player off balance. Of course, you’ll need to consider the flop as you move forward in the hand. If you call a pre-flop raise with pocket 6s and see a flop of T-Q-K, there’s little point in going to war. Give your opponent credit for a hand that beats yours and look for a better spot. But this doesn’t mean that you should be willing to give up on anything less than top pair. Against a single opponent, I’ll play second pair pretty aggressively. Sometimes, I’ll lead at the pot with this hand, and sometimes, I’ll check-raise with it. Taking this aggressive approach with a shaky hand allows me to play my big hands in the same manner. When my opponents see me check-raise, they won’t know if I’m making this play with as little as second pair or as much as a set. As I said earlier, playing from the big blind in limit poker is tricky. In my opinion, it’s one of the toughest spots in all of poker. My best advice is that you should stay alert to your opponent’s tendencies and look to mix up your play. If you’re on your game, it will be tough for other players to put you on a hand while you’ll have a pretty good idea of what they’re doing.
|
| In No-Limit Hold ’em, one of the trickiest and, sometimes, scariest situations occurs when you bluff at a pot on the flop and get called. The turn brings a blank and you’re left with a big decision: Do I fire a second bullet and continue with the bluff?
Recently, while playing in the World Poker Tour event at The Mirage, an opponent launched a double-barrel bluff against me, and he got me to lay down the best hand. It was early in the tournament and I was in late position. My opponent, a pro whose play I respect, raised from early position, and I called with Ac-4c. The flop came A-J-7, rainbow with one club. My opponent bet out and I called. The turn brought a blank, and my opponent put out a very large bet. I was in a tough spot. It was early in the tournament, and I didn’t want to call off most of my chips with this hand. I was pretty certain the bettor wouldn’t have fired a bet of that size with something like A-K or A-Q. With a hand like that, he’d have to worry that he was beat, and he’d probably try to get to the showdown as cheaply as possible. I figured he either had a very big hand – maybe a set of Jacks – or not much at all. In the end, I decided to lay down my pair of Aces. My opponent then showed pocket Kings. I give my opponent a lot of credit for playing the hand well. He had a good sense for how much heat I was willing to take. His play illustrates the most important consideration when deciding if you should continue with a bluff: Your opponent’s mindset. If you’re up against an opponent who is unwilling to play without a very big hand, firing the second bullet can force them to make some bad lay downs.To make this work, however, you need to estimate the price a particular player is willing to pay, and then bet more than he seems capable of handling. In the hand I discussed above, my opponent zeroed in on a price I couldn’t stomach. Sometimes, a meek player will get stubborn and try to get through a hand by calling you down with something like second pair. You need to have a sense that he’s trying to get through the hand in this way, then price your bets so that he won’t be able to call. If, however, you’re against a guy who has shown a willingness to call any bet of any size with just about any hand, then you need back off and wait till you flop a monster. In the end, the most important thing is to know your opponent. If you’re attentive at the table and pick up on the tendencies of those around you, you’ll find some nice opportunities for double-barrel bluffs. That said, I should note that I’m far more willing to bluff on multiple streets in cash games than I am in tournaments. If I get caught running a big bluff in a cash game, I’ll re-buy with the knowledge that my actions will force some bad calls later in the session. In tournaments, if I bluff off my chips, I’m on the rail. As your no-limit game develops, study your opponents and identify those who are vulnerable to bluffs on multiple streets. As you develop this skill, you’ll pick up some key pots and become a more profitable player.
|
|
Lesson: 63 |
| In an earlier article, Perry Friedman gave some guidelines as to what you should be looking for at the start of a Seven-Card Stud hand. Perry concentrated on third street, when you make your initial decision to proceed with the hand or not. For this tip, I’d like to go further down the road and talk about fourth street.
When playing Stud, fourth street is the last of the smaller betting rounds. On fifth street, the bets double, so if you decide to play beyond fourth street, your investment in the hand is going to be hefty. On fourth street, I look to see if an opponent has picked up a card that has a relation to the door card (the first up card). If fourth street builds straight or flush possibilities for my opponent, I’m likely to muck a lot of hands; if it appears to be a complete blank, I’ll usually continue. For example, say one player open-raised with the Qd as a door card, and I called with split 8s and a suited 6. If he catches a total blank (something like the 2c) on fourth street and bets, I’m likely to continue and see if fifth street brings either of us any help. On the other hand, I will probably dump the hand if my opponent catches anything between a Ten and an Ace, and I don’t improve. I won’t know for sure if a Ten, Jack, King or Ace helps my opponent’s hand, but at that point, his board presents too many warning signs for me to continue. Many players will enter pots when they start with three big cards, so any high card on fourth street has the potential to make my opponent a big pair or get him closer to a straight. Either way, my eights are pretty flimsy. Another sort of situation develops when I catch two-pair on the turn. Say that I started with a split pair of 8s and a 6. My opponent open-raised with the Qd and I called. The turn brings me another 6, giving me two pair. My opponent catches a blank and bets. In a spot like this, I think raising is a big mistake because the two-pair is well hidden. If I raise on fourth street and happen to catch a boat on fifth or sixth street, it will be almost impossible for my opponent to continue with the hand after my show of strength. He’ll have to assume that I’ve hit and he’ll fold to a bet. If, however, I just call on the turn and then hit a 6 later in that hand, my opponent may continue with his pair of Queens. Moving on to a third example, say I have Kings in the hole with the 6d as my door card. Again, assume my opponent open-raised while showing Qd on third street. In this spot I’m likely to just call my opponent’s raise on third street. If I were to re-raise with a 6 as my door card, I’d be announcing that I held a big pocket pair. My opponent would probably fold and I wouldn’t get any value out of a nice hand. After I call the third-street raise, I’m hoping that the turn brings a card like the 8d. If my opponent then leads at the pot, I’ll raise, hoping to give the impression that I’m on a draw. Once my opponent has that impression, he’ll probably call my raise on fourth street. If fifth street appears to be a blank, he’ll probably call a bet there as well. I’ll be building a nice pot while holding a strong hand. These are just a few situations you might run into on fourth street. If you play your hand correctly at this point, you stand to pick up some big bets on later streets when things go well, and save some bets when things go south.
|
| A couple of years ago, I was wandering a Vegas poker room after busting out of a tournament. I was looking to play a no-limit ring game, but the higher stakes games had long waiting lists. I decided to take an open seat in a $2-$5 game.
When I sat down, I did a quick assessment of the table. There were a bunch of young guys — I guessed they were in town for some college road trip. The others were retirement age. All seemed very concerned about the money they had on the table. They were playing very timidly and I was certain that I was by far the best player at the table. How was I going to attack this group? I open-raised the next 67 hands. Actually, that’s something of an exaggeration. But from the moment I sat down, I was willing to raise to $20 or $25 in any position with almost any cards, and I was talking it up as I did. “Raise it up again!” I’d say after popping it for the 15th consecutive hand. I was trying to give the impression that I was a certifiable lunatic. To my opponents, I seemed reckless but, at this table, there were strategic advantages to this style. First off, I was benefiting from a tremendous amount of information. If I raised with something like 4-9, I knew this group of opponents would get rid of any marginal hands that could cause me a lot of trouble. So, if I happened to hit trip 9s on the flop, I wouldn’t need to worry that I was out-kicked by a hand like 9-T or J-9. These guys would only call with hands like pockets 7s or A-Q. In fact, there were so few hands that they’d call with that I always had a very good idea of where I stood. But they had no idea what I held. Given this disparity of information, I knew when I could pick up a pot with a bet on the flop — which was most of the time. I was making a fair amount of money by raising with trash and betting the flop when I actually found a big hand, pocket Kings. I raised the standard amount, to $25. Then the small blind came alive and re-raised me. I then came over the top in a ridiculous way: I moved all-in for $4,000. My opponent was in agony. He let everyone know that he had pocket Jacks and that against any other player he’d fold. But me — given the nut case that I was, he felt he had to call, and that’s what he did. This guy was so convinced that I was crazy that he made a huge mistake. He bought into the act and failed to realize that in all that seemingly maniacal play, I never risked much. I had convinced him that there was no difference between a $25 raise and a $4,000 raise. You might want to experiment with this approach in your no-limit play, but before you go out and start splashing in every pot, I have a few suggestions:
If all of this works out, give it a shot. You may find that being a “maniac” can be profitable and a lot of fun. |
| Say you’re playing in a low-stakes no-limit ring game. The blinds are $.50 and $1, and it’s folded to you in middle position. You find a nice hand – pocket Tens – and bring it in for a standard raise of three times the big blind. It’s folded around to a player in late position, who re-raises the minimum amount, making it $5 to go.
I’ve seen this sort of play repeatedly in the past few months while researching my next No-Limit Hold ’em book by playing in low-stakes games. Every time I’ve been faced with a minimum re-raise, I’ve been up against a monster – pocket Kings or Aces. A player who opts for the small raise may think he’s being crafty by getting me to put a little extra money in the pot while he holds a big hand. But this is not a profitable play. There are two major problems with the minimum raise. I’ve already mentioned the first problem: My opponent has telegraphed his hand. And making good decisions is pretty easy when you know exactly what your opponent holds. The second problem is mathematical. My opponent is giving me 5 to 1 to call the additional raise. (In this example, my extra $2 will give me a chance win $10.) When I make the call, I know that I stand to win a very big pot. My implied odds – the money I stand to make if I hit my hand – more than justify the call. If my opponent started the hand with a $100 stack, I could get paid at a rate of 50 to 1. So I call and see a flop. If there’s no Ten on the board, I’m done with the hand. And if there is a Ten, I’m going to wipe my opponent out. As I said, poker is a pretty easy when you know what your opponent holds. What’s the proper play when you hold Aces and a player has raised in front of you? Find the “Bet Pot” button and click it. Put pressure on a player who you know is starting with a second-best hand. Who knows, if he’s got pocket Queens or A-K, he may be willing to put his entire stack in pre-flop. If he holds something like Jacks or Tens, your big raise will minimize your opponent’s implied odds. You should be wary of minimum raises at other stages of a hand, as well. Say you raised pre-flop with A-K and one player called. You hit top pair top kicker on a K-8-4 board. You bet out the size of the pot and your opponent min-raises you. At this point, you need to be very concerned that your opponent has hit a set. You have to wonder why he’d be raising an amount that almost begs for your call. My advice here is twofold: First is that you should all but eliminate the minimum raise from your game. In some rare circumstances when you hit a full house or quads, it might be appropriate, but that’s about it. Second is that alarm bells should go off whenever you see a min raise. Your opponent probably has a big hand and you need to proceed accordingly. |
| Players get excited when they flop two pair because they know they’re in a great position to take down a pot. But often, two pair is not nearly as powerful as it seems. This is especially true when holding bottom two pair or top and bottom pair. These hands may look dominant on the flop, but they’re usually quite vulnerable.
For example, say you’re playing a No-Limit Hold ’em ring game. There’s a standard raise to four times the big blind from middle position. You figure the player has A-K or maybe a middle or high pocket pair. Everyone folds to you on the button, where you find 5d-7d. You’ve got favorable position and a hand that can flop some powerful draws, so you decide to call. The blinds fold, and the flop comes 5c-7h-Ks. This is great. Not only do you have two pair, but it’s very likely that your opponent has a piece of this flop, with top pair top kicker or maybe an over-pair. He bets into you, and you have to decide what action is best. I’ve seen some players smooth call in situations like this, but that is not a wise play. When you have bottom two pair and your opponent has an over-pair or top pair/top kicker, you’re not as big a favorite as you might think. Your opponent has five outs – cards that will counterfeit your two-pair – which gives him a very live draw. You’re a 75% favorite to take the pot, and that’s great, but it’s not the type of statistical edge that justifies slow playing. The better play is to raise and put your opponent to a decision right there. Many players overplay top pair and over-pairs, and will either call or re-raise all-in. That gives you the chance to put all of your money in the pot as a big favorite. If he puts a bad beat on you at that point, so be it. Is it possible your raise will force your opponent out of the pot and kill your action? Sure, if he’s sitting with a pair of Queens or Jacks he’ll likely fold, but against that sort of hand, you’d have no chance to win much of a pot anyway. Your opponent would probably check to you and then fold to any bet on the turn. And as Howard Lederer pointed out in a recent tip on playing sets, if a blank comes on the turn and you raise at that point, you’ll be sending an indication that the turn card helped you in some way. He’ll have to assume that his lone pair is no good. There will be occasions when you flop bottom two pair or top and bottom pair at the same time your opponent catches top two pair or a set. When that happens, you’re going to go broke. In fact, you should lose your stack in most situations like this. If you’re not willing to risk a lot of chips in this kind of hand, you’re probably not doing enough to maximize your pots when you hold the best hand. When you find yourself holding two pair, play them aggressively and get your money in on the flop. It’s the surest way to get the maximum profit from a strong but vulnerable hand. |
|
You’ve probably heard the standard reason to avoid slow playing: It’s dangerous, because when you slow play, you give an opponent a chance to make a bigger hand at a minimal cost. This is absolutely true. But there’s another reason to play your big hands fast, and this one isn’t talked about as frequently. A slow play can give an opponent a chance to get away from a hand more cheaply than he would have had you played it fast from the start. Consider the following example. You’re in late position in a No-Limit Hold ’em ring game. A player raises in early position. You look at your cards, see pocket 8s, and decide to call. The flop is absolutely perfect: Qh 8h 2d. You’ve hit your set and, with the Queen out there, chances are your opponent has something – maybe A-Q, maybe pocket Kings or Aces. He bets the flop. Many players will just call in this spot, hoping to get their opponent to bet on the turn. But a raise is usually the better play. If you just call, you risk seeing a heart on the turn. I don’t think you need to be especially worried about the flush beating your set. You might get your set beat by a flush draw even if you raise. However, you do need to be concerned about the effect the third heart will have on your opponent. He very well might suspect that you were on the flush draw and he’d no longer be willing to commit a lot of money to the hand, even if he has Aces. In fact, any King, Jack, 10, 9 or a card that pairs the board is likely to give your opponent pause. If he bets on the turn and you raise, you’re signaling that the turn card helped you. In effect, you’re saying that you liked the flop enough to call and the turn improved your hand in some way. You’re announcing that you can beat one pair. So the flop very well may be the only time when your opponent is willing to make a stand with a single pair. If he bets the flop of Qh 8h 2d and you raise, he’s likely to think that you’re semi-bluffing — raising on a flush draw. At that point, he might feel compelled to protect his hand with large re-raise or perhaps an all in. When this happens, you’ll take down a monster pot. It’s OK when a flop raise doesn’t get you the result you want. You might scare off someone holding pocket Jacks or Ace-King, but you wouldn’t make a lot of money off these hands anyway. And, if you’re up against Ah-Jh, you may lose a big pot to a flush. But that’s OK, because you’ll have gotten your money in with the best hand. Of course, there are some occasions where slow playing is the best choice. If you flop quads or something like Queens full, you’ll want to give an opponent a chance to make some kind of hand on the turn or river. But frequently, the best option is to play fast on the flop. It may be your only chance to win a big pot with a big hand. |
|
Lesson: 58 |
| I’m best known in the poker world for my tournament success. I’ve won four World Series of Poker bracelets, including the World Championship in 1996. With as much success as I’ve had in tournaments, however, I still prefer to spend most of my time in cash games. If I were to limit myself to tournaments, I’d miss out on some of poker’s most interesting aspects.
In tournaments, you’re constantly moving. The tournament director may move you so that he can balance tables, or your table may break. So, even if you’ve been attentive to your opponents’ tendencies, there’s a good chance that you won’t be able to exploit the information you’ve gained. In a cash game, however, you have far more time with a set of players. When I play a cash game in a casino, I might spend eight, 10, or 12 hours with the same group, so I have a longer time to study my opponents and exploit their weaknesses. If I’m going to be playing with the same people for hours, I can create a table image that will benefit me over the course of my session. For example, when I first enter a game, I might make a series of unprofitable plays – some strange bets or bluffs. These plays may lose me a little bit of money, but they affect how everyone thinks of me for the rest of the session. Even if I shift to a more solid mode of play, some players will retain the idea that I’m a nut case. In a tip I provided a few weeks ago, I showed how developing this sort of table image can be used to great effect by representing a bluff. In a tournament, however, it’s tough to profit from that kind of persona. You can spend an hour getting everyone to believe you’re a maniac only to be moved to a table of complete strangers. At that point, your stack will be decimated and your image will have disappeared. In cash games, you also have the chance to track your opponents’ mood shifts over time. At various points in a session, a player may get tired, frustrated or just go on tilt. If you’re attuned to your opponents’ moods, you’ll find opportunities to profit from their weakened states. In a tournament, you rarely get a chance to take advantage of someone else’s tilt. Usually, the hand that gets a player steaming also busts them from the tournament. While tournaments can provide for some great action, playing them exclusively can limit your game. By branching out and playing cash games, you’ll develop a completely different set of poker skills and be able to explore some of the more interesting psychological aspects of the game. |
| Most players are aware of the significant advantages that come with having a big stack in a tournament. When a player has chips, he can attack and pick up pots by forcing those around him into a corner where they have to make tough decisions. Those who have short stacks are always vulnerable to attack by those who have managed to accumulate lots of chips.
Why can the big stacks be more aggressive? The answer may surprise you. In tournaments, the more chips you have the less each individual chip is worth, making it easier for the big stacks to throw more into each pot. It’s a strange concept, but one you should understand. To illustrate the point, say that you have 100,000 in tournament chips, and you lose 20,000 in a pot. You’re not going to be happy about the loss, but that setback is not nearly as devastating as losing 15,000 from a 30,000 stack. When you have a lot of chips that aren’t worth much, you can be a lot freer to use them. You can go after blinds and antes without premium cards, or you can enter into race situations. If some hands don’t work out, that’s OK, because you weren’t risking much to begin with. The benefits of having deep stacks are significant enough that I’m willing to take some risks early in a tournament that give me the chance to build up my chips. When I’m playing in position, I’m likely to call raises with hands that I wouldn’t play in a ring game or late in a tournament – hands like Q-9 suited or K-T suited. In a ring game, with these sorts of hands I’d be worried about being dominated and getting myself in serious trouble if I flop top pair. But early in a tournament, I can call with the hope of hitting the flop pretty hard. I’m looking for two-pair, trips, or some kind of big draw. When I flop a draw, I’ll have the opportunity to semi-bluff; if I hit two pair, I might take a lot of chips from an opponent who can’t get away from top pair. Also, keep in mind that there are likely to be a higher proportion of weak players early in a tournament. You want to get as many chips from these players as you can before they bust. Playing more hands early in a tournament does expose me to greater risks, but I’m fine with that. I’d rather gamble early and bust than cling to a short stack for hours on end. When I’m short-stacked, I know that one bad beat or one lost race will have me on the rail. I’d rather take some chances and try to accumulate a stack that can stand up to a little adversity. So, in your next tournament, look for situations in early levels that give you a chance to acquire a big stack. You may bust, but if things work out, you’ll give yourself a far better shot at surviving deep into the tournament and having a big payday. |
|
Re-buy tournaments are my favorite types of tournaments to play. I am not much of a gambler away from poker; I rarely play table games like craps or blackjack, and I never bet on sports. My tournament style, and overall poker style for that matter, is generally tight-aggressive, but during re-buy tournaments, I use a different strategy that is fun to play and has given me a great deal of success in the past. That said, there are some things you should consider when you play a re-buy tournament. The first thing to keep in mind is that you have to budget a lot more money for the tournament than just the initial buy-in. I budget for the initial buy-in, two re-buys, and the add on. So, if I am playing a $1,000 re-buy event, I will show up with $4,000. This gives me the opportunity to play the event correctly. In a re-buy tournament, you can present your opponents with an image that you will later exploit in the tournament. Early on, I will often make unorthodox moves, pushing chips and building a hyper-aggressive image. Then, when the re-buy period ends, I revert back to my normal tight-aggressive style, and I tend to get paid off on all my big hands. The key to creating this image and opportunity, however, lies in budgeting enough money and a willingness to take risks. If you are not willing to invest enough money to make some re-buys and for the add on, then you should reconsider playing the event. You may catch cards and win a lot of pots and therefore never need to make a re-buy, but if you don’t at least have that opportunity, than you are at a disadvantage. There is one important factor in a re-buy tournament that you will have no control over, and that is your table draw. Before the start of a re-buy tournament, tournament directors will post the breakdown schedule for that tournament. This lists the order in which the tables will be broken down as players are knocked out of the tournament. A good table draw has you sitting at a late break table. A bad table draw breaks early. I am always willing to invest more re-buys in a tournament when I am seated at a late break table simply because if I lose those chips, I will have a lot of time to win them back after the re-buy period ends. If my table is scheduled to break early and I donate a lot of chips to those players, I will not have the opportunity to exploit my newfound loose image to win them back. When it comes time for the add-on, many players question whether or not they should take it. I suggest always taking the add-on unless your chip stack is in the top 20% of chip stacks after accounting for the other players taking their add-ons. This will help make sure you do not find yourself at a disadvantage when the real play starts. So, if you find yourself playing with me at your next re-buy tournament and you notice that I am gambling it up, be careful! When you call my all in bet after the re-buy period ends, you are likely to find yourself staring down at the business end of the stone cold nuts! |
|
In the middle and later stages of tournaments, there are often times when you’re forced to make a pretty big commitment on a relatively weak holding. These are uncomfortable spots because you never want to risk a large percentage of your chips with a mediocre hand. Things get even more difficult when you’re playing from the blinds and out of position. For example, say you’re playing late in a tournament. The blinds are $500 and $1,000, and there’s a $100 ante. You’re in the small blind with $18,000. It’s folded around to the button, an aggressive player who raises frequently in late position. He has $30,000 in his stack and he raises to $3,500. You look at your cards and see Ad-9s. You know that A-9 isn’t a great hand, but you can’t ignore it in this situation. First off, given your opponent’s history, he may very well be raising with a hand that is far worse than yours. In fact, in this spot, he could very well have two rags. Another consideration is that there are a lot of chips in play. Between the blinds, antes, and your opponent’s raise, you stand to pick up over $5,000 in chips if you can take down this pot, which would be a nice addition to your short stack. So, you’re probably going to want to play this hand. But what’s the best action? At first, it might seem that calling is a reasonable course, as it would keep you from getting overly committed on this marginal hand. But calling has some pretty big downsides. With a hand like A-9, you’re usually not going to like the flop very much. In fact, you’ll fail to make as much as a pair about two-thirds of the time. If you do flop a pair of 9s, how are you going to proceed if the flop also has an over card? Even on an Ace-high flop, you’ll have a tough time knowing if your hand is good. What’s more, if you miss the flop completely, you leave yourself vulnerable to being outplayed. It’s going to be very hard to bet if the flop contains three cards that don’t help your hand. If you check, your opponent will likely make a continuation bet, and you’ll be hard-pressed to continue, even though Ace-high might be good. In spots like this, your best move is to press an edge while you have it – before the flop. Re-raise all-in pre-flop. Your opponent probably won’t have a hand that he can call with and, if he does, you’ll have plenty of outs. You still have about a 25% chance against AK, for example. Not good, but not dead. The important thing to keep in mind is that, in the later stages of a tournament, you don’t want to make many decisions after the flop when you have a medium-strength hand like Ace-middle kicker or middle pocket pair, and you’re playing out of position. Put your chips in while you think you have the best of it, and hope for the best. If you let these marginal but good situations pass you by, you might regret it later when your stack has been whittled down even further.
|
|
Beginners come to poker thinking that the bluff has one simple purpose: To take pots when you don’t have a hand that can win at showdown. In No-Limit Hold ’em, however, the bluff can be used in many different ways. As a recent tip by Huck Seed pointed out, a good player can use the threat of a bluff to force an opponent into making a very bad call. For this tip, I thought I’d show another way you can use the bluff to your advantage. Using this technique, you’ll neither be bluffing nor threatening to bluff, but rather, you’ll be convincing an opponent to bluff in a situation where you almost certainly have the best hand. Say you’re playing a game of No-Limit Hold ’em and you raise in middle position with Kh-Qh. You’re called by two players – one behind you and one in the blind. You’re thrilled to see the flop: 2h-7h-Th. You flopped a flush. The big blind checks to you and you bet. (Note that I highly recommend betting in this sort of situation. Betting the made hand often does more to disguise the strength of your holding than slow playing does.) Your bet is called by the late position player. What’s he calling with? Maybe he has a Ten or the Ah. The turn is a blank, the 3c. You bet again, and once again are called. Now the river is another blank, the 4d, making the board 2h-7h-Th-3c-4d. What’s your play? On the river you should consider checking – but not because you’re worried that your opponent has a better hand. Rather, since your opponent called on the turn, you have to consider what he may have. It’s hard to bluff on three consecutive streets, and most players won’t launch that third bullet. So, after calling you on the flop and turn, your opponent may look at something like top pair and give up, thinking that you must have him beat if you’re willing to fire at this pot three times. Or, if he only has the Ah, he’ll have no choice but to fold. Either way, there’ll be essentially no way for you to get any value out of the hand by betting. If you check, however, you let your opponent stab at the pot. If he’s got just the Ah, he may be inclined to see your check as a sign of weakness. He’ll fire at the pot in desperation, hopeful that he can force a fold. Then you’ll call and take a nice pot. Remember, your opponent’s broken draws offer great opportunities for you to induce bluffs. When you have a hand and you appear to be up against a draw that doesn’t get there by the river, you stand to make the most by checking to your opponent, who can then do his best to pick up the pot by betting. It’s a great technique, and yet another way you can use the bluff to your advantage.
|
| I play in some of the biggest cash games in the world. Usually, these games are loaded with pros – folks who know the intricacies and advanced strategies of pretty much every poker game. We normally play a mix of games that can include Hold ‘em, 7-Stud, Omaha, and one or more of the Hi/Lo variations. Most of the time, we play with a fixed-limit betting structure.
In a recent session, I had a stretch where I was pretty card dead, so I spent most of my time folding. To my knowledgeable opponents, it must have appeared that I was playing especially tight. Then in a game of 7-Stud, I was dealt an Ace as my up-card. The bring-in bet had been raised and I re-raised. Then, two top-rate pros with no more than their antes in the pot called my re-raise. There are only a couple of hands that might justify their calls. However, as the hand proceeded with me as the aggressor, it became clear that the callers of my third-street re-raise didn’t have much at all. One held three unconnected hearts, the other had a middle pair with no kicker. What were these guys thinking? It’s hard to know, but my guess is that one of them let his desire to gamble get the better of him. Though that can pay dividends in well-chosen spots, this wasn’t one of them. The other might have thought he could outplay me later in the hand. In the end, neither of their strategies makes much sense. I made it expensive enough that it was a lousy spot to gamble, and given that I’ve declared that I have a pair of aces, there’s little chance that I’m going to get bluffed out of the pot. I think this hand highlights a couple of the mental traps that sometimes snag advanced players. As players improve, they inevitably see more opportunities for profit, and thus, see potential in a greater number of hands. But it’s a slippery slope, and a player can easily lose the long view and convince himself that he can make any starting hand work out. This just isn’t the case – especially when playing fixed-limit games. Even at the highest levels, profitability in limit poker is largely determined by a player’s ability to choose the right starting hands. If you fail in this regard or somehow lose your discipline, it’s nearly impossible to recover. Fancy plays and good decisions on later streets cannot overcome early-hand mistakes. If you’re throwing money into a pot when you shouldn’t, you’re going to lose money. There’s no way around it. If you find yourself in a stretch where things aren’t going especially well, take a step back and make sure your hand selection is all it ought to be. Review the previous tips from the other Full Tilt Poker pros. Jennifer Harman has written on hand selection in Stud-8,Omaha-8, Razz, and Perry Friedman has written about third street decisions in 7-Stud. Always remember that in limit poker, hand selection is the foundation for your entire game. You can’t build a solid game on a weak foundation.
|
|
Deception is a vital tactic in poker. Usually, when a player talks about a deceptive play, he’s referring to a bluff – a time when he represented a hand of greater value than the one he held. But this isn’t the only deception available in poker – not by a long shot. If you study your opportunities thoroughly, you can use the threat of a bluff to engage in another type of deception, one in which you’re trying to convince an opponent that you are bluffing when, in fact, you have a great hand. Say you’re playing in a No-Limit cash game and things are going well. You’ve been playing actively and aggressively. You’ve been firing at a lot of pots, using a combination of good cards and well-timed small bluffs to pick up a number of them. To your tablemates, it seems as if you’re trying to capture every chip on the table. They’re starting to grow suspicious and feel you’re getting greedy. With the table in this mindset, you call a middle position raise from the big blind. You’re holding modest cards – 6d-8d. The flop comes 7c-4h-Qs. You now have a gutshot straight draw and check. You’re opponent bets half the pot and you call, feeling that if you hit, you can win a big pot. The turn is the Tc. Now you have a double gutshot draw – any 5 or 9 will make a straight. At this point, put out a large bet. If your opponent holds Jacks or Ace-King, he’ll likely fold. If he’s got Aces or Kings, he’ll probably call. And, if so, you’ll know he holds a good hand that he’s willing to defend. The river brings a 9, completing your straight. Now you can use you’re aggressive image to your advantage. Move all-in, even if the bet is two, three or four times the size of the pot. To your opponent, it’s bound to look like a bluff. Your bet will seem ridiculously large and impulsive. If you had the nuts, he’d reason, you’d bet smaller, trying to get some value. He’ll look at his big pocket pair, feeling that he needs to make a stand against your relentless play. This deceptive play where you’re actually representing a bluff will give you a chance to win a huge pot. If your opponent folds, you’ll want to make a note. You’ll know he folded a big hand and might be willing to make other lay downs in the future. But, you don’t want to push this guy too hard. If you force him to make two or three big lay downs, he’s sure to call you down later. When he’s reached that state of mind, make sure you have a big hand the next time you play a pot together. No-Limit poker offers some great opportunities for deception. As you develop your game, look for spots where bluffs and the threat of bluffs can win you big pots.
|
|
Many of the people crowding the tournament circuit these days developed their interest in serious poker from watching broadcasts of the World Poker Tour and the World Series of Poker. With hole cards shown as the hands are played out, viewers get to see how the best players in the world ply their craft. They can then apply the lessons they’ve learned in their own play. In the last couple of years, I’ve noticed that some of the less experienced players who have entered $10,000 buy-in tournaments don’t fully appreciate what they’ve seen on TV. Many are apt to misapply the techniques they’ve witnessed. As a result, these players find themselves on the rail early, wondering why a move that worked so well for Phil Ivey or Chris Ferguson had such disastrous results for them. To avoid falling into this trap yourself, take note of two key pieces of information the next time you sit down to watch the WPT or WSOP: The number of players at the table and the stack sizes relative to the blinds. World Poker Tour final-table broadcasts start when six players remain. Through the vast majority of tournaments, however, tables are nine or 10-handed. When 10 people are at the table, you always need to be concerned that someone holds a big pocket pair or Ace-King. As a result, most good players tend to be cautious at full tables. They won’t get themselves in a lot of trouble with speculative hands like a middle pocket pair or Ace-10. At a short-handed table, however, the chances of running into a big hand are greatly diminished. When play is three- or four-handed, a pro will likely play a hand like pocket 9s very aggressively. Usually, in the late stages of tournaments, the blinds are extremely high when compared to the size of the stacks. For example, in the recent WPT event from the Gold Strike in Tunica, when four players remained, the average stack had about 1.4 Million in chips. This may sound like a lot but, at that time, the blinds were 30,000 and 60,000 with a 10,000 ante. The short stacks, who had less than 1 Million each, couldn’t afford to be patient. If they failed to play for a mere 20 hands, their stacks would be cut in half. As blinds increase, good players get more aggressive, making frequent pre-flop raises while attempting to steal the blinds and antes. They know that if they sit and wait for top-quality hands, the blinds and antes will decimate their stacks. At these stages of tournaments, you’ll see a lot of attempted steals with second-rate hands. Other good players, fully aware that their opponents may be raising with very little, might re-raise or fight back from the blinds with similarly modest holdings. Short tables and high blinds create settings that necessitate near constant aggression and continual action. So, for example, when you see a pro re-raise all-in from the blinds with pocket 7s, it’s likely he’s properly considered the situation and has made the best available play. He’s thought about the short table and high blinds, determined that he probably has the best hand and, most importantly, that his opponent likely can’t call the re-raise. The same player would treat the same hand very differently at an earlier stage of the tournament. The final factor to consider when watching televised poker is that the shows are highly edited. At this year’s WSOP, it sometimes took 15 hours and hundreds of hands to determine a winner. On ESPN, they usually include about 20 hands in an hour-long broadcast. So, you can be sure that much of the context if missing from these telecasts. A call or re-raise that seemed odd on TV may have made perfect sense in the course of the event. For instance, if an aggressive player raised eight consecutive times on the button, the big blind may have decided that he had to fight back with rags, just to let his opponent know that he was willing to take a stand. It’s not a play that person would normally make, and it may look strange on TV but, in context, the re-raise with 8-high made perfect sense. I suggest that you TiVo the next poker event you plan to watch. Keep track of the number of players and the size of the blinds. By paying attention to the details, the big picture will likely become clearer.
|
|
There’s no question that aggressive poker is winning poker. If the world’s top players have only one thing in common, it’s that they take control of the hands they play with bets and raises. Usually, among the world’s poker elite, calling is the least attractive option. For this tip, however, I thought I’d talk about a couple of instances when playing passively – just checking and calling bets – may be the preferred option. Top Pair, Favorable Board Say I’m in the early stages of a tournament and I have an ample stack. I find Ace-Jack in middle position and raise to three times the big blind. A player in late position, who I know to be solid but fairly aggressive, calls my raise, and everyone else folds. The flop comes As-4d-8h. I’ve got top-pair, with a decent kicker. First, I want to think about the hands my opponent might hold. It’s likely he called my raise with an Ace or a pocket pair, maybe in the range of 66-99. He may have also called with two high cards like KQ, KJ or QJ. In this situation, I’m likely very far ahead or hopelessly behind if my opponent hit a set or has a bigger Ace. If he’s got an Ace with a worse kicker, he’s drawing to only three outs. If he’s got a pocket pair like 77, he has only two outs. With just two face cards, he’s almost drawing dead. And on this board (As-4d-8h), I don’t need to be especially worried about straight or flush draws. Because of this, I don’t mind giving my opponent a free card. If I bet my top pair and my opponent holds a pocket pair, he’s likely to fold, and I’ll have failed to get any additional value out of my hand. If I check, however, I give this player the chance to bluff or bet his lesser Ace, and I can then call. Ideally, I want to get one decent-sized bet in over the course of this hand and by checking, I prevent my opponent from giving me more action than my hand can handle. Say the turn is 3c. The situation hasn’t changed much. I’m still either way ahead or very far behind. I can check again, and allow my opponent to bluff. On most river cards, if we have checked the hand down, I will generally bet. If we’ve put one bet in, I’ll probably check-call, and if we’ve put in two, I’ll likely check and fold. Playing the hand in this manner provides three advantages. It allows me to get good value out of a strong hand, and it also keeps me from losing more than I need to against a hand that has mine beat without too much risk. Additionally, playing this way gives my opponent the opportunity to bluff, which is the only way to get any money out of him if he holds a hand like QJ. Decent Hand, Scary Board Here’s another early tournament situation where my opponents and I have relatively deep stacks. Say I’m holding pocket 8s in middle position and a player has raised pre-flop from early position. I call the raise and a player in late position calls as well. The three of us see a flop of Jd-Jc-4s. There’s a decent chance that my 8s are good, but I want to proceed cautiously, as either of the other players in the hand could hold a Jack. Say that all three of us check this flop. I really haven’t learned too much, because someone could be slow playing trip Jacks. The turn comes 6h. This doesn’t look like it would have helped anyone’s hand, but the pre-flop raiser bets from early position. This is a spot where I’d likely just call. There are a couple of advantages to just calling in this situation. First, it doesn’t over-commit me to the pot. If the player in late position raises, I can muck having lost a minimum number of chips. Secondly, the call is going to look very scary to my opponents. They might be thinking that I’m the one slow playing trip Jacks. So, even if the early position player holds a higher pocket pair, he’s likely to check on the river no matter what card hits. At that point, I can show down my 8s and see if they are in fact the best hand. The problem with this play relative to the last one is that I am probably giving my opponent six outs to catch up and beat my hand if he has two over-cards, as opposed to two or three outs in the previous example. I don’t play passively often, but under the right circumstances, just calling bets can provide good value while minimizing risk. For another perspective on passive play, be sure to read the lesson entitled In Defense of the Call by Gavin Smith.
|
|
These days, it seems like you can’t walk through a bookstore without tripping over a poker strategy book. How do you play A-K in early position short-handed? Should you raise with suited connectors on the button after the big stack smooth calls? When is it right to slow play pocket aces? There are now dozens of books written by expert poker players that will answer all of those questions. I’ve seen entire chapters devoted to playing certain hands in particular circumstances. And while it’s useful to understand why these authors make the suggestions they do, it’s more important to realize that all of these questions have the same answer: It depends. Poker is a game of infinite complexity. Players like Chris Ferguson can calculate the odds of almost any situation, but there are no hard, fast rules for how to play a specific hand. The math matters, but if you want to take your game to the next level, you need to start working on three things: Creativity, imagination, and flexibility. There are many successful styles that work in poker. From the seemingly reckless manner of Gus Hanson (there is a method to his apparent madness), to the tightly disciplined systems of David Skalansky, your goal should be to experiment with different ways of playing. Once you’ve started doing that, you need to figure out which style will work best for you and the situation at hand. If the game is too loose, it’s often right to play fewer cards. If the table is a rock garden, you can sometimes get away with bluffing more. The key is not to be stuck to some plan that is “always right,” but to redefine yourself in each given situation. Learning how to adjust your play takes practice. Shorthanded play is a great opportunity to test your creativity because you have more decisions to make. You can also invest time playing single table sit & gos, where the increasing blinds force you to play more hands against your opponents. Imagination is at the heart of the game. Just as there is no right way to write a song or paint a picture, there is no right way to play poker. The best players are experimenting and adjusting all the time. The beauty of the game lies in this ever-shifting landscape, and it keeps us interested each time we sit down.
|
|
As a writer covering the poker circuit, I wasn’t surprised to see that John D’Agostino took second in the Borgata Winter Open, netting more than half a million dollars. John is widely considered one of the great, young, all-around players in the game. He’s equally comfortable playing limit and no-limit, cash games, and tournaments. I got a particularly close look at John’s play a week prior to Borgata, when we shared a table in Tunica at the $10,000 buy-in World Poker Tour event. John didn’t cash in that event, but during the hours we played together, I witnessed many qualities that make him a great player – here are three of them. Overcoming a Tough Stretch In Tunica, the players started with 20,000 chips. Within the first blind level, almost half of John’s stack was gone. In a key hand, John made a tough lay down when he deduced that his high pocket pair hand had not survived to the river. A couple of difficult hands followed soon after. It was the kind of tournament start that dispirits others. After such a difficult opening, it’s not uncommon to see even very good players overwhelmed with resignation. I’ve heard players utter “It’s not my day.” At that point, they’re sealing their fate. John, however, settled in. He didn’t make unneeded moves that would decimate his stack. On his way to his second-place finish at Borgata, John was able to deal with a far greater level of adversity. With 25 players remaining, John was the chip leader, holding nearly one million in chips. A few tough hands and four hours later, John held only 280,000 chips and was in twelfth place with 16 players remaining. Despite these setbacks, he didn’t tilt – he focused and made good decisions. He waited for his spots and was able to build his stack back. During Tunica, John was keenly aware of his own stack and the stacks of others. After the tough early hands, he was quiet while waiting for a spot to double up. He didn’t rush it. He knew that he held more than 20 big blinds in his stack and could wait for the right opportunity. He wasn’t forced to push in on Ace-Nine or a pair of 3s. Once he managed to build himself back, he was on the hunt, looking for stacks to attack. Sadly for me, he noticed that I had become the table short stack. John was in late position when I had the big blind, and he let no opportunity go by to attack my blind. With only 20 big blinds, I couldn’t afford to fight back without a premium hand, as any decision I’d make would be for my tournament life. John was the only one at the table (other than me) who seemed fully aware of the situation. Others were far more focused on their own cards, rather than on the other factors that would give them opportunities to pick up pots. Inscrutable Behaviors In Tunica, most of the players at my table offered a treasure trove of information. They varied their bet sizes pre-flop – a little higher when they didn’t want action, a little lower when they welcomed it. Their arm and hand movements varied wildly from hand to hand. With time, one could draw fairly accurate conclusions based on such tells. John, however, offered nothing. When he open-raised, he did so for three times the big blind every time. His motions seemed nearly identical to me time after time. If I tried to read his facial expression, I got only a view of his downcast eyes as he stared vacantly at the felt. As far as I could tell, there was nothing to learn. The Tunica event didn’t go well for me, but I leaned a lot from watching John. Without question, observing the pros is one the easiest ways to improve one’s game.
|
|
There are four possible outcomes for any session of poker. You might win a little, lose a little, win a lot, or lose a lot. Most of us react differently to the different outcomes. When we win big, we’re elated; when we lose big we’re upset. Think back to some recent bad beats. Do you recall feeling a rush of adrenaline and an overwhelming sense of rage? If you haven’t encountered this, you’re lucky; most players have. I believe that reactions at the poker table are so strong because the game taps into a very primal portion of our brains. In poker, we’re fighting for something we view as critical – money. In these days of relative safety and comfort, our battles at the poker table are as close as we get to the life-and-death struggles that our ancient ancestors encountered. Eons ago, the adrenaline served a purpose – it triggered a response critical to survival. Without thought or reason, ancient man knew two things: Fight or flee. The quick surge of panic and anger kept the species alive. At the poker table, however, the same response serves no useful purpose. You can’t beat the dealer over the head with a rock. Screaming in panic and running from the room isn’t a great idea either. So most of us just steam – we tilt. With no outlet for the excess chemicals, we sit at the table, angry, while our judgment becomes clouded. Maybe we blast off some money or run a ridiculous bluff as a way to relieve the pressure. The thing is, you need to overcome these instinctual reactions if you’re going to become a consistent winner at poker. It’s not easy to control the instinctual part of your brain, but it’s something that you can work on every time you play poker. Endeavor to leave each session in the same emotional state. If you win big, keep yourself from getting too excited. Remind yourself that this is just one session that has gone well, and that another is bound to go poorly. Reverse the argument after a big loss. I believe that if you commit to engaging the thinking, reasoning portion of your brain at every opportunity you can, in time, overcome the primal reactions. It isn’t easy. Some players with incredible mastery of the game are long-term losers because they can’t get a handle on their emotions. Embrace the challenge of evening your emotional responses. It may be the most important thing you can do to improve your poker results.
|
|
You’ll be seeing a lot of me on next year’s World Poker Tour broadcasts. So far in the 2005-2006 schedule, I’ve made three final tables. I won the Mirage event, finished third at the Bellagio and fourth in Tunica. When you see a broadcast that features my play, you may be left scratching your head, asking, “Why the heck is that guy playing those cards?” There’s no question that I do play an unconventional game. But, there is a method to my madness. I play a style that’s usually referred to as “small-pot poker.” Using this approach, I’m looking to pick up a lot of small pots by applying a constant level of pressure to my opponents. Pre-flop, I raise frequently, especially in position. My raises are small, usually around two-and-a-half times the big blind, as opposed to the customary three or four times the big blind. I’ll raise with a huge variety of hands – everything from big pocket pairs to “junk” hands, like 6d-4d, or 5c-8c. Usually, I’ll miss the flop when I raise with junk. In fact, two-thirds of the time, I won’t make as much as a pair. But here’s the thing: If someone called my pre-flop raise, he’s also going to miss the flop most of the time. When we both miss, I have a distinct advantage. As the pre-flop aggressor, I have control of the hand. Most of the time (as much as 90 percent of the time), I’ll follow up my pre-flop aggression by betting roughly half to two-thirds of the pot on the flop. A good percentage of the time, this bet will be enough to take down the small pot. Let me give you an example. Imagine that you’re playing in the big blind and you hold Ks-Qs. I raise in late position to two-and-a-half. K-Q suited is a pretty decent hand against someone like me, who has been raising constantly. Still, it’s not necessarily a hand you want to risk your whole tournament on. So you call. When you opt to just call, I put you in a position where you really need to hit the flop. If the flop is all rags, you need to be worried that I made two-pair with 4-7. Or, if there’s an Ace on the flop, you need to be concerned, since I could be holding a real hand. Most of the time, you’ll end up surrendering the hand to my bet on the flop. If you do hit a hand – say the flop comes K-Q-4 – that’s fine. With my playing style, I’m accustomed to getting check-raised a lot. But that’s okay, too. I didn’t risk a whole lot with my bets, so I can just surrender the hand and look for better spots down the line. There are a couple of other advantages that come with playing this style. One is that no one ever puts me on a big hand pre-flop. So, when I do pick up pocket Aces or Kings, my hand is well disguised. My opponents are willing to call with marginal hands (like the aforementioned K-Q) and maybe get themselves in a lot of trouble. If someone does flop top pair when I hold an overpair, it’s likely I’m going to get a big portion of his stack. The other great benefit comes when I hold junk and hit the flop hard. When I raise with 5-7 and flop a straight, an opponent holding pocket Jacks is going to be in a lot of trouble. Some of the best tournament players around – Daniel Negreanu, Gus Hansen and Phil Hellmuth among them – employ some version of the small pot approach. Is it the right method for you? That’s something you’ll have to find out for yourself. I do, however, caution beginners from trying this style as it requires a lot of difficult decisions (what do you do with top-pair bad-kicker on an 8-high flop, for example). These are answers that sometimes come easier to more experienced players who have developed a feel for the game. Still, you can give small-pot poker a shot. Register for a low buy-in tournament online and mix up your game. If the tournament doesn’t go so well, you’ll only be out a small buy-in.
|
|
I’m writing from Tunica, MS, where I’ve played in several World Series of Poker Circuit events at the Grand Hotel and Casino. A couple of days ago, I played in a $2,000 No-Limit Hold ’em tournament, and I saw some of my opponents make some pretty odd plays. For this tip, I decided to highlight a couple of these strange decisions and describe why you should avoid making similar plays. A Curious River Raise Midway through the tournament, I saw King-9 in the cutoff (the seat to the immediate right of the button). I raised to put some pressure on the blinds, and I was called by the big blind. The flop came T-5-2 rainbow, so it was no help to me. My opponent checked, and I checked behind him. The turn was a 9, giving me a pair. He checked, and I made a small bet that he then called. The river was a King and I now had two pair. After my opponent checked and, thinking that I had the best hand, I made a substantial bet. At this point, he surprised me and made a large raise. I was reasonably sure I was up against a set or Q-J for the straight, but still, I made the crying call. He showed pocket Aces and I took a nice pot. What should my opponent have done? For starters, he could have re-raised pre-flop, though calling pre-flop was certainly reasonable. He also could have taken the lead in the betting on the flop or the turn, not allowing free cards to hit the board. However, his real trouble came on the river. When he check-raised, he failed to ask himself a critical question: What hand can I call with that he could beat? His river check-raise showed a lot of strength – so much, in fact, that I probably wouldn’t have called with any one pair. By the river, he really had no idea what I was holding. For all he knew, I could have had Queen-Jack or any sort of two pair. If I held the straight, he’d be facing a very large raise, one that would certainly be a mistake to call. In this sort of situation, his best play was to check-call on the river. By the time the river card hit, he should have been looking to showdown the hand with the hope that his pair survived. While here, I’ve seen many players make similar mistakes on the river. They bet or raised with any hand that they suspected was best, including marginal cards like second pair. But their big mistake was that they failed to consider their opponent’s hand. When you hold marginal cards, you should ask yourself two important questions: Do I have the best hand? And, if I do, does my opponent hold a hand that he’s willing to call with? If you can’t answer “yes” to both questions, just check the river and showdown the hand. Trouble on the Turn Later in the tournament, I raised pre-flop in late position with King-6 and the big blind called me. The flop came Ac-As-7s. I didn’t have an Ace, but I bet anyway when my opponent checked. After he smooth-called and a 6h came up on the turn, my opponent bet big. This play makes no sense because it doesn’t tell a coherent story. A check-raise on the flop would be reasonable – my opponent would be representing a big hand, maybe trip Aces. A check-call on the turn would make sense, too. In that case, he probably holds a monster like a full house or he could just have a seven. As it turned out, my opponent had A-7 (that’s what he said, anyway), and by betting he forced me to fold. That wasn’t very smart. If he checked, I might have continued with my bluff (though that-s unlikely). In any case, it’s almost never a good idea to check-call a flop bet, and then bet the turn if a blank hits. A play like that might confuse your opponent momentarily, but you’re unlikely to gain much value. Your flop and turn bets should be related – they should tell a consistent story. If you think carefully about your turn and river bets and what you’re trying to gain, you’re sure to improve your results. You’ll get better value on the turn and avoid drowning on the river. See you at the next tournament stop.
|
| “Poker is a tough business,” says Erik Seidel. “You can go through long streaks when you don’t win anything.” When things go badly, when you can’t seem to cash in a tournament or win a significant pot in a cash game, you come to understand the importance of maintaining an adequate bankroll.
Just how big should your bankroll be? How much money do you need to ensure that a bad run won’t put you on the rail? We Full Tilt Poker pros agree that the answer depends on a number of factors, including the types of games you’re playing, the level of competition you’re encountering, and your psychological disposition. As Jennifer Harman says, “Some players can be effective on a relatively short bankroll, but others need more of a cushion. They’ll get stressed out and play scared if they don’t have enough money behind them.” So you need to be aware of your comfort level at the table. If you’re nervous about what you stand to lose in a given pot, you’re probably playing too high for your bankroll. Harman, like most Team Full Tilt members, recommends a conservative approach and suggests maintaining a bankroll that leaves plenty of room for downswings. “If you’re playing $10-$20 limit, I think $10,000 is about right,” says Harman. John D’Agostino agrees, “You should never play a limit where you feel uncomfortable.” He suggests that a player shouldn’t put more than five percent of his bankroll in play at any time. The need for a sizable bankroll exits for tournament play as well as cash games. Erik Seidel, a tournament specialist, notes that long droughts are common for tournament professionals and that entry fees can add up quickly. “If you were to play all of the $10,000 buy-in events, you could spend half a million over the course of year,” says Seidel. “Even top players can have years when then don’t cash for $100,000, so having a proper bankroll is critical.” “You need a much bigger bankroll in tournaments than you do is side games,” agrees Chris Ferguson. “A lot of people play tournaments without nearly enough. You easily need 100 buy-ins. Maybe 200.” Playing over your bankroll is fine once in awhile, but all the pros concur that it’s important to leave yourself plenty of money to recover from unlucky hands and the occasional mistake. D’Agostino, one of the top young players in poker, offers one further tip for hanging on to your money. “Don’t play Phil Ivey heads up. I tried that once and I failed miserably.”
|
|
In an earlier tip, I gave advice for playing Stud-8 or Better. For this article, I’ll look at the other popular hi/lo split game, Omaha-8 or Better. In my article on Stud-8, I encouraged players to look for hands that have the possibility of scooping entire pots. The same goes for Omaha-8: whenever possible, you need to position yourself to take every chip from a big pot. The best Omaha-8 hands have four cards that work together. Something like Ad-Ks-2d-4s is a terrific hand. It gives opportunities for high hands with flushes and straights. It’s also likely to make a winning low. When you see a hand with this sort of potential, play it aggressively pre-flop. You also want to play hands like Ad-2c-3h-5s, Ad-2c-3s-8c, and Ah-2d-3c-Qc, but since these hands don’t have as many opportunities to make great highs, you may not want to be as aggressive. Some players overvalue any hand that contains A-2. For example, a hand like Ah-2c-8s-Jd isn’t all that great. It’s got a chance to win the low half of a pot, but it’s unlikely to make a decent high. Another problem is that a hand with A-2 and not much else is in danger of “getting quartered.” That means if another player holds A-2, you’ll only win half of the low half. Getting quartered in a big Omaha-8 hand isn’t much fun. That warning aside, in very loose Omaha-8 games where six or seven players are seeing every flop, you should play most hands that have A-2. The pots will be large enough to justify playing for only the low half of the pot. But even in a multi-way pot, there’s no need to play every hand with A-2 aggressively. When you have little chance of winning a high, you’re better off seeing a flop cheaply. In tight games, where only two or three players are contesting most pots, you can muck a hand like Ah-2c-8s-Jd pre-flop. When the pots are small, you don’t want to get involved in any confrontation where you have little chance of making a good high hand. Many players undervalue hands that contain four high cards. For example, a hand like K-Q-J-T is a solid Omaha-8 hand. Any flop that has two cards above a 9 will give K-Q-J-T a straight draw, two-pair, or a set. On such a flop, there probably won’t be a qualifying low, so there’s a great chance to scoop. (In Omaha-8, three of the board cards must be 8 or below for anyone to make a low that can take half the pot.) If the flop has three low cards, you can abandon K-Q-J-T, knowing that it’s got essentially no chance to win. Should you find yourself playing a hand with four high cards, don’t be seduced by a flop that gives you only top pair. A flop of K-5-2 is not good if you’re holding K-Q-J-T. With such a flop, you can be pretty sure that some of your opponents are playing the low end of the deck and are working on powerful lows and straight draws. In fact, in multi-way pots, you should be wary of any single pair or even two-pair. It usually takes a strong hand to take the high-half of a multi-way Omaha-8 pot; a five-card hand – a straight, flush or full house is often necessary to win. Omaha-8 attracts players who love to play pots. Many draw too frequently and play hands that can only get them in trouble. If you learn to play Omaha-8, you can take advantage of these loose players and turn a solid profit.
|
|
Most poker literature warns of the dangers of becoming a calling station. Common wisdom has it that when you’re playing a hand, you should be betting, raising or folding. Calling is usually considered the worst thing you can do. I disagree. When I play in No-Limit Hold ’em tournaments, I find a lot of situations where calling is the best available option. A strategic call might keep me from going broke in a hand where I hold a good, but second-best hand. Or, a well-timed call might allow me to pick up a pot with a hand that wouldn’t win at showdown. Take a look at the following examples. I think you’ll see that the call is a powerful and underutilized weapon. Say you’re in the middle stages of a tournament and you have a stack that is slightly above average. A tight player opens in early position for a raise of three times the big blind. You look at your cards and see pocket Tens. You probably don’t want to fold Tens. It might be as good a hand as you’ve seen in a long while, and it may very well be the best hand at that moment. Many people would say that, in this situation, you should throw in a large re-raise. But the re-raise can be dangerous. Depending on the size of your stack, you could end up committed to the pot and have no choice but to call if your opponent moves all-in. If that happens, you’re probably up against a higher pair or, at best, A-K. You never want to commit all your chips when you’re either a small favorite or a big underdog. If, however, you just call the open-raise, you’ll have a far better opportunity to make a good decision after the flop. The flop might come A-Q-7, at which point, you can fold to any bet, knowing there’s essentially no chance your hand is best. Should you see a flop of 4-4-6 and your opponent bets, you can raise. Most opponents holding only A-K would fold at that point. If your opponent then moves all-in, you can be pretty sure that your Tens are no good. You can fold, having preserved a good portion of your stack. However the hand plays out, you’re sure to have a lot more information to work with if you just call the pre-flop raise. You’ll get to see three of the five community cards before you commit the bulk of your stack. You’ll also force your opponent to react to the flop. His action – his bet or check – is sure to help you determine the strength of his hand. Here’s another situation where calling pre-flop has great advantages. Say you’re in late position with pocket 7s and a player from middle position open-raises. For the sake of this example, assume that the opponent holds pocket Jacks. The flop comes A-K-4. It’s nearly impossible for the player with Jacks to continue with the hand. A good percentage of the time, this player will check. When that happens, you can bet representing the Ace, which will probably force a fold. You’ll have earned a pot by outplaying your opponent. There’s no better feeling in poker. These are just a couple of simple examples, but I want to make the larger point. A lot of beginners seem eager to make all of their plays before the flop. On any decent hand, they’re raising and re-raising, doing their best to get all-in. I believe that playing after the flop opens up opportunities for tough lay downs and good bluffs that aren’t available pre-flop. Playing post-flop is actually a lot of fun. In your next tournament, try some calls in spots where you might have re-raised. I think you’ll enjoy the experience.
|
|
My first poker experiences were in the low-limit 7-Stud games at Commerce Casino in Los Angeles. From the start, poker was an important part of my income. It had to be. I couldn’t afford to go broke. I needed to avoid the fate that hit many of the good players around me. They experienced massive swings in fortune — one day they’re playing in the big games, the next they’re on the rail, trying to scrape together enough money for a buy-in. Early in my poker career I set a simple rule for myself: I would never move to a higher limit until I won three consecutive sessions. If I lost three consecutive sessions at a given limit, I would move down to a lower limit. It took discipline to stick to my rule. For a very long time – years, in fact – I never made it beyond the low-limit tables. I couldn’t put together three consecutive wins. It was frustrating, but it was a great learning experience. By the time I made it to higher limits, I was a seasoned, experienced player who could deal with the intense competition I encountered. Another nice thing about using such a patient approach was that I always had comfortable padding in my bankroll. In those early years, I may have had a hard time winning three sessions in a row, but I was beating the games regularly. I could pay my rent and add to my bank. When I moved to higher limits, I had plenty of money to sustain myself through any bad runs. In any case, if a lousy run of cards lasted three sessions, I’d back down to a limit where I was risking less. I know a lot of players who have a hard time using an approach like mine. Most can’t step back because they feel a lower-limit game is beneath them. Their egos tie up their heads and they try to prove themselves against better players. They end up playing higher than they can afford, in games that are tough to beat, and they wind up broke. As a professional, I don’t play for ego. I play for money. As Paul Wolfe recently pointed out, often a smaller game offers a better opportunity for profit. Think about incorporating something like my three-win, three-loss rule in your own play. Stepping down a level when things go bad will not only preserve your bankroll, it will sharpen your skills and build your confidence. When you step up, you’ve got the momentum of a winning streak behind you. You’ll be playing your best – ready for higher stakes and sharper players. |
Super Welcome Bonus
Open a new account today at Sky Poker and enter promo code 'POKER' and you will automatically get a £5 No Deposit Bonus and entered into 2x£2500 New Player Freerolls
Check the site for details.
