There’s a scenario that happens surprisingly often in online single-table tournaments which used to bother me but since I have found it can set the table for a profitable session I‘ve come to enjoy it.
Here’s the scenario. Early in the tournament 2 or 3 players end up with lots of chips in the pot, raise before the flop, healthy betting after the flop, turn and river. At the showdown you find out that 1 or 2 players had legitimate hands and 1 donkey was on a wing and a prayer, significantly behind until he hit a runner-runner 3 outer to win the hand.
When I first started playing online I found this scenario and the donkey frustrating and annoying even when I wasn’t in the pot. Now I have sort of come to expect to see that kind of play every now and again and actually have found it can be quite helpful as long as I wasn’t the player who got burned. Here’s why.
When that kind of scenario plays out here’s some of what happens.
1) A bad player has a lot of chips.
2) He took them from a player(s) who appears to be at least decent.
3) Who would you rather battle, a guy who has chips because he plays well or a guy who has chips because he got lucky and is clearly a donkey?
4) Much of the attention of the table is on the player(s) who took the bad beat and the donkey who laid the beating. Sounds like you’re under the radar doesn’t it? Since your objective is to win the tournament not to be the center of attention, that’s probably a good thing.
5) You’ve got at least one decent player who might be fuming, most people don’t make their best decisions after taking a bad beat. Don’t get me wrong, some people recover alright but I still think this can tilt things in your favor a little.
When I face this scenario I tighten my game, pick my spots a little more carefully and push a little harder when feeling good about a hand. So far that strategy has worked out alright and I save myself the aggravation of being annoyed by how some people play.
Qualify for the WSOP at PokerStars.com. Sign up now!
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
A few of my poker beliefs
I thought today I'd share some of my poker beliefs.
I don’t believe poker is a game of chance despite the fact that luck is involved.
I don’t believe you can make any decision without having all of the information. For example, new players will often ask me something like this - I had J 9 suited in the small blind, the player before me put in a minimum raise, I called, and that was okay wasn’t it? The only possible answer I can give to a question like that is maybe. There are simply way too many other factors I would need to have information on before I could tell you what I “think” was the right play.
I don’t believe you should get angry at the person who is willing to pay a lot for a draw. You might not like the outcome 20% of the time (or so) but if you want to sit at my table and my game and pay for draws all night, then pull up a chair and make yourself comfy. Can I get you a drink?
I believe your buy in gives you the right to play your game the way you like. I really get frustrated by people who get angry because someone at the table made a particular decision. I have seen A LOT of decisions that made me scratch my head (at the poker table and in every other area of my life) but that’s life.
I believe it is poker not solitaire. I love this quote from Doyle Brunson as a response to a kid who put him all in, when Doyle called the kid asked in an angry tone "How could you call with that?" and Doyle responded "We're Playing poker, Not Solitaire!" That's poker is another one of my catch phrases, I usually pull this one out when I go in ahead and lose the hand ... it helps keep me sane.
I believe in not going broke in an unraised pot. I have heard different people try to explain this one but the way I take it and what I try to keep in mind is to not risk much on a small pot. Here's an extreme example of what I mean. I was watching/coaching my lady through a small stakes online 6 person tournament the other day, she picked up A 9 off suit in the big blind early in the tournament, blinds were 10-20, all 6 players had roughly the 1,500 chips they started with. There were 4 people (including her) in the hand for a total of 80 chips. The flop came A A A - no kidding, she flopped quad aces ... a rare thing to be sure. Right away I say to her CHECK THIS! Before I can get the words out the small blind goes all in! She calls, everyone else folds and the small blind turns over 4 5. Granted this was a $2 tournament and this is a really extreme example but I think it illustrates the concept of not going broke in an unraised pot. Wouldn't a pot sized bet have induced folds if he had stealing on his mind? Maybe.
Would love to hear any feedback you might have.
Qualify for the WSOP at PokerStars.com. Sign up now!
I don’t believe poker is a game of chance despite the fact that luck is involved.
I don’t believe you can make any decision without having all of the information. For example, new players will often ask me something like this - I had J 9 suited in the small blind, the player before me put in a minimum raise, I called, and that was okay wasn’t it? The only possible answer I can give to a question like that is maybe. There are simply way too many other factors I would need to have information on before I could tell you what I “think” was the right play.
I don’t believe you should get angry at the person who is willing to pay a lot for a draw. You might not like the outcome 20% of the time (or so) but if you want to sit at my table and my game and pay for draws all night, then pull up a chair and make yourself comfy. Can I get you a drink?
I believe your buy in gives you the right to play your game the way you like. I really get frustrated by people who get angry because someone at the table made a particular decision. I have seen A LOT of decisions that made me scratch my head (at the poker table and in every other area of my life) but that’s life.
I believe it is poker not solitaire. I love this quote from Doyle Brunson as a response to a kid who put him all in, when Doyle called the kid asked in an angry tone "How could you call with that?" and Doyle responded "We're Playing poker, Not Solitaire!" That's poker is another one of my catch phrases, I usually pull this one out when I go in ahead and lose the hand ... it helps keep me sane.
I believe in not going broke in an unraised pot. I have heard different people try to explain this one but the way I take it and what I try to keep in mind is to not risk much on a small pot. Here's an extreme example of what I mean. I was watching/coaching my lady through a small stakes online 6 person tournament the other day, she picked up A 9 off suit in the big blind early in the tournament, blinds were 10-20, all 6 players had roughly the 1,500 chips they started with. There were 4 people (including her) in the hand for a total of 80 chips. The flop came A A A - no kidding, she flopped quad aces ... a rare thing to be sure. Right away I say to her CHECK THIS! Before I can get the words out the small blind goes all in! She calls, everyone else folds and the small blind turns over 4 5. Granted this was a $2 tournament and this is a really extreme example but I think it illustrates the concept of not going broke in an unraised pot. Wouldn't a pot sized bet have induced folds if he had stealing on his mind? Maybe.
Would love to hear any feedback you might have.
Qualify for the WSOP at PokerStars.com. Sign up now!
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Poker and me
I spend a fair bit of time playing, thinking about, talking about, reading about and watching poker. I play online, in tournaments at a casino near my home and in a weekly home game. It’s a rare day that I don't play any poker. Mostly I play no limit Hold'em tournaments but I do play some cash games and I like to play some HORSE from time to time to sharpen my game. For those of you who don't know HORSE it's a game where the play changes every few blinds from Hold'em to Omaha (sometimes Hi/Low) followed by Razz, Seven Card Stud then Stud (Hi/Low "E"ights or lower - hence the E). I intend to use this blog to share my thoughts on a variety of poker topics and hopefully get some feedback from other players.
There are many adjectives people use when describing a poker player's style and approach to the game, I'll try to use a few of them to describe my game. Like most players with any experience worth talking about I mix it up and definitely do not play one style 100% of the time, in fact when I am playing well and seriously I will switch my style several times during a long tournament.
The "math" poker player. For this player it's all or at least mostly about odds, pot odds, implied odds, the odds that his opponent might be bluffing, the odds his opponent is holding what he is representing, the odds that he will hit the card(s) that will make his hand and likely see him take down the pot. I'd say I am about 30% that guy. I definitely find myself calculating the pot odds when contemplating a play, I think about implied odds when I am not the last to act and I think about how much I have to bet to give the odds I want to give to a player when forcing the action.
The "people" poker player. I am somewhat a people player but I find that term can be overused and misleading, but I'll still say I am 30% that guy. I'll hear someone who doesn't know much about poker say something like "don't play the cards, play the people". Well, the main problem with this approach is that poker is a game where deception is rewarded and any decent player will change their style from time to time. The other problem is that in order to play the people not the cards you have to have a pretty good sense of your opponent and in short online tournaments (where I spend a lot of my time) getting that kind of read is not always easy and a mistake can be costly.
The "situation" poker player. That's me more than any other style and in some ways the situation player is a combination of the math guy, people guy, blind stealer, bluffer and grinder who can play tight, aggressive or loose and switch gears at any time. This player makes decisions (and again this is mostly how I play) based on trying to interpret all of the things happening at the table.
Here are some of the things I think about while playing a hand. Position. I play position a lot, but keep in mind that as a situation guy my brain is trying to absorb a lot of info so position alone is not an easy thing to explain. For example, if I pick up a real premium hand like KK under the gun with 3 very loose pre-flop raisers behind me and one or more of them has a low chip count I might limp into the pot even though my preferred play by far is to raise in that situation. Other times I'll fire at the pot to try and take it down right then and there, depending on the situation.
Another important thing I think about is my image at the table. I am always aware of how many hands I play, am I limping into pots or pushing people around, how many times and how recently have I pushed someone off the pot without having to show my hand? I work at managing and or altering my image at the table a fair bit.
How the other players are playing and what is their image at the table? I look for all of the things mentioned above in other players. Is this guy a limper? How many times has he raised pre flop? How many chips does he have? Does someone have to stand up to him and put him in his place soon? Will it be me? Will he pay good money on a draw? Etc.
The fact of the matter is that many great books have been written about the complexities, subtleties and nuances of poker and that is not my intention with this blog. I guess I am simply using this first post to outline my approach to the game even more than my style of play. I like to think I am a cerebral player who tries to decipher all of the information available and use that info to make as many good decisions as possible and I suspect that should tell you a lot about me as a player.
Qualify for the WSOP at PokerStars.com. Sign up now!
There are many adjectives people use when describing a poker player's style and approach to the game, I'll try to use a few of them to describe my game. Like most players with any experience worth talking about I mix it up and definitely do not play one style 100% of the time, in fact when I am playing well and seriously I will switch my style several times during a long tournament.
The "math" poker player. For this player it's all or at least mostly about odds, pot odds, implied odds, the odds that his opponent might be bluffing, the odds his opponent is holding what he is representing, the odds that he will hit the card(s) that will make his hand and likely see him take down the pot. I'd say I am about 30% that guy. I definitely find myself calculating the pot odds when contemplating a play, I think about implied odds when I am not the last to act and I think about how much I have to bet to give the odds I want to give to a player when forcing the action.
The "people" poker player. I am somewhat a people player but I find that term can be overused and misleading, but I'll still say I am 30% that guy. I'll hear someone who doesn't know much about poker say something like "don't play the cards, play the people". Well, the main problem with this approach is that poker is a game where deception is rewarded and any decent player will change their style from time to time. The other problem is that in order to play the people not the cards you have to have a pretty good sense of your opponent and in short online tournaments (where I spend a lot of my time) getting that kind of read is not always easy and a mistake can be costly.
The "situation" poker player. That's me more than any other style and in some ways the situation player is a combination of the math guy, people guy, blind stealer, bluffer and grinder who can play tight, aggressive or loose and switch gears at any time. This player makes decisions (and again this is mostly how I play) based on trying to interpret all of the things happening at the table.
Here are some of the things I think about while playing a hand. Position. I play position a lot, but keep in mind that as a situation guy my brain is trying to absorb a lot of info so position alone is not an easy thing to explain. For example, if I pick up a real premium hand like KK under the gun with 3 very loose pre-flop raisers behind me and one or more of them has a low chip count I might limp into the pot even though my preferred play by far is to raise in that situation. Other times I'll fire at the pot to try and take it down right then and there, depending on the situation.
Another important thing I think about is my image at the table. I am always aware of how many hands I play, am I limping into pots or pushing people around, how many times and how recently have I pushed someone off the pot without having to show my hand? I work at managing and or altering my image at the table a fair bit.
How the other players are playing and what is their image at the table? I look for all of the things mentioned above in other players. Is this guy a limper? How many times has he raised pre flop? How many chips does he have? Does someone have to stand up to him and put him in his place soon? Will it be me? Will he pay good money on a draw? Etc.
The fact of the matter is that many great books have been written about the complexities, subtleties and nuances of poker and that is not my intention with this blog. I guess I am simply using this first post to outline my approach to the game even more than my style of play. I like to think I am a cerebral player who tries to decipher all of the information available and use that info to make as many good decisions as possible and I suspect that should tell you a lot about me as a player.
Qualify for the WSOP at PokerStars.com. Sign up now!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
