Home Blog Page 115

2016 WSOP on ESPN: What Would You Do?

By
Social Poker
-
0

Finally — finally! — the first episodes of the 2016 World Series of Poker Main Event are starting to appear on ESPN. The first two arrived this week, with the network picking up the action on late on Day 4.

This week’s hands began after the dinner break when just 357 remained from the 6,737 players who started the event, with episodes covering the last couple of levels of the night until just 251 remained.

Two former Main Event champions had feature table time, with 2004 winner Greg Raymer and 2013 champ Ryan Riess both nursing short stacks. (Riess would go out in 271st for $36,708, while Raymer made it through to Day 5.) Several all-ins and busts were shown from outer tables, and we caught glimpses of eventual November Niners Cliff Josephy, Kenny Hallaert, and Griffin Benger.

At one point during the first episode Christopher Frank impressed with a big preflop fold of {K-Diamonds}{K-Clubs}. It was a three-way hand in which Frank had opened, Robert Allain three-bet shoved a short stack, then Maxim Sorokin just called the shove from the blinds. Frank then reraised, and when Sorokin reraised back Frank thought a bit before letting his hand go.

Allain had {A-Diamonds}{8-Hearts}, but as Frank had suspected Sorokin turned over {A-Hearts}{A-Clubs} (and would win the hand to knock out Allain in 291st for $32,130).

“That’s gonna be on TV, right?” asked Frank afterwards, who pumped his fists and grinned a little afterwards, having been correct when making a tough decision.

Speaking of tough decisions — and the pressure being on television — we’re selecting a couple of the more intriguing hands from this week’s shows and putting the decision to you how you would play them. The first came right at the start of the very first episode, while the second kicked off the latter hour.

Hand #1
It’s the feature table, and with 357 players left the average stack is 943,000. They’ve begun Level 20, with the blinds at 8,000/16,000 with a 2,000 ante.

Ryan Tococ is first to act under the gun. He has 721,000 to begin the hand, and after looking down at {Q-Spades}{Q-Clubs} he raises to 35,000. It folds to Shaun Deeb in middle position who has nearly 1.5 million to start the hand, and Deeb three-bets to 102,000.

Everyone else folds — including Raymer who lets go of pocket sevens from the small blind — and Tosoc calls Deeb’s reraise. Pot 246,000.

The flop comes {9-Spades}{9-Diamonds}{10-Diamonds}. Tosoc checks, and Deeb bets 73,000. Tosoc calls.

The turn then brings the {2-Spades}. “Lon, since the dawn of time a deuce on the turn does not change anything, anywhere, anytime, anyhow,” says Norman Chad to his partner Lon McEachern, noting the deuce being an apparent blank.

Tosoc again checks, and when Deeb fires another bet of 173,000, Tosoc calls again with his overpair. The pot is up to 738,000.

The river brings the {2-Hearts}, putting two pair on board and prompting a repetition from Chad of his observation that a deuce on the river is also unlikely to have changed anything. Tosoc checks one more time, and this time Deeb pushes all in.

“Oh, man,” says Tosoc with a grin. “I wish this wasn’t televised. I’ll look so bad if I’m wrong.”

He has 371,000 left, meaning Deeb has put him to a test for his remaining chips. Eventually Deeb calls the clock, though with editing it isn’t obvious how long Tosoc has tanked.

Ultimately Tosoc decided to call, and nodded when Deeb showed him {A-Hearts}{A-Clubs}.

“Nothing you can do,” said Deeb. “It’s the perfect run-off… I have all the missed draws.” They discussed the hand a bit further afterwards before Tosoc departed in 357th place ($28,356).

Hand #2
Another tough decision came at the start of the second hour, a three-way hand that also involved Deeb, James Obst (who had the chip lead for much of the latter part of Day 4), and Valentin Vornicu.

2016 WSOP on ESPN: What Would You Do? (Or “I Wish This Wasn’t Televised”) 101
Valentin Vornicu
We’ll play along with Vornicu in this hand.

With about 280 players left, the average stack is just under 1.2 million. With the blinds up to 10,000/20,000 with a 3,000 ante, Vornicu — with 1.67 million to start the hand — chooses to limp in from late position with {8-Hearts}{7-Hearts}.

With 1.547 million in the small blind to begin Deeb calls, and Obst — the leader with 3.771 million — checks his option from the big blind.

“My favorite blinds,” jokes Vornicu, referring to the two challenging competitors he’s up against, albeit with position.

The {7-Diamonds}{8-Spades}{6-Diamonds} flop brings Vornicu top two pair while also providing a possible made straight, a straight draw, and/or a flush draw for his opponents. Deeb leads with a bet of 36,000, and both Obst and Vornicu call.

The turn then brings the {8-Diamonds} — a terrific card for Vornicu as it gives him a full house. Deeb fires 102,000 this time, and when Obst calls the pot is up to 399,000.

Both of his opponents seem to have caught something, but unless there’s a straight flush sitting in the blinds Vornicu has best.

While Chad in his commentary suggested a call would earn Vornicu more value on the river, he chose to raise to 382,000. That chased Deeb, but Obst stuck around with a call.

The river brought the {2-Hearts}, and after Obst checked, Vornicu had another decision to make. There was 1.061 million in the middle. Vornicu had 1.22 million behind, while Obst had 3.33 million.

Vornicu chose to bet 925,000, prompting a smile from his opponent.

“Will this one make TV, you reckon?” said Obst. At last he did call, turning over {Q-Diamonds}{5-Diamonds} for a flush, and Vornicu earned a big boost to his stack. (Incidentally, Deeb folded {J-Hearts}{9-Diamonds} on the turn.)

Some intriguing decisions, made all the more so with the pressure of being televised. What did you choose? And what would you have done with Obst’s hand on following Vornicu’s big river bet?

The Dangers of Selective Attention, Why We Repeat Our Poker Mistakes

By
Social Poker
-
0

Today will be the last of a few articles I’ve written on poker insights I’ve found from reading the work of Robert Trivers, a prominent evolutionary biologist who has extensively studied the role of deception in both humans and other species.

I’ll jump right into three more such insights. Again, I think you’ll readily see what Trivers says about deception reveals something important about what happens at the poker tables.

1. Selective Attention

Trivers devotes more space to self-deception than to other forms. Human beings are exquisitely refined self-deceivers — and if you think you’re not self-deceptive, it’s only because you are!

 He describes one experiment in which “people were convinced that they were likely — or highly unlikely — to be chosen for a prospective date.” If they were convinced they were picked for a date, “they spent slightly more time studying the positive rather than negative attributes of the prospective date, but if [they weren’t], they spent more time looking at the negative, as if already rationalizing their pending disappointment.”

Trivers tells of another experiment in which people were played an audio tape of someone describing the dangers of smoking, with the subjects explicitly told to pay attention to the content.

“Meanwhile, there was some background static and the subjects had the option of decreasing its volume,” he continues. “Smokers chose not to decrease the static, while nonsmokers lowered the level, the better to hear what was being said.”

Scientists have conducted thousands of such experiments. Test subjects consistently show this kind of bias — we look harder for and pay more attention to the information that tells us what we want to hear, encourages us to do what we want to do, or reinforces a decision we’ve already made. We tone down and filter out contrary messages.

Mike Caro has long warned about the danger of using poker tells in this selective way. For example, in an article titled “Great Mistakes in Poker Tells,” Caro explained how “When it comes to tells, you’re apt to overestimate the value of ones that invite you to call and ignore ones that suggest you should fold.”

You can see the problem.

“If you use tells in that manner, you’re making a great mistake,” Caro continues. “That mistake is so common and so serious that if you can’t shake the habit, you’ll probably make more money by just ignoring tells altogether.”

2. Being Inconspicuous

Most deception having to do with one’s strength, ability, or aggressiveness is biased upward, projecting more than is actually present. Pufferfish inflate their bodies, cats stand their fur on end, and all sorts of animals selectively use lower-pitched vocalizations — all with the goal of seeming bigger and more threatening than they really are.

“But there is a second kind of deception — deceiving down,” explains Trivers, which is what happens when an organism tries “to make itself appear smaller, stupider, and perhaps even uglier, thereby gaining an advantage.” For example, he tells of how in different kinds of seabirds “offspring actively diminish their apparent size and degree of aggressiveness as fledglings, to be permitted to remain near their parents, thereby consuming more parental investment.”

There are various reasons for such “deceiving down.” “Appearing less threatening may permit you to approach more closely,” he writes. “This is a minority strategy that probably owes some of its success to the fact that most people are doing the opposite, so our guard is not as well developed in this direction.”

In other words, being less conspicuous — and seeming less threatening — can thereby enable the deceivers to act more freely and get more of what they want.

I can’t find the exact quotation, but I remember once in a World Series of Poker broadcast thatNorman Chad said of Allen Cunningham something like, “You don’t even notice he’s there until he’s stacking your chips.”

I’m a naturally quiet, shy, solitary person, so I can’t easily slip into the role of the gregarious, chatty, social animal at the poker table, despite knowing that it would be more profitable. Instead, my strategy is to emulate Cunningham — a goal I achieve in demeanor far more than in skill.

That is, I try to be pretty much invisible, somebody that is easily overlooked as a threat. I don’t want to set off anybody’s alarms. To that end, I don’t talk during hands. I don’t bluster, taunt, or trash talk. I don’t expose my knowledge of poker math, strategy, or history. I just sit and play, hoping to leave with a nice profit before anybody realizes I’m winning.

3. Repeating Mistakes

Trivers is, of course, far more sensitive to the perils of self-deception than most of us are, having spent his career studying it. Yet he admits that he can still fall victim to it in embarrassing ways. He is guilty, in fact, of a fault most of us have — repeating our mistakes over and over.

“Take one common problem I have involving both conflict and self-deception,” Trivers confesses. “Someone does me harm, and I imagine a spiteful response, a nasty letter or some other gesture of contempt.”

“Then the submerged side of me says, ‘But, Robert, you have been in this situation 614 times already and you have talked yourself into the spiteful action, yet in every case shortly afterward you regret your action. This is no different. Do not do it.’ And then the dominant part of my personality comes roaring back. ‘No, this time is different. This time I will feel satisfied and happy.’ And there goes number 615.”
I think if that confession doesn’t elicit a chuckle of self-recognition from you, you must be some sort of pod-person, not a real human. We’ve all been there, right?

There’s a guy I play with often in a penny-ante (almost literally) home game. He never goes all in on the river unless he has the stone-cold nuts. But I swear I must have called him with a second-best hand ten times after I had figured that out about him.

Each time I thought, “Well, he knows that when he’s made that bet before, he’s always shown me the winner. So surely this time he’s taking advantage of that history to bluff me out of the pot.” So I call. Again. And lose. Again.

I’ll bet that with not too much effort you can think of a similar kind of mistake that you have repeatedly made while playing poker — maybe even after you had recognized it as a mistake that you should fix. And I’ll bet further that if you reconstruct the decision process that has led to repeating that mistake, you’ll find a prominent element of self-deception, some way in which you talked yourself out of the right move and into the wrong one. Our train of thought tends to derail in the same way time after time.

The Importance of Gathering Information from Showdown Hands

By
Social Poker
-
0

The game is $1/$2 no-limit hold’em. A player raises to $8 from early position and it folds around to you in the cutoff where you’ve been dealt {7-Clubs}{7-Diamonds}. You decide to call and everyone else folds.

The flop comes {K-Spades}{5-Hearts}{4-Diamonds}, your opponent bets $12 and you call. You both then check the {5-Spades} turn. The river is the {10-Diamonds} and your opponent fires another $20 into the middle — that is, a little less than half the pot.

You think your sevens might be good, but ultimately decide to fold your hand. The dealer pushes the pot to your opponent, collects the cards, and as another hand is dealt you sit and wonder what your opponent might have had.

He could have had a king, you think, although his checking the turn makes that seem less likely. Or maybe he had a pocket pair himself, one better than your sevens. Or ace-ten. Ace-jack? Without a showdown, you just don’t know.

But what if you did call that river bet? The hand your opponent turns over potentially reveals a lot of information about that player. Indeed, if this hand were happening between two other players and you weren’t involved, you’d do yourself a lot of good sitting up in your chair and getting a look at what the players were showing down after the river call, as that information could be of great benefit to you going forward.

Let’s imagine the river bettor turning over a few different hands here after you call that last bet. The completed board is {K-Spades}{5-Hearts}{4-Diamonds}{5-Spades}{10-Diamonds}, and after raising from early position preflop, continuation betting on the flop, checking the turn, then betting again on the river, he turns over…

{J-Clubs}{10-Clubs}
Heck, he rivered a better pair, you think, as you muck your sevens in frustration. But wait… you’ve lost the pot, but you’ve gained a lot of information.

For one thing, you now know your opponent to be a player capable of opening from early position with medium suited connectors (i.e., not just with premium starting hands). He also can continuation bet even when missing flops, so he knows something about the advantages of being aggressive and keeping the initiative when he has it. Meanwhile he did not keep barreling on the turn, meaning he was perhaps wary of your flop call (and not a total maniac).

Then when the 10 came on the river he made an interesting value bet. Or maybe it was a blocking bet designed to keep you from betting more. In any case, you’ve got a lot to work with the next time you get involved in a hand against this player.

Or say on the river he bet, you call, and he turns over…

{K-Clubs}{K-Diamonds}
Oof, you were crushed, you think. Good not to have lost any more than you did. Again, though, set aside the result and look back through the hand. What does the hand tell you about this player’s style?

For one thing, the preflop raise and continuation bet on the flop are both less remarkable — more “standard” than with jack-ten. He then checked the turn after improving to a full house, a slow play likely decided upon in the hopes that you’d fire that turn rather than check behind. The river bet, then, was clearly for value, and it did earn him some more on the end.

A much more straightforward sequence, then, somewhat suggesting (in a limited way) a more straightforward player.

Or let’s say things turned out better for you following your river call, as he turns over…

{A-Spades}{J-Spades}
You’re stacking chips, but don’t let the joy of having made a correct call get in the way of reviewing what just happened — in particular what the hand reveals about your opponent.

Ace-jack suited is a better hand than jack-ten suited, although opening from early position with it still represents a somewhat aggressive play. His continuation bet was standard, but he chose to check the turn despite picking up the flush draw. Then when the spade didn’t come, he bluffed the river. The combination of the turn check and smallish river bluff perhaps suggests he can be aggressive before and after the flop, but tightens up on the turn and river.

The fact is, practically every hand that goes to a showdown is going to offer similar insights into your opponents’ styles, including information about their starting hand selection, the attention they pay to position, their bet sizing as it relates to relative hand strength, their preflop and postflop tendencies, how they bluff or value bet, and more.

Don’t forget also that whenever you make it to showdown, you are also revealing information to your opponents about how you play. Here you showed a willingness to call from late position with middle pair, to stick around even with an overcard to your pair appearing on the flop, to show caution on the turn and not take the opportunity to bet when given an opening, and to call on the river despite having only a medium-strength hand.

Going forward, be mindful of how your image might have been affected by these actions, knowing that others may peg you as a “sticky” calling station, or a player who understands the power of position, or a cautious and/or passive player — all impressions you might then exploit in a subsequent hand.

Some showdowns reveal more than others. It happens sometimes that players catch a run of good cards causing them to reach more showdowns than usual, thereby giving an impression that may or may not fit with their actual playing styles.

But almost no showdown is without significance. Every time hole cards get turned over, the chips go to the player with the best hand. But the information is available to everyone, with those paying the most attention reaping the greatest rewards.

Five Key Differences Between Pot-Limit Omaha and No-Limit Hold’em

By
Social Poker
-
0

For many no-limit hold’em players, pot-limit Omaha is a logical next game to try.

On the surface, PLO plays similarly to NLHE. It’s also a “flop” game with five community cards, the same number of betting rounds, and small and big blinds.

Unlike other fixed-limit variants, PLO is also considered a “big bet” game like no-limit hold’em, although the size of your bet is limited by how much is in the pot (hence “pot-limit”).

However a big, obvious difference between the games is the fact that in PLO you are dealt four hole cards instead of two, and you must make a five-card poker hand using exactly two of your hole cards and three of the community cards. That difference greatly affects hand values and the importance of draws in PLO. Indeed, oftentimes having the nuts on the flop isn’t enough in PLO — you also want to have redraws to better hands should the action continue onto further postflop streets.

But that’s just scratching the surface of the differences between pot-limit Omaha and no-limit hold’em. Here are five important ones:

1. No huge favorites preflop in PLO
If you go all in before the flop in no-limit hold’em with {A-}{A-} and get called by a player holding {K-}{K-}, you’re a huge favorite to win the hand (better than 4-to-1). In fact, with pocket aces you’re a big favorite over any other hand in a preflop all-in situation. There are many other situations in NLHE where one hand dominates another, too.

Such is usually not the case in pot-limit Omaha, where even the best starting hand is often only 60-65% to win versus even mediocre four-card starting hands.

2. You have to make better hands in PLO
With four cards each player has six different two-card combinations from which to choose in PLO in order to make a five-card poker hand. That changes hand values dramatically, since all of those combos mean there are many more hands to beat than is the case in no-limit hold’em.

Making two pair or a straight often is going to be the best hand in NLHE, but in PLO such hands can be vulnerable to better ones. Especially if the board pairs or three cards of the same suit appear among the community cards, you can often count on someone having better than two pair or a straight.

3. Drawing hands can be favorites over made hands in PLO
Perhaps one of the least obvious differences between NLHE and PLO to those who are new to pot-limit Omaha is the fact that drawing hands can sometimes be overwhelming favorites over made hands after the flop. You might even flop the current nuts and be an big underdog with two cards to come.

Say you have {10-Clubs}{10-Spades}{9-Clubs}{2-Spades} and the flop comes {Q-Hearts}{J-Hearts}{8-Clubs}, giving you a queen-high straight. You shouldn’t get too excited, though, as a player with a flush draw and draw to a better straight might actually have you crushed. Someone with {A-Spades}{K-Hearts}{10-Hearts}{7-Spades} would be nearly 63% to win against you if the two of you got all the chips in on that flop!

4. Pot-limit betting means more postflop poker
Another significant difference between PLO and NLHE has to do with the pot-limit betting format. Unless a player is short-stacked, no one can simply open-push all in before the flop in PLO. Rather there often has to be at least a raise and reraise first — and perhaps even more raising — before anyone can get all in.

As a result, you’ll find a lot of players sticking around before the flop, willing to call a raise and see what develops. NLHE players accustomed to playing with short stacks and not having to make many postflop decisions can find PLO challenging since so many hands demand players have postflop skills. The increased complexity caused by the four-card hands also makes it harder to narrow ranges in PLO for some NLHE players.

5. Position is more important in PLO
Because of all the factors listed above, position is often more important in pot-limit Omaha than in no-limit hold’em. Having position gives you extra information when acting — namely, knowing what your opponent has chosen to do first. It’s an advantage in most forms of poker, but especially so in PLO.

The pot-limit betting makes it harder for a player acting first to push opponents out of pots, while it also helps the in-position player control the size of the pot that much better. The player who has position can check behind or call bets with medium-strength hands that have the potential to draw to better ones. Thus can the in-position player often lose less and win more. Many experienced PLO players are much less willing to call raises from the blinds or get involved from early position even with strong starting hands when compared to NLHE.

A few summers back, we asked Daniel Negreanu at the World Series of Poker what advice he would give no-limit hold’em players wanting to jump into a PLO event. Hear what he had to say:

There are still more important distinctions between PLO and NLHE, including how the games tend to play (PLO can be a lot looser) and the difference in variance (greater in PLO).

For those of you who play both no-limit hold’em and pot-limit Omaha, what are the biggest differences between the games in your opinion? Let us know in a comment below.

Five Things a Beginner Poker Player Needs to Know

By
Social Poker
-
0

Poker is one of the most popular games played across the globe. Interestingly, most of the new players don’t spend time before making any decision while playing. No wonder once you feel the urge to hit it, why waste time thinking around right? Well, this is where you go wrong and face loss in the game. Here are 5 important things you as a beinner should follow when playing poker. Go through these and get inspired:

Poker is a roller coaster ride
One of the important things for you to know is how much variance is involved in the game. If you are a skilled player, you can win in the long term, but you are beginner you need to be more careful. In simple words, you will experience a lot of highs and lows in the game. Keeping this mind, you must be focus during the game and shouldn’t divert your focus. Even during downswing try to stay focused and make correct moves.

You can’t win right away
There is another important lesson you must know that you can’t win right away. Just like any other game, poker also rewards the experienced players who spend a lot of time playing it. Even though you can jump into any tournament, you can’t expect to win big right away. Learn to control your temper and expectations in the beginner to become a good player in the long run.

Learn about terms and conditions of the game
When you are playing poker, be it offline or online, make sure you know about the rules and playing-poker-2bregulations. Different sites and companies have different set of rules and in order to win you must know about it. For instance, some sites might offer you a bonus of $1 if you unlock 75 points. This means if you have included $100 you need 7500 VIP points to unlock it.

Don’t stop practicing
When you are a beginner in this game, your key to succeed lies in your practice. There’s no fate or accident that the top players win continuously, the main reason behind it is practice. In fact, they excel in the game because they try to improve their strategy as well as their game. As a beginner, you must practice as much as possible. Check review sessions, training videos etc. to sharpen your skills.

Don’t be satisfied too soon
Winning a game or two as a beginner is nothing to show off. In fact, to be called a big player you need to see your winning records, how many matches Online-Poker-US-Players-Safeyou have played and won, etc. You simply can’t call yourself a big player by playing 100 tournaments and winning $1000. You won’t know how good a player you are if you haven’t won at least 20,000 cash on poker or you have played 500 games or so.

Now, these are the top 5 tips that you must know as a beginner when playing poker. No one can become a big poker player overnight and for that one needs to keep these tips in mind. So, follow these above mentioned tips to gain great expertise on the game and turn into a master player. (source:jasonmecier.com)

How to Tilt Lesser-Skilled Players at the Lower Stakes

By
Social Poker
-
0

My approach to the game of poker has always been very simple. I am there to play against the bad players, a category that in the lower stakes games is often comprised of casual or “recreational” players. I know that this is where the money comes from in these games and so my attention when playing in them is often entirely focused on this group of opponents.

But just being at the table with a weaker player is not the end goal. Sure, this is a good situation and you will turn a profit in the long run. But your real aim should be to stack the weaker opponents before any of the other regs can.

This is why one of my main goals when playing against the recs is putting them on tilt. Note: I am notreferring to behaving badly in order to throw others off their games — that’s a huge no-no. Rather, I’m referring strictly to playing in such a way that tends to frustrate opponents, especially lesser-skilled ones, causing them subsequently to play even less well and make more mistakes.

When somebody is on tilt (frustrated with me), then that player is much more likely to pay out like a slot machine when I finally hit something good.

In this article I am going to explain exactly how I go about tilting lesser-skilled players with the way I play against them.

You Need to Have Position

Putting players on tilt is always going to be a million times easier when you have position on them. This gives you the ability to raise their limps, three-bet them, float them, bluff them, and bet much more.

The process of tilting someone really is all about being as annoying as possible. (Again, I’m talking about being annoying with your bets and raises, not with your behavior.) This is infinitely easier to do when you always get to act last. For this reason, when playing cash games I will go to whatever lengths I can to make sure that I have position on the lesser-skilled player.

This also means that I typically avoid all forms of speed poker online. In these games you are moved to a completely random table every single hand, which makes it impossible to maintain position on anyone. In these games it is also very difficult to build up a playing history or “dynamic” with any of your opponents, because they might only be at your table once every 10 or 20 hands.

Weaker Players Like to Limp; I Like to Raise

Now that we have position on such an opponent, what do we do?

Well, players like this tend to limp into the pot a lot. They like to play as much as 50% or more of the hands that are dealt to them and see a “cheap flop” whenever they can.

The easiest way to start building up a desired dynamic with a player like this is to start raising them widely. They will get frustrated quickly when you consistently prevent them from seeing their cheap flops.

I will raise their limps with a wide range of hands that I typically refer to as “anything remotely playable.” What is my anything remotely playable range? Any pair, any two Broadway cards, most aces, most kings, most suited connectors, most suited one-gappers, most suited two- and even three-gappers. You get the idea, I am raising wide.

One consideration here is that it is important to have docile regs behind you. If you have aggressive regs to your left, then there is no way that they are going to let you keep getting away with isolating the weaker players with a range this wide. Luckily though, most regs at the lower stakes are fairly passive.

Continuation Bet the Flop… a Lot

Your approach on the flop should be fairly similar. That is to say, take the aggressive approach more often than not.

When my opponent checks to me, I will be making a continuation bet most of the time. This is especially the case early on in our playing history because I expect the player to give me more respect.

It is important to note that if I get called on the flop, I will often shut down on the later streets, especially if I have nothing at all. If there is one thing these players love to do, it is call a lot. Don’t try to bluff them off their middle pair. It won’t work.

The real key here, though, is that they will miss the flop most of the time, which means you will often take it down with a simple flop c-bet. Also, even if they hit the flop, we could still get lucky and hit a draw or spike an overcard later on in the hand. Since we have position, we will get to control the entire pace of the hand.

Essentially, the deck is stacked in our favor, and that is why we will win in the long run with this approach.

When Lesser-Skilled Players Go on Tilt

If you follow this approach of raising widely before the flop versus this category of players then betting the flop a lot, you should be able to take down the majority of the pots. This is because, once again, they will miss the flop most of the time.

This will lead them to get frustrated. Which, of course, is the whole point of this little game.

As we build up a history with these players and take down several pots, they will start to get more aggressive in some spots because they want to get back at us. A lot of the time these attempts at aggression will come in the form of silly bluffs, but it is important to refrain from getting involved in a big pot with them unless you have a good hand.

By “good hand” I don’t mean having the nuts at all. I mean having as little as top pair, no kicker. As our opponent’s bluffing range opens up, our bluff catching and value betting range needs to open up as well. We don’t need the mortal nuts in order to play a big pot against them.

Should you be lucky enough to find a big hand during this stage (e.g., aces or kings preflop, a set postflop, etc.), the chances of you getting paid off in full go way up.

Final Thoughts

Many people forget these days that the money in poker comes from the bad players. It should therefore be your goal to focus on those players and stack them as quickly as possible.

You do this by getting actively involved in lots of pots against them and hopefully even tilting them. It is important to remember, though, that while these players often lack a solid understanding of the game, they are not stupid. If you sit there waiting for your aces all day before ever getting involved in a pot with them, they are not going to give you the big action that you want when you finally make your hand.

As the old saying goes, “you have to give action to get action.” The best way to do this is by getting position on the weaker players and raising and betting a lot, especially in the early stages of the hand. Eventually you will make a big hand (or even just top pair) and you won’t have to worry much about getting paid off. (Source: pokernews.com/strategy/…)

Three Key Ingredients to Winning No-Limit Hold’em Tournaments

By
Social Poker
-
0

No-limit hold’em tournaments not only challenge players to discover the best ways to play particular hands, they also require them constantly to keep in mind the broader perspective imposed by the tournament format. In other words, while it’s great to have a solid understanding of NLHE fundamentals, in tournaments you always also have to remain aware of the constantly changing contexts for individual hands.

Popular Twitch streamer Evan “Gripsed” Jarvis identifies three key ingredients that he believes can help you maintain a dynamic strategy to maximize your expectation in poker tournaments no matter what the situation.

Those three ingredients are:

  • Look at the big picture
  • Know how to play various stack sizes
  • Understand the effects of the payout structure

In the video below, Jarvis explores each of these three ingredients in more detail.

Under the heading of looking at the big picture, he explains how even the best players only cash a small percentage of tournaments, making the deep run (and big cash) an important goal upon which to focus. Meanwhile knowing how to play various stack sizes represents a skill that distinguishes tournaments (somewhat) from cash games — especially deep-stacked games — since stacks are changing so frequently in tournaments. Finally, understanding payout structures can have a big effect on how much risk you take on in the effort to make that deep run and finish in the highest-paying spots.

With the 2016 World Series of Poker getting underway this week, Jarvis will be back at the Rio All-Suite Hotel and Casino where among other goals he’ll try to tie Ronnie Bardah‘s record by cashing in a fifth-straight WSOP Main Event.

To mark the start of the series, Jarvis is hosting a couple of free webinars this weekend along with fellow poker pro and coach Nicholas Verkaik.

The first, titled “How to Win Consistently at the WSOP,” happens Saturday, June 4 at 1:00 p.m. ET and will cover planning for the series, maximizing expectations, deciding when and where to play, managing your time, energy, and emotions, and more. The second follows on Sunday, June 5 at 1:00 p.m. ET, covers “How to Sell Action & Play More Events,” and will discuss the process of selling action, putting together packages, finding investors, record-keeping tips, among other related topics. (Source: pokernews.com)

Five Reasons Why You Aren’t Winning in a “Great” Home Game

By
Social Poker
-
0

A player in that great home game you’ve heard about has finally invited you to play. You’ve gone to the game, have been accepted by the group, and now you are a regular. It’s a great group of guys, with excellent fellowship, a nice spread, and many seemingly poor home game players from whom to win money. Congratulations!

But there’s a serious problem. You have been losing! And you can’t figure out why.

Here are five things that you should consider about the game which may be contributing to your losses. And when you’ve figured them out, I’ll show you what you can do to turn things around in my next column.

1. You’re Too Clever By Half

Bad players are generally bad for one reason — they call too often with poor hands. The chief difference between a typical home game among casual players and a casino game among good players is that the casual home game players have much lower standards for playing their hands. That means if you’re trying to use clever plays to confuse and exploit your opponents, you may well be costing yourself a lot of money.

I remember a friend of mine, someone I had first met at Foxwoods in a tough Omaha game. I invited him to come play in my home game. He lost an enormous hand and bellyached that his opponent should have folded to his bluff, since he had the ace of a suit and was representing the nut flush with his raise. His opponent had called him down with a lower flush, in spite of my friend’s huge bet on the river.

My friend had brought his tough, clever, and deceptive game to my house — and he had run into a calling station who didn’t know enough to be fooled.

2. You Play Too Aggressively For the Turf

In a casino poker room, the goods often go to the player who is willing to take the most risks with aggressive play. Against the typically tight, aggressive opponents you find in a public room, you can often win pots by representing a strong hand while serious players avoid the risks of standing up to you. But against home game players, you may be hurting your bottom line with your uber-aggressive play, risking much more than you need to on borderline hands and interfering with your opponent’s natural inclination to call.

By playing extremely aggressively in a game that is typically more passive, you may be needlessly sticking out. In the process you might be scaring away opponents who might otherwise be calling you with subpar hands and keeping as opponents only those players with monster hands that are well ahead of you.

Imagine the first round of a flop game with blinds. In a tough casino game, it is typical for at least one player to raise the blinds and not uncommon for a third player to reraise. But in many home games, this is highly unusual. Players whom you want in with their bad hands are scared into folding by an unusually aggressive move (for this game), while players with huge hands stay in to draw against you. In other words, your aggressiveness may be increasing your risk without doing much for your reward.

3. You’re Seeing the Forest, Not the Trees

You’ve noticed that this should be a good game. There are many casual players who are out to have a good time more than they are trying to win money. That’s what attracted you to the game in the first place — all the “bad” players.

But you don’t play against the average level of your opponents as a group. You play against each one of them individually. And in your zeal to exploit their collectively weak play, you may have failed to address each of their particular styles.

Just because you are the most experienced and thoughtful of the players (if indeed you are), that doesn’t mean that you are foreordained to win every contest. You must take specific actions against specific players. At the same time, if your game has been ramped up in a general sort of way, you may well be making yourself exploitable even by the relatively unsophisticated players you’re up against.

4. Not Paying Attention to the Rake

Not all home games are created equal. Gone are the days when the great majority of home games were just free, easy-going affairs among friends, rotating each week with the expectation that everyone was in it for a good time and little else. Today some home games, though still featuring easy lineups of casual players, are run for a profit — occasionally an extremely high profit.

Setting aside legal questions regarding such games, be aware that these profit-driven games can sometimes consist of a 10% rake up to a maximum of any amount. Those who operate games like these try to hide their avarice behind such lines as “it just covers the food” or “the game is so good that you won’t notice the rake.” But believe me when I tell you that both lines are usually bullshit.

With a professional dealer, it is common to be dealt 40 hands an hour. If the house is raking 10% up to a maximum of $7, and you are tipping the dealer $1 a hand, then the game is raking off up to $250 or so every hour. That’s an average of $25 an player per hour. If players bring an average of $300 to such a game and play for 8 hours, the house is raking $2,000 of the $3,000 total brought to the game.

I don’t care how good you are — you are going to lose in that game!

5. Underestimating Your Home Game Opponents

Though home game players tend to be less skilled than those you’ll face in the typical casino game, that doesn’t mean that you are better than each of them. Players vary. Some “casual” players are very strong. Some excellent players find their way into home games — after all, you did!

Though your typical home game opponents may approach the game with a friendly, happy-go-lucky attitude, that doesn’t mean that they don’t have skills that rival or exceed yours. Their laid-back, somewhat passive style may cloak their understanding of what really works best in their home game — something that you may not have figured out.

I recall one regular weekly home game where I initially interpreted the loose-passive style of a couple of the regulars as a sign of weakness and poor play. A few thousand dollars later I realized that they had adopted this style to best exploit their opponents in a way that my hyper-aggressive style didn’t do. Recognize the possibility that one of the reasons you may be losing is that your opponents are simply playing better than you are.

If You’re Not Bluffing, Then It’s Not Poker

By
Social Poker
-
0

During Season 1 of High Stakes Poker, Doyle Brunson ran a failed bluff against his friend,Ted Forrest. After he was caught, Brunson was heard mumbling to himself “I know better than to bluff an idiot.”

Brunson obviously does not believe that Forrest is bad at poker — rather, he was just humorously lamenting his bluff getting called. In spite of this, many people took his words completely out of context. They use them as a mantra to remind themselves not to try and bluff players in small stakes games which they view as a sea of idiocy teeming with schools of fish incapable of folding.

The truth of the matter is, if you’re not bluffing, then you’re not playing poker. You’re playing with one hand tied behind your back. This was a huge mistake I made when I began playing live cash games. Once I realized this, my results began to improve dramatically.

Why Bluff?

In my first live cash game, I quickly noticed players limp-called with much weaker hands than they do online. Then if they made a pair or had a draw, they’d call down to the river. They just wanted to see if the hand they made was better than the hand I was betting. Usually, it wasn’t. This allowed me to print money by just betting big hands. I thought to myself, “if they’re going to call my value hands, why should I ever bluff?”

There were two big problems with this sticking with this strategy. For one, I didn’t make big hands often enough. As soon as one of them got cracked, I gave back the bit of money I’d made. The bigger problem, though, was in the stereotyping of players as “idiots.” They were not idiots. They just found joy in making big hands and winning. Eventually, they realized that I was a nit and that the hands they made were not big enough to beat me.

Occasionally, I’d find that one guy who would announce “Oh, Carlos is betting? I know you’ve got the nuts… sigh, I call… nice hand.” I loved that guy, but he’s one in a million nowadays. Most of my opponents soon realized that when I bet, I had it. If they could crack my big hands, they’d call. If not, they’d fold. I, the learned poker scholar who’d mastered tight-aggression and never bluffed the river, had become the “idiot.”

The “never bluff and print money” game I’d found had become the “never bluff and never make money” game. After working on the neglected bluffing half of my betting range, I learned how to do it correctly and began playing a completely new game called… poker.

What is Poker?

Poker is a game of adjustments. Your job is to adjust until you find a good mix of value bets and bluffs that best exploits your opponent’s mix of value bets and bluffs. If they truly never fold, then never bluffing is the correct strategy. Just wait for aces, shove, and collect the other stacks on the table often enough to buy yourself a few islands.

In reality, we know that they do fold sometimes. So now, we can improve on that strategy by finding the times when they fold and then bluffing. Even I knew this back when I “never” bluffed. That’s why I would continuation bet on ace-high flops when I didn’t have an ace. The play had become so automatic in my game that I’d completely forgotten that continuation betting without a pair is, in fact, a bluff.

The problem I ran into is that there are some players in small stakes games who will call that bluff without an ace. Most times, I did not double-barrel the turn. The times I did, I rarely triple-barreled because I thought they’d never fold the river. Now I know I was just fooling myself. This is only a legitimate concern in games where people consistently play with small stacks.

Bluffing requires the ability to put significant pressure on your opponent. In order to do this, you have to make sure you have enough chips in the effective starting stacks to size bets big enough to get the job done. In my game, the stacks were deep. My problem was not that I shouldn’t bluff — it was that I didn’t continue my bluffs often enough against players who called the flop bet with weak ranges.

An Example Bluff

Preflop

A lot of well-intentioned aggressive players make their first mistake when they try to bluff small stakes players with bad hands preflop. Very rarely do these players fold before the flop. The whole reason they are playing is to see if they can make a hand. In their minds, if they are going to fold to your preflop raises, then they may as well stay home.

A bad preflop bluffing hand is one that has very little potential to become the best hand postflop. This usually means hands that are unpaired, unsuited, unconnected, and not very big. Raising hands like these in small stakes games, then not being willing to bluff on multiple streets when called, is a recipe for disaster. If you aren’t an expert on postflop bluffing, you have to tighten up your preflop range.

Flop

Once you do get a hand with which you can raise preflop, you’re going to be stronger on average going into the flop than the players who limp-call before the flop. This means that you are more likely to have the best hand. More importantly, you are likely to have a robust drawing hand that you can use as a semi-bluff when you are behind. Let’s look at an example of a hand where I decide to bluff my loose friend postflop.

My friend, let’s call him Sticky, limps in from middle position. I raise from the button and get called by the big blind and Sticky. The flop comes {A-Diamonds}{9-Spades}{5-Hearts}. This is a good flop for my range which has a lot of {A-}{x-} hands. It checks to me and I make a continuation bet, the big blind folds, and Sticky calls. Great.

Sticky is the guy about whom I used to have nightmares. He is the inspiration for the “I should move up to where they respect my raises” fallacy. When he calls my c-bet, he could have a set, two pair, an {A-}, a {9-}, a {5-}, any small-to-medium pocket pair, or any of the available gutshots.

If he has any pair, he’s happy because he’s made a hand. This was his purpose in calling preflop. He’s not just going to fold it to a single continuation bet. Once I fire the flop, I know I’m going to have to fire the turn the vast majority of the time to convince him to fold his weakest pairs.

Turn

The turn is the {8-Clubs} (completing the rainbow). This is where I used to go wrong. I wouldn’t fire the second barrel because I knew he wouldn’t fold. If he didn’t believe me on the flop, why would he believe me on the turn?

I’d remember that one time I barreled the turn and got my self-righteous suited-Broadway cards beaten by some guy with a trashy bottom pair when the river went check-check. I’d say to myself “This time, I’m not going to throw good money after bad.” I’d silently chant Brunson’s sage advice to myself and decide to check it down. Sometimes, if you were sitting close enough, you could sniff a whiff of defeatism in the sigh I’d undoubtedly exhale.

But that was yesterday. Today, I barrel the turn. I now know that this bet adds credibility to the story that I have a big ace. In spite of my selective memory, many of my opponents will fold to a sizable turn barrel (that is, if the turn doesn’t improve their hand). Unfortunately for me, ol’ Sticky McCallingston could have anything, so I don’t know if this card improves his hand or not.

He calls the turn bet. This could mean he has the ace, but because he is Sticky, he could also have any other pair or draw. I used to take the pessimistic view that he’s calling with every possible pair and I could not beat any of them. Now, I instead notice the good news, which is that he did not raise. This allows me to remove the strongest hands from his range, like a good two-pair hand or better, because he would have likely raised the turn with these.

The bad news is that this turn card improves his range significantly. A lot of his pairs picked up draws and a lot of his draws picked up pairs. But even this has a bright side — I now have a good idea of which river cards are good for me and which are bad for me.

River

Finally, we get to the… river. Just the sound of the word used to conjure up bad feelings for me. Previously, by this point I would have already mentally checked out of the hand. This was a huge mistake because the river is the spot in the hand where you have the most information and where people play the worst. Now instead of being fearful, I’ve come to realize that this is where I can have my biggest edges and win my biggest pots.

I know that Sticky is not likely to have a strong hand given that he did not raise the turn. If he were drawing to a strong hand, I know which cards he’s looking for. The board is {A-Diamonds}{9-Spades}{5-Hearts}{8-Clubs}, so the cards right around the middle of the pack will help his pair-plus-a-draw hands. They could give him a straight or two pair. Chances are, he’ll let me know if they do by betting.

I will not reveal the river card, but I will say that he checks to me again. In the past, I’d check back and prepare to muck. Now I see his check as a green light to make my move. I am not expecting to make him fold the times he has an ace or better. I just want to get him off of his weakest pairs that did not improve to two pair or a straight. For this, I can size my bluff smaller. This has the added benefits of needing to work less often and possibly being successful more often because it looks like a thin value bet.

Even for ol’ Sticky it’s going to be very difficult to make this call with a hand like {5-}{x-} or {8-}{x-}, especially if the river is another overcard and all the draws miss.

But What If They Call?

If you bluff and get called, don’t worry. It’s not supposed to work every time. Don’t be ashamed to show your hand. This may lead your opponents to call you down more lightly in the future.

Meanwhile when they show the winner, pay particular attention to the hand that called you. If he shows you top pair or better, don’t worry because you weren’t trying to make him fold that hand, anyway. If he shows you bottom pair, then you really are dealing with a maniac and you can go back to never bluffing, but only against him specifically.

Conclusion

If the people in your small stakes game do not give up easily with their wide ranges early in the hand, then you should find out where they do give up and bluff them there instead of not bluffing them at all. In order to do this, you’re going to have to play hands that allow you to get to these spots with decent equity for you to use as a Plan B in case they do hero-call you.

Those who live and die by Brunson’s often misunderstood words either face players they don’t have enough history with to exploit their nittiness, or they are fortunate enough to have truly found the last game of regular idiots in existence. Luckily for them, they can continue to play No-Bluff-It Stack’em.

But the rest of us had better learn to box with both hands if we want to play No-Limit Hold’em. Source: pokernews.com/strategy/…

Select Starting Hands in No-Limit Hold’em

By
Social Poker
-
0

As explained in the video, one factor affecting starting hand selection is the number of opponents at the table. With full-ring (nine- or ten-handed) games it is often necessary to tighten up your starting hand requirements, whereas in short-handed games (six-handed, four-handed, heads-up) you’ll want to be looser and play more hands.

Also briefly touched on are certain hand groups like big pocket pairs, hands with two Broadway cards (i.e., ace through ten), and suited hands, all of which can be playable given your position and your opponents’ styles.

The biggest pocket pairs (aces, kings, queens, and jacks) are generally always playable, while discretion sometimes needs to be used when playing middle and lower pairs, particularly in the face of a lot of preflop aggression from others.

Ace-king, ace-queen, and king-queen are often good starters that can make top pair/top kicker hands, while other hands containing two Broadway cards can sometimes fall into the category of “trouble hands” that aren’t always so easy for beginners — or even experienced players — to play postflop.

Suited aces — e.g., {A-Hearts}{9-Hearts}, {A-Spades}{7-Spades} — can make nut flushes, while other hands like suited connectors and suited one-gappers can be potentially profitable, too, especially if you can see a flop cheaply with them.

Probably the most important element worth recognizing for new players when it comes to starting hand selection, though, is to realize how a large percentage of the hands you’re dealt in no-limit hold’em isn’t necessarily playable on the basis of their value preflop or potential to make strong hands postflop.

In other words, while you might occasionally play “trash” hands like {10-Spades}{6-Diamonds}, {J-Clubs}{4-Clubs}, {K-Diamonds}{6-Hearts}, and so on based on position, stack sizes, or your read of an opponent being tight and/or weak, you generally will toss such hands away and only get involved with stronger holdings.

In fact, for beginning players especially, it isn’t a bad practice simply to limit oneself to the better starting hands, particularly when out of position or facing a raise. Source: pokernews.com

1...114115116...126Page 115 of 126

MOST POPULAR

Load more

HOT NEWS

© 2023 mysocialpoker.com
Accessibility by WAH