Today we’ll dive into raising. We all know I am not a fan of “calling,” generally speaking. Anyone who’s been on the tables with me knows I am not a “cheap date.” In general, I endorse the “raise or fold” approach. That’s not to say that a raise is to always be put in, nor is it saying that we should blindly raise. Let’s take a moment for you, my cold medicine, and I to ponder why one raises and by how much, generally speaking.

Why Raise?

There are a few different reasons why one raises a pot. First of all, putting in a raise is the act of putting in a bet that is at least double the size of the big blind. A raise typically says “I have a good hand.” But should you raise just because you have a good hand? One would be inclined to say yes, however this is not the case.

We are dealt our hole cards, and we identify what kind of poker hand we have and then we take a look at what position we’re sitting in. I also recommend whether playing live or playing online you make yourself familiar with the chip stack size of everyone at the table prior to doing any of the above. I like to know how many chips everyone else has, as well as how many I have before making any decisions. Once we’ve checked the stack sizes, identified what hand we have and what position we’re in, we reflect on how this hand best plays.

Beer Guy, what do you mean by reflecting on how this hand best plays? Don’t all hands play best when you flop the nut? HaHa… no that’s not at all what I am talking about. What I mean is, are we holding a playable hand or not? If no, fold… If it is playable, does this hand play out better against more opponents or fewer opponents (recall the conversation regarding speculative hands, top pair hands, and powerhouse hands?) Speculative hands play better multi-way. These are hands such as 8-9s. They do not typically hold up when top pair flops. They do, however, pay dearly when 7-6-10 hits the board. Depending on my position the blind levels and my chip stack, I might be inclined to either raise, call or fold with this hand.

If I am sitting in the early position with 8-9s in the middle of the poker tournament with an average chip stack, I’m throwing this hand away. However, middle of the tournament, sitting on the button with 8-9s and 1 caller, I’d be equally as likely to call or raise preflop with this hand. Let’s suppose for argument’s sake I get 1 person to limp preflop from the middle position. He can be making this limp with pretty much anything, a small connector suited or not, ace small, deuces, etc from his middle position. After his limp, action folds to me. I have two choices, neither of which are “incorrect” but I like to mix play up.

I’m playing this hand, the question becomes, do I raise or do I call and what are the benefits of each? If I call, I most likely will get a completion from the SB and a check from the BB and will see the flop four handed. If I put in a standard raise (3-6 times blinds), I have a few different things going on. First, I am showing strength. Second, I might be able to steal the pot right there. Third, I may get a caller or two, which I have the benefit of acting last and have shown strength before the flop. A raise here would be put in for steal potential (preflop or on the flop), to coax more chips into the center which gives me and my hand better odds to draw after the flop providing two or three of them are calling, and protects the value of my raises down the road with monster hands.

I’m going to wrap this post up, as I need to go lay back down (cold medicine is kicking my ass). In closing the reasons I put a raise in:

1. To get more chips in the center of the table, sweetening the pot,
2. To attempt to steal when appropriate,
3. To isolate 1-2 callers with a strong hand that better holds up 1-2 handed,
4. (in the above situation with 8-9s, 1 caller mid position and I’m on the button), to protect the future value of my raises with premium hands.

I apologize that this post is not detailed further. Perhaps I will add to it later today. Otherwise, we’ll continue on this topic tomorrow.

Mike

Poker Strategy
Small Stakes Holdem

As usual, these posts are not meant to replace any book that we discuss, but instead its meant to supplement these books. I highly suggest running to the store or ordering online “Small Stakes Hold’em” by Ed Miller, et al. from twoplustwo publishing. Additionally, the posts are meant to be read in order, so I suggest first reading the post on basic poker hand groupings, and then on position.

The two biggest mistakes one makes before the flop is playing weak hands and calling raises with mediocre and potentially dominated hands. One needs to identify what kind of hand they hold when looking at your cards. Is it a hand that plays well with many opponents? Is it a hand that can stand on its own, and likes few opponents. Is the hand just straight up crap?

In the early positions, you should avoid playing hands that are not among the best hands out there. Specifically, this means avoid playing Ax (suited or not), kt, kj, q10, small pocket pairs, etc. Additionally, one should avoid “calling” with these hands. A raise typically says, “I have a strong hand.” Unless you’re in the big blind, you should be playing only hands that a normal skilled player would be comfortable reraising with. Hands such as kj, Ax are easily dominated and often make second best hands (especially when the raiser is holding AK, AJ, KK, JJ, etc. Don’t just think about what you’re holding next time you face a raise, think also about what your opposition is holding and how badly you could be dominated. You want to speculate (cheaply) with your speculative hands – which means throw them out to a raise and in the early positions. You’ll selectively play your “top pair” hands when facing a raise – varying with calls, and reraises. Same will stand true with the powerhouse hands, generally speaking.

Mailbag is tomorrow, as is the CheckRayz Leaderboard Challenge, where we’ll be giving away $100 and a free activated copy of pokertracker courtesy of the Beer Man, CheckRayz, and River Belle Poker. See you there!

Mike

Poker Strategy
Small Stakes Holdem

No that that’s out of the way, we’ll move on to our talk we began yesterday. These posts are not meant to replace any book that we discuss, but instead its meant to supplement these books. I highly suggest running to the store or ordering online “Small Stakes Hold’em” by Ed Miller, et al. from twoplustwo publishing. Additionally, the posts are meant to be read in order, so I suggest first reading the post on basic poker hand groupings.

Position

When I speak of position, I am referring to where one is sitting, relative to the button or the dealer. This is important to me for a few reasons, when hearing a story about a poker hand. The poker table works in a clockwise manner. The person to the immediate left receives the first cards, and the person to the right of the dealer receives the last cards (before the dealer does, of course). The two individuals to the immediate left of the dealer are known as the “blinds.” They’re “forced” to place bets, with the small blind typically placing a half bet, and the big blind placing the full bet on the table. Despite their “punishment,” they are the last to act in a betting round before the flop comes. This is a reward in a sense, as they get to observe how everyone else views their hand before making more of a decision. However, this reward is more so in the form of a double edged sword, as they already have money on the table. If someone “acts” like they really like their hand, the blind’s money is already out there, in the pot. Additionally, the blinds are the first to act after the flop. They will act before everyone else and will not have the luxury of first seeing everyone else’s actions once the flop comes.

Why is it important to know how everyone else acts prior to making a play, you ask? Simply put, if you have 7-6s and I have aces, and you act before I do. Wouldn’t you like to know that I am going to play as if I have aces? I know I’d want to know this. If I were holding the 7-6 suited and knew that someone who bet after me was playing like they have aces, I’d probably want to lay down the seventy six suit (unless I had “evil intentions” and could extract more money from them overplaying this hand – much later topic). In fact, if I were acting after aces guy, I’d lay down that hand without second thought. For this reason, one should play their hands according to position. Said another way, one should play based on the amount of information they have now and the amount of information that is still unknown.

The earlier we act in a betting round, the better our hand should be and the higher our standards must be. That being said, hands in the early positions (preflop) should be among our best hands, generally speaking. Hands played from the middle position should be medium to high quality, and hands from the late positions can be medium quality hands, all generally speaking and assuming a raise has not come in yet.

How do I know which hands are high quality, and which are not? I use three simple criteria:

1. Do they fall into the “top pair” category? (remember yesterday’s blog entry?)
2. Are they suited?
3. Are the cards connected?

Essentially, I am first asking myself if the hand can hold up on its own if my highest card hits the board and ends up being the highest card at the very end. Hands like A-J have “top pair” capability, while hands such as A-4 may not. Hands like KQ may, and K6 may not. The “top pair” question is the most important of the questions I ask myself on a “non paired” preflop hand.

When reflecting on the suited and connectivity, I’m asking if I can make a flush by having three “like suited” cards on the board (are both my cards of hearts, clubs, spades, or diamonds, or are they different suited?). Can I easily make a straight out of these cards? I can with King Jack, but cannot with King eight. I can with 10 nine, but cannot with ten six.

In summary, the more logical ways I have to win, the stronger my hand is and the earlier position I will play it in. So, I’d be inclined to play Ace Jack when I am first to act, but would refrain from playing ace nine when first to act. I’d play king queen suited, but not king seven suited. I want cards that will win if I make top pair, flop a straight, and/or a flush. If I do not have those three ways to win, generally speaking, and I am the first person to act in the preflop betting round, I throw my cards away.

If I am first to act in the preflop betting round, look down and see 3-3… To make things easier on my chipstack and I, I throw them away. But BeerGuy, they’re a pair! Yea, I know, but I need a third three to hit the board if I expect to win, so knowing that I pretty much have to I’d rather not. I would play them if I were in the mid to late position (most likely the late position though), and would be willing to play them pretty much only if the pot was not raised preflop (we’ll discuss raises and betting on Wednesday). Additionally, I’d be prepared to throw them away after the flop if my hand did not improve to three of a kind.

So, when acting early, you must have higher standards, when acting later, you may have lower standards, but you really want to get into the habit of evaluating your hand for top pair strength, suit, and connectivity each and every time you look at your cards. In fact, start practicing that now, asking yourself how likely you are to win with each hand if you flop top pair, or if you can easily flop a straight, or a flush. Doing that will help begin your evolution as a poker player.

As I said, tomorrow we’ll have a report on the CheckRayz championships, and we’ll continue this series on Wednesday with discussion on betting.

For starters, for each starting hand, there are characteristics that a hand has. Can… or does this hand win often without improving? Does this hand typically win as top pair? I ask myself what kind of hand I have every time I look at my cards. Identifying the characteristics your hand has is of paramount importance. David Sklansky broke the starting hands into groups. While I like his hand groupings, it can sometimes be too difficult, especially when you’re either new to the game, or new to the “organized game.”

Ed Miller, in the book “Small Stakes Hold ‘em” (twoplustwo publishing) attempts to simplify this.

Top Pair Hands

Top pair hands consist of two big off suit cards, such as Ace Jack, ace ten, king jack. These hands play better against fewer opponents, can often win with top pair and sometimes win without improving when heads up. Typically these hands will need to improve to win when facing three or more opponents. Keep in mind, it takes a better hand to “call a raise” with than it does to initiate a raise with these hands.

Speculative Hands

Small to medium coordinated cards, pocket fives, seven six suited are speculative hands. Thse hands MUST IMPROVE in order to win. By their nature they require a cheap flop and several opponents to hold up and be long term profitable. The speculative connectors are not hands that one plays out when only flopping one pair.

Let me repeat that. If you’re five way going into a flop, holding an eight seven and you flop king eight three, you’re wise to fold if bet into. I don’t care how many times you see the seven come on the turn or another eight, you’re wise to fold (unless situationally planning to make a play on a later street) – nuff said.

Powerhouse Hands

Large pocket pairs – AA, KK, and large suited cards such as AJs. These hands have several ways to win (flush, straight, set, two pair, etc), and typically play better against few opponents but also stand up well against several.

Its important to know what kind of hand you have, how the hand “works,” and what you can or cannot profitably (long term) do with each type of hand in each type of situation. Tomorrow we’ll build upon the hand types with talk on position. Keep in mind, these posts are not meant to replace any book that we discuss, but instead its meant to supplement these books. I highly suggest running to the store or ordering online “Small Stakes Hold’em” by Ed Miller, et al. from twoplustwo publishing.

“SuperDonk” was describing a hand he was in a few nights earlier during one of our tourneys. I stop him, asking what he had, where the blinds were, how was his stack relative to other people’s stacks, where were the loose players, the weak players, etc. Pretty much typical information that one needs when getting the context of a hand.

Unfortunately, I had to stop him when he answered the “what he had,” asking him what the hell he was doing playing the 3-6 UTG. His response “they were suited and I was sick of seeing my folded hand hit the flop hard.”

I’m not sure why people cannot divorce themselves from their hand once they lay it down. Yet, so many people tease themselves (and later trick themselves) by rabbit hunting or mentally continue in the hand after they’ve folded. I told him if he’s trying to do more playing and less fishing, he cannot play shit like that, first of all. Second, he cannot worry himself with what he correctly threw away after the flop comes. This is a primary reason a knowledgeable player turns into a bad player (there are a few, but this is a biggie for the newbie).

When the flop comes, and you’ve thrown your hand away, DO NOT SECOND GUESS YOURSELF AFTER THE FLOP. Don’t remember that 3-6-6 came down when you discarded your 3-6 preflop UTG. The cards don’t remember, so neither should you. Instead, focus on more important and profitable things, such as who does this flop help? How do those still in the hand act? Try to anticipate everyone’s actions, guess their hands, break down their play, figure out who is weak, who is aggressive, who is tight and who is loose in their play. Study the things that matter to improve your game, as oppose to corrupting it via “card memory inclusion.” Remember, when you’re not busy sweating yourself, there are lots to learn from others. You profit most from people making mistakes after the flop. Don’t enter making a mistake, as you’ll start off in the red.

Nuff said…

Shark and I were discussing moving up limits in general and how one must get their respective games ready at the lower levels to move into the “bigger” games. I’ll be back to that in a second.

Marty Schottenheimer, head coach of the Chargers – former head coach of the god awful Cleveland Browns (Steelers fans by rule must hate the Browns) has historically been a very good “regular season” coach. Generally speaking, he does exactly what he needs to in order to win games. He sports a relatively decent regular season winning percentage (.602 lifetime with 177-117-1 in the reg. season).

Its safe to assume that over his coaching history, he’s done what it takes to get to the next level from the regular season. Now, looking at his record when he’s “moved up” to said next level (playoffs), his record is horrible (5-12 — .294 winning percentage — he made the playoffs twelve of his 20 years coaching).

Is this the same coach? Is something different going on here with him? What the hell went wrong? In further analyzing his stats, it seems to me that while he’s playing “to win” in the regular season, when he elevates his game, he plays to “not lose,” playing more conservatively, or even a bit scared perhaps.

Skeptics halt right there. There is indeed a difference. This isn’t a “half full vs half empty” problem at all. This is a real problem that both haunts and taunts Marty. When he’s playing to win, he’s making the right play calls in the proper situations. He’s being aggressive when appropriate, getting conservative when the situation calls for it. He’s doing what works and tossing aside what does not, until he can make it work (generally speaking) when he is playing to win. He’s mixing it up, with respect to risk-reward when he’s trying to win, and refusing to take on necessary risk when he’s playing to lose.

You see, there is a difference. Run left for 5, Run middle no gain, pass short for a first down, run middle 2 yds, play action for the end zone, Score! vs. Run middle lose yards, run middle lose yards, run middle no gain, punt. You see the difference? He appropriately mixes it up when he’s trying to win, he sticks with the most conservative plays when he’s trying to not lose.

In poker, I’ve seen many a person KILL the lower limit games, KILL I tell you! Playing in position, throwing a standard raise (4x blinds) out there, no cold calling, being tight-aggressive. They’re playing to win!!!

Then, they decide they’re ready to move up the ladder to higher limits and “try their luck.” However, something changes in their mentality. They still play hands in position. However, they begin throwing a weak ‘standard raise’ out there (2x blinds, as opposed to 4x), which gets walked all over. They suddenly add “cold calling” to their game. They are playing scared, over their heads as if drowning, perhaps.

Instantaneously, this monster in the lower limits is a mouse in the higher limits. Easily scared, not betting and raising with confidence, bluffed off hands they should be in. Next comes frustration and more fear. Next thing you know, you’re back down to your previous limits, feeling all beat up, bruised ego and all.

What could possibly have caused this? How could a brotha go from being a chip slinging, check-rayzn, money making machine to being nothing more than a mouse who only occasionally can nibble at chips and pots, scared to act, scared to not act. Could it be that you begin playing to not lose?

Make sure when you’re looking to move up the limits that in addition to forming good habits now, you also are revisiting those good habits. One must adjust those habits to reflect the level of play, not change them or abandon them. Standard 4x raise in .10/.25 games is $1. $1 is only 2x blinds in .50/1. Know that. Force yourself to think along the lines of # of bets, not dollars and cents. Go with what has been working (after slightly adjusting the game plan to reflect the higher numbers). You playing tight aggressive now and killing the lower levels, keep with it!!!

Don’t ever stop playing to win. Never play to not lose.

Poker is not the only place position is to be considered. Take my soccer franchise, for example. Our Club won three Indoor Championships in a row. Everyone had a defined role and complimented one another. Then of course, our collective heads became too large and we signed “the world,” as we had to expand the roster moving from indoor to outdoor. On paper, we were phenomenal. On the field, we had a shortage of footballs to go around, too many scorers, not enough defense. We had too many superstars and no longer were we predominantly consisting of “role players.“  As a result, we were not successful in our summer campaign.

One would think that everyone in the organization would have learned their lesson. I split my top squad into two groups, one headed by yours truly, and the other by my ever so famous friend “SuperDonk.” I left virtually everyone to him, and formed a brand new squad, so building successful franchises is my specialty. Kyle (“that guy”) had very little building to do, as he already had the real deal. He had a spot or two to fill, but nothing that had any urgency. The spot was defensive in nature, of course. So, he runs up to one of the most offensive minded people in the league (Rick) and asks him to come play.

Kyle somehow convinces himself that Rick is a phenomenal defender, forgetting that Rick put four in on him just a few short weeks ago (that would be my first clue that dude’s not a defender).

This decision was unpopular amongst the team, and resulted in one defection to my new squad (i didn’t offer anyone but wouldn’t turn them away if it fit my system). So, he once again has too much O and not enough D, and catches his squad out of position for about 1/2 the game. When everyone was in position, Beer controlled the match. With four minutes to go, Kyle initiates a sub from the field, pulling Capt. Steve (all around player, very aware defensively, brilliant soccer mind) to bring Rick the Defender in. Kyle shouts out for Rick to come in on Defense.

Now, Kyle was trying to secure at least a draw, if not a win. With four minutes left, that’s about 8% of the game left over. If the score is 5-6, in my mind, the game is still within reach. Especially considering the momentum shifted to the Beer Squad’s favor. There was no urgency to rush forward, which is what Rick does. So, Kyle makes a save… And instead of bringing the ball out in a slow, controlled manner, he plays it swiftly to Rick and tells him to go with it.

Rick carries down the field, gets a shot off, the ball comes back the other way… no defenders in sight and Bam goal. Then a minute later, same thing, attack, counter, goal. Kyle’s team loses a winnable 8-5 in the final 8% of the game.

This positional mistake brings me back to poker and expected value. When one builds a successful arsenal of poker hands, he or she must consider position. You can’t play crap out of position. You cannot be the first to act with a shady hand. One generally doesn’t want to act UTG with a jack-9 not suited. That’s simply not the position for that hand in most games. I see someone do that, I expect them to lose more often than win, thus giving it a negative expected value primarily based on position. Save those hands for loose games when you’re in the BB or on the button, don’t attack with it when you have no clue what anyone else has or how people will conduct themselves after you.  Why speculate with no information?

If someone throws an all-star attacker on their football squad and calls them a defender, I expect them to lose as well. Position is important. Position is more important than the cards in the hole. Respect position, do what makes sense. Don’t concern yourself with the last flop coming jack three three and you tossed jack three offsuit preflop.

Don’t worry about signing an attacker to prevent someone else from doing so, when you’re not in the market for an attacker. Do things that have positive expected value.  Retain the role players.  Do things that make sense – things that are proven to work within the system.  Do things that fit and have a positive expected value.

Haiku of the day:

Act in position,
If you don’t, you will go broke,
Cryin’ all the way.

“Bitch” was stumbling all over the place, buying drinks for all his buds, who were all laughing at him and shaking their head. “Bitch” was aware he had “said word” on his forehead, and seemed OK with it. However, I think the ink was somehow affecting his hearing, as he was speaking in a manner similar to how an old person that’s losing his/her hearing talks. Said another way, dude was yelling because he couldn’t hear himself think… Maybe in thinking this one through, perhaps the idiot couldn’t hear himself think because he straight up wasn’t thinking? hmmm…

After we had our fun with him, he walked down to the end of the bar and was most certainly talking to a set of larger than life “Victoria’s Secret Models” (this dude thinks he was surprised to look in the mirror and see “Bitch” on his forehead, he’s certainly going to be surprised when he sees who he is really talking to, if you catch my drift). I’m not busting on anyone who might be gravitationally challenged, its more so that this dude’s perception was way off.

Which brings me to my main points. Wouldn’t it be nice if the people you sit down at the poker table with all had tattoos on their forehead telling you who they are? “Monster,” “Sucker,” “Moron,” “ATM,” “On Tilt,” “SuperDonk,” and “Lucky Bastard” are a few of the many tags I’d LOVE to see on my opposition’s foreheads. That would certainly make life easier for all of us if everyone had these accurate and descriptive terms on their foreheads.

But in reality, I’d propose these tattoos are already there in most of us, if not all. “What?” u ask? “How can you expect me to believe everyone goes to the tat parlor down the street and has their stats on their forehead?” Well, no… they don’t go have it placed on their forehead. But if you look hard enough, you can see it.

One of the differences between “That Guy” and a true “craftsman” in the game of poker; even the game of life for that matter is that the craftsman is aware that there are other people playing the game, while “that guy” thinks he is the only game in town. The craftsman knows the opposition has a hand, possibly even almost exactly what that hand is. “That guy” can’t see past his own cards. The craftsman studies his opposition and picks his spot, examines risk-reward relative to his chances of success. “That guy” looks no further than the tool box he’s in — unless its spelled out for him in the form of a tattoo on one’s forehead. Often, when I am playing against one of “those guys,” I raise preflop, we go to the showdown and I turn over a monster of a hand and “they” look surprised every time. I’m not sure why, as I’ve not been caught “accidentally” raising preflop with garbage.

When I’m in a hand, I have quality material; something with positive expected value. I’m no Fred Sanford… I’m not in the junk business, yet every time the “that guy” at the table seems shocked I have a great starting hand. I think it would help if he was aware I had two cards in front of me. I think that my forehead marking is just as invisible to him as my hole cards are.

When playing poker, you can’t stop at your cards. U have to be acutely aware of what your opponent may have… asking yourself (among other things) what hands this guy could play in this manner, is he bluff capable, will he cave to pressure? You want to strive to be the craftsman of your trade, not the tool. A craftsman is a master of his profession and/or hobbies. He people watches when he’s not in a hand, looking for the hidden forehead markings, taking in the scenery no matter how ugly it may be. He knows what is around him, the dangers and opportunities each present. And he knows how to utilize his own strengths and is aware of his weaknesses, working to constantly improve and add to his skill sets.

Poker Haiku of the day, dedicated to the idiot who called my 4x raise on my pocket aces…

What a “tool” you are,
Callin’ me down with five-nine.
What you think I had?