“Why do you bet so much before the flop?”

“Why do you bet so much before the flop?” (an answer to a question raised at the table)

I was asked at my home game last night why I raise such 'large amounts' and potentially shut out action at the poker table. Or to split the question into three sub questions: Why do I raise? Why not raise small? and Why not limp every hand instead and bet from the flop onwards? At the table I did not manage to fully explain the nature of the 'tight-aggressive' style of play I adopt and why raising substantial amounts holds many advantages compared to limping preflop but I shall attempt to give an overview here.

Tight-aggressive or TAG for short is a style of poker play that became popular the mid 2000s, as a direct result of the strategy manuals penned by Dan Harrington and to a lesser extent Phil Hellmuth.  The style is defined by a twofold approach to the game: 'Tight' in terms of hand selection and 'aggressive' in terms of betting amounts and frequency. The style maximises profits from carefully chosen starting hands and avoids difficult decisions after the flop. Since the style is aggressive you are always leading the betting and in doing so you ask a question of your opponents, “My hand is good, how good is yours?” and when your opponent's call they are answering “Mine is somewhere between o.k and good, let's see a flop.” The first reason for betting then is to take initiative in the hand and learn something about your opponent's hand strength before the flop comes down.

The second reason for raising is that often, the tight-aggressive player is aiming to get heads-up in a pot and see a flop against one other person. This is done to seize a greater equity share (potential profit share) of the money in the pot from blinds/antes and preflop calls. If 4 players see a flop then typically no one has greater than 35% or so equity share of the money. The chances might be something like 35%/25%/15%/25% for the respective hands JTs,98o,22,A2o if you just deal them out and no one bets from start to finish. If the 22 had raised in this example and the JTs had called then the chances change to 48%/52% in favour of JTs. The 22 has therefore gained 33% equity in the hand by raising and driving out the 98o and the A2o from calling. This simple example demonstrates  why raising is sometimes necessary in poker to get maximum value from the  hands you are dealt.

If we accept for a moment that raising is a good idea then why not raise smaller to lure other players into the pot with dominated hands? The answer to this question is that one person's concept of a large and off-putting preflop bet is different from another person's. It is up to the discriminating TAG player to sell his good hands for as much as the market is willing to pay. In a sense tight-aggressive poker relies on your opponent's making the mistake of calling the preflop raises with dominated hands and if players will not do this, then I may decide to scale my bet sizes downwards. I may not want to risk returning to the four way flop scenario outlined above with my 22 so if I make a small raise and receive three callers I only have myself to blame for not adjusting to table conditions. If you are playing heads-up poker there is definitely an argument to be made for scaling your preflop bet sizes down, since there is no risk of multiway pots and losing your equity share to other prospectors.

The third and final part of this discussion is to compare the merits of a strategy based around limping all the time to see flops and then judge how much you would like to invest in the pot from this point onwards. This is called a passive strategy and you are considered 'loose-passive' if you limp more than around 30% of hands dealt and 'tight-passive' if you limp less. The advantages of a passive style are that it is low in terms of initial investment, and your hands are well disguised. If you limp in with AA, 107s, JTo,88 etc. no one can get a feel for how strong your hand is preflop, unlike the TAG player who has raised and already told you he/she has a good hand. People who play a passive strategy are limping into pots hoping to flop a concealed hand such as two-pair and above and then hoping that someone will follow them all the way to the river with a worse hand. Passive styles are inherently risky since you see many multiway flops where the best hand possible is more often in play compared to heads-up. You are trying to turn a low equity share preflop into a big profit post flop and hoping that when this happens it coincides with somebody else holding a good but not better hand and paying you off. You will lose many small pots fishing around around for the big catch and you must have the patience to wait for the right moment combined with the skill to recognise when it is time to land your big fish. From experience I know I cannot successfully play a limping strategy unless I am heads-up against certain types of opponent, so I usually choose to adopt a TAG approach in games with more than two players.

Additional note re stealing from the big blind

In our home game we also discussed a unique scenario at the table: whether the big blind should automatically raise a small blind who meekly limps when it is folded around to them, regardless of his/her hand. In this pseudo heads-up situation I routinely raise the big blind since the small blind has told me they do not have a good hand and I stand to gain in this hand and in future folded small blinds by bullying anyone who limps into me by stealing their money the first time they do this. Unfortunately for me on this occasion both myself and the small blind were dealt good hands and the small blind was limp-trapping and I felt I had to fold on the flop when I bet and was raised. The potential victim of my bullying tactic turned out to be David to my Goliath. I can count on one hand the number of times this has happened, compared to the countless times it has been successful so I will not be changing my strategy any time soon, I just got unlucky on this occasion ;)

Reflective practice

When I was a trainee teacher I developed a habit of reflective practice which has stayed with me, even though the classroom teaching career has not. I ruthlessly apply preparation, evaluation and analysis to my online poker game and am slowly and gradually reaping the rewards. The biggest benefit to my game has been a reduction in the severity and length of tilt and a more realistic perspective on my results. I have identified the features of my A,B and C games and in evaluation this helps me to be objective about how well I have played and how lucky I am getting in each session. I am in essence using a system called 'the adult learning model' to develop my repertoire of moves whilst also eliminating mistakes. This method should hopefully see me inch forward in profitability by winning more when ahead and losing less when behind.  

Nobody understands percentages like a poker player

33% of people will be affected by cancer in their lifetime.

I have the early stages of bowel cancer and a doctor recently told me there was a 50% chance he could remove my lump all in one go. Another doctor told me with 100% confidence that my lump was benign and nothing to worry about.  Yet another doctor told me my lump had developed into full blown cancer approximately 40-45% of the way. As things stand I don't know my chances of survival and I don't want to morbidly look them up on medical websites, but as a poker player I think I have a greater understanding of the psychological effect of quoting percentage chances than the medical professionals I have seen recently.

When I was quoted 50% to remove my lump I instantly thought to myself "Shit I'm in a coin flip here." My pocket pair is facing two overcards or vice-versa if you are a glass half empty kind of a guy. As any tournament poker player knows a coinflip is a precarious position to be in. On the one hand you can double up and sail through or on the other hand it could be curtains. Even though the percentage chance is an appreciable 50% you can have 5-10 flips go against you in a row fairly easily. In other words I did not feel very reassured to know the chances were 50/50 so why quote it to me? Was I supposed to nod sagely, take a coin from my pocket and toss it in the air before laying back and saying "O.k doc cut me, I'll take those odds?"

My point is that it is kind of irresponsible to quote percentage chances to vulnerable patients when they are not really in a position to do anything with the data. The other quote I received regarding the 40% cancer growth really got me tilted in hospital when I was over 24 hours into a fast and 12 hours from my last drink of water. The only thing the statistically insensitive surgeon achieved was to make me think "Oh bollocks I never win 60-40 all-ins" I do not wish to sound flippant about what is my health and future on the line but I am used to routinely processing and being subject to percentage chances at the poker table, and I know that for 60% to feel like a genuine advantage you have to play it out over and over hundreds of times. I only have one life and if my lump is too evolved and has taken over my body, then what use was telling me minutes before my surgery? If I had been approached weeks or even days before surgery and had the numbers explained then I might have found it hard to swallow, but at least I could have taken comfort in my small advantage and used this information to explain to my loved ones what the implications are.

Continuation bets: through the looking glass

Continuation bets or cbets are when you raise preflop and proceed to bet the flops that you miss. You are expecting your opponent to fold even though they have some degree of equity in the pot.  The extent to which your bet is a bluff will be unknown and often you are betting a slightly better unpaired hand into a worse unpaired hand that will fold. Continuation bets can only work if you are checked to, or you are out of position and bet first on the flop and should rarely be done with more than two players to the flop.

I have been analysing my use of cbets to try and stop over-thinking in game flow, and to stop betting in bad spots or missing potential continuation bets.

I ran some trial flops and discovered that for 3 broad categories of flops the following seems to occur:

Approx 40% of the time the board is dry eg Kh7c3d
Approx 40% of the time the board is slightly connected eg 4c7h8h
Approx 20% of the time the board is very connected eg 9hJcQc

It is generally recommended by many sources that a solid aggressive poker player continuation bets with a decent frequency such as 60-70%. Against thinking players some experts can get away with higher if they are (perceived as) especially tight preflop and also have the balls to play maniacal post flop.

Based on the success/failure rate of my cbets vs flop types up to this point I have developed a theory. If I cbet dry flops 100% of the time, slightly wet flops approx 50% of the time and very connected/sopping wet flops very rarely then I will get the greatest number of folds on the flop for my bets, whilst maintaining an optimal percentage of cbets overall.

I am using the Dan Harrington clock face randomizing method to decide ahead of the flop if I will bet (a type 2 board) or not so can use all my thinking power for other decisions when the flop comes down, such as planning what sort of turn cards to bet again on..

The second level conclusion I have reached is that I can raise more trashy hands from late position without having to panic and improvise spur of the moment betting lines from the flop onwards. I already know what I am going to do on the flop and the success or failure of my bet has nothing to do with my cards and everything to do with the texture of the flop. I think;)

Multitabling

I am starting to regularly play two tables at once, although on my site there is not always enough fishy tables to sustain this for long. All the regular players move tables constantly to try and get position on the fish and it is hard work to keep a table going. I think the 5/10 players must descend to 4nl and 2nl when their tables go quiet.

I am finding multitasking o.k but I am occasionally timing out on one table, usually just after a big decision on one table when my mind replays a hand to look for mistakes. This is a mental game mistake I am working on and I am now using a jotter to note key hands to come back to later rather than replay them in my mind there and then.

I enjoy having lots of button clicking and thinking to do at the same time and two tabling has helped to reveal consistent errors in my game such as continuation-betting the wrong types of flops into the wrong types of players. I am also limping the small blind too often/calling the big blind so as to make open folding a better proposition long term with any two cards in the blinds! I suspect that in the long term playing the blinds correctly is the key to full ring success becuase you always lose from the blinds and you can maximize your gains elsewhere by minimising your inevitable losses.
 
I now have a system of game evaluation that means I can constantly target my weaknesses and seek to drive donkey plays out of my game. I have decided to only move up in stakes when I am CRUSHING my limit and not when I am on the cusp, as I did once before and got insta-slapped back down! I am playing with greatly reduced tilt problems now, and have made great progress using Jared Tendler's methods. I am also on the search for the best music to fuel a poker game and I generally balance my mood with heavy tunes when I am tired and mellow post rock when I am too amped. Gotta take it up a notch whilst taking it down a notch sometimes;)

Mental Game Fish

I am reading Jared Tendler's book 'The Mental Game Of Poker' and have quickly realised I suffer from many of the mental defects Jared claims make you a mental game fish, even though I am not a massive fish in strategy terms (except for problem #2 below). Here are the first five things I could think of out a massive list I made, that hinder my game and give me problems:

1. Changing proven winning strategy to try and counteract run-bad
2. Trying to win every hand
3. Thinking that certain cards are 'bound to come'
4. Schooling other players
5. Feeling frustrated when bad players win more
   
   
    I am using pre game preparation and post game evaluation to try and combat these problems the Tendler way, along with regular hand analysis. The work is similar to cognitive behavioural therapy and it feels good to be proactive and working on aspects of the game that I may be able to apply elsewhere too. My long term aim is to move up in cash game stakes so I have stopped playing heads up and multitable donkaments for the time being.

June home game match report

We could only arrange 4 players for last night's home game but decided to go ahead and combine a match with watching European cup football in the background. The home game line up has gone through a lot of changes of late and a recent injection of youth has made our tournaments well attended and increasingly tough to beat. Given the low turn out and the fact that we would all have half an eye on the football, we decided to play a microstakes cash game which would remove time pressure on the blinds.

The Conge and King_Tubby mixed it up early on as KT was in Conge's big blind and not in a mood to roll over. Tubby played like Rooney on the comeback trail: loads of energy at the start, taking an early lead and mixing it up in a lot of plays. The Conge took on the role of Joe Hart: he was playing a cocky game, making dramatic moves when it was called for and bossing the rest of us around. King Tubby took down a fairly large early pot holding KK vs Pokerhontasz' AQ on a Qxxxx board and another highlight was me folding TP (with no kicker) on an AKXX board to Conge's huge turn bet and then tilting afterwards because I was likely bluffed off the winner.

On the whole I thought I played like Steve Gerrard: getting involved in the action when called for and staying predictably solid on set pieces, but also looking a bit old and tired. I snuck through a few standard raises and c-bets from the button but as luck would have it when I hit they folded and when I missed they called it down. King_Tubby's run of good cards ended after a while but that did not stop him from trying to force the action and at one stage it looked like he would run out of steam and not make the full 90 minutes. Pokerhontasz took on the role of James Milner, playing a defensive game but occasionally moving forward only to make a few near misses. In one hand Pokerhontasz rivered trip Queens holding KQ on a xxxQQ board only to lose to Conge's rivered flush which she managed to shrug off fairly swiftly, remaining composed for the TV cameras.

By the end of the match we were all dog tired and with stacks roughly back to where they started we decided to call it a night. King Tubby was the overall winner with about 20 big blinds and I made about 15bb, which demonstrates how close the game was. Our seating arrangement and reduced player pool meant that the money ultimately passed around the table full circle: from Conge to KingTubby in a series of small bluffs which got called down; from KingTubby to Pokerhontasz in a series of big hand match ups; from Pokerhontasz back to The Conge in an assortment of coolers and tight folds and, then from Conge to me because I called down a couple of Conge's big bluffs after he stung me the first time! In a cash game I think you need fresh injections of players from time to time to boost the game and also a few more than 4 players means more good hands turn up more often to create interesting pots. We did the best with what we had and it was nice to have a change of pace, but at the end of the day it's the team with the most goals big blinds that is the winner so well done King Tubby.

Away game report

Our most recent home game took place at King Tubby's house and he kindly laid on a smorgasbord of excellent snacks and dips. Jennoi and her beau, 'TheHunter' descended on the fantastic buffet like 'a hobo on a ham and cheese' (Jesse May) after an afternoon in the pub. The Conge forgoed daytime drinking and turned up recharged and ready to rock.  Pokerhontasz and I were both properly knackered but still glad to be out the house for a change. Once we had finished admiring King Tubby's beautiful poker chip set a deep stack tournament 20min blind structure with flat payout was agreed. This would reward loose play in the early game and an aggressive shove strategy later on: something which would determine the fate of and eventually separate our two most active players: TheConge and TheHunter.

The first hand of the night produced quad tens when TheHunter turned a set and rivered the nuts on an Axx1010 board and this set the tone for his becoming table captain early game. His nemesis Conge made a set of 5s twice and they sparred frequently as TheHunter refused to be bluffed off his hands. It was interesting to see a range of post flop bet sizes from TheConge, whose game has evolved from pot betting any untouched flop and I think TheHunter read too deeply into some of Conge's bets, and felt he had to pay off these suspicious-looking amounts. KingTubby took a dent to his chip stack when he was unfortunate enough to be on the receiving end of a tricky situation holding A2 Vs Conge's A6. On an AxK76 board King Tubby paid off 3 streets of value, convincing himself that the 3rd bet must be a bluff and he was therefore way ahead.  TheHunter continued to play 80% of hands, stabbing and taking down a lot of uncontested pots but ran into Pokerhontasz's underfull on an 5566x board, although I can't remember what he paid off her river bet with.

As the blinds began to increase each hand became more pivotal in determining who would make the gravy. Jennoi received a healthy boost to her stack on a Jc6d10h3cboard having flopped the nut flush draw and turned a pair of tens holding ATd. Pokerhontasz raised preflop out of position, but shut down from betting after her continuation bet was called. Jennoi continued to run good but nearly mucked the nuts on a KK2JQ board when TheHunter proudly showed K9 for top set. We had to point out to Jennoi that her pocket jacks were good and she bemusedly raked in all the chips! King Tubby went all in with Q8 on a KcQcAs10s board, only to be called in two spots: TheHunter chipped up significantly in this hand holding AJc which flopped top pair and rivered a straight to beat Tubby' Q8 and Jennoi's AK even though she flopped top two -pair. TheHunter quickly acquired the rest of my chips limp-calling JJ to my 10bb shove holding 55. Pokerhotasz was next out and Jennoi almost crippled TheConge sucking out with J9s to his KK all in as we went 3 handed.

TheConge affected a series of double ups with a series of all in bets that were called by The Hunter and held up to knock him out in 3rd place.  Jennoi gradually blinded out in a short space of time and Conge got it in with 8h2s vs Jennoi's QdTc and the 8h2s runner-runnered an improbable spade flush  on a 4s10s6cAs5s board to lock up the win. This completes a hat trick of wins for TheConge and deservedly so: he is not afraid to mix it up and play a range of hands early doors, and seems to make very thin value bets that still get paid off by worse. He knows when to put the pedal down and shove a wide range of hands, which helps to mitigate the effects of luck in the face of rising blinds. He has also had unspeakably bad luck in all-in pots in our home games so it is nice to see variance turn around and reward solid play.

Cardinal sins of poker

I just committed several massive poker errors and cost myself two buy ins at a higher level. This is 8 buy ins at the lower level so it will take a while to undo. I did not play against better players, I was not cleverly outplayed and outclassed, I read the table well and bet all my good hands for value. So how did I manage to donk off all my chips?

1. I played for too long and was not focused on good decision making. I usually stop after 40 hands but pushed on.
2. I tried to recoup losses before quitting the table so was pushing marginal hands too hard.
3. I continued sitting in an unfavourable position on the table, kidding myself that I could overcome it.
4. I fell in love with top pair and later, an overpair when they were both obviously beaten

I am not angry/tilted or whatever but I do feel very very silly. In theory I am rolled to continue playing at these stakes, but unless I learn some self control there is not much point as I will lose my entire roll in no time.

Play Money Holiday

Whilst off work and recovering from a sedative in hospital I have sensibly avoided cash poker and been playing for play money:) I have always argued that there is no point in playing poker for no stake at all but this is simply not true as it is actually great fun. Some of the highlights so far have included sextupling my play roll in omaha cash during a 9way all in fest; quadrupling through in the second hand of a 6man nlhe sit and go, then trying my hand at 7 card stud and doubling through my starting stack in no time! Now obviously all my run good has arrived at once but the fact is that these games are a great training ground for the lowest limit play anyway.  You have to think long and hard before bluffing in play money because of the insanely wide calling ranges but conversely you can bet the pants off players with your better starting hands and flop hits. These are two of arguably the three most important elements of poker besides choosing good starting hands. Players also tell you more or less straight away with their timing and betting patterns how strong their hand is in a very exaggerated way.  If they insta check you can bet as a bluff, if they dwell you can charge them to draw/pay you off with a worse made hand etc. I met a player today who insta potted all his bluffs for example, which baffled the rest of the table into submission whilst I took note of it until I was in a position to make a play.

Play money has also given me the bug for seven card stud again. I definitely enjoy 7stud more than omaha as you get more reward for selecting tighter starting hands plus glean lots of information on other players' hands as you move through the streets. I only play omaha from time to time in an effort to become a more rounded player but I find that it is a very swingy game better suited to people with more money to burn than I have. I also nearly got pwned heads up in a  nlhe sit and go until I noticed that my opponent was adjusting and not playing a static 'loose passive' game. I was card dead, limping into pots and bluffing at a rate of 0% because I thought I faced a 'calling station' passive opponent, but they suddenly morphed into a stabbing, aggressive pot stealer heads up. This was better play than I have typically faced in dozens of heads up matches and it left me wondering. If this player is able to get heads up in a sit and go, plus make strategic adjustments based on their opponent's game, why weren't they playing for real money? Perhaps they were just ill/tired and off their regular game or maybe it is because for them the true essence and appeal of poker is in beating and outwitting your opponents,  not the strategic and systematic acquisition of cold hard cash? I think I have just (re) discovered or reaffirmed in my mind poker's magical dichotomy which separates (or at least should separate) the thinking players from the social gamers: I am calling it the donkotomy of poker. Game on:)

Tagpoker competition entry

Tagpoker competition entry

I knocked up this silly animation for Tagpoker.co.uk $500 free bankroll/coaching competition. The aim is to advertise the site in a 'wacky' manner. I made it just after watching a Tagpoker leakfinder vid and thought it would be funny to do a tilt based skit on donkey plays.  I used the free version of Goanimate to make the basic animation and then edited the footage using windows movie maker, camstudio and videodub.The music is a backing track I knocked up to use when teaching guitar although I wanted to have 'Loser' by Beck but I was scared of getting copyright spanked once it was up on Youtube. The competition runs until September so it will be interesting to see how many hits it gets. It still makes me laugh, partially because the animation and text-to-voice are so stilted. I highly recommend playing about on Goanimate because it is very satisfying creating a character and have them say funny stuff, especially out of context swearing. I also recommend Tagpoker.co.uk for no-nonsense poker strategy. It is mostly heads up based videos but this will sharpen your game like you would not believe.

Losing my rhythm

I am sick at the moment and finding lots of time to fill whilst sat around the house. Naturally online poker can do this very well but it is not really a profitable exercise.  I am losing my rhythm, finding myself stranded across the beat unable to make sense of the pulse of the game. I am misreading strength as weakness and misreading weakness as strength and often folding better hands. The more you play with donkeys the more you start to play like one since they make such odd size bets at random times and routinely play any two cards. I have been trying to nit up and play solid hands, but the high proportion of rocks in the cash games makes this unprofitable. Your aim is to stack a donk but this can take time and I am firing at all the wrong times and not punishing tight players enough to keep afloat. I want to be able to move into multitabling but I see potential pitfalls that many bad reg players suffer from. You can limp into too many pots because it is easier to think 'i can flop a flush with A5s if I limp, so I call' than it is to note your position, who is behind, who might pay you off if you hit, and what would happen if you repeated the move 100 times? I am already having problems limping in the small blind too often multiway and errors like this compound when you multitable. You also lose the ability to spot timing tells which have become very useful to me. So many players routinely quick check polarised hand strength and have a long think about marginal situations, making your post flop decisions easy in heads up pots. Of course if I am being truly honest with myself the main reason I want to multitable is that I have just discovered how to tile the tables together into a neat pattern on the screen and it looks very cool indeed.

My first proper brag post

This is my first real 'check me out and chill' post because I have made my first $100 in pure profit! I nearly reached the landmark around one year ago but donked off 10 buy ins and then withdrew all my starting capital. I came very close to the threshold a week ago but had some mental problems crossing the finish line as it were and lost a few buy ins trying too hard. This felt like the start of a tilt-induced downswing so I took a few days off to reflect and since then it has all come together with a cash game mini-heater and freeroll final table finish tipping me over the edge. To make the magic $100 I landed 6th place out of 3000 runners in a freeroll through a combination of insanely good luck, bad calls and suckouts:)

I have already started playing some cash games at the next level 2/4 (or 4nl if you want to use forum speak) but these are mostly 6max which is a format I am not as successful in as full ring.  In a recent foray into 2/4 I played a $5 pot and it would not take many of those going the wrong way to send me into screaming monkey tilt! I have also dabbled in 2-tabling 1/2 (2nl) but the problem I see with this strategy is that it is tricky to table select well and there are a lot of regular 2nl multitabling players, many of whom play across the microstakes. I am not sure if I want to sit in a big pool of rocks waiting to be coolered in overpair vs set confrontations. I really enjoy the challenge of heads up play but took a break from turbo HUSNGs because I kept losing to weak-tight players and I had to take a step back and admit that my heads up game is a little too spewy. I would rather work on my heads up game in a regular speed format which on my site is more than double the buy in of the turbos, so I need to wait until I am suitably bankrolled before I can regularly play in these games.

The good thing is there is a high proportion of donks across the stakes on my site so as long as I keep my bankroll management tight and keep working to improve my game, I stand a very good chance of climbing up the ranks. I often open up tables at the higher stakes and it is great to see weak players I have notes on entering $24 tournaments or playing 5c/10c cash games for example. Even better still I have seen $5/$10 cash game players limping in then min betting AK across all 3 streets. That is the kind of action I am used to seeing at 2nl! Oh boy...

If I know, he/she also knows...

A theory has been rattling around my head for dealing with the varied types of players players at the cash tables. For every piece of information I know about an opponent's tendencies and playing statistics, they also know a comparable amount about mine. This sounds like a truism but from this I can modify my game play, stay aware of my table image and make the occasional play against regulars that I would not make against most fish. I was raised by a regular opponent in position recently, so I popped a 3 bet preflop with rags and was able to 2 barrel an ace high board to take it down. This move worked because I know enough about my opponent to know that he would likely be getting out of line in late position, therefore he knows enough about me to know that I would only ever 3 bet good aces and medium pairs+ so the flop probably helped me. This sort of move does not give me license to spew chips, but demonstrates a point where a small edge in a game can be ground out.

The further conclusion of this theory is that if I know nothing about an opponent, all they know about me is my actions in a hand or two. If I decide to call a hand down, it looks weak, if I decide to bet it looks strong. It is for this reason that if unknown fish are still on the line and you have shown aggression twice then it is quite often correct to check-fold. It is horrible weak-tight poker, but time and time again the third bet is just spew. Our approach to continuing with aggression should be to look at the flop, decide whether to bet 1,2, or 3 times and then plan a line based on the passivity/activity of the fish in question. This morning I played a slight losing session where I tried to isolation raise an aggrodonk when I was in position, so I could skin him before he went broke. The trouble was I had was a passive fish in the big blind that kept calling my raises with 45% of hands. In one pot I ended up heads up in position to the fish, with a small pair that missed the board. The board read K89 two hearts. Here my line is to decline to c-bet, check back the flop, and check fold the turn all day of the week. The reason for this weak play is what hand can my opponent call with preflop that will not also call a bet post flop that I am still ahead of by the turn? Only small pairs and weak aces. Since I am behind most of his small pairs ( I had 44) and having watched this fish for a few rounds of the table I know he would check down a missed ace all the way. That leaves Kx, Qx, Jx 109,108, 98, 97 etc. all of which are happy with the flop, will certainly call and will likely improve on the turn. Furthermore this fish had also ran a check trap play since sitting down at the table and so would likely check all his kings+ hands on flop for sure.I was happy that I had shown aggression, backed off at the right time and made the right play for this particular opponent in this particular spot.

Home game report: caught between a rock and a hard place

Last night we played a super tight 4 handed sit and go home game. Small pairs were being played cautiously and weak aces were hitting the muck. When the cd player stopped you could hear a pin drop as we sat statuesque like deer hunters 4ft from their prey. I have never felt such a tense poker atmosphere and my emotions were a mixture of doom and elation when I was dealt QQ early in the game and got reraised by Hitman preflop.  Following Hitman's raise Pokerhontasz and TheConge called in the other two spots and I repopped the hand with some trepidation. To cut a long story short I lost half my stack on this stupid hand and Hitman would go on to ride my chips to heads-up later on. At one stage Pokerhontasz got coolered with trips undeneath TheConge's turned full house and never really recovered fully, so she was first out in the shove/fold stage. I was out shortly after and head's up was a very short affair because Hitman was tired and zombie re-shoved Q6 into The Conge's aces preflop.  The real story of the match though was TheConge's relentless button raising strategy.  Time and time again I had to look down at Q4o, J6o etc in the small blind hoping for a glimmer of a hand to 3bet with but none came. He played great last night, and more so when he didn't really have much of a hand to start with, because he played his position. By acting last after other player's decisions TheConge could wait to judge tells/range/action/board texture etc. and make some good post flop moves. I wish I could play this well when on the button but I am so rooted in 'level one' poker because of playing gutter stakes online that I cannot make the leap, or do so at the wrong times against the wrong players. TheConge and I have had our higher level battles in the past, but last night I was sandwiched between his button and the big stack's big blind.

Insta actions in nano stakes cash games

As far as I am concerned, an insta bet or insta check in online poker can only be one where the pre-emptive button has been pressed and the betting action happens the instant play gets around to the villain. Some poker information websites will have you believe that a super-fast bet is an insta-bet but this is not so. A super -fast bet or check may well contain loaded information and act as a tell, but it is not to be confused with the instantaneous (or near-instantaneous) action. At nano stakes cash full ring,and in order of frequency seen instantaneous actions can be:

1. The insta-check or insta call

Rarely in full ring is this anything other than weakness or a drawing hand. A player may preselect check/fold or check/call. The surest time when you can take down the pot in these situations are when a player who multitables has used the insta check button out of the blinds. The texture of the flop will tell you if you should bet or not in position, and if you are insta called on a wet board a dry turn card and bet should finish the job off.

2. The insta min-bet

This is most often ace-high, two overcards or a weak pair in the pocket. Many players will preselect insta min bet all 3 streets with these kinds of holdings. The insta min bet is a hand they perceive to be o.k but not worth betting properly with. The only time you should fold is if you have 1. terrible position and a weak hand multiway 2. Worse than ace high heads up or 3. They change the bet sizing on the river to HUUUUGE! It doesn't take a genius to work out their hand has been the nuts all along, or miraculously came good by the river.  It is also important to spot any timing delay on the turn. Calling stations who insta-min bet the flop and think before min betting or 2xing the turn are often trapping, with the intention of blasting the river with a pot bet. More aggressive donkey players perform all these moves with 2X or 3X size bets (which can be pre-selected) as well, so be on the look out for this high level and cunning bluffing tactic.

3. The insta click raise

I cannot think of a situation where this would be anything other than a monster hand. Unless you are playing against a super aggressive moron who has a sizing tell where he bets instantly most of the time and also bets proportionally to the strength of his hand.

4. The insta river shove

Foldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfold....... Or risk going down the road of "he cannot have it this time I call oh shit its the mortal nuts, dammit I wish I had folded!" The thing to remember here is that this move was pre-planned. The villain had to know on the turn that he was shoving the river so ignore the river card and fold your unimproved pocket jacks, again.


5. The insta pot bet

This is the only insta action with any ambiguity as far as I am concerned and it is player dependent. It screams strength but you often see players betting like this if they are scared. AK is a hand that gets some players into trouble this way. They know it is supposed to be a good hand, but cannot believe it when then the flop comes down ragged time and time again. In response to this cycle of disappointment they formulate a plan: to pot the hand regardless and show super strength. If they bet this way then only players with a really strong hand can call down, which is unlikely because they have a top 5 starting hand. This donk logic is doomed to fail and all the showdown value of AK vanishes when weaker aces may have stuck around for smaller bets, or weak pairs may have called and been outdrawn by you on the turn or river. The only time you get action you are crushed and these sorts of players have a hard time folding AK once they have invested a chunk of cash into the hand. More often than not an insta pot bet is a decent pair hand though, so look out for players who mostly check/fold and then suddenly insta-pot the flop when they 'have it.'

What happens when I am losing

This is one of those stream of conscious semi-tilted posts I sometimes write to rationalise losing money and recover from it. Losing is painful for me no matter how small the event or stake. If it is a game of pool, darts, cards, monopoly etc. the feeling is still the same. In other words the monetary loss is not really the source of the pain. I have had problems in the past being a very 'bad loser' and I am not sure of the origins of this behaviour as it dates back as long as I can remember. I spent a long time away from pool tables because of this attitude problem, but have since managed to partly exorcise these demons. For me, losing prompts an adreneline rush and this is the trigger for foggy thinking and bad decision making. Sometimes I will complain, blame others, beat myself up etc but on the poker table bad decision making quickly leads to loose play and loss of money.

I just left a ridculous, cheap and donkey filled poker table after 40 mins because I was losing. If I had stayed longer I was a big favourite to win back my losses and more but I still left the table for several reasons. Firstly I analysed the optimum session length of my most consistent winnning sessions and found that 15-40 mins is optimal and any more or less is linked to more losses. Secondly I have decided to put some balance back into my life and play a little less poker in my leisure time. Thirdly, when you sit and lose for 40mins at a poker table even the biggest drooler on the planet will gain confidence in your losses, notice that you usually bet but this time checked a street and use that as a cue to experiment with bluffing. The donkey in question has probably played 100% fit/fold up to that point and many donks accidentally bluff with the best hand, so it is not worth looking them up with a marginal hand when you can return another day to flop the nuts and stack off with a different donkey who has stubbornly held on with 2nd pair Ace kicker to your set.

Finally another statistic hit me today: I was running a hud and my preflop play stats matched exactly another player on the table sat to my left, and he too was having a losing session of similar proportions. The super tight style was clearly not working at this moment in time on this table, with this group of players for what ever reason. The one thing I have learned not to do in this situation though, is start playing crappy hands. If 3 donks limp and I look at QJo and think 'If I raise the btn I'll have pos'n, the blinds will fold and .....' I know it is time to leave the table and let the adreneline leave my system. Even though isolating in position or going multiway in position can be profitable you are working marginal edges and must accept bigger swings. There is also more multistreet guesswork against groups of players with super wide hand ranges as you rarely get heads up when you raise from any position.  The only way to beat the donkeys is to raise massively preflop with good hands (for your position), flop well and then get it in fast on a wet board or build a pot over 3 streets on a dry board. This is how I built my cash game profit, and this is how I intend to keep it.

Sunday Bloody Sunday

I don't know what it is about Sundays and online poker but I should routinely take a day of rest instead of playing. My best and most consistent tournament finishes have been on a Sunday because there are so many monkeys playing the big fields, but my worst overall cash/sit and go losing days have been on a Sunday. I think I develop some kind of false invincibility shield by wading through 500 players in a tournament, and then wear my new shield to the cash tables where I am of course totally vincible, as it were. I performed a classic donkey move yesterday, taking all my lovely tournament profit and losing it in a slightly higher stake cash game. At first I told myself that it would be a learning experience, to improve my game. At first I told myself I would drop out when half stacked and accept the loss for experience's sake. Unfortunately I made the classic mistake of dumping loads and then trying to get even before quitting. DONG!

I descended into some kind of gambler's distorted mind set, I got tilted in a subtle way and began to play HORRIBLY. I flatted weak aces aout of position, I stopped hand reading and played on whims and at one stage I stubbornly called down with an underpair to the board. In short I turned into a total weak-tight calling station idiot. In the cold light of day I am through the self loathing period of this disastrous session and in truth my roll is still plenty intact. I am not like the sad blackjack players on Louie Theroux's special programme on gambling, but I experienced a little of what they must go through. Mike Caro calls it the 'threshold of misery,' when you have lost an amount by which any further losses are inconsequential to you compared to what you have lost already in emotional terms. Next Sunday however, if I play and if I cash in anything I am going to do what all the weak tight nitty Sunday cash game players do: I am going to hit..... and run.
;)

To value bet or to bluff? That is the question

I have made two large post it notes, one says 'value bet' and one says 'bluff.' All bets in poker are one or the other and I have had some problems automatically betting without a good reason either way. My polarised post it notes are helping me to keep a check on my reasoning. I should also be able to isolate problem situations where it is not clear cut either way. For those who are not clear on the definitions a value bet is a bet which stands to be called by a range of worse hands eg you bet AK on a KJ8 board into a passive player who will chase draws and peel with middle or bottom pair eg JQ, J10, J9, A8 etc. Some of these hands will be superior hands, such as 88 but it is still a value bet when you make it, since there are fewer monster hands that are potentially ahead of you. A bluff is a bet that will fold out a range of better hands such as a donk lead on a A72 board with 64. Your hand is worthless and you do not want to go to the river only to be beaten by 9 high, so you bluff and your opponent will likely fold KQ,KJ,QJ,J10 etc to a bet thinking that you hold an ace in your hand. To make these bets you need to know your opponent's playing style and mood, since a tight aggressive player will pay off obvious value bets less often than a calling station and a tight-passive player will often fold to bluffs.  The psychology of betting in poker fascinates me and I think the reason why calling stations call with such a wide range of hands is that they fear being bullied and they are also eternally hopeful about the hands they might make if they get lucky 'this time'. This is why you should rarely bluff at nanostakes poker, because you are playing against people gambling for fun with very little money. They are happy to splash about their chips and so you should value bet the living daylights out of them every chance you get.

Turbo booster

Quick blind levels in microstakes heads up turbos creates an interesting set of challenges for the thinking/improving poker player. You are forced to observe frequencies of player actions within a few hands and make decisions based on these observations with the ticking time bomb of 3 minute blind levels. When you factor in the aggressiveness of many heads up players this makes some matches like a game of chicken. Your initial impressions of a player can be mistaken though, and if you do not keep reevaluating their playing style then you miss it when the swingometer moves in the other direction. This is not to say that players are varying their style to confuse and disorientate, they are simply not that sophisticated at my level of play.  What players are doing though is hitting or missing hands and any change in consistency is likely to reveal a hit rather than a miss since they will rarely have a strong hand.  My strategy is based around exploiting the following general player characteristics:

1. They call and slow play too much
2. They bet more with better hands and less with bluffs (unless they are an aggro donk)
3. They are impatient
4. They do not read the board to assess your hand strength, only their own
5. They are happy to get all the chips in early to feel the rush of the board running out yeah! Bizarrely though, they often tighten up when they have less than 7-8bb.

So to counter these general characteristics I try to:

1. Bet more for value and bluff less
2. Avoid overthinking their overbets, but stamp on min bets
3. If they think for a long time, they are likely in a marginal spot, not super strong or super weak (unless preflop with high blinds when you sometimes see a tank min raise or tank min 3bet with AA/KK which is surprisingly common amongst calling stations or weak tight players)
4. Look at the board and announce how well it fits their likely hands and compare their strength to mine
5. Try to avoid giving them the perfect reshove at around 15bb, but shove wide myself at -10bb

I am on a mission to remove fancy play from my game. It is a long road ahead but these simple rules should help to keep me in check. I have stopped playing full ring SNGs because everyone has tightened up way too much so the value vs the time it takes has vanished from them. I am too busy for cash games so heads up is the way to go with a busy lifestyle. A HU Turbo only takes 20mins max to complete. Current roi 6% and counting....