July 10, 2006
Slowplaying The Big Boys (And Why You Shouldn't).
First, an instructive example.
In a 90-player freeroll which had a prize of exactly one entry into the next tournament, the following hand decided the match:
Full Tilt Poker Game #785277592: .NET Satellite to Round 1 (5202652), Table 1 - 500/1000 - No Limit Hold'em - 10:42:11 ET - 2006/07/10
Seat 6: puckett101 (78,320)
Seat 7: mandrake11 (33,640)
Seat 8: smpchicana77 (23,040)
smpchicana77 posts the small blind of 500
puckett101 posts the big blind of 1,000
The button is in seat #7
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to puckett101 [Ah Ac]
mandrake11 raises to 2,000
smpchicana77 calls 1,500
puckett101 raises to 78,320, and is all in
mandrake11 calls 31,640, and is all in
smpchicana77 calls 21,040, and is all in
puckett101 shows [Ah Ac]
mandrake11 shows [Ad Jh]
smpchicana77 shows [Kh Ks]
Uncalled bet of 44,680 returned to puckett101
*** FLOP *** [4s 4c 6s]
*** TURN *** [4s 4c 6s] [8h]
*** RIVER *** [4s 4c 6s 8h] [2s]
puckett101 shows two pair, Aces and Fours
mandrake11 shows a pair of Fours
puckett101 wins the side pot (21,200) with two pair, Aces and Fours
smpchicana77 shows two pair, Kings and Fours
puckett101 wins the main pot (69,120) with two pair, Aces and Fours
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 90,320 Main pot 69,120. Side pot 21,200. | Rake 0
Board: [4s 4c 6s 8h 2s]
Seat 6: puckett101 (big blind) showed [Ah Ac] and won (90,320) with two pair, Aces and Fours
Seat 7: mandrake11 (button) showed [Ad Jh] and lost with a pair of Fours
Seat 8: smpchicana77 (small blind) showed [Kh Ks] and lost with two pair, Kings and Fours
I was lucky in that I happened to catch the absolute best starting hand at the same time that the other two players, both of whom were covered and then some, caught hands that allowed them to call my all-in bet. I had also been pushing them around a bit which allowed them to think that I might be bluffing. This is not a particularly subtle play - the raise makes decisions easy. My opponents must call or fold. There is no opportunity to re-raise or play games to see a flop and perhaps make a hand at the flop or turn. They must define the strength of their hand, put me on a range of holdings (which, at that point, could have been anything from 9-10 suited on up) and determine whether their hand was strong enough to call. I suspect that if the player holding pocket kings was immediately to my left, the player with A-Jo might not have called the all-in. As it was, with two all-ins ahead and pocket kings with the opportunity to triple up, calling my all-in made sense. My aces held up and I eliminated both remaining players to win the only seat offered in the freeroll. The key lesson, stated often, is not to slowplay the big boys.
Here's another example to illustrate what can happen when you try to slowplay the big boys by limping in and extracting more money after the flop:
Full Tilt Poker Game #785289679: .COM Satellite to Round 1 (5202644), Table 3 - 800/1600 - No Limit Hold'em - 10:52:31 ET - 2006/07/10
Seat 4: puckett101 (22,640)
Seat 5: JAMax (38,025)
Seat 6: usarmyproperty (28,540)
Seat 9: mrrobert (45,795)
puckett101 posts the small blind of 800
JAMax posts the big blind of 1,600
The button is in seat #9
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to puckett101 [8h Tc]
usarmyproperty folds
mrrobert calls 1,600
puckett101 calls 800
JAMax checks
*** FLOP *** [9h Js 7s]
puckett101 bets 1,600
JAMax folds
mrrobert calls 1,600
*** TURN *** [9h Js 7s] [6d]
puckett101 bets 1,600
mrrobert raises to 3,200
puckett101 raises to 6,400
mrrobert raises to 9,600
puckett101 raises to 19,440, and is all in
mrrobert calls 9,840
puckett101 shows [8h Tc]
mrrobert shows [Ad As]
*** RIVER *** [9h Js 7s 6d] [Ah]
puckett101 shows a straight, Jack high
mrrobert shows three of a kind, Aces
puckett101 wins the pot (46,880) with a straight, Jack high
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 46,880 | Rake 0
Board: [9h Js 7s 6d Ah]
Seat 4: puckett101 (small blind) showed [8h Tc] and won (46,880) with a straight, Jack high
Seat 5: JAMax (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 6: usarmyproperty didn't bet (folded)
Seat 9: mrrobert (button) showed [Ad As] and lost with three of a kind, Aces
In short-handed play, my opponent limped with pocket aces. I limped in the small blind with one-gapped off-suit cards. After the flop, with a possible straight, my opponent merely calls my blind bet. At the turn, with two possible straights on the board, he begins re-raising me. Based on his tricky play, I put him on 8-5 and a smaller straight at best. The re-raises further confirmed my belief that he had a hand, but that it was unlikely to be as strong as mine. While Phil Gordon is right in that the fourth raise means aces, the fifth raise after the flop seems to be the one to be concerned about. By that point, after all the re-raises, he had the pot odds necessary to call my all-in and he obviously believed that his slow-played aces were good, probably putting me on a jack with a medium kicker.
In the parlance of our times, oops.
This is why you don't slowplay aces or kings. The times you only take the blinds will more than off-set the times you double someone else up because they flopped a monster and you think you're trapping them. It is better to win a small pot with a big hand than lose a big pot with a big hand.
As it is, I doubled up on the hand because I flopped the nuts and he over-valued top pair when my betting history should have indicated to him that he was beat. Then again, aces are hard to get away from and he had me covered and then some.
In that freeroll, we both finished in the top 3 to win entries into the next round so the point became moot, but let this be instructive to you. Don't slowplay the big boys. You might lose big because of it.
Posted by puckett at 03:52 PM | Comments (0)
June 23, 2006
Purely for the record ...
Gabe Kaplan may well be the single worst poker announcer ever. His announcing is about as skillful as Colin Quinn's poker playing. It's as if he has never held a deck of cards ... I stopped watching the heads up poker showdown simply because:
1. I can't handle his voice.
2. Whereas some poker commentators try to explain what a player might be thinking while deciding what to do with a hand (see: Lederer, Howard and Gordon, Phil), Kaplan usually states the blindingly obvious ("He's got a pocket pair!") and then states the exact opposite of what the player subsequently does (i.e. "He's gonna have to lay this one down!" [Player goes all-in] "Or maybe not!").
3. His calls are invariably wrong (see above). Gabe, you're a lousy commentator, but you're invited to any home game I ever hold. Bring money. Lots of it.
I swear, it seems like he has never even played the game - not a single variant of it. I've read some folks who get irritated by Vince Van Patten breathlessly exclaiming that so-and-so is looking down at a wired pair of 8s! In my opinion, Vince and Mike actually make a good announcing team, but Kaplan? Total car wreck. You could team him with Phil Gordon AND Howard Lederer and he would still be so awful that he might actually decrease their ability to offer insightful commentary on the play, sort of like the way that Chernobyl's meltdown had effects on surrounding areas.
On the other hand, it might be funny to watch that - I can't imagine that either one of them would put up with Kaplan's constant stream of incorrect calls and bumbling asides that have nothing to do with the play.
Welcome back, Kotter. Please go away again. Now.
Posted by puckett at 02:04 PM | Comments (0)
The last few days ...
1) Why do I bother with freerolls? Full Tilt Poker was doing a freeroll satellite to a Red Rock tournament and I figured I might as well - it's free, right? I started off well - I picked up 5-6s on the first hand and folded it when three people went all-in. The flop was 7-8-9 rainbow and I almost cried. Running the Pokerstove sim later, I realized I was actually the pre-flop favorite because of the multi-way pot - I was 32% to win or something silly like that. After the flop, I was about 99%. The second hand took some of the sting out when I caught pocket queens. I made a sensible bet which was automatically re-raised by three people to all-in. One of them had 9-7s - that, honestly, was the only hand that worried me. The other two players were both holding A-K, dramatically reducing the odds that they'd catch a pair. By the river, I was holding a full house. Things went to hell when I caught pocket aces UTG and bet 3.5x. In a freeroll, that's like saying you want to play badminton. I had one caller in UTG+1 and then UTG+2 announced they were tired and went all-in. No callers, I raised all-in and UTG+1 folded. UTG+2 showed 7-6o. So far, so good, and so it was until the river when they were holding a full house and I was holding a portion of my anatomy. Phil Gordon was once asked about the circumstances under which he would fold pocket aces and he said never. I would like to respectfully ask Phil whether he considered freerolls and low buy-in tourneys before he answered. Honestly, we all know I would have called anyway. I had aces! Whatever he had could NOT be better than aces before the flop. Luckily, I had him covered. Next hand, I caught Q-9h and two all-ins in front of me, one of them the person who caught the boat. By this point, I'm thinking that it's a queen and a 9, they're soooted and that's probably good enough to crack whatever else anyone is holding and I was right - the boater had off-suit gapped junk like 8-2 or something. The other caller had pocket 3s. Naturally, the only thing helpful to hit the board was a 3 at the river to add insult to injury. With $70 left, I pushed all-in with off-suit gapped crap which included a 9 - and that will become important later - because the blinds were $50 and it seems like any idiot can rub any two cards together to make fire. Naturally, I rivered a 9-high four-flush to win the main pot and prove my point. Back up to $375 and with blinds still at $50, I pushed in again to end my misery. Thankfully, the board brought tons of useful cards, all of which were higher than my 8-7o and none of which could be used with any runner-runner combination to help me win. I finished in 32nd place. Like I said before I wished everyone luck - playing in the first 10 minutes of a freeroll and placing 32nd ... isn't that like winning the main event?
2) Cash games. Heavens. I could move up in limit to the $.50/$1 tables, but I'm not sure the level of play would be any better there. A normal 3-4x blind bet is simply insufficient to indicate strength at the $.05/$.10 tables which is what I normally play. Here's a perfect example which just happened to run in my favor tonight:
Table Sparkling (6 max) - $0.05/$0.10 - No Limit Hold'em - 4:14:07 ET - 2006/06/23
Seat 1: Holliday_PHD ($10.75)
Seat 3: Gabri29 ($10)
Seat 4: just_got_felted ($15.60)
Seat 5: puckett101 ($3.70)
Seat 6: potliqour666 ($1.50)
puckett101 posts the small blind of $0.05
potliqour666 posts the big blind of $0.10
Gabri29 posts $0.10
The button is in seat #4
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to puckett101 [9s 8h]
Holliday_PHD raises to $0.20
Gabri29 calls $0.10
just_got_felted folds
puckett101 calls $0.15
potliqour666 calls $0.10
*** FLOP *** [9c 8s Js]
puckett101 bets $0.30
potliqour666 raises to $1.30, and is all in
Holliday_PHD calls $1.30
Gabri29 folds
puckett101 raises to $3.50, and is all in
Holliday_PHD calls $2.20
puckett101 shows [9s 8h]
potliqour666 shows [Ac 7s]
Holliday_PHD shows [Tc Kd]
*** TURN *** [9c 8s Js] [9h]
*** RIVER *** [9c 8s Js 9h] [5d]
puckett101 shows a full house, Nines full of Eights
Holliday_PHD shows a pair of Nines
puckett101 wins the side pot ($3.95) with a full house, Nines full of Eights
potliqour666 shows a pair of Nines
puckett101 wins the main pot ($4.25) with a full house, Nines full of Eights
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $9.10 Main pot $4.70. Side pot $4.40. | Rake $0.90
Board: [9c 8s Js 9h 5d]
Seat 1: Holliday_PHD showed [Tc Kd] and lost with a pair of Nines
Seat 3: Gabri29 folded on the Flop
Seat 4: just_got_felted (button) didn't bet (folded)
Seat 5: puckett101 (small blind) showed [9s 8h] and won ($8.20) with a full house, Nines full of Eights
Seat 6: potliqour666 (big blind) showed [Ac 7s] and lost with a pair of Nines
So let's review - Holliday, someone who showed himself to be a solid player later, raises 2x the blind with K-10o. That isn't a big enough bet to make me lay down 8-9o. Potliqour (spelling correct) calls with A-7o. The flop hits me like its name is Ike Turner and I bet 3x with two pair flopped. Dudebro raises all-in with NOTHING. Holliday called with an open-ended straight draw. At the time, I was concerned that he was holding one or both of the two cards that scared me - a queen and a 10. I was right on the first part, but he was waiting for a queen or 7 to make his straight. That was a very reasonable play on his part considering his stack size, dudebro's stack size and dudebro's loose play to that point (which had already cost me a stack because he was calling 10-12x bets with K-6c and bottom pair). Since he called and didn't raise into me, I pushed all-in. If he was on a draw, I wanted him to pay for it and I liked my chances with two pair. He though about it for a while and called. The turn brought another 9 and they were both drawing dead. Life was good, I did a mental Ewok victory dance and left the table not long after that. I took down a few more pots by betting 8-10x the blind as a standard bet to push marginal hands out - I left the table with something on the order of $.90 than I had when I sat down.
My conclusion? Screw ring games. They suck.
3) Thoughts on being the short-stack and pot commitment. Maybe it's just that I'm a guy, but in poker, I don't like being told I'm committed to anything. In a $5+.50 SNG last night, I was down to WAY less than two orbits. Blinds were $600/$1200 and I had around $2500. Instead of pushing in with any two, I waited for a pocket pair. In the meantime, mid-stacks were pushing in with marginal aces and drawing hands and getting knocked out. As Sklansky pointed out, sometimes it's better not to mix it up, no matter how badly short-stacked you are - you can move up in the pay ladder that way. Finally I caught a pocket pair and pushed in - when it held, I doubled up. I did that again and fought my way back to finish 3rd for a nice little payout that more than erased my losses from cash games for the day. In fact, I was up a few bucks. Let's hear it for me! At any rate, this whole concept of pot commitment is math ... I never have liked math, so let me offer this idea - let's say you're on a date and the restaurant was just horrible. After you've barely touched your food because it tastes so bad, the waiter comes up to you and tells you that the meal was going to cost half the money in your wallet and offers you an unknown dessert which will cost the rest of the money in your wallet. Would you believe you were meal committed and risk going broke for a rancid slice of apple pie, or would you hold onto the money and maybe take your date to a movie afterward to make up for the ghastly food? If you're being asked to call half your stack and don't have much in the way of hole cards or haven't hit anything, it may make sense in Sklansky's model to fold and pray that the next hand hits you or another opponent (if you're short-handed) and helps you move up the pay ladder. Just sayin'.
4) Pot odds. I've exchanged a few emails about this subject, particularly making it unprofitable for someone to call, lately and this hand came up:
$5 + $0.50 Sit & Go (4845020), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 2:30:27 ET - 2006/06/22
Seat 1: lonniej (1,330)
Seat 2: Em_Em420 (970)
Seat 3: FC Levski (2,885)
Seat 4: puckett101 (1,765)
Seat 5: bigchefdan (1,645)
Seat 6: spoony503 (1,410), is sitting out
Seat 7: Major magoo (1,320)
Seat 8: DMercado (5,035)
Seat 9: puntertm (1,365)
FC Levski posts the small blind of 20
puckett101 posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to puckett101 [Td Th]
bigchefdan raises to 189
spoony503 folds
Major magoo raises to 338
DMercado folds
puntertm folds
lonniej folds
Em_Em420 folds
FC Levski folds
puckett101 raises to 1,765, and is all in
bigchefdan has 15 seconds left to act
bigchefdan folds
Major magoo folds
Uncalled bet of 1,427 returned to puckett101
puckett101 mucks
puckett101 wins the pot (885)
The blinds are now 25/50
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 885 | Rake 0
Seat 4: puckett101 (big blind) collected (885), mucked
Seat 5: bigchefdan folded before the Flop
Seat 7: Major magoo folded before the Flop
So let's think about what happened here. First of all, I was lucky enough to have a hand in the big blind, but what's REALLY going on? I don't claim to understand pot odds well and I'm working on that aspect of my game, but after some recent email discussions, I have been able to identify what people when they're trying to make it unprofitable to call and one tactic is making bets that are not standard multipliers. If it's 1.6 to 1, maybe they won't call! If it's 3.2 to 2.9, maybe I'll take the pot down! Sure. Maybe that's so. And maybe if you're playing like that, I'll do this again and take your bets that smell like bluffs and pot odds gerrymandering. These bets flat out stank - they reeked of trickery, indignity and odious behavior. They carried the aroma of theft. Pushing all-in forces a decision and, as Phil Gordon points out in the Little Green Book, poker is about making correct decisions. There are no more games at that point, considering I had both of them covered, even if it wasn't by much. Their decision was call or fold. There would be no more attempts to adjust pot odds in their favor. They both folded and I took down a nice pot without ever seeing a flop. The lesson here? If someone has guts, adjusting the amount of money in the pot to make pot odds more favorable to you won't help. If you have a significantly smaller stack than the other person, they're still likely to call. Poker is situational.
The other problem with this is that it told a confusing story - if the first raise had been, say, $140 (remember, $20/$40 blinds), I might have just flat called to see a flop, but the first raise wasn't 3.5x, it was something like 4.6x the big blind. The second raise didn't correct it - it may well have just been hitting the min raise button (which part of me doubts since that would have at least made the last digit a 9), but it was something on the order of 8.46x or some nonsense (I'm estimating multipliers here - if I'm wrong, I don't much care), not 3x the previous raise to indicate a significantly stronger hand - remember the Gap Concept here ... you have to have a better hand to call with than to raise with and if you're re-raising, that hand has to be a monster. These bets looked and smelled fishy; since I had a decent pocket pair, I forced an end to the game and forced a decision in the process. I don't claim to be an expert, but everything I've read indicate that you must tell a story, whether you have a hand, are bluffing or are semi-bluffing.
The story must portray strength if you're trying to force a fold or uncertainty if you're trying to extract money with the best hand. That's the point behind continuation and value bets - to force decisions. The more decisions someone has to make, the more likely they are to make a mistake. If you bet 3.5x or 4x before the flop and 5-10x after the flop, you're either saying the flop hit you or your hole cards are still strong. If you bet 3.5x or 4x before the flop and check or make a small feeler bet after the flop, you're either trying to find out where your opponent(s) is, trap someone, see if you can make your draw or stop the bleeding. Similar concepts apply at the turn and river - all of this combines to say "I have a strong hand" or "I'm not sure I have that much ... you should probably call me or re-raise me to find out ... muahahahaha." That story must be credible - you have to make your opponent BELIEVE they're beat before they call ... unless you want them to call. If that story gets confusing at any time, someone might push because they think you're bluffing and catch you with your pants down. Remember, this story needs to be direct and plausible - no trickery here. Think Stephen King's level of directness ... not David Foster Wallace and his penchant for writing what most people would call novels in his footnotes.
Here's a perfect example of a simple portrayal of strength, including a feeler bet:
$5 + $0.50 Sit & Go (4845020), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 2:28:41 ET - 2006/06/22
Seat 2: Em_Em420 (1,280)
Seat 4: puckett101 (1,455)
Em_Em420 posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #9
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to puckett101 [Jh Kc]
puckett101 raises to 140
Em_Em420 calls 100
*** FLOP *** [2h 2d 3h]
Em_Em420 has 15 seconds left to act
Em_Em420 bets 150
puckett101 raises to 1,315, and is all in
Em_Em420 folds
Uncalled bet of 1,165 returned to puckett101
puckett101 mucks
puckett101 wins the pot (600)
I had nothing but good hole cards before the flop. I bet 3.5x before the flop, representing strength. In position, I was able to re-raise that 3.75x blind bet to all-in - my opponent may have made a small pair (they obviously didn't have a deuce) but it wasn't a pair they felt strongly enough about to call an all-in. They found out where they were at in the hand relatively cheaply - where they were was having to make a decision about the rest of their chips. They felt it wasn't worth the call and they may have been right.
Here's another example from a cash game:
Table Brookdale (6 max) - $0.05/$0.10 - No Limit Hold'em - 22:31:34 ET - 2006/06/21
Seat 1: puckett101 ($4.45)
Seat 2: maxswell ($3.95)
Seat 3: The Card Reader ($4.90)
Seat 4: BurninThousands ($4.55)
Seat 5: kilgore3363 ($3.40)
Seat 6: mdmaxx1 ($4.60)
mdmaxx1 posts the small blind of $0.05
puckett101 posts the big blind of $0.10
The button is in seat #5
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to puckett101 [9c 8c]
maxswell folds
The Card Reader folds
BurninThousands folds
kilgore3363 folds
mdmaxx1 calls $0.05
puckett101 checks
*** FLOP *** [Tc Td 7s]
mdmaxx1 bets $0.10
puckett101 raises to $0.30
mdmaxx1 calls $0.20
*** TURN *** [Tc Td 7s] [As]
mdmaxx1 bets $0.10
puckett101 raises to $0.85
mdmaxx1 has 15 seconds left to act
mdmaxx1 calls $0.75
*** RIVER *** [Tc Td 7s As] [5s]
mdmaxx1 checks
puckett101 bets $2.25
mdmaxx1 has 15 seconds left to act
mdmaxx1 folds
Uncalled bet of $2.25 returned to puckett101
puckett101 mucks
puckett101 wins the pot ($2.25)
In cash games, I like to see flops cheaply - hell, I'll play almost any two cards in a ring game if I can just get to the flop. I seem to be a monster after the flop because it usually hits me hard when I'm holding rags and the strength of my hand is concealed - I limped in, what could I possibly have that's worth betting 8.5x the blind with 10-9-6 on the board? It's obviously not better than the A-9o that the person across the table has.
In the above example, it was pure post-flop aggression and betting to my opponent's vomit factor - you know, that level of betting where sphincters tighten and stomachs turn. I limped, re-raised after the flop, really re-raised him when an ace hit the board and bet 22.5x the blind - which was the size of the pot - at the river. He didn't feel his hand had improved and I took a nice pot with nothing more than a draw that didn't pan out after the flop.
The common factor here is that these bets tell a credible story - they all say, "You're beat, you know you're beat, I know that you know that you're beat, and you know that I know that. I'm going to take so much money out of you that you're going to feel like my personal ATM."
The other common factor? All of these bet series induced folds (which was a damn good thing because there was only one hand in them that I actually was comfortable with). They told credible stories that made people feel like they were cutting their losses and living to play another hand that they might win. They gave that hand up. That can't be estimated enough.
I think all this stuff is elementary, but given what I keep seeing in SNGs and ring games, it may not be.
Just some thoughts from an early morning when I finished up in cash games and couldn't find an SNG ready to go.
Posted by puckett at 09:45 AM | Comments (0)
June 20, 2006
Back in (the) black.
After all my muttering about bad beat lately, I need to shut up now because I came in 2nd in an SNG this morning and finished first in one tonight, more than erasing my losses yesterday.
Pocket kings held up and flopped sets against short-stacks who went all-in pre-flop with A-4o. I was able to make well-timed bets with draws on scary boards (my favorite tonight was a board of [8h Ks 6d] [Js] when I held 10-9s - a queen or 7 made a straight, Qs made a straight flush, any spade made a flush - it didn't matter that I didn't have a made hand - my hand had so many outs - and so many people had checked the flop and to me on the turn - that I HAD to bet the pot). My semi-bluffs worked and pushed people off stronger hands. In short, it was all zen tonight, baby.
One very interesting hand that prompted some discussion when it was over (I think in part because it was the hand that burst the bubble) was this one:
120/240 - No Limit Hold'em - 3:07:00 ET - 2006/06/20
Seat 4: mow grass (1,910)
Seat 6: welderles (3,295)
Seat 7: puckett101 (5,715)
Seat 8: dingo1414 (2,580)
mow grass posts the small blind of 120
welderles posts the big blind of 240
The button is in seat #8
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to puckett101 [Jd Qd]
puckett101 raises to 750
dingo1414 raises to 2,580, and is all in
mow grass folds
welderles folds
puckett101 has 15 seconds left to act
puckett101 calls 1,830
welderles is feeling confused
dingo1414 shows [Ts Tc]
puckett101 shows [Jd Qd]
*** FLOP *** [4h 2s 3d]
*** TURN *** [4h 2s 3d] [Qs]
*** RIVER *** [4h 2s 3d Qs] [2d]
dingo1414 shows two pair, Tens and Twos
puckett101 shows two pair, Queens and Twos
puckett101 wins the pot (5,520) with two pair, Queens and Twos
The person knocked out asked me why I called and I had actually debated calling. What it boiled down to, for me, was that the pot was a little over $3,600 and I was being asked to call $1,800 with J-Qd. That hand isn't a lock, but I'm getting 2-to-1 on my money - if I'm understanding pot odds correctly, that means the correct mathematical decision was to call and besides, I had them covered and then some. While it would have switched chip leaders, I still would have been in the game with sufficient chips to make plays. The person calling asked what I put them on - I think it's a leak in my game that I didn't put them on a hand exactly (i.e. I didn't think they had pocket queens or A-Jo or something else like it). I thought about the math, how they had been playing, what hands they had played before and how, how many chips I put into the pot and the possiblity that they were trying to take down the pot right then, adding over $1k to their stack in the process. I had also been running the table a bit, raising into blinds with a fair number of hands - not quite stealing, but not quite winning legitimately. I just priced them off their hands and, as we all know, that can lead to frustration and frustration leads to anger and anger leads to tilting and betting with crap. In short, I knew they had something but I also didn't figure it was that strong with so few people remaining in the game.
As it turned out, I won the hand - I suppose that means that, regardless of whether my math was right or wrong, my play was correct. In running the numbers afterward, my hand was a slight underdog before the flop, a bigger underdog after the flop and - oddly enough, a 95% favorite after the turn.
If you have any thoughts on it, I'd appreciate it.
Posted by puckett at 08:00 AM | Comments (0)
June 03, 2006
The solace of poker ...
Something that may get lost in all our blogging about Ms and orbits and suck outs and bad beats (and I'll get to complaining about those in a moment) is that poker, when played with the right people, can be a reassuring, comforting pastime. When played with even one or two sociable and good-natured people, even a $1 turbo SNG can become a place where jokes and banter make friends, even if only for 30-45 minutes. The suck outs suck less, the bad beats don't seem so bad.
Today, I have lost to two rivered A-10 straights which cracked top pair or two pair. I went all-in before the flop with an M of just under 3 while holding pocket 8s and flopped 10 8 10 ... but lost to a rivered king because my caller was holding K-10c. I went all-in before the flop with A-K off-suit and was called by pocket kings. I flopped my ace, but lost to a rivered diamond four flush (for the record, the odds of catching runner-runner diamonds to make a flush - even holding two diamonds, much less one - are something ridiculously small that I don't remember off the top of my head. It is the least probable flush). That's how my day has been.
However, every time it's happened, the people who sucked out were gracious about it, admitted it was a suck out and wished me good luck and congratulated me on well-played hands. And likewise, every time I suck out, I make a point of apologizing to people and letting them know they made the right play and that luck was the only reason I won.
Frankly, that's incredibly meaningful. Yes, poker is a game of misdirection and deceit, but why can't we be civil about it? Why can't we all simply be NICE to each other? Rudeness doesn't put me on tilt, it just makes me ignore someone and makes everyone's time at the table less enjoyable.
Be gracious, even in defeat. It's more sporting.
Here are two opposite ends of the spectrum.
Last night, I was watching John Juanda playing against Mike Matusow on Full Tilt Poker. The rail was just brutal - constant insults, catcalls, profanity - even racist epithets directed toward both players. Later, while watching John D'Agostino play at another table, it was no different. It was, without question, the absolute ugliest observer chat I have ever seen in my life. We're talking about comments that - even in polite society - would get your ass kicked and deservedly so.
And yet last night and this morning, I had entirely different experiences with John Juanda. While the abuse hurled at the pros would seem to make them likely to turn off observer chat, he was joking back and forth with someone who just graduated law school and myself about criminal justice and whether habitual bluffers should be prosecuted.
And yesterday, after asking him very politely if he'd be willing to play a few hands at lower stakes because I couldn't afford $50/$100 NLHE (particularly not facing his bankroll), he sat down at a $.50/$1 fixed limit table and stunned everyone there just by playing a few hands. I know this much - everyone who was sitting at that table will always remember that moment. Hell, I took screen captures - the online poker equivalent of carrying a digital camera to capture a moment with a player you admire. After my years of journalism, I don't get star-struck because I used to sit next to folks like Mel Gibson and Ron Howard and ask them questions. Yesterday, I was a raving fanboy.
See, it's been a very hard few weeks for my fiancee and I - I've been on disability for over seven weeks due to massive back problems and have been unable to do anything - I can't go to the grocery store, I can't pick things up, I can't even really walk. I need more help than I ever have before in my life, just to get through daily life and simple things like putting dishes in the dishwasher and taking them out. Tuesday, my neurosurgeon pointed at an MRI of my neck and brain and identified symptoms of multiple sclerosis and didn't name any other condition that could be causing all this - I'm waiting to see a neurologist for a second opinion, but right now, it feels like being all-in with 7c-2d against A-Kh with a board of Qh Jh 9d 8c and hoping to make a pair on the river or go home early. I can't spend more than about an hour or so sitting up on any given day because of the pain. I have only left my apartment a handful of times in the past two months and most of those times have been for MRIs or doctors' appointments.
But last night, when John Juanda was in the big blind and I caught K-10s ahead of him, I forgot all that for a moment. And when I paired my king at the flop, the only thing I could think about was that I can't even consider myself an amateur, I was head-to-head against one of the best poker players in the world and I had just made my hand. When it finally came to showdown and he turned over J-8c with a board of Kc 5c 6h 9s Jd, I realized a few things:
1. He had 12 reasons to go to the river. He had a 36% chance of making his flush and caught 3 more outs at the turn for a 24% chance of making his flush or catching a straight at the river. In short, he had a grip of ways to beat me. I had to dodge more bullets than Neo in "The Matrix" to win. I just got lucky and my hand held up.
2. I had just played a heads-up hand with one of the world's best and most gracious poker players and won.
The pot size was ridiculously small (I was embarrassed even asking him to play at the stakes I could afford, but I learned long ago that you never get what you don't ask for, but - IF you ask - something magical might just happen) but the pot wasn't the point. John Juanda graciously gave a few minutes of his time and it made my week ... and I imagine more than a few people, myself included, told their spouses, co-workers, poker buddies ... even people that don't even know a thing about poker ... that they shared a table with him for a moment and that it made their week as well. For him, those few moments were likely nothing. If I ever meet him face to face, I doubt he'd even remember although he'd probably say something polite like "Yeah, that was a lot of fun. I just had to focus on the higher-limit games I was in, otherwise I would have stayed longer," but to me and the people at that table, I suspect it meant everything. There's a George Bailey moment for you.
Thank you, John.
And that's what I mean by the solace of poker.
Several years ago, I think it was 1999, I drove from San Diego to Denver to visit a dear friend for New Year's. I had broken up with my fiancee of a few years only a few months before under very bad circumstances which - not to put too detailed a point on it - involved her infidelity. I was trying to grieve, trying to heal and trying to get past it all. I had routed my return trip so that I could go through Vegas and play some poker at Circus Circus (it's pretty much my favorite casino besides the ones on Fremont with .25 craps, etc.) - nothing fancy, just five-card draw with a $5 maximum bet. It took a while to get a table going because it was the start of a week and not many people were around, but when that table started, it was great. The dealer was funny and talkative and made up her own nicknames for people (any time it came around to me, she said, "Bet's to you, San Diego"). It was just guys at the table and we talked about baseball and sports and women and our best and worst hands of poker ... the stuff that men who have never met before and are unlikely to meet again talk about when they are in the company of men at a poker table. I was the youngest there by at least 20 years, but I was playing well and taking down pots. Finally, one of the guys I had been talking to most apologized and said he had to leave, but on his way out, he stopped, put his hand on my shoulder and whispered some advice to me:
1. Slow down.
2. Don't tip so much.
Then he grinned and walked away. It may not sound like much, but at that time, after that conversation, it was a moment of genuine human connection and those are too few and far between and too often go unappreciated when they happen.
I think sometimes we all forget how nice it can be to sit down and have a friendly game and tease each other and talk about whatever comes to mind, to take our minds off of whatever else may be troubling us in our lives ... and how healing that can really be. And maybe that means that we're missing the best thing poker really has to offer.
Posted by puckett at 05:56 AM | Comments (0)
June 01, 2006
Celebritar Poke Poke!
It's usually a bad sign when any kind of activity begins televised events featuring celebrites. Remember Network Battle Of The Stars? Oof. Forget jumping the shark - when you're added to a Rock & Jock softball team, that's when you know it's done.
For the most part, watching Bravo's Celebrity Poker Showdown has been engaging for one reason and one reason only. While the "celebrities" they invite can generate a moment or two of laughter from quips, it's mostly akin to watching a monkey hump a doorknob while a bus filled with schoolchildren drive over a cliff and destroy every Bald Eagle nest on the way down before crashing to a bloody halt in a grocery store giveaway box of cute little beagle mix puppies wagging their tails. The play is almost universally bad and, while I don't claim to be an expert, I routinely watch people move in with, for example 9c-6h with a board of Ah, Qc and 10d on the chance that they just might make a pair.
They play poker like Luke Skywalker.
So what's engaging about that?
Simple.
Phil Gordon's running commentary.
Maybe I'm a contrarian, but Phil's constant, hand-by-hand analysis made me want to bitch-slap Dave Foley until he was incapable of speech because Phil's insight essentially provided a detailed tutorial of what not to do at a poker table and also provided a significant glimpse into how people are playing now that NLHE is so visible. Rags? Call your raise and re-raise. 9-6 is good, right? Yeah, it's gotta be good. These are the absolute nuts.
Phil, meanwhile, is holding his head in his hands as he watches the disaster unfold before him.
He was never mean about his comments, but he was direct and dropped nuggets of wisdom about every hand like a card-playing version of Robert Fulghum.
For whatever reason though, Phil isn't calling this season and has been replaced with Phil Hellmuth. So far, the only reason to watch is Dave Foley's cracks and the off chance that someone will do something entertaining at the table.
That's really no reason to watch people play bad poker. You can get that on ESPN and the Travel Channel. I'll reserve judgment until I've watched another episode or two. Perhaps Phil is just shy about appearing on camera. Maybe he'll be a little less camera shy and a little more talkative as he gets used to being on camera and sitting next to a star as big as Dave Foley.
In the meantime, I miss Phil Gordon because his commentary was incredibly useful to anyone starting out. If you get a chance, you might want to record the old episodes. They were actually worth watching.
Posted by puckett at 10:21 AM | Comments (0)