Playing Higher Limits

Playing Higher Limits
Many players think about competing in higher stakes games. It’s a natural progression as your skills improve, yet there’s still a lot to consider when moving up in limits.

The first thing to think about is whether you’re truly capable of winning in bigger games. With rare exceptions, you’ll be facing better quality players as you move up to higher limits. So before you even consider jumping to that next level, be honest with yourself about how you fare at your current stakes.
Keeping records is a must. It’s the only way you’ll accurately know how well you’re doing in a particular game over the long run. If you determine that you win handily and regularly at your current limit, then you just might be ready to take that next step.
Here are a few guidelines to follow when you do make the jump to higher limits.
Play shorter sessions
To play effectively in higher stakes games, especially in your first few outings, play shorter sessions. You simply can’t play at a peak performance level if you’re mentally or physically fatigued. If you normally sit for 8-10 hours at your current game, don’t play for more than 4-6 hours at the higher stakes game until you start to feel comfortable.
Decide on a loss limit and stick to it
One of the key reasons players fail when they move to higher limits has less to do with talent and more to do with pressure. In higher stakes games, players must be able to endure bigger financial swings. A few bad beats can send even the best players on tilt. Even worse, an unexpected loss can quickly erode your poker confidence and turn you into a scared-money player.
To combat this effect, make sure to set a loss limit that you can handle both emotionally and financially. If you lose that money, even if it’s in the first ten minutes, get up and leave. For example, if you normally play $5-$10 No Limit Hold’em but decide to step it up to $10-$20, don’t risk more than your initial buy-in. A $2,000 loss limit might be appropriate for some, but it’s important to set a limit that’s right for your own situation and playing ability.
Whatever your loss limit, it’s critical that you stick to it! For that, you’ll need self-control. If you don’t trust yourself, never bring more money than your loss limit as this will prevent you from impulsively buying additional chips. Take a walk back to your hotel before you thoughtlessly decide to reload your wallet. The fresh air just might knock some needed sense into you.
Play a low fluctuation style of poker
If the game you’re thinking about jumping into appears to be fast-paced with crazy action, don’t play. Instead, look for a game that’s more controllable when you decide to step up to higher limits. This way you can comfortably get your feet wet and play a patient game.
It’s important to play cautiously in your first higher limit sessions. Don’t make overly aggressive or tricky plays. Remember, your realistic goal is to not lose big. Use this new experience to get accustomed to the higher stakes and to pick up on your opponents’ styles and tendencies. Only after you’ve logged some hours playing at higher stakes should you take chances with bluffs and more aggressive play.
Here’s one final point.
Determine your own motivation for playing higher limit poker
Is it ego, the desire to improve your game against better competition, or is it simply about making more money? If it’s all about the money, consider that you might actually do better playing small limit games against weak opponents than you would facing advanced players in high limit games.
Picking the right game is just as important as playing well.

PPA 11-24-08 Update

Poker Players Score Big In the Elections

The Poker Players Alliance (PPA) played an important role in the national elections this year by supporting pro-poker candidates for Congress all across the nation. While the voters casted their votes based on a number of important issues it is clear that poker players made a significant difference in several key races.

The PPA was successful in helping to unseat a number of anti-poker U.S. Representatives; we also achieved our goal of electing many pro-poker candidates. Of the 54 candidates PokerPAC, the political action committee of the PPA, endorsed (12 of which were challengers) 46 won their elections on November 4, 2008. Moreover, we are pleased to announce that more than 40 of our lowest rated Members of Congress will not be returning to Washington next year.

The PPA’s advocacy efforts have come a long way since successfully unseating then Iowa Congressman Jim Leach, who was the author of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) in 2006. With your continued help, we can have an even greater impact in future elections.

Please visit our Election Results page to learn how all PPA rated Congressmen and Senators fared in this past election.

The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) was resuscitated last week in a last ditch effort by the Bush administration to implement this flawed law before he leaves office in January.

President Bush pushed through “midnight” regulations that require UIGEA to go into effect on January 19, 2009, one day before President-elect Barak Obama is sworn in to office.

One way that PPA members can help effect change this coming year is by going to President-elect Barak Obama’s transition website and submitting comments on the importance of undoing the UIGEA when he takes office and why he should seek to license and regulate Internet poker.

Please tell Mr. Obama:

• That you’re a proud poker player, a voter and want your rights protected.
• To repeal UIGEA because prohibitions do not work, especially ones that put undue burden on the financial sector by deputizing banks to subvert the rights of adult Americans.
• That the best way to protect children and families from any perceived harm from Internet Poker is by licensing and strict regulation; it will also generate billions in federal and state revenue.
• That poker is a game of skill and not a game of chance, and as such should be protected.
  
  The drama continues in Kentucky’s effort to seize Internet poker domain names to block its citizens and perhaps the world from accessing the most popular online poker sites. This erosion of our freedoms and right to play poker has not gone unchallenged.
  
  In the wake of Judge Wingate’s wrongful decision many groups have filed for appeal. An appellate court hearing is set for December 12, 2008 to hear oral arguments in the attempt to overturn the ridiculous ruling.
  
  To assist in this effort, the PPA filed an amicus brief outlining the fact that poker is indeed a game of skill under Kentucky law. In addition, other pro Internet freedom organizations such as the Electronic Freedom Foundation and the Center for Democracy and Technology have filed briefs in support of the appeal and warning of the severe impact this decision will have on the future of e-commerce should Judge Wingate’s decision be upheld.
  
  To review the PPA brief and others and to also get the latest news and info about the Kentucky case visit the PPA KY webpage.
  

AK

167

Playing AK Out of Position

Jon 'Pearljammed' Turner

November 20th, 2008

Ace-King may be one of the strongest starting hands in poker, but you’ve got to play it right in each position to make it pay – especially in the early stages of a tournament. Being in early position adds another challenge to the situation. But if you’re betting consistently and keeping an eye on your opponents, you should be able to take more than a few pots when you’re holding Big Slick.

To start, let’s look at the early stages of tournament play. Suppose I have 3,000 chips, the blinds are 20/40, and I’m under the gun with AK. I’ll raise to 120 and assume that there are a couple of callers. Regardless of my position, this is a good situation. With just two callers, I’ve likely got the best hand.

Let’s say the flop comes A- or K-x-x. I’ve got to be careful not to overplay my hand. If I start out check-raising here it will be obvious that I’ve connected with the flop and I’ll likely drive out some of the weaker hands that I can probably get action from if I just check-call. A better move here, however, is to avoid slow playing this hand at all and to lead out at the pot with a continuation bet like I would at any other time. This not only helps to build the pot, but it also prevents my opponents from catching a free card that could somehow cost me more later on.

If I do get action from an opponent after I lead out, I’ll probably check on the turn. By doing this, I can control the pot size and induce my opponent to bluff into me with a weaker hand. If my opponent checks behind me, I can value bet on the river and try to induce a call if he’s holding a pocket pair like Js or Ts and he thinks his two-pair may be ahead. If my opponent is holding a weaker Ace, checking the turn and value betting the river is also a good way to keep them in the hand and to extract an extra call at the end of the hand.

If my opponent leads out and bets after I check the turn with my AK, I’ll usually just call his bet and head to the river. Again, check-raising here isn’t a good play because it’s likely to drive a weaker hand out of the pot or cost me more chips if I’m facing a stronger hand.

If I lead out after the flop and get raised by my opponent, I’ll usually just flat call and see the turn. I’ll seldom re-raise here because all that will do is drive weaker hands than mine that still might put money in the pot. One situation where I will re-raise, however, is when I’ve got an opponent who’s consistently overplayed his hands – especially when he’s holding an Ace. If I’m facing an opponent like this, I may re-raise all-in to induce a call when he’s way behind.

Assuming I’ve just flat-called a re-raise on the flop, I’ll check the turn just like I did in the earlier example. If my opponent checks behind me, I’ll value bet my AK on the river and hope for a call. If my opponent bets out after I check the turn, then I’ve got a tough decision. If he’s firing a second bet, I can be pretty sure he’s holding a strong hand like a set and that he has a good idea about what I’m holding. This is especially true if I’m up against an experienced opponent. I may lay down my AK here in order to save my chips for a better spot or I may call depending on the size of the bet and any history I have with this opponent. If I call and he bets strong again on the river, I’ll almost always fold as I have to assume that he’d very rarely bet here with a worse kicker or as a third bluff.

One situation where I won’t check the turn is if the flop comes K-x-x with two suited cards on the board. In this spot, I’m going to lead out if the flush card doesn’t hit on the turn in order to protect my hand from the potential flush coming on the river. If my opponent has a set or a hand that already has me beat, he’s probably going to re-raise to protect his hand as well. This complicates things even more, and I’m going to have to rely on my read of him at that point to determine what I should do. If I really think he has a hand or he’s proven to be a solid player, I’ll probably fold and look for a better spot.

AK is a very powerful hand, but it can also be dangerous – especially when you’re playing it from early position. By continuation betting after the flop, you can get a pretty good idea of how strong or weak your opponents may be, and plot your next moves accordingly. Depending on whether your opponent calls or raises, checking the turn can either set you up to pick up some extra chips by value betting the river, or save you some precious chips if you’re forced to lay down to a bigger a hand. Either way, you’re retaining control of the hand and giving yourself the best chance to make it to the money.

Stop wasting money

Stop wasting money: video games and energy efficiency

By Lori Bongiorno

Posted Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:02am PST

Related topics: Kids, Saving Money, Saving energy at home

More from The Conscious Consumer blog

35 votes

Video game consoles consume a "staggeringly high" amount of energy, according to a report the Natural Resources Defense Council is releasing on Wednesday. How much electricity do they use each year? About as much as it takes to power the city of San Diego.

There's plenty of room for improvement. We can cut our nation's electricity bill by more than $1 billion and avoid 7 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year, according to the report.

How much can you personally save? Depends on what brand you choose. The Sony Playstation 3 and Microsofts Xbox 360 use as much as nine times more energy than the Nintendo Wii.

Habits play a crucial role as well. The systems use nearly the same amount of power when they are turned on and idle as they do when you are actively playing a game or watching a movie. If left on continuously, the Playstation 3 or Xbox 360 will consume the same amount of energy as two new refrigerators over the course of a year.

Here's how the three major brands stack up against each other:

Image from NRDC "Lowering the Cost of Play" report

• Sony Playstation 3 is the most power-hungry model. For the 2007 version, you'll spend about $12 a year if you turn the console off when you're not using it, compared to about $134 if you leave it on all the time.
• Microsoft Xbox 360 ranks a close second. If you shut it down when you're not playing a game or watching a movie, it costs about $11 to operate annually. Leaving it on continuously will cost you $103.
• Nintendo Wii uses significantly less energy than the others. It costs about $3 a year if you turn it off after use, compared to about $10 if you don't.

The comprehensive report outlines significant changes industry needs to make. For now, though, here's what consumers can do to make a difference.

• Always turn the system off when you are done playing a game or watching a movie. Don't assume that just because you turn off the TV that your console shuts down too. It doesn't. If you're in the middle of the game, save it so that you can pick up where you left off.
• Enable the automatic power down feature, which will shut down your device if it's left idle for a certain amount of time. This isn't always easy to do and you might need to install software first so click here for step-by-step instructions.
• Limit movie watching on gaming devices. Viewing movies on a stand-alone unit is a lot more efficient. The Playstation 3, for example, uses five times more power than the stand-alone Sony Blu-Ray player to play the same movie.

Environmental journalist Lori Bongiorno shares green-living tips and product reviews with Yahoo! Green's users. Send Lori a question or suggestion for potential use in a future column. Her book, Green Greener Greenest: A Practical Guide to Making Eco-smart Choices a Part of Your Life is available on Yahoo! Shopping.

http://engrish.com/

http://engrish.com/

If you like to laugh please do visit the site.

KAMIKAZE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kamikaze All-In Plays

When watching poker tournaments on television, you’ll invariably see a hand where a player makes a re-raise for all of his chips with an absolutely terrible hand. The commentators will marvel about how great a play it was, but I promise you this: Kamikaze all-in plays with garbage hands will get you eliminated from tournaments far more often than they will work in your favor.

I wouldn’t, however, eliminate the reraise-with-garbage tactic from your repertoire. Instead, think about making this play only when the worst-case outcome wouldn’t result in a catastrophic hit to your stack.

Let’s say the blinds are 400-800 with a 100 ante and you’re sitting on 100,000 in chips. A player from late position raises to 2,400; you suspect that he’s attempting to steal the blinds.

In this example, consider trying to re-steal the pot, even if you have a hand as bad as 2-7. You’ll have to make a large reraise, though, as you definitely don’t want your opponent to call and see the flop. Try raising it 10,000 more. With 12,400 in the pot, you’d be risking just 12.4% of your stack. If your play works, you’d increase your stack by 4.5% and that’s not bad.

Now, if you only had 12,400 chips instead of 100,000, this play would be far too risky for a couple of reasons. First, a player that has not yet acted just might call your bet with a playable hand. Or, the original raiser might have a strong hand himself. It’s also possible that even if the original raiser’s hand wasn’t particularly strong, he’d still call since it wouldn’t cost him much to try to eliminate an opponent.

You see, position is of utmost importance when using this tactic. It works best from the button or the blinds since you significantly reduce the chance of having another player call your bet.

How about when you’re playing on a short stack?

Well, that’s when it’s most imperative that you protect those precious chips. Make sure that when you attempt a last ditch effort to double up, you have a hand that will be competitive in an all-in situation.

Amateur players tend to give up way too early when their chip stacks dwindle, and that’s a big mistake. It’s amazing how quickly things can turn around if you’re patient and wait for decent opportunities to play your remaining chips.

It’s actually fairly simple to play a short stack in a tournament because there are so few poker weapons at your disposal. Yes, some players consider the kamikaze all-in bluff a weapon – but not me. When your tournament life is on the line, it’s a play that should be avoided at all costs. It’s much wiser to pay close attention to the action and look for a good situation to make your move.

Remember, too, that it’s difficult to steal blinds as a short stack. So, when your chip stack dips to less than ten times the big blind and you do decide to play a hand, be aggressive and go all-in rather than make a standard raise of three times the big blind. Ideally, you’ll end up in a situation where you wouldn’t mind if your bet is called because your hand rates to be the best. If everyone folds, well, that’s not a horrible result either. Eventually, though, you’ll need to win a race for all of your chips in order to get back into contention.

Patience is often rewarded when you’re a short stack. Let the quitters make the kamikaze all-in plays while you sit tight looking for that solid opportunity to double up.

WSOP Champion

WSOP Heads-Up: It's Over!

Champion!

The 2008 World Series of Poker Main Event is over and Peter Eastgate has emerged the champion of the November Nine! The 22-year-old Dane has defeated Russia's Ivan Demidov in heads-up play, making a wheel straight on the climactic hand to clinch the tournament and $9,152,416 in prize money.

Here's how the final hand played out:

Demidov and Eastgate returned from a 20-minute break with Eastgate squarely in control, holding more than $120 million of the $136.8 million chips in play.

On the first hand back, Eastgate limped in and Demidov checked his option in the big blind. The flop came K 3 2 and Demidov checked to Eastgate, who bet out $1.25 million. Demidov made the call and the turn was the 4.

Again, Demidov checked and Eastgate fired out $2 million. Demidov raised to $6 million and Eastgate opted to smooth call, though at this point an all-in on Fifth Street was almost a foregone conclusion.

The river was the 7 and sure enough, Demidov shipped. Eastgate instantly called and after a tension-filled pause, Demidov turned up 4 2 for two pair. Eastgate flipped A 5 for the wheel, however, taking the pot and clinching the tournament at 2:35 a.m. on Tuesday, November 11th.

Eastgate becomes the youngest-ever WSOP Main Event champ, supplanting Phil Hellmuth for that honor. He claims the second-largest first prize awarded in WSOP history and earns his first World Series bracelet in the process.

For his runner-up finish, Ivan Demidov takes $5,809,545 to go along with the £344,850 he earned for his third-place finish at the Main Event of this fall's World Series of Poker Europe.

We'll have tons more coverage of this landmark event, including full coverage on PokerListings TV, as well as an interview with the winner and full recap blog before the night is over. Stay tuned!

• Level: 39
• Blinds: 500,000/1,000,000
• Ante: 150,000
• Average Stack: $136,880,000
• Players Left: 1
• Tables Left: 1

Dont Sweat It

Don't Sweat the Small Stuff

I like to peruse the Full Contact Poker online forums to read and comment on posts about interesting poker hands and whether they were played properly. I find that many of the contributors consistently suffer from the same problem: they are far too preoccupied with statistically insignificant aspects of a poker hand.

My point is that the minor details of many poker hands are often unimportant and simply not worthy of in-depth analysis. Worrying about these insignificant details won’t have much effect on your bankroll at the end of the year.

You see, the best way to improve your poker game is to focus on the important aspects of the game, like eliminating big mistakes. Instead, I see too many players fretting about whether they are a 56.2% favorite or a 51.8% favorite.

Obsessing about statistics won’t make you a better poker player. In fact, you’ll end up wasting too much valuable time on that stuff when you should be concentrating on crucial issues, like getting a read on your opponents and studying the psychological aspects of the game.

If you want to plug leaks in your game, plug the biggest leaks first. Here’s how to get the job done.

Don’t call a big all-in bet on a whim. Unless you have a powerful hand, or you have some reason to suggest that you know your opponent is bluffing, there’s no reason to make what’s known as a hero call. Any call that jeopardizes a big chunk of your chip stack just because you think your opponent might be on a bluff is flat-out wrong.

Don’t bluff off all of your chips. This is a common mistake made by impatient players. Sure, you might get away with a big bluff once in a while but when you do get caught -- and eventually you will -- it could mean the end.

Protect your hand when you’re confident you’re in the lead. Don’t be greedy and try to milk your opponent for a few more chips when the pot is already large. The turn of a single card can change the lead fast. Toss out a big bet rather than let your opponents beat you for free.

When making a bet or call that represents, say, five percent of your chip stack, you just don’t need to worry about whether it’s the correct play.

For example, I see many players with average skills waste too much mental energy deliberating whether to play K-J from early position. That intellectual power is better spent focusing on the other players at the table.

Here’s the bottom line: A decision to fold, call, or raise with K-J from early position won’t have a significant effect on your long term results. It doesn’t matter if your play was inappropriate. If it was, you committed a marginal error at worst.

Okay, so how should you play K-J from early position? Arguments can be made in favor of all three options.

If the other players at the table are super-aggressive, raising when you call a bet or reraising when you raise, the correct play is to fold. If the other players are excessively tight, the correct play is to raise. And if the table is filled with bad players who won’t fold to a raise and tend to make big mistakes after the flop, the correct play is to call.

Look, in poker as in life, don’t sweat the small stuff. Instead, focus your mental energy on those more important factors that will definitely affect your bottom line.

Aggressive Image

165

The Benefits of an Aggressive Image

Scott Montgomery

November 4th, 2008

One of the most important aspects of poker is establishing an individual image and using it to your advantage. By playing an extremely aggressive game, you’re likely to get paid off when you make a big hand because your opponents assume you have nothing; by consistently playing tight, you’ll get away with bluffs because they assume you’re strong. Either approach is fine, but it’s tremendously important to be aware of your table image so you can profit by playing against it.

Most of the time, players fall between these two extremes and that’s not a formula for success. One of the keys to succeeding in poker is consistently playing a different game than everyone else at the table. Developing a unique style and then varying your game allows you take advantage of opponents who don’t adjust their game.

Personally, I feel the style that works best is all-out aggression. One important reason for this is that it gives me a shot at becoming the chip leader and running away with the tournament. On the other hand, it can also lead to busting out early. For me, this is a risk worth taking; in the long run, I’m more interested in finishing tournaments in 1st place once in a while than just making the money most of the time.

Keep in mind that this type of aggression isn’t just a matter of bluffing to steal pots; my ultimate goal is to get paid off when I have a big hand. By getting involved in a lot of pots with mediocre hands while still keeping my stack close to even, I put myself in a position to profit from opponents who are convinced that I’m completely loose and taking shots with any two cards. I don’t have to be successful every time I bluff, just enough to stay alive and reinforce that wild image so that when I catch that hand, I’ll be sure to win a big pot.

Here’s a perfect illustration from Day Seven of the World Series of Poker Main Event – the day that determined who would reach the final table. I came into the day with about 4.5 million in chips, which was a little below the average. I knew that to make it to the final table and have a real shot at taking it down, I’d need about 15 million in chips. I had no intention of sneaking in short-stacked, so I knew I’d have to triple up over the course of the day.

I stayed pretty even throughout the whole day, except for two massive pots that were directly related. The first pot came early in the day, when I tried to bluff a player off a pot on the flop with nothing but Ace-high. I made this all-in move because I thought I could get the guy to fold. He ended up calling with top pair, but I spiked the Ace on the river to double up through him. I certainly got lucky there, but one other very important thing came out of it: I made the table aware that I wasn’t afraid to make a move for most or all of my stack.

Later in the day I was involved in a hand where I had the nuts – there were four spades on the board and I had the Ace of spades. My opponent had a smaller flush – with the nine of spades, I believe – but my image was so crazy that he called because he put me on another bluff. The earlier hand, when I pushed with the Ace-high, had to have been in the back of his mind. Poker players always want to call. They think: what hands can I possibly beat? This is magnified when you’re at a TV table, because no one wants to be that guy who laid down a good hand and lost a huge pot to a stone-cold bluff, especially when the whole nation is watching. Because of my loose image, I ended up winning an 18 million chip pot.

In a sense, it isn’t easy to play poker this aggressively. You have to be equipped to handle the emotional swings; you have to understand, deep down, that sometimes you’re going to lose huge pots – maybe even your whole stack – on a bluff. When it happens, you can’t collapse. You have to walk into the next tournament willing to make that same play again, because most of the time it will work. You can never be afraid at the table or preoccupied with the past. To play this aggressively, you have to believe that it’s the right way. If you can manage this, you’re going to be successful in the long run.

Play your best poker

A Personal Checklist for Playing Your Best Poker

No matter how many years you’ve played this game, it’s still important to review a personal checklist about your own game every time you sit down to play. That’s how to know that you’re doing everything possible to play your best poker.

Make sure that your checklist contains these three subjects: playing fundamental poker, playing disciplined poker, and playing observational poker. If you are constantly aware of these topics, positive results will follow.

First, play fundamental poker. The tactics and strategies you employ must fit the style and composition of the game that you’re playing.

Sometimes you’ll find that your actions are skewed by the playing style of others at the table, and that’s not good. It is, however, inevitable if you aren’t focusing on your personal fundamentals.

For example, say you’re playing in a tough game with several players bluffing and making sophisticated plays. Obviously, you’ll need to make some adjustments to deal with these players. What often happens, though, is that when you return to facing weaker opponents, the adjustments you’ve made to hang with the better players will actually work against you.

You see, the same fancy plays used to deal with pros can lead to tournament elimination when used against amateur players.

When entering a new table, focus on playing an appropriate and fundamentally strong game. If the table warrants a different approach, adjust your play accordingly. Realize, however, that you’ll need to return to basic ABC poker when that session ends. Trust me; this is a difficult but necessary change to make.

Second, play disciplined poker.

Okay, so you’re playing both fundamental poker and a style that is appropriate for your table. Now, just stick with it.

When circumstances start to turn bad, some players get impatient and make ill-advised moves. For example, one guy might constantly reraise you before the flop. Just because you’re fed up with his antics doesn’t mean you should make a silly play. Don’t panic. Instead, let him continue to push until you find the right situation to trap him for all his chips.

Remember, though, no plan is bulletproof. Still, it’s essential to have a plan and to stick to it, especially in the face of adversity.

Finally, be observant.

Don’t get lazy! Unfortunately, it happens to all of us. Remind yourself to be observant every time you sit down at a table.

Playing fundamental and disciplined poker will only get you so far. If you don’t pay full attention to what’s happening at the table, you’ll lose your edge, costing yourself valuable opportunities to make really good decisions.

It’s easy to play on autopilot. But the simple truth is that you’ll win more often when you know exactly how your opponents play. You can’t afford to miss the physical tells and betting patterns that you’d likely miss if you don’t pay attention.

It’s the power of observation that delivers that extra edge

Observation skills are generally weakest among online players. These players are accustomed to frenetic internet action but bore easily in live tournaments where the pace is much slower. They just don’t pay as much attention as they should.

Having keen observational skills is what separates the best players in the world from everyone else. Make this your top priority.

Watch every action that occurs at a poker table -- in every single hand. Sure, you’ll miss some things. But if you strive for perfection and fall a little short, you’ll still end up with far better results.

Full Tilt Poker Learn From The Pros Lesson 164

164
Betting out to control pot size
Kelly Kim
October 30th, 2008
Intuitively, it would seem that checking and calling is the best way to keep a pot small when you’re uncertain as to whether or not you have the best hand. And often, that’s the case. But believe it or not, betting out can sometimes allow you to get to the showdown cheaper than checking. If your goal is to control the size of the pot, sometimes voluntarily putting chips in will actually keep the pot smaller than passively putting chips in only after your opponent does.
Here’s an example from a hand that I played during this year’s World Series of Poker Main Event that will illustrate this tactic. The blinds were 12,000/24,000 and I opened for 60,000 on the button. Usually when you open for 2 1/2 big blinds like that, especially on the button, it portrays some strength. In this case, I only had Q-J of hearts. The small blind called and the big blind folded.
The flop came A-10-rag; he checked, I bet 65,000 and he called. The turn card was a Queen – making me second pair – and he checked. This was the key moment in the hand. I decided to bet 100,000. I did this for pot control: I didn’t want to call a bet of 150,000 or 200,000 on the river, so I made a smaller bet at that point expecting it to freeze him on the river with most hands.
Let’s say my opponent had A-3. My small bet on the turn made it look like I had a strong hand and was milking him, wanting him to call. There was no way he could bet on the river with an Ace and no kicker; he was just as happy as I was to see a free showdown at that point.
It’s also important to note our stack sizes. I started the hand with about 600,000 in chips and he was deep, with about 1.5 million. By betting 100,000 on the turn, meaning I had committed more than one-third of my stack, he couldn’t try a bluff raise because it was too likely that I was pot-committed. On top of this, I had established a tight image and he had to respect the likelihood that I had a real hand. If he had come over the top, I would have found out that I was beat for a relatively cheap price.
The main goal of the turn bet was to get me to the showdown for 100,000 instead of a larger amount. If I’d checked there, with about 280,000 in the pot, he could very well have had Ace-baby, and my check would have told him that I didn’t have an Ace. He then could have easily bet about 150,000-200,000 on the river to extract value from me. He was looking for an amount that I might have paid off with a Queen or what looked like a bluff. If he had Ace-baby and opted for the 200,000-chip bet, I would have saved 100,000 by betting out on the turn.
Obviously, he could have thrown a wrinkle into the plan by moving all in on the river. Again, this is a situation where you have to incorporate image, and I’d been playing real tight to that point – he was just as scared of me as I was of him.
What if I did have him beat with the Queen? Let’s say he had J-10 or K-10; he would have been priced in to call, and I wanted him to – I needed to pick up the extra 100,000 for my stack. I was willing to take the risk of seeing the river because he only had five or six outs.
Against other players who are capable of seeing the river card and just moving in, I might have tried a different strategy, like playing real small ball and checking the turn while being prepared to pay off 175,000 on the river. But against this guy, I knew for sure he was going to check the river unless he made trips or a straight.
As it turned out, I never saw his hand. He checked the river, I checked behind. He was disgusted when I showed him the Queen, so it was obvious that he had a 10 and I turned him. But he couldn’t have just had a 10. For him to have called with a 10 on the turn he needed to have a straight card there – he either had to be holding J-10 or K-10. And that was exactly the hand I wanted to be up against on the turn.
This situation was very circumstantial because it was based on stack size and image, which are very important in live tournaments. Because of the size of my chip stack, I was playing really tight and couldn’t afford to get out of line. I couldn’t see many flops. I played with this opponent for a while to set up this play, and I knew it was the perfect situation for it. I wanted to get to a showdown because I thought queens could have been the best hand, but didn’t want to pay 200,000 in the end to find out.