a very large pot

I had an unfortunate no-points finish on Monday night after Lee and I got all-in preflop and my AK of spades lost to his AQ of clubs. However, last night at the Friday night game, things went a lot differently. There was a lot in play, as is becoming usual in that game. I had started somewhat badly, and was stuck $45 when I reloaded for $45 more. With this stack, I managed to scrape back my other money, and was sitting on a stack of around $115 when the following hand occurred:

We were five-handed at the time, and the positions were as follows: Trey was under the gun, followed by Eric, then John on the button, Dale on the small blind, and myself in the big blind. Trey decided to put the $1 straddle on, and Eric, who is a straddlemonger and can't resist it, re-straddled for $2 (In a way, though, I don't mind this move since he's one off the button and could easily be buying the button this hand). I had almost everyone covered. John called from the button, and Dale called (which I don't like). I looked down at my hand, and saw exactly what I wanted to see - two red aces. Jackpot. There was no way I could just call and expect a raise from Trey or Eric, and I wasn't about to let four opponents in against me, so I decided it was a good idea to raise here (duh). At this point, the pot was $7.50. I decided to raise it to that amount, or $5.50 on top of the re-straddle. To my astonishment/wonder, Trey made it $15 total, raising me $7.50 more (slightly more than the minimum raise, he doubled the standing bet)! Everyone folded back around to me.

I had to think about whether to raise, or just call here. I clearly had the best hand right now, and the question was how to play it in order to extract the most money possible from my opponent. I wanted to get Trey psychologically committed to the pot. I had definitely seen him get involved in pots he shouldn't have been in and not seem to be able to fold out of sheer stubbornness before. Actually, a lot. But on the other hand, a few hands ago, against Eric, he was in a hand where he folded in a large pot on the river getting something like 4 to 1 pot odds (not that he's necessarily considering pot odds there). Still, he had reraised me - the tightest player at the table - after I'd raised into four opponents. Also, I'd be out of position for the whole hand, assuming it played out after the flop. If Trey knew I was aware of this, he would have to give me credit for an even stronger hand. In either case, the pot was large, and I decided to raise. The pot was $36 (after my call of the $15), and I decided that if Trey was going to call any bet, he'd probably call up to a pot-sized bet, and maybe even his whole stack. However, I still felt it was too soon to get all-in, so I overbet the pot a little, for $40 on top. He thought about it and then called. At this point, the pot was $116.

The flop came out 6 of diamonds, ace of clubs, queen of clubs. I had flopped top set of aces. Before I could act, I saw Trey reaching for his chips! I fully believed he thought it was his turn to act, and was going to bet the hand. I announced, "I check," and he went all-in! I instantly called and flipped my aces face up. He showed the ace ten!!!!!! I was shocked at how he had played this hand, and realized how thin he was drawing, saying "He needs king-jack!" The turn card was the six of clubs, making me aces full, and the river card didn't matter anymore, because no card would now give him a better hand. I counted down my checks, and I had $63.50, which had him covered. He got up, zipped up his bag, verbalized a few obscenities, and stormed off into the night.

Detailed points standings

Going into week twelve of the Monday night game, the points standings are as follows:
Me (71 pts)
Chip (62 pts)
Marc (60 pts)
Chris (52 pts)
Lee (47 pts)
Dale (38 pts)

Jake and Lori (27 pts each)
Andrew (14 pts)

Daniel (11 pts)

Mark (9 pts)

Randy (8 pts)

Eric (7 pts)

Brent (5 pts)

set over set

Cash game tonight at the office - it went okay for me (up $31), but Lee and Dale took a somewhat severe beating in the game. In fact, Lee got his money in in spots that you couldn't possibly blame him for, but got sucked out on or was beat to begin with. In one pot, he flopped middle set of queens on a board of , and his opponent Justin, who held the T9 of, you guessed it, spades, got all-in against him (having Lee covered by a reasonable amount). When the board failed to fill or quad up Lee's hand, he was out another buy-in.

Perhaps worse was the one-outer beat he took from Marc earlier in the evening. Marc put the live $1 straddle on, and three players limped to Lee on the button, who made it $6 to go. Eric folded his small blind and I looked down at the on the big blind. Knowing that this was (A) marginal, (B) I was out of position, and (C) I had four players yet to act behind me, I mucked the hand. Marc then proceeded to raise it to double Lee's bet, or $12. The limpers all folded, and Lee went all-in for about $8 or $10 on top of the $12. He showed down the ace-king, and Marc showed down two red eights. This was interesting, since I had folded outs for both of the relevant hands. It became even more relevant when the flop brought the king of hearts, and the turn blanked. But lo and behold, drawing to one out in the deck, Marc hit the last eight on fifth street, stacking Lee and foreshadowing the rest of the evening.

Tonight's Bad Beat Story:

JUSTIN : 77

JOHN : QQ

FLOP: 7 T Q (set over set!)

TURN : 8

RIVER : 7

A good result at the office, and observations on the Monday game

I played at the office tonight with Marc, John, Trey, Eric, and Dale, and it was a pretty big game in terms of big blind totals in each player's stack. Marc hit a great run of cards early and got his hands on quite a few chips. At one point, I had him dominated in a huge pot where I went all-in for the fourth raise preflop with AA and he called with the AQ. Unfortunately, the flop came down QKT, then the awful J on fourth street, followed by an eight of diamonds on the river for a chop.

Despite this tough split pot, I did manage to score a nice $52 profit in the game (it was really $57, but I lost a 3-player dealer's choice $5 freezeout with Dale and Eric when during a hand of hold'em I lost a coinflip of QQ vs. AK).

Tomorrow, of course, is the Monday night $11 game, which I hope will be a profitable one for me. Unfortunately, the Monday game, though I feel I still rate to profit in it, is no longer as enticing for me, since I began playing with the Friday night crowd. However, I still enjoy it quite a bit in terms of bragging rights, and first place usually pays pretty well. Plus, first place for the end-of-the-year jackpot should be a pretty good payday if I can win it.

It's sort of ironic about the games at the office being better than the Monday games, in a sense, because this year the buy-in for Monday night actually increased. I think in a way this increase was a way to make the payouts better, entice more rebuys, etc. but in a way it is also a compromise. Many of the Monday night players would not be comfortable at levels of much more than $20 to buy in, but some players, myself included, wanted to raise the stakes. I figure I rate to take money in the long run, so by playing higher I feel I can increase my expected value per tournament on average. So, the increase from the $5 + $0.25 buy in w/ one optional $5 + $0.50 to the $10 +$1 w/ unlimited $5 rebuys was a concession in a way. However, had it not increased, the gap in limits between the cash games on Friday and tournaments on Monday would mean, essentially, that the first place Monday payout would be roughly somewhere near the shortest stack's buy-in on Friday.

four fived

two nights ago, at the Friday night game, the following hand occurred: I was on the big blind, and Eric, to my left, straddled for $1. There were several callers, and when the small blind made it $2 to go, I looked down at AQ of hearts. Knowing for sure that this was the best hand, especially given the just-calls and the very tiny raise from the small blind, I made it $8 to go. The initial straddler called, and there were a few folds around to Trey, who doubled it to $16. Since Trey is a loose maniac, I knew this raise didn't mean much. I stuck my remaining $2.25 in on top of Trey's raise, and was called in two spots, by Eric and Trey. The flop came down J73, and they checked it down. The turn was a 6, the river another 3, and it didn't look too good for me. They turned over their hands.

4-5. Both of them had 4-5 offsuit and had willingly put in $18.25 (36½ big blinds) before the flop, and worst of all, they made the straight!! I was in for $40 at the time, and reloaded and managed to win back $24 of my lost $40, but was in utter shock at the play of this hand. While it was a brutal beat, I am glad to be playing in a game where this sort of thing occurs, because my expected value in these types of situations is huge.

I mean, they both had 4-5! The chances they catch a pair of 4s or 5s when my AQ blanks are reduced severely. They pretty much have to make either a straight or a BS flush, etc. to win the hand. I would willingly put the money in there again, and again, because the long-term payoff would be huge.

Sorry about the bad beat story.

lesson one - position

Of all of the basic concepts of poker which contribute to winning play, position is often said to be one of the most important. However, there are many low-stakes players who either do not make adjustments to their play based on position, and indeed have a flawed understanding of both the concept of position and its value.

In poker, a player is said to be "in position" on their opponent when they act after their opponent throughout the hand. This happens anytime the opponent is closest to the left of the player with the dealer button in front of him/her. If the opponent is the one acting last, the player is said to be "out of position" against him/her during the hand. Interestingly, in hold'em, the blinds are actually in position against the other players before the flop, and out of position for all remaining rounds of betting.

So, why is it so advantageous to act last? Actually, there are several reasons:

1. You have more information when it is your turn to act. This is perhaps the most obviouos reason. Poker is a game of incomplete information, and you are constantly attempting to determine what your opponents' hole cards are. By seeing what your opponents do on each street before you decide whether to bet/check/call, etc. it is easier to determine what you're up against. This leads to point number two.

2. You can take pots to which you aren't entitled. In other words, you can more efficiently attack weakness. If, when observing your out-of-position opponent acting before you, you sense that they are weak (often because they have checked multiple streets, etc.), you can often make shrewd bluffs that will take these pots down. Out of position, however, you can't really know for sure whether a given card helped your opponent, since they haven't done anything since it came out. You'd have to fire bets into the pot "blind" in a sense.

3. There are more plays available to you. This one applies to all kinds of hands, but especially drawing hands. Put plainly, it is easier to play draws in position. By definition, a drawing hand is probably not the best hand until it's made. By acting last, you can know for sure whether your bet will end the action on that round, and you control whether free cards come off the deck. This is critical. Not only can the "raising for a free card" play not be done from out of position, but when your opponent(s) check to you, you can decide whether to keep the pot small and see a free one, or bet as a semi-bluff with a more powerful draw.

There are whole sections of poker books devoted to preflop hand selection, and virtually every single one advises playing different arrays of hands when in different positions. Generally speaking, they advise playing only the absolute best hands when out of position, and loosening up your hand requirements the closer to the button you get. When you are first to act before the flop, you are said to be "under the gun." When you're in this spot, you have the entire table yet to act behind you, and have no idea how they'll be playing the hand. Thus, you should stick to hands which are likely to be good regardless of the action around the table, like AA, KK, AK suited, etc.

The more players yet to act, the better the odds of a hand that beats you being out there. That's just simple math. If you have a hand, and you have one opponent, the odds your hand is the best hand (if no one has looked at the cards) are 50-50. If you have three opponents, you're a 3:1 dog to have the best hand. Therefore, if it's folded to you preflop on the button, you have only two hands to get through. You don't need AA or KK to feel like you probably have the best hand, so you can raise with a lot more holdings. Plus, even if you don't have the best hand currently, you'll be in position against any callers for the rest of the hand, and can fold if you think you're beaten on later rounds.

As an added last note, it's extremely valuable to have opponents who don't understand position and don't utilize it properly. One of the traps that weak players get in that cost them a huge amount of long-term value is playing weak hands out of position - especially easily dominated hands like AT and KJ. You want your opponents playing these hands out of position against raises, because they'll more than likely be handing you lots of chips over time.

New literature

Just got the new CardPlayer as well as volume I of the newly published Harrington on Cash Games, which came out last month. If it's anywhere near as valuable as his trilogy on tournament play, it will have been well worth the wait. However, the cover price is a staggering $34.95!!! Though I believe that I will recoup this amount in winnings in the future, it's still quite a bit to charge for a non-hardback. At any rate, hopefully I'll get around to posting my thoughts on the content of the book when I'm finished.

Points update

A Monday win! This is great, since it extends my narrow lead a tiny bit. Also, my confidence that I'm still rated to win in the tournaments is increased. I'm going to have to wake up early tomorrow to get to work, so I don't have time to write too many details of tonight's game yet. However, I will list the current points standings.

Me (64 pts.)

Chip (57 pts.)

Marc (51 pts.)

Lee (47 pts.)

Chris (44 pts.)

one hundred U.S.

Another fantastic game at the office tonight, continuing the recent trend of cash game wins at that location. It was much different than the last game we played there, with only five players playing as opposed to Friday's ten. The lineup was Eric, John, Lee, Dale, and myself (in clockwise order). John ended up leaving pretty much even, and the big winners were Eric and myself.

There were some wild hands in the game tonight!! Lee and Dale were involved in a large all-in pot in which Lee was drawing to four outs to make a gutshot straight with two cards coming. They agreed to run it twice, and Lee's eight came, filling his straight. When the board paired, Dale remarked that he was glad they had agreed to run it twice, since if they'd just run it once Lee would have won the pot, rather than the split which was almost certain to come. However, on the second board, the eight came again. When the board didn't pair, Lee won a disgustingly unlikely pot.

In a hand of Omaha hi-lo, Eric and I saw a flop of 10 10 2 rainbow, and I held a 10 against Eric's 2 2 for deuces full. Of course, I coudn't possibly put him on this hand, and since I was first to act, I bet the pot. He called, and fourth street was a four, making me fours full with the 10 4. Since he had called my bet on the flop, I figured he had a big piece and would call another pot-sized bet. I made the bet, and as expected, I called it. On the river (an offsuit 8) I bet around two thirds of the pot, and got paid off with my full house, tens over fours versus his full house, deuces over tens.

Even more insane, at one point Lee was felted by Eric when he flopped fours up on a flop of 4 2 2. The turn was a blank, and the river another 4. Eric had a huge amount of chips at this point, as an aside. The action was bet and raise all-in, and Lee declared "I have the four," and showed his hand. Eric turned up pocket deuces, for quads. He flopped four of a kind, and Lee had improved his two pair to the full house, which still wasn't quite good enough.

All told, it was quite a game for me, as I made about $27 an hour, which is a more than adequate hourly rate for the limits I'm playing.

Another good cash

Last night was a great game at the office. Ten players were there including myself, and there was quite a bit of cash in play. I walked away with a nice profit, as did a couple of other players. Of course, that means some of the players got hurt a bit, but those are the breaks I suppose.

I wanted to use this post to address the topic of minimum-raising. I know that there are plenty of players out there that like to do a lot of min-raising, but I really don't like the play in very many situations other than high-blind situations late in a tournament. There are several reasons to raise a pot, and one of the reasons which shouldn't be overlooked is raising to eliminate opponents when you likely have the best hand already.

This may seem counter intuitive. If you have the best hand, don't you want as much money going into the pot as possible? Yes and no. When you have the best hand, it is often correct to make large bets, thereby protecting your hand by forcing your opponents to pay (more than they reasonably should) to outdraw you, or fold. Often, monster pre-flop hands actually play better against fewer opponents. Aces are a huge favorite against one random hand, but their expected value drops a whole lot for each extra person in the hand. Put another way, the flop has to be pretty good to connect with one opponent's hole cards in such a way as to crack your aces. But if it can connect in such a way with any of several opponents, this can lead to trouble, especially if you have a tough time getting away from a big pair on the flop.

I tend to prefer opening for a standard 3 big blind raise, plus 1 BB for each person who's limped in before me. This helps build a bigger pot when I get called, and provides me a maximized chance of winning the pot because it helps thin the field against my raise.

A bad tournament in between two good cash games

As the title implies, things didn't go my way on Monday, as I walked away with no points. This is unfortunate, as it means that the game is on in terms of the overall points standings. I'm still in first place, but by a two point margin. Marc and Chip are right on my heels, and interestingly enough, there's a 3-way tie for 4th between Chris, Dale, and Lee. I'd prefer not to have to sweat each game as one in which my opponents are even capable of overtaking the lead, but I'll have to take some consolation in the fact that I've been crushing the cash games pretty soundly over at the office.
In fact, when I've had the best hand and the money's gone in, it's actually been holding up. On Sunday, I doubled through Marc in a cash game when I raised the 45 of clubs up front (a hand I almost always just fold) and took a flop heads up against him. The flop came down 2A3, giving me the wheel and therefore the nuts. Sometimes, when I'm out of position against Marc, since he's an aggressive player, I'll let him do the betting all the way down and wait until the river to put in a raise for the rest of my chips. However, given the flop (and the fact that it contained a two-flush), I thought I could (and should) get it in there on the flop.
Plus, I was the preflop raiser, and almost always continuation-bet when heads up. I decided to bet out, hoping that Marc had an ace. I didn't put him on a hand like AK or AQ because he would have raised preflop, so I was hoping to be up against something like a medium ace (A7, A6, etc.), a pair under the aces but above the treys, or a small ace, which would give Marc either two pair or top pair plus an inside wheel draw. The pot was already $3.25, and rather than go small, I decided to bet $3.50 and determine right away whether Marc had a hand.
I could barely contain myself when he announced a raise to $10 straight. Calling would leave me with $28.75 with a pot of $20.25. Rather than just call and allow another spade to roll off, putting my in a tough situation, I decided to go ahead and stick the rest in there, and I got paid off by Marc's ace-deuce.
It's important to note that, while I did get lucky by flopping the nut straight when I had raised with the 45, this pot was most of my profit for the night. The point is, play for the big pots. If I had missed the straight, or not connected solidly on the flop, I would have thrown the hand away and lost only my initial bet. Playing all night and folding in marginal spots is fine, as long as your opponents will pay you off when you hit big. In this game, the entire night's profit usually comes from two or three big pots rather than a slow accumulation of small ones.