Making a stand against bluffers

We are all prone, unfortunately, to providing others with ways of taking our money. Obviously we should be working hard to constantly evaluate our play and determine to keep leaks and mistakes to a minimum.

But some players are rude enough to steal our money through bluffing us out of a pot. Is this not our fault because we are being prudent in folding, or another weakness in our play in that we don’t do enough to combat steals?

The good news is that we are able to trap these players, and another weapon in our armoury is putting up enough of a fight to prevent them from messing with our game so that they pick on someone else or even move on for pastures new. It’s a nice feeling to catch out a bluffer and some players actively seek them out but, in the main, they are a nuisance, and we can concentrate our efforts in exploiting other kinds of players so fighting our corner is a good strategy.

It’s not too difficult to identify bluffers, who probably prefer to call themselves ‘loose aggressive’ players. They are the ones who can’t resist peppering the pot with bets they hope are big enough to scare everyone off. This can work out well for us sometimes, but can be more than an inconvenience, for example when we have a marginal holding or when their throwing money around interferes with how we were planning to approach a hand.

The problem most players have when wondering how to address bluffers is that taking a stand requires a certain leap of faith. But the longer we dither and fail to act the longer our own strategies are disrupted – indeed if we can’t properly respond we’re better off leaving and finding a table where we can operate, but this, of course, isn’t the right attitude.

One advantage of having a table image tight enough to attract bluffers is that when we do elect to hit back at them they are more likely to believe us. At some point we should allow them to bluff and, preferably with a hand that has some kind of positive relation to the board (numerous outs, for example), raise big enough to turn the tables and force them out of the pot. Note that there’s no point doing this for the prize of a small pot.

Once might be enough, but generally a bluffer will soon get the message and, fingers duly burnt, leave us alone. The point of their game is to steal pots, and when we have established that we are not to be messed with they won’t take the risk any more. This also enables us to better read them when, after backing off, they do get involved.

The desired result is that by demonstrating the steel to fight our corner we get to play the type of game we want while disrupting someone else in the process. Getting our own way and frustrating others is a key part of the game.

Good luck at the tables!

Angus Dunnington (AngusD at the 32Red tables)
32Red Poker Ambassador

Tweet

No Limit: Can we play a full ring table in short-handed mode?

The answer should really be no, but that isn’t to say we should discount the possibility altogether. In the ‘old’ days, when online poker more mirrored the traditional casino version, full tables were not only considered a good starting point for beginners – as is still the case – but also a more popular choice for experienced players than we see today.

As the game became more tactical and aggressive the 6-max tables saw a considerable gain in popularity, the modern style of getting involved more in the action being the appropriate way of addressing the more frequent blinds.

So-called tighter players prefer to stick to full ring games, which have the additional attraction of being cheaper due to the cost per hand thanks to the ‘longer’ orbit – this might seem insignificant but over many hands makes a big difference. ‘Fewer’ blinds also means that not needing a compensatory loose approach tends to produce less variance and this, in turn, allows us to feel a little more relaxed than might be the case at a 6-max table.

Because there are far more short-handed tables nowadays (as well as heads-up tables, where tight in its literal poker sense simply won’t work), and because short-handed poker is viewed as the more fashionable and exciting game, people tend to discount full ring as an option despite the fact that it might well suit them better. But even if we ultimately end up choosing 6-max there’s something to be said for trying out bigger tables in order to better appreciate such aspects of the game as hand selection and patience. Full ring play also places more emphasis on stronger hands and implied odds.

Furthermore, once we have spent some time on both kinds of table we can return to full ring and exploit the players who are clearly the archetypal tight, conservative, no-risk full ring regulars as well as those who demonstrate little or no experience and are just too loose. It is indeed possible to apply short-handed bullying tactics and (re)steals and so on at a full table, rather than feeling that by definition we must revert to a style of ABC poker that runs the risk of being one-paced.

Poker has evolved enough over the years to afford us some flexibility.

Good luck at the tables!

Angus Dunnington (AngusD at the 32Red tables)
32Red Poker Ambassador

Tweet

A common mistake on the river

One of the problems with poker is that, when we try to adhere to this or that guideline and introduce into our armoury more ways of playing, if we fail to read situations properly our action instead becomes a mistake rather than a money earner.

One such common error is throwing in a raise on the river because we convinced ourselves we were way ahead, or making unnecessary would-be ‘value’ bets, calling big bets/raises and generally being unable to acknowledge that we are beaten.

For example if we raised in position pre-flop with a hand like AsKs and get a lone caller we run the risk of overestimating our chances on a ragged board that features an ace. Let’s say the flop comes Ac 4s 9d, our opponent checks and we make a ¾ pot bet that is called. The turn brings the 2d, we are checked to again and we bet roughly ¾ pot, with another call. The 4c appears on the river but this time, instead of checking, the opponent bets around 1/7^th of the pot. Given the way the hand has panned out thus far we figure that a possible holding could be an ace with a weaker kicker so we see this as an opportunity to extract some additional value, raising to triple the bet… After a slight pause we see a call followed by the chips heading away from us because all this time we have been up against 4d 6d. Thus the result of our attempting to earn a little extra did succeed in making a bigger pot, albeit one that we didn’t get to collect – we made our opponent some cash!

This is easily done, especially in view of how we assumed the initiative right from the beginning. A very similar mistake is when the hand follows the same path and we bet the river when checked to and call a raise with what turns out to be the worst hand.

It is an imperative to continually reassess during a hand so that we can make more realistic evaluations, ideally picking up warning signs along the way that help facilitate the decision making process. In this case our opponent check-calling considerable bets should serve as a wake-up call and alert us to the fact that we may well be holding second best despite our strong looking hand. When the board pairs, incidentally, the alarm bells should be at their loudest. At least then we can avoid falling into traps. It makes more sense to just call these bets and check out rather than expose ourselves to bad situations – remember that raising/betting with a pair on the river tends only to be called by a better hand.

Generally, a dangerous looking board and an opponent who wakes up (or checks after check-calling big bets) need treating with respect.

Good luck at the tables!

Angus Dunnington (AngusD at the 32Red tables)
32Red Poker Ambassador

Tweet

Adjusting Play

Yet another comparison between poker and life (no apologies) is that we need to learn how to adjust to changing circumstances. We might have read here and there that it is important to mix up our play a little (note that this article is aimed at No Limit). This should indeed be something we are willing to do, but making deliberate adjustments is more important – and effective – than randomly altering our game.

The latter tactic, for all but the more experienced players, can often confuse the player wielding the weapon more than those it is directed against.

Adjusting play after getting a feel of the dynamics of a table and any habits and weaknesses (not forgetting strengths!) of the opposition, on the other hand, has specific aims and thus more achievable results.

If it becomes evident that there are more players than is usual limping and calling raises pre-flop we should tighten up a little if we have also been loose, instead betting strongly with premium hands as we are likely to be called and thus able to build a pot. Conversely, once we have been able to establish that we are in a tight game we can exploit the situation by widening our range and stepping up a gear or two.

Passive players prone to folding at the first hint of trouble should be mercilessly put under pressure, and usually avoided when they wake up with bold bets. Against players like this who are really tight we should also start playing with suited connectors and small pairs because, when we hit monsters, they are not going to let their big pairs and other strong made hands go. Extra-aggressive players also require us to adjust, ideally with a view to trapping them.

Of course we’re dealing here with adjustments rather than sudden, drastic, inconspicuous 180-degree shifts in how we bet and so on, and clearly these need to be made with our own table image in mind. We are not going to trap these players with an out-of-character play that sets off alarm bells. After a long enough period during which we have set out our stall such that opponents might find aspects of our play predictable, it’s time to craftily make a few changes that will ultimately give them a nasty shock.

If we have gone quiet, then choosing to return to battle by raising with a marginal or speculative hand – rather than a strong one – is a good, tricky play that can reap big rewards on uneventful flops. Noticeable aggression on our part – with a wide hand range – can be gradually stripped down.

The important thing to remember is that a game ebbs and flows, and we must learn how to make appropriate changes that maximise our chances. As we gain experience it becomes possible to anticipate these shifts so that we can engineer adjustments with maximum effect. Blindly continuing with the same approach regardless of what is going on around us is a recipe for disaster!

Good luck at the tables!

Angus Dunnington
32Red Poker Ambassador  

Tweet

No Limit Tournaments: Final Table Strategy

Following our feature about cutting a path through freeroll (and general) multi-table tournaments, here are a few reminders about how we might – should we survive that far – handle the final table.

Obviously, as the tournament progresses, what will have started as a patient approach during which we concentrated on good hands and position will have gradually stepped up in pace (along with growing blinds and a decrease in players), so that we were willing to get involved with a wider ranger of hands, and not necessarily limiting our aggression to late position.

Ideally we also made a point of exploiting other players’ fear of missing out on the paid places as the bubble approached, while at the same time avoiding big, unnecessary confrontations against anyone who could knock us out of the tournament.

The problem for inexperienced players (indeed most players) who find themselves sitting at a final table is having to readjust to the dynamics and come up with a new strategy to cope with the changed situation. One mistake – unless we have a stack so tiny that the only option is to take our chance rather than passively give in by being blinded away – is that, guaranteed a decent prize but behind six or seven players on what is left of the leaderboard, we almost immediately throw caution to the wind and gamble in an effort to have one of the bigger stacks. Every final table sees this happen, usually with this player exiting with a far from strong hand when, in fact, it would have been possible to sit tight for a while and wait for genuinely favourable opportunities, only pushing all-in if it becomes absolutely necessary. Moreover, with other players – even those above us – gambling away their survival, it is not unusual to be promoted from 8th/10 to 6th or 7th/9 within an orbit or two of the final table getting under way – patience, even at this stage, remains a key part of the game.

Often such an elimination will be thanks to someone with a huge stack taking it upon themselves to go head-to-head with gambling short(er) stacks, sometimes with random, mediocre hands. It’s important – for now, at least – to forget about runaway chip leaders rather than have a go with, say, KJ after seeing them risk a few thousand of their enormous stack with 89 – unless circumstances dictate it, there’s no point being around a 60-40 favourite (KcJs v 8h9h is roughly a 60:40 match-up) if we’re healthy enough to pick our spots.

Nevertheless, as usual, we need some kind of happy medium, ideal situations being when we get involved with premium hands while someone is trying to steal, a player goes with a lesser hand or someone has reached (what they perceive to be) a critical, desperate stage.

It is imperative to keep in mind our position relative to the other players in terms of where the different size stacks are. This makes certain players safer/riskier than others, which we should factor in to the decision making process.

Throw in the occasional steals against passive players – which are easier to make if we have started the final table patiently and thus earned ourselves a solid, not-to-be-messed-with image – and it becomes much easier to pick our way through the minefield while others self-destruct around us.

By employing a patient, solid (not passive) and ultimately aggressive strategy we should be able to remain in contention until there are a handful of players and, consequently, win a bigger prize than had we initially lacked discipline. If we do manage this and find ourselves lagging so far behind the rest then, far better now to take our chances all-in and finish 5th, for example, than do the same with all ten players still in the game.

Good luck at the tables!

Angus Dunnington (AngusD at the tables)
32Red Poker Ambassador

Tweet

Don’t Min-Raise!

In a recent article about bet sizing we looked at how it is important to make sure we put in bets that are big enough to do the job in order to extract value from our strong hands, force the opposition to pay for draws, get information and so on. As well as feeling uncomfortable when making 3/4 pot bets, for example, many players have the same problem when it comes to raising so, to push the point home that we need to take the bull by the horns, this time we will look at what is wrong with the minimum raise.

First and foremost, if the point of the raise is to build a pot that we believe we have a good chance of winning, then we are missing out on value. Indeed if we are in the habit of doing this at every betting juncture, then the cumulative difference between the small pots we’re winning and the bigger pots we should be building is going to hold us back in our quest to progress. Big hands need big raises.

With a min-raise we are often committing a poker sin in that, instead of being the aggressor and taking the initiative, we are actually doing opponents a favour in many situations by helping them out with favourable pot odds for draws. If by raising too passively we are pricing someone in to overtake us then this is a serious leak in our game, and when it does happen it’s certainly due to poor play rather than bad luck. Moreover, we need to apply pressure with big raises to also take into account implied odds, so only slightly increasing a min-raise isn’t enough. (Note that with each successive call of a min-raise opponents are getting increasingly favourable odds).

Finally, apart from these numerical reasons to avoid the min-raise, it’s also a particular mistake pre-flop with a monster because, nowadays, with so many more experienced, thinking players around, it’s very likely when we believe we are being clever with premium hands (namely AA and KK) that we are in fact doing the opposite and instead ‘showing’ our cards.

The problem is that a min-raise isn’t intended to win the pot there and then, which means that opponents can effectively discount hands such as 10 10, AQ and AJ – holdings which, if we aren’t just calling with, we would prefer to play more aggressively – as well as small pairs, with which we’d like to see flops cheaply. Meanwhile, we are hardly going to be bluffing with a min-raise, either. All things considered, our min-raise essentially indicates aces or kings (this kind of bet doesn’t help QQ), so our logic has backfired. Poker might be a tricky game but often the obvious play is the best play; if we really must be crafty in this pre-flop situation we would be better off just calling to disguise our hand.

Generally, avoid the min-raise.

Good luck at the tables!

Angus Dunnington (AngusD at the tables)
32Red Poker Ambassador

Tweet

Bet Sizing

Beginners are not the only players to make inappropriate bet sizes. It stands to reason that, because the size of the pot relative to bet and stack sizes forms the foundation of each hand, we should try our best to at least find the right bet sizing range. It is imperative that we make correct bet sizes in order to get the most value from each hand we are involved in, whether this is maximizing gains or minimising losses.

Making weak, smallish bets gives the opposition both favourable odds for drawing hands (indeed decent odds for all sorts of hands to overtake us) and the opportunity, upon sensing our inability to bet more aggressively, to bully us and thus collect what should be our spoils. Betting strongly has the advantage of forcing drawing hands to pay over the odds to continue as well as reminding others that when we bet we mean business.

First, let’s assume that we already follow a general rule pre-flop along the lines of raising 3xBB plus 1xBB for each limper (some players, depending on the action, might opt for 4xBB) so that we don’t give anyone a cheap ticket to see the flop. Also, if we are going to raise someone else’s pre-flop bet, then we should be raising roughly three times their original bet to make their odds unattractive.

Moving on to the flop and beyond, we should always be aware when making a bet of both the size of the pot and relevant stack sizes but, as a rule, in order to optimise our play and thus induce incorrect play from opponents we should be looking to have a minimum bet in mind. In ‘normal’ circumstances – when we think we have the best hand at the table, for instance – we really need to be betting around 3/4 of the pot on the flop. Many players put themselves off betting this much, either not wanting to scare off the opposition or even because they are afraid to bet so big in case they are up against a monster (an awful, negative line of thought!). But this is in fact an optimal bet size as it achieves the two key aims of giving opponents with drawing hands incorrect pot odds and maximising value every time someone calls with a worse hand.

Unless we are absolutely positive that a 3/4-pot bet won’t bring the desired result (of course there will be instances where smaller bets are called for) we should get into the habit of betting strongly rather than giving away pot odds and losing value. Moreover, if we aren’t prepared to bet big we might consider not betting at all. It might feel a little difficult at first if we are instead used to betting 1/3 of the pot, for example, but it won’t take long to appreciate that more appropriately aggressive play is far more effective.

Remember also that big bets garner information (and thus help us better define hand ranges) as the opposition needs a genuine reason to remain in the hand – betting small merely invites all kinds of hands to stay in contention.

To make life so much easier when it comes to bet sizing, take advantage of 32Red‘s very useful Bet Slider tool, a facility that allows us to pre-select bet sizing options so that we don’t have to fiddle about during a hand. This has a massive range of pre-settings to choose from so that we are able to decide precisely the values in the bet boxes that pop up when it is our turn to act. When seated at a table, sort out this excellent tool by clicking on Menu, Options and Bet Slider and, in the Texas Hold’em/Omaha tab, create a new profile.

Good luck at the tables!

Angus Dunnington (AngusD at the tables)
32Red Poker Ambassador

Tweet

No Limit: The Check Raise

Check raising is – as the name suggests – when we check with the intention of responding to a subsequent bet behind us with a raise. Along with slowplaying strong hands, this is one of those ‘fashionable’ plays that, once we see it in action, we can’t wait to use it ourselves.

Of course poker requires from us a certain level of balance and therefore we need to make sure we don’t overdo it in order to avoid being predictable. Despite our urge to be tricky and trappy we should be aware that having too much of a good thing runs the risk of our opponents catching on and turning the tables on us, so that they even anticipate our trap and we come unstuck. This is a genuine problem for many players who enjoy spicing up their game a little too much, especially when we take into account that we don’t need as strong a hand to check raise as we do to slowplay, for example.

But the check raise is nevertheless a very useful weapon indeed and it is vital we learn to recognise when it is appropriate and, equally important, what ‘conditions’ we need to keep in mind. Other than a stone-cold bluff against a thief, we need to rate the strength of our hand – for instance we might have such a strong holding that a better option would be the more deceptive slowplay. And of paramount importance, obviously, is the ability to read the game well enough to be sure that a player will in fact oblige by betting after we check! There’s never a guarantee we’ll induce that desired bet – however well we observe the ebb and flow of the game – but if our check raise attempts keep backfiring when nobody bites, perhaps we’re not doing it right. We don’t want to be giving a free card to those who would have folded to a bet, nor be ‘losing’ a bet from those who would have called.

When done properly, and as part of a balanced strategy, check raising clearly has great benefits. As well as the ‘standard’ use of extracting extra value from our good hands by getting lesser hands to invest more by having to call our raise, we can also, for example, use it to thin out the field when the target player is on our right, the point being that those players in between who also checked would be more likely to fold when facing a bigger call.

Good luck at the tables!

Angus Dunnington (AngusD at the tables)
32Red Poker Ambassador

Tweet

Wise Guys Results (3rd – 9th October)

Win at the 32Red Poker cash tables and you may qualify for even more cash rewards with our Wise Guys weekly leaderboards. Yes, we reward our biggest winners at 32Red Poker and we reward them well, with over $1,000 in prizes every week!

Congratulations to last week’s prize winners…

32Red’s Wise Guys

32Red Poker rewards loyalty, and winners – so if you’re a winning player, don’t be shy and try out our Wise Guysweekly competition. Have fun at the tables and good luck this week!

Tweet

No Limit: Slowplaying a strong hand

Slowplaying is characterised by checking or calling with a very strong hand, the aim being to lure players who might have folded to aggression into betting themselves, or to tempt players with decent hands into assuming the initiative. Of course when we manage to pull this off the results can be fantastic, and it always seems more of an achievement to win a pot that saw us manipulate an opponent into a big bluff.

However, slowplaying also brings with it an element of risk in that, not only might we end up with less, if the hand sees no more action, than had we bet in the first place and at least extracted a call, but there is also the chance we could come unstuck and lose the pot after giving the opposition the opportunity to overtake us (and usually we will have put more in the pot with our strong hand on the turn and/or river).

Consequently it is important to recognise which situations are more likely to justify slowplaying than others, in order not to get in the habit of giving up security against potentially dangerous hands or simply failing to build the pot against those players who don’t take the bait.

Key factors are the tendencies of the other players, as well as our position in relation to them.

The best scenarios involve proven over-aggressive players and bluffers. If they are sitting behind us (to our left) and we have already seen them betting into unopened pots and generally taking a stab at the slightest hint of passivity, especially when this is followed by more aggression on the turn, then a slowplay is preferable to a bet if we are confident that we are well ahead. In such cases we would check the flop and only call the bet, and then throw in a further check on the turn.

But if there is any doubt we should avoid being too tricky and running the risk of giving a free card, instead electing to check-raise the flop bet/bluff. Note that this particular play tends to succeed in inducing a call from even mediocre hands as many players find it hard to fold in this spot given the pot odds. If we are called we should continue in the same vain with even more aggression on the turn.

We can also use the slowplay to exploit these players when we have position on them. When facing a bet, and confident that we have the best hand, we slowplay by simply calling and thus allowing our opponent to remain in the driving seat, at which point they are more likely to fire again on the turn. Again the correct play is often to just call (perhaps after a pause to add to the air of weakness) so that when the river comes we should be able to extract even more value, this time not forgetting to throw a raise into what will by then be a sizeable pot.

These are just two examples of the slowplay but, as long as we are aware of the dangers and are prudent when the flop is clearly too dangerous to allow free cards and so on (or at least are prepared to get our fingers burnt should we anyway decide a slowplay is a viable option), then this is another weapon we need to incorporate into our ever-expanding armoury.

Good luck at the tables!

Angus Dunnington (AngusD at the tables)
32Red Poker Ambassador

Tweet

Next Page »