A Few Errors

Today, I will discuss a few common errors among people who think they play well. Most of the time, the players involved don't even know they are making a mistake, because they seem to be doing the right thing. I will analyze three of those errors, and explain why I view them as such.

Error No. 1: Raising preflop from the button with what appears to be the best hand – when raising may in fact make it harder for you to defend your hand after the flop.

Let's say that in limit hold'em, you hold A-J offsuit on the button. There are three relatively weak limpers in front of you, which means your hand is quite likely to be the best. Even if this is the case, it is usually better to just call than to raise in situations like this, and it has to do with the nature of your cards. An A-J offsuit will often win if you make top pair with a good kicker. If you get the type of flop you want (say, J-9-3 rainbow), you would like someone with a hand like J-10 to lead into you, so you can raise and shut out overcards, smaller pairs, and straight draws. But if you raise before the flop, this might not happen. People will often check to you, knowing that you will probably bet, but because the pot is much bigger now, they will be more inclined to call you – even with relatively weak hands. This is not what you want when holding just one pair yourself, simply because one-pair hands tend to perform rather badly in multiway pots. (Of course, the higher the pair, the more likely it is to survive.) Even if someone does bet into you and you raise, people still might call you with hands like K-10 or Q-9, and they may be correct to do so – while in an unraised pot, they would probably let it go. So, this is the type of situation where just calling before the flop might cost you less in case you miss, and if you do hit, you might be able to defend your hand better. This is despite the fact that you do seem to be holding the best hand before the flop, and thus it would seem only logical to raise.

Error No. 2: Automatically checking on the end in a heads-up situation when first to act and a scare card has come up on the river. It still may be correct to bet.

Recently I was heads up with A-A-X-X in a limit Omaha high game. Despite the scary board of K-Q-X-X with two clubs (that I didn't have), I had been betting all the way, with my sole opponent – a weak calling station – calling my bets. The A came on the river, giving me three aces, but at the same time completing the flush and straight draws with which my opponent might have been calling me. Despite this (and also because I smelled weakness in my opponent), I bet, got called, and won. Most people would have checked because the draws had gotten there, and out of fear of getting raised by one of those draws. However, quite often the last card will look as scary to your opponent as it does to you, especially if he is not the type of player who plays nut hands only. If you check when your opponent has a non-nut flush, he will probably bet (and you will have to call), but if you bet, he will often just call, fearing that you might have the nuts. Plus, if he's a true calling station, there are lots of hands worse than yours with which he will pay you off but wouldn't bet if you checked. This means that quite often, you will lose exactly the same amount by betting or checking if your opponent does have you beat, but if he doesn't, betting will win you an extra bet that you wouldn't have won by doing the obvious (checking).

Please note that this recommendation applies only if you are first to act in a heads-up situation. If you are last to act (and your sole opponent has checked to you), or if you are up against more than one opponent, you probably should not bet. In the first case, this is due in large part to the possibility of a check-raise, and in the second case, with two or more opponents it is just too likely that one of them has made his hand. In fact, with two or more opponents, you will often be forced to check and fold, especially if there's been a bet and a call.

Error No. 3: Betting for information, when the information you're going to get is likely to be unreliable.

Many good players like to show strength by betting and raising early in the hand to test their opponents' strength, and if they run into lots of resistance, they might surrender (unless, of course, their hand is strong enough to beat some legitimate raising hands of the opposition). They use the cheap streets to gauge their opponents' strength, to be able to make the proper decisions later, when the real money is at stake. I would say that in general, this is a good strategy, and the proper way to play poker. But, some players take this concept too far and use it indiscriminately, or against the wrong players. I will illustrate this with two examples:

•A good player (John) has called a late-position raise by James when holding king-small suited in the big blind. The flop comes K-Q-7 with two of a suit that John doesn't have. He check-raises James, all others fold, and James three-bets. John calls, knowing that he might be drawing dead to his kicker, but realizing that James might just as well be semibluffing here, with a flush or straight draw, for example. So, when a blank comes on the turn, John fires again, only to see his opponent raise him once more. Now, John reasons: "Gee, after so many signs of strength by me, James still raises. So, he must have a better hand than my mere top pair-no kicker. I'll fold." Now, don't be surprised to see his opponent turn over hands like J-10 or A-10 suited. If James is a savvy player who knows he can make his opponent lay down a hand like top pair, especially on the turn, John will have taken his otherwise good strategy too far, or to be more precise, he has used the wrong strategy for this type of player.

• In limit Omaha high, this same player (John) holds a small diamond flush, bets on the flop, and gets called. Once again, his opponent is James, a tricky and highly knowledgeable player. Not knowing whether he is up against a higher flush or a set, John bets again when a blank comes on the turn, only to see his opponent raise him. John folds his 8-high flush, and James flashes me his hand: top two pair plus the bare Au. Once again, he has gotten his opponent to lay down the best hand, using John's tendencies of betting and then folding to a raise against him.

I am certain that some players will not view all of the plays mentioned here as "errors." This may be correct: Sometimes, "exploitable weakness" may be a better term, or even "fairly good play that could be better." Whatever the term, I hope you have learned a few things, some mistakes to avoid, in order to play a better overall game.