Getting a Leg Up on Kill Games

From the mailbag: I recently received an e-mail from a young man by the name of Jeff, who wrote: "I have been playing poker for about two years, and I'm always trying to learn and improve. One of the local casinos has recently added the 'kill pot' feature, and most of the hold'em games at the limits I play ($4-$8 up to $9-$18) are now kill games.



"I assume this new format requires adjusting my strategy, but I'm not sure how. Should I play tighter when I'm playing kill pots? In a way, I feel that I should play them exactly the same as regular pots, but when I've asked more experienced players about this, some say yes and some say no. What do you say?"



Well, Jeff, I say: yes and no.



Before I elaborate, let's clarify things for those readers who play in poker rooms without the kill feature, and who might be unfamiliar with the term. A kill game is a limit game in which some hands – designated as kill pots – are played for double stakes. In hold'em, the kill is triggered when a player wins two or more consecutive hands. Whenever you win a hand in a hold'em kill game, your pot includes a button that indicates you have a "leg up" – which means that if you win the next hand, you will then be playing a kill pot.



In the most fundamental sense, a kill pot is just like any other pot – one in which you should play your very best. Assuming that your bankroll is sufficient to handle what is now a bigger game, there's no need for you to tighten up per se - out of fear, for instance, that money lost in a kill pot will take twice as long to recover in regular pots. By the same token, you need to resist the temptation to overplay your cards in kill pots in an attempt to recover money lost in regular pots "all at once." Poker hands are independent trials, and just as the cards have no memory, neither do they possess any awareness regarding when it's a kill pot.



At the same time, playing your best game requires you to be aware of how your opponents' perceptions differ from your own. Almost certainly, some of them will be inclined to tighten up when facing the double stakes, especially when facing cold raises on fourth and fifth streets – and it is your job to be aware of who they are. It is also your job, when muscling these players, to be aware of which other players have a sense of what you're up to. Otherwise, you'll find yourself walking into too many traps.



But without a doubt, Jeff, the most common error that players make in low-stakes kill games has nothing to do with their approach to playing kill pots, but rather their approach when they have a leg up.



For some curious reason, many players think that when they win a pot and have a leg up, the "goal" becomes to win the next hand so they can kill it. Thus, they loosen their starting-hand requirements, as well as their calling requirements during the hand – without regard for the specific situation. They vaguely sense that if they can just manage to drag this second pot, the ensuing kill pot represents implied odds that will justify their too-loose play. The problem, of course, is that those "implied odds" are attached to an utterly separate event – the next hand – which doesn't make winning the current pot with bad cards any more likely than winning the next pot with two random cards. By lowering your calling standards when you have a leg up, Jeff, you will only be lowering your ratio of chips won relative to chips contended for – in precisely those situations when that ratio needs to be higher, given the fact that when you do win, you'll have to post a double blind. That double blind amounts to a hefty winner's tax – a form of reverse implied odds, if you will. (And the money frittered away by playing bad cards amounts to an even heftier indirect tax added to the kill tax.) In effect, then, the value you're receiving is lowered, as is the price you're receiving on draws, which means that your calling requirements need to be higher when you have a leg up in order to make playing profitable.



This leads to another important consideration. As mentioned, it is a fundamental mistake in poker to assume that your opponents perceive things the same way you do. But you must keep in mind that this includes their perceptions regarding this very concept! In other words, just because you're avoiding this assumption about your opponents doesn't mean they're avoiding it about you. On the contrary, many players will assume that you think as they do. As an obvious example, I'm sure you've noticed that when you suffer a bad beat and then pick up premium cards on the very next hand, some players will give you less credit for your raise than normal, assuming that yours is a "steam raise." That's because this is how they think, and since steam-raising is a natural, automatic reaction for them, they assume it's the same for everyone – so they project their instincts onto you.



Well, kill games present a similar situation.



You may very well find that when you raise preflop with a leg up, some opponents will cold-call your raises more often than usual, since they assume that your objective is the same as theirs would be, which, as noted earlier, is to try to win the next hand at practically any cost. This can make your normal approach to protecting your hand problematic, in which case you should consider an alternative strategy. With big pocket pairs and hands like A-K and A-Q, you might want to call more and raise less. This way, if you miss the flop, you'll have saved yourself a bet, but more importantly, you'll actually be in a better position after the flop to defend a hand like top pair or an overpair. If you build too big a pot too soon, your opponents will have much more incentive to chase you down, and you'll be the one who provided it.



Here's one final note: Many cardrooms these days are offering half-kill games, in which the limits are raised 50 percent in kill pots, instead of being doubled. (For instance, in a $4-$8 game, the kill pot is played at stakes of $6-$12 instead of $8-$16.) These formats can make for some intricate distortions in hand values, especially with regard to blind-stealing when you have a leg up, and to defending your blind in kill pots. Expected values that would be clear-cut in regular limit games become much more marginal in fractional kill games. In fact, the whole risk-versus-benefit equation can get downright confusing, even to experienced players. The optimal adjustments to be made in these situations is a subject far beyond the scope of this column, so let me just say that when it comes to call-completing your blind in a half-kill game, or to stealing the blinds when you're on the button, don't take any of your old assumptions for granted.



If you can, run some computer simulations with various starting hands.



But even in this high-tech world, there's no substitute for taking the time to review situations after your sessions are finished – and for anticipating them beforehand. Thanks for the e-mail, Jeff, and good luck.

Brian Mulholland can be reached at [email protected].