The Charge of the Chip Brigade

Much is written about hand-selection strategies and odds of given poker situations. Most are relatively easy to learn and anyone of reasonable intelligence with common sense can play a reasonable game of poker by applying them. But to excel at poker, you need to be able to read your opponents' minds and emotions, and adjust your play accordingly.



World-class players take it a step further and manipulate their opponents' minds and emotions to increase their edge. Some players do that by aggressively antagonizing their opponents, and while there can be short-term gain from that strategy, they run the risk of alienating their target and running him from the game, thereby losing his action.



A better plan is to utilize aggressive plays that baffle your opponent, causing him to misread and misplay you, which gives you an increased edge over him. This will not alienate your opponent. He probably will enjoy playing with you even more. It also juices the game up and can often increase your edge over other opponents, as they will struggle to adapt not only to your targeted opponent's reactions, but also to you.



I was playing two games at once on different screens and sweating a third $20-40 limit hold'em game, in which I was first up on the waiting list. In the game I was sweating sat a player who was incredibly aggressive, bluff-raising lots of pots. He generally just attacked, and was in "charge of the chip brigade" mode. At the time, he was doing well in the game, catching a card or two in some very key big pots in which opponents were forced to overplay their hands because of his aggressive style. And he was winning all of the pots in which no one made a hand.



A player left and I took a seat three to his left. As the old saying goes, the first impression is the most lasting one, and knowing that Mr. Berserko was going to be the key variable in this game, I wanted to make an impression on him early. Deception plays have more value when made against players who will not read them as deception plays, and even more value yet when made early in a session in which the player(s) are likely to remain for a period of time.



On the first hand, I picked up the A 5 after posting behind the button. One player called, Mr. Berserko raised, and I called. One of the blinds also called, and we took the flop off fourhanded for $40 each. The flop came 6-4-2 with one diamond. The blind and the pot opener both checked to Mr. Berserko, who predictably fired $20 into the pot. The flop was not my dream flop, by any means, but it was one with some potential. I had a gutshot draw (but it was a communal one-card gutshot that had a greater likelihood to split if made), an overcard (plus, a pair of fives might have some chance to win), a backdoor-flush draw, and an ace high, which had a good chance to be a better hand than that of Mr. Berserko. Then again, ace high might be in deep trouble to the two hands yet to act behind me.



I chose to raise, hoping to blow out the two players behind me and get the pot heads up with Mr. Berserko. By getting it heads up, I would increase my chances of winning the pot significantly, since there was a good chance that ace high had Mr. Berserko beat, and also might give me extra wins/value that the other two players had blocked; for example, if one of them had an ace with a better kicker. The plan was mostly unsuccessful. The player in the blind called the raise cold, and Mr. Berserko three-bet. I called, as did the blind. We were down to three players.



I caught a very favorable turn card, the 7, which gave me an open-ender and a flush draw to go along with my other possible outs. The blind checked and Mr. Berserko, once again bet. Just because Mr. Berserko three-bet the flop and bet the turn did not mean he had ace high beat. He had made many overaggressive plays early in the session with hands as weak as two overcards. Having that association in my mind, I thought about what my best next move would be. My hand still would play better if I removed the player in the blind from the pot. If ace high had Mr. Berserko beat, I didn't want him over-calling with a small pair and taking the pot away from me. I had 15 cards that would give me either a straight or a flush, plus other possible wins, so even if I was beat, I had a good shot to draw out.



With all those outs, the negative value of a failed raise play was greatly reduced. Given all the plausible scenarios, I thought my best play was to raise to try to remove the player in the blind, giving myself a better shot to win with ace high and possibly giving myself other outs that the player in the blind might have shut out. There was also some chance that Berserko might fold, but I didn't put much value in that scenario.



I raised. To my delight, the player in the blind folded. But to my disappointment, Mr. Berserko reraised. Now I knew I was in trouble and had to make a hand.



But, I wasn't in so much trouble that a card couldn't save me. Bang! The poker gods smiled upon me, as the 8 hit on the river, giving me a straight. Mr. Berserko, unintimidated by the four-straight on board, fired $40 into the pot. I raised and he paid me off, showing the 7 4, having made two pair on the turn.



Yeah, I got lucky to win the pot, and put a bad beat on the poor fellow. But that doesn't mean I made bad decisions! I liked my thought process throughout the hand, and while the scenario was a tough one for my holding, based on the information available to me, it was likely that I was in much better shape than I turned out to be. And the play had great psychological value. Mr. Berserko became even more aggressive in pots in which I was involved, particularly those in which I raised. He assumed that whenever I raised, I had no hand, and he tried to move me off the pot. There was a downside to that, of course: He put several beats on me, and they cost me the max. But overall, it was a huge win!



Whenever I had a big hand, Mr. Berserko helped me make the pot sweet. Other players observed our raising and got caught up in multiple raised pots with hands with which they normally would not be calling. At the end of the night, I had put together a big win.



Had I not been observing the game before I sat down, I would have missed the opportunity to create this situation. Whether playing live or on the Internet, I think it is always valuable to observe the action for a few laps and identify value situations.



Also, I think the importance of this being the first hand I played is worth reiterating. When people notice you, especially on the Internet, they tend to pigeonhole you and make all or nearly all subsequent decisions based on their initial observations. This is one reason that many players have notes that are of little value, as they are based on insufficient data. But you can use that tendency to create an inaccurate image of your play in an opponent's mind, and derive great value from it.

Roy Cooke, a Las Vegas real estate broker and 16-year veteran as a professional poker player, has written a column for Card Player since 1992, and has worked in the Internet poker industry since its very beginnings. John Bond is an attorney and freelance writer from Dania Beach, Florida. They are the authors of the recently released Cooke's Rules of Real Poker.