Poker's Meta-Game

Lots of decisions in poker are close. In the terminology a poker-math guy would use, many different choices at the poker table have similar expected values. Still, much poker analysis is devoted to analyzing close decisions, trying to determine which play is ever so slightly more profitable than the other one. Here's a little secret: This analysis is a waste of time.



If a decision is close, by definition it won't matter much what play you end up making. My friends Jerrod Ankenman and Andrew Prock first introduced me to this concept, and the more I think about it, the more I buy in to the logic. Some authors devote pages and pages to analyzing the hard decisions of poker, but in my opinion, hard decisions are usually close decisions, and I choose not to worry too much about which play will have a higher expected value (EV) when I'm involved in a close decision. I think that when a decision is tough, the best course of action is to consider how each play will affect my profit on future hands.



For example, as I touched on in an earlier column, if you have a close choice between calling and folding, you might as well call down. You'll get more information on how your opponent plays, and you'll establish an image that you can't be run over. But the point is that your decision to call is based not on the EV of this specific hand (which is about the same whether you call or fold), but on your overall EV as a poker player. The amount of work it takes to determine the different EVs is not worth it. Someone recently introduced me to the term "rational ignorance," and that's what we need to employ here. It is more beneficial to remain ignorant of which play is best for this particular hand, and instead focus on the broader, meta-game considerations that will almost certainly affect our bottom line more in the long run.



Close decisions are perfect for helping us to think about the big picture. Close decisions give players the opportunity to ask themselves not, "How should I play this hand?" but, "How should I play poker?" I'll give a real-life example to further clarify what I'm saying.



There were 19 players in the $5,000 no-limit hold'em event at the 2005 Trump Classic at the Taj; 18 got paid. My friend Chris Bell, an extremely talented professional player, was on my right with a decent stack. At one of the other tables, there was a short stack trying to do everything he could to avoid finishing on the bubble. (As most of my readers probably know, I don't care much about bubbling, and am much more concerned with giving myself a chance to win the tournament.)



Everyone folded to Chris on the button, and with blinds of $800-$1,600 and a $200 ante, Chris opened for $4,800. I had $64,000 in my stack, and Chris had about twice as much as I did. I had the A 4 in the small blind. Should I call, fold, or reraise? Some players advocate folding here, but that's not a choice I would really consider (maybe we can debate that in another column). That leaves reraising or calling. If I reraised to something like $15,000, I might win the pot right away, but if Chris then moved me in, I'd be in a very awkward spot. I probably would have to fold, but it would be close because of the price, and because Chris is an aggressive player. If I called, I probably would get to look at a flop, but I would have to play from out of position against a good player. Both choices have an upside and a downside. In other words, the decision is close. I decided to call. I did so in part because a reraise was likely to get me into a zero-EV situation in the future (for example, if Chris moved in, there would be no option that I really liked, and I'd probably end up folding and losing almost a quarter of my stack without even seeing the flop). I want to avoid putting myself in zero-EV situations. This is how I want to play poker. I'm not convinced calling had a higher EV than reraising for this specific hand, but I know I don't want to constantly open myself up to getting blown off hands preflop. The meta consideration overrides the consideration of which play has a higher EV for this hand, in my opinion.



The big blind folded, and the flop came down 8-3-2 with two spades – a superb flop for my hand. But how should I play it? There was $12,000 in the pot and I had $59,000 in my stack. I had the kind of hand that wants to get all in, preferably as the raiser, with two cards to come. So, I probably should check-raise all in. But if Chris checked behind me, I'd end up in a bad spot if I missed on the turn. I'd either have to bet and fold to a raise or check-raise all in, but with much less equity if I was called, since there would be only one card to come.



Fearing that the action might go check, check, I decided to lead out for $9,000, hoping Chris would raise so that I could then move all in. Unfortunately, Chris made a great decision to just call my bet. He said later that he had two tens, and I presume he decided to wait for a safe turn card to get aggressive. The turn brought an offsuit 10, and I was right in that bad spot I'd been worried about. Check-folding, bet-folding, and check-raising all seemed like lousy options. But those were the only choices I had. I decided to bet $27,000. Chris moved me in, and I was just barely priced out of calling (as I knew I would be). I folded.



I'm not sure that the line I took in this hand was "worse" than check-raising all in on the flop in terms of EV, especially considering that there was some value in surviving the hand and getting into the money. But I know that I want to play an aggressive style of poker, and since the decisions were close in this hand, I should've opted for an all-in play somewhere. Sure, the flop could've gone check, check, but I should've realized that Chris could just call my flop bet and foil the bet, raise, reraise plan.



This hand left a bad taste in my mouth for some time, and not just because I ended up bubbling an orbit later. It left a bad taste because I ended up doing exactly what I was trying to avoid doing when I flat-called Chris' raise preflop: I put myself in a zero-EV call-or-fold situation. In the future, the way I play no-limit hold'em will include more all ins and fewer bets followed by folds – especially when the decisions are close.

Matt Matros is the author of The Making of a Poker Player, which is available online at http://www.cardplayer.com/. He recently finished 22nd in the PokerStars Caribbean Poker Adventure, where he went broke reraising all in on the flop.