Great players read hands. They read situations and apply nonstandard strategies to win extra bets and pots - which those who use only conventional-wisdom strategies don't win. Of course, that is much easier said than done. It obviously requires that a player not only know the nonstandard strategies, but also be able to read his opponents with accuracy.
Midway into a $30-$60 hold'em session, I was in the big blind with the 7
6
. A local player, one with whom I had played a fair number of hours, opened the pot with a raise from middle position. I knew his game well and could read his hands with a high degree of accuracy. He was the type of player who overvalued starting-hand strategy, mistakenly thinking that starting with quality hands is all there is to being a winner in the game. He raised only with quality starting hands, and tended to overvalue them on later streets, constantly taking overcards to the river, often paying off with ace high. His mindset was that he had patiently waited so long for a starting hand that he hated not to play it through.
The rest of the field folded and it was up to me to take him on heads up if I so chose. Sometimes I fold a hand of this type to a single raiser; you just give up too much when he holds an overpair. But because I could make accurate reads on this guy, get away from my hand when I was taking the worst of it, and get extra edge when I was in the driver's seat, the call had value. I tossed in $30 and took the flop off heads up.
The flop came down 9
8
6
, giving me bottom pair, an open-end straight draw, and a backdoor-flush draw. I thought about my next move. If I fired a bet into him, he would call me with all overcards and raise with any overpair. Since I was about a coin flip to win if he had an overpair, the bets going into the pot had little value either way. But if he put in bets with overcards, I was a significant favorite to win the pot and those bets. Therefore, I wanted to maximize the volume of bets if he held overcards. I chose to check-raise him, knowing that he would auto-bet the flop with any hand he had raised preflop. Sure, he would three-bet me if he held an overpair, but that didn't hurt me, as the edge factor was close to neutral. But by check-raising, I would guarantee getting in two bets with a large edge if he held overcards, and a particularly large edge if he held no straight draw with them. And getting in two bets as a big favorite is much better than getting in one. Conceptually, you want to play your hands in a manner that increases your volume in those situations in which you hold the highest edge.
I check-raised, and he flat-called. At this point, I knew he held overcards, since he would have three-bet me with an overpair, and his style is a straightforward, nondeceptive one.
The turn card was the Q
. I had picked up a flush draw to go with my pair and open-ender. I led into my opponent, who flat-called. At this point, his range of hands was wide. I could give him many hands, including those containing a queen, thereby giving him the best hand, but not significantly favored over mine. But he also could hold overcards that contained a 10 or a jack, or A-K. Some other hands were possible, too, but much less likely.
The river was a blank, the 3
. Now I was faced with another dilemma. Should I bet my hand or check? If I bet, he would call me with any ace or pair; of course, any pair beat me. If I checked, he would bet any pair and would occasionally bluff, thinking I would put him on a big pair and fold a small pair. That said, while he did occasionally bluff, he wasn't the type of player who liked to do so. If I checked and he bet, I was calling, because the chance of him bluffing and the size of the pot would warrant it. If I bet, he was calling me with some hands that beat mine, and also if he held an ace.
I analyzed the bets gained and lost, and asked myself: Would he call me with an ace more often than he would bluff? If in all other situations the bets came out the same and I check-called him with the worst hand, I would lose the same amount as I would if I bet the worst hand and he called with a better one. I thought it more likely that he would call with ace high than bluff, thereby making a bet correct.
The river situation speaks to my mindset - how I think through a situation. I analyze the data, put it in the form of a question, and answer the question as best I can, by utilizing either known data, math, other concepts, or feel. Of course, data and feel quantify themselves differently. By data, I mean known knowledge that you acquire from books, experience, or what is evident in the play of the hand. Feel is something that's based on judgment from the knowledge, emotions, and style of your opponent. It's an art, not an exact science. But approaching it from the correct logical perspective will improve the precision of your decisions.
I bet the river and got called. After I turned over my hand, my opponent mumbled something about never being able to win with A-K. Of course, that's not true, as he does win with A-K; he just gives away too much with it when his opponent makes something and he makes something less.
I often look back at a hand and ask myself if I could have made more or lost less, and also how my opponent would have played the hand had our positions been reversed. It helps me to get some precision in my decisions against the same opponents in future situations. What would he have thought with my hand in my situation? Sometimes I find that I've made an error, and sometimes I find that I've gotten the maximum or lost the least. In this hand, with my opponent's holding, I'm sure that I would have lost less, and if he'd had mine, he would not have made more. That's just how I like it.
Roy Cooke has played winning professional poker since 1972, and has been a Card Player columnist since 1992. He serves as a freelance consultant to the I-poker industry and has a successful Las Vegas real estate brokerage firm. He has written six poker books, which are available from www.conjelco.com/cooke. His website is www.roycooke.com. His longtime collaborator, John Bond, is a freelance writer in South Florida.
