Some people like putting others to the test. They take charge of situations and see how much pressure their opponents can sustain. My friend Joe Z. is one of them. He is the skeptical sort who doesn't think poker players have much in the way of integrity and are always trying to steal chips from others. I don't know how he arrived at this way of thinking; maybe he thinks others think just like he does, because he tries to steal every chip that isn't bolted down.
When you play against opponents with a hard-charging style, you have to take some stands and play back at them some. You need to create doubt, and try to take some of their plays away from them. You must let them know that they can't run over you without fear of it costing them. But you can't run back at them nonstop, or you'll lose the value from doing so; they will begin to disregard your plays. You have to selectively pick your spots.
I was at Wynn Las Vegas, Joe's favorite hangout, playing in a tough $30-$60 limit hold'em game. Joe, recognizing the texture of the game, adjusted his style and was being more cautious than usual. That didn't mean he was playing tight, just tighter. Having larceny in his blood, he still selectively looked for spots to rob chips from their rightful owners. And he has always had a particular fondness for removing chips from my stack.
Three players limped in. Joe, as he is often prone to do, raised in position. I had the A
K
in the small blind. Oftentimes against a frequent post-flop bettor (Joe), I just call in this position to set up the field for a check-raise if I flop top pair. Assuming that the preflop raiser bets the flop, it creates a situation in which the field must call two bets cold to draw at my made hand. This protects my hand from getting outdrawn if my opponents fold, or gives them a reduced price to draw at me if they come.
However, whenever a play comes to my mind, I don't automatically execute it. As my father used to tell me over the chessboard, "When you see a good play, look for a better one." I considered my image and how my opponents might react to a reraise. I'd been card-dead and hadn't played a hand in a while. My image was tight. The likelihood of my hand being better than Joe's was very high - high enough to make up for the loss in value from being out of position. If I reraised, I thought I might fold one or more of the limpers and have dead money in the pot. If it didn't work, I was getting 4-1 on my hand; even from out of position, that wasn't near the worst I have gotten my money in during my poker career.
I three-bet, and one of the callers folded and two called. The dealer then turned the 10
4
4
, a flop that was unlikely to have hit anyone. My hand had some chance to be good, and even if it wasn't, unless someone had 10-10 or a 4, there was value in seeing a card. I thought my hand played better if I bet, rather than check and call, which would give the impression that I had the hand that I held.
I fired $30 into the pot. Both limpers folded. Without thinking for a second, Joe fired in a raise. I thought about how to play my hand, and how Joe would perceive my actions. Joe plays very fast and loose at times, but has good hand-reading abilities. He sniffs out weakness like a shark senses blood in the water. And he's constantly testing his opponents, pressuring them. I knew that he knew I would three-bet with a draw or overcard hand if I thought I could bet it down and win the pot. Obviously, whenever a player can read your play, it loses value. I've been playing with Joe for years, and he reads my column. He has a good read on my thinking.
But, I knew that - and thought perhaps that I could use his perception of me to my advantage. I needed to mix up my play and still give myself a shot at this pot. I decided to flat-call and then check-raise if I liked the card that came off on the turn. That way, I was playing my hand in a manner that Joe would not read as a potential bluff, and I would force him to make a hand to win the pot. And even though Joe plays fast and loose, he is still capable of laying down a hand to save a bet if he believes he is beat!
The turn card was the 7
, a blank as far as I was concerned, but you can never be sure it's a blank with Joe. I checked with the intent of check-raising. Joe didn't disappoint me, and fired. I check-raised. Joe thought for a minute, and called. His possible range of hands was huge, and I had no clue what he had.
The dealer rivered the 2
, and I fired $60 into Joe. He muttered that he had missed everything. I'm not sure what everything was, but it was a comment that I was happy to hear. He tossed his hand into the muck without showing it, and I stacked the chips.
I stacked those checks because of reading the situation; many players who are adept at reading cards are less skilled at reading situational plays. You must use not only your knowledge of your opponents, but their knowledge and image of you, to make winning plays and create edges for yourself.
If I had utilized the more likely play of three-betting the flop and firing down, as Joe had seen me do before, he might have either moved on me on the turn or paid me off with a marginal hand. Since I made a play that appeared to be a trap, one that from his perspective appeared much less likely to be a bluff, the value of my aggression was increased even though the aggressive play was more expensive to execute. Of course, now that I have written this column and Joe knows that I am capable of this play, it has lost value against him. Joe, being analytical, will include this knowledge in his future decisions.
When designing plays to make, think about what your opponent is thinking; think about what he thinks you are thinking. What's his knowledge level? What has he seen from your play previously that will have a bearing on his thinking? Design your plays with those thoughts in mind and you will add value to them.
Roy Cooke has played more than 60,000 hours of pro poker and has been part of the I-poker industry since its beginnings. His longtime collaborator, John Bond, is a freelance writer in South Florida.
