'Poker Erosion'

I'm going to discuss a concept that I call "poker erosion." Everyone knows what erosion is in science. You take a block of granite, start a slow water drip into the center (drip, drip! drip!), come back in a few centuries, and there is a huge hole in the granite.

Poker erosion is the same thing. As players put in losing bets, one bet at a time (drip! drip! drip!), they hardly notice their chips are gone. But, come back in a few years, and there is a huge hole in their bankroll.

You see this constantly in the cardroom:

• A tight player raises from early position, and a late-position player calls with Q-J. Drip!
• After three players limp in, the small blind completes with 5-5. The flop is A-J-9. Someone bets, and there is a call. The player with 5-5 calls, as well. Drip!
• A good player raises from middle position. The cutoff three-bets. The big blind calls two bets cold with K-9 suited. Drip!

The following hand shows a somewhat more sophisticated form of this erosion:

Background: In a Bellagio $30-$60 limit hold'em game, I am sitting next to a young player (Kid). He has been commenting on the large number of seat changes and table changes that one or two players have been making. I explain to him that they are trying to find the lucky table/deck/dealer. He snorts and says, "What? Don't they understand mathematics?" Of course they don't, but not many people put it that way. I figure that the Kid probably understands poker math.

The hand: An hour or so later, I am dealt the A K on the button. A weak player limps in from middle position, and Kid raises. I three-bet and everyone folds to the limper, who calls (drip!). Now, Kid raises again. Even if he thinks I am just three-betting with position, his four-bet generally shows considerable value, especially in Las Vegas, where this action does not cap the betting.

I am not going to fold, but should I raise or call? If I could get the limper to fold, a raise would be mandatory, but he shows no signs of giving up at this point. But, even though I may be up against aces, there is a lot to be said for raising. It may get me a free card at some point if I think I need one. It may enable me to win the hand outright if we both have A-K. I will punish the limper even more, as he is certainly an underdog to our hands. While I could make a case for calling (which I think would be weaker), I decide to raise. Everyone calls.

The flop is quite favorable for me: A J 6. I am ahead of all of Kid's likely hands except A-A and J-J, and even J-J is only marginally likely, as few players think J-J is worth a four-bet.

My opponents check, I bet, the limper folds, and Kid makes a hitch-call (drip!). That very slight hesitation before calling gives me a mountain of information. It almost certainly means pocket queens! Why is that?

If he held A-K, his call (or raise) would be easy. With A-A or J-J, he would smooth-call with no problem. That leaves K-K and Q-Q. (If he had an underpair at this point, he would likely fold.) Which one? It could be either, but more players with kings resolve to keep playing, thinking I might have queens, and do not hesitate. If he has queens, he realizes that there is no hand I can legitimately five-bet preflop that he can beat, so he makes the hitch-call, knowing that he should fold, but not wanting to give up.

The turn is a terrible card for me, the Q. He checks. If I believe my read, I have to check now. I still can improve to a straight, and have no desire to get check-raised. Indeed, I do check, taking the free card that my preflop five-bet "bought" me. The river is the useless 2. He bets, I call, and he shows me a set of queens. I quietly fold, and get ready for the next hand.



Analysis: Kid is not done, though. He tells me, "I put you on aces or kings when you capped."

I cannot help myself. I ask him, "So why did you call the flop?"

His answer: "It was just one bet." In that simple statement, you can hear the erosion bellowing.

Let's look at the math. For simplicity, let's call the small blind a full bet. Three of us put in five bets each preflop, so there are 17 small bets preflop. After I bet on the flop, there are 18 for Kid to contemplate. He is a 23-1 dog to hit a queen, so he needs to win five more small bets to justify his call. "Well, that's not so bad," many of you are saying, "look at his implied odds."

The trouble is, for his call to make sense, he not only has to win those bets when the queen hits, he must never lose! When a queen does hit, he will lose almost always when I have A-A, 13 percent of the time when I have K-K (because a king or 10 will come on the river), and 9 percent of the time when I have A-K and river a straight. This is a terrible parlay for him, because he will lose one small bet when he misses, and several big bets when he hits and loses. The pots he wins cannot make up for this.

Conclusion: The essence of poker erosion is that losing players occasionally win a big pot, like Kid did, and remember it well. They do not notice that the small, steady loss of one bet greatly exceeds the number of bets that were in the memorable big one.

This selective memory and occasional "big" win are very seductive. Then, add in the pain they feel when they properly fold, their miracle card comes, and they watch the pot they would have won being pushed to the lucky so-and-so who does not even realize how fortunate he is. Of course, they frequently tell him after the hand ("I folded the winner"), which makes them more likely to chase the next time and erode their stack.

Poker erosion is insidious. Be aware of it, and listen for that drip! sound when you put your chips in. The small bets that you do not lose add up to huge wins over time.

Barry Tanenbaum is the author of Advanced Limit Hold'em Strategy, and collaborator on Limit Hold'em: Winning Short-Handed Strategies, both available at www.CardPlayer.com. Barry offers private lessons tailored to the individual student. Please see his website, www.barrytanenbaum.com, or write to him at [email protected].