Trends

You almost certainly have not been counting, but this is the 100th column that I have written for Card Player. This is by no means a record, as stalwarts like Roy Cooke and Roy West have produced hundreds more, but for me, it represents a milestone.

Many things have changed about our game since my work first appeared here. For this occasion, therefore, I will depart from my usual strategy column and look at some trends in poker that people often ask me about.

Their questions are:
1. Is the poker boom over?
2. Are the games tougher to beat?
3. Is limit hold'em dead?
4. What is the biggest strategic change in the past few years?

Is the poker boom over? Yes and no. To some extent, it depends on when you entered the game. Certainly, the total number of people regularly playing our game is less than it was two years ago. Government regulation severely curtailed the number of people willing to play on the Internet, and many players attracted by the trendiness of the game lost money, did not wish to put in the effort to improve, and stopped playing.

But there are still many more players now than there were before the boom started. Most of them have discovered the fascination of poker and will continue to play regularly. Poker is quite healthy, alive, and well.

Are the games tougher to beat? Once again, the answer depends on when you started playing. If you have been playing for more than 10 years and remember the middle-limit games of that era, the games today remain incomparably softer.

If you entered the game during the height of the boom, when the games were at their softest, then yes, they are tougher to beat. I noticed at that time that a number of "professionals" regularly played a style that was winning against weak competition but would not continue to be profitable once the games toughened up a bit. Now that the games have gotten tougher, these players are complaining, and many of them are not making enough to support themselves. This change was inevitable. It is the so-called professionals who need to work on their games.

Is limit hold'em dead? The answer here is a resounding "No!" I'd like to take some time to explain why.

With the poker boom came an explosion in no-limit hold'em (NLH). This form of poker is exciting and challenging. Unfortunately, it is not a good long-term idea for cash games.

NLH makes for a very good tournament, as people can make big moves, amass or lose a lot of chips, and make terrific comebacks. Pot-limit may require more skill, but NLH is far more exciting.

As a cash game, NLH is not as good. The reason is simple: The best players have too big of an edge. Weaker players lose all of their money too quickly and do not come back. Thus, eventually, the games tend to dry up. As a demonstration, take the fact that, until a few years ago, it was almost impossible to find a no-limit hold'em game in Las Vegas. This was not because no one in town knew how to play. It was because everyone who wished to play was already excellent, and there was no money to be made.

It takes three things to make a great competitive gambling game (as opposed to a great casino game):
1. The game must be easy to learn.
2. The game must have deep, non-obvious strategies.
3. The losers must be able to win.

Poker is easy to learn. Most people can learn to play in less than an hour. And most forms of poker have deep strategies.

In limit hold'em, the losers can, and often do, win. While some players dislike this aspect of the game ("How can you stay in with that hand? If this were no-limit, I could have bet you off that draw!"), it is precisely this feature that makes limit poker so long-lasting. Because you can bet only a limited amount that is frequently a small percentage of the pot, errors by weaker players are not severely punished. Of course, in the long run, these small errors accumulate to provide a reasonable profit for the eventual winners, but the weaker players can last a long time and have a fair number of winning sessions in the process.

No-limit punishes weaker players' errors far more dramatically. Bets can be much larger, making the errors made by calling much larger, as well. This effect is exacerbated by the seemingly inevitable inflation in buy-ins. When no-limit was catching on, the stakes were low, as was the maximum amount for which a player could buy in. This protected poorer players from themselves; they could not make big errors with smaller stacks. As maximum buy-ins have increased (mostly from pressure from the winners, who want more, faster), the skill edge has increased, as well, to the long-term detriment of the game.

Weaker NLH players cannot compensate enough by occasionally getting lucky. Thus, they lose too quickly. They either quit poker, go play limit, or wise up in a hurry and learn to play. Eventually, NLH cash games become a trap-fest, in which no one will commit much money unless he has a monster hand. Yes, the great players will still have an edge, but that edge is small and the games are tougher. This drives more people to limit, which will remain alive and well long into the future.

What is the biggest strategic change in the past few years? By far the biggest change in the games that I play is increased aggression. Many more players now play aggressively, and many play too aggressively. Coaches have been promoting selective, aggressive play for a long time, and increasingly, players are catching on to the aggressive part. Most still need a lot of work on the selective part.

Interestingly, there is a lot to be said for passive play now, which was not true in the past. This strategy works only when your opponents will do your betting for you, often on substandard hands or even hopeless bluffs, if you let them. Far more players now bet virtually every time you check to them, eliminating the fear of giving them free cards.

Since betting now represents some sort of badge of courage to many players, you need to give them more opportunities to make this sort of error.

Conclusion: I have absolutely enjoyed writing these 100 columns and have greatly appreciated your comments and suggestions in person, via e-mail, and on my website. I look forward to continuing to share my thoughts and hearing yours about this fascinating game.

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