The Oracle's Corner

Erica Schoenberg has won nearly $600,000 in tournaments in the past two years. The former member of the MIT Blackjack Team is a recognizable face whenever she plays an event. The following hand took place at Caesars Palace in a $1,000 World Series of Poker Circuit preliminary event this April, and it provides an example of the "hero call" in action.

Facts of the Hand




Erica Schoenberg's Read
Usually, I would respect an under-the-gun raiser; however, this guy played lots of pots and was fairly easy to read, and I was sure that he was pretty weak. It appeared to me that the flop missed him, because in the past, he would light up and bet when he had something. So, I took the lead and opened for a little more than half the pot. I was sure that he wanted to fold, and when he changed direction midstream, I briefly wondered if it could be a reverse tell, but I was as sure as I could be that it was inexperience. I thought that he might have a small pair or ace-little that missed, and thought he would fold if pressured; and if he did call, I had outs to the nuts. So, when he called my all-in bet, I was sure that I'd see a set, but was shocked to see the 2-2. He said, "Yeah, I thought that was what she could have." I guess I had too many outs to win the hand and fell victim to a "great call."

Roy Winston's Analysis
I also played this event at Caesars and was shocked at the level of play. Having just played the events surrounding the World Poker Tour Championship, I thought the players would be similar, but that was not the case. I also got crazy "bluff" calls from players in these events. I think that by watching a threehanded final table on TV, some players get the notion that you play that way throughout an event, and at a full table, donkey see, donkey do -- or is that supposed to be with monkeys? Normally, I would have a problem with Erica's calling an under-the-gun raiser with A-J, even though "it's suited"; however, in this game we call poker, reads are everything, and I respect Erica as a solid player with the ability to ferret out an opponent like this. On the flop, she was right on again with her assessment of the situation. My only thought is that perhaps this is not the best spot to get her chips in. I always say that tournaments are about survival, and without chips, there is no tournament, so before I commit a large amount of my stack to a hand, I ask myself, "Is this the best spot?" Frequently, this saves me, although there are cases in which I should have been more aggressive and made a bad fold, although my mantra is: A bad fold always beats a bad call. However, Erica didn't call; she pushed. And you know who made the bad call and won. It is amazing to me that the "hero call" has become the standard by which players judge themselves. Erica had 15 outs twice, which unfortunately failed to materialize, but I'll leave all of that math stuff to Mike.

Michael Binger's Analysis
With the blinds at 400-800 with a 100 ante, it costs 2,100 every orbit to play poker. Dividing this number into your chip count gives what is known as your "M." Thus, Erica had an M of 18, and her opponent had an M of 14, which, relative to the blinds, gave them a decent amount of play, especially for a smaller buy-in tournament. Therefore, Erica could afford to trust her read and call 8 percent of her stack preflop with A-J suited against a loose, bad, and readable under-the-gun (UTG) raiser. Against many opponents, you would fold A-J suited preflop, since you are too often dominated by an under-the-gun raiser and often don't know where you are in the hand if you hit the flop. However, both of these concerns are diminished against the opponent Erica described. Once the flop came down with two diamonds and the under-the-gun player checked, Erica had to consider betting. With a pot of 8,100 and effective stacks of 27,000 (the UTG player has 27,000 and Erica has 35,000), it is a tricky situation. You don't want to bet and price yourself out of calling a raise. For example, if Erica bets 5,000 and the under-the-gun player moves all in for 22,000 more, she will have to call 22,000 to win 40,100, giving her less than 2-to-1 on her money and making it wrong to call unless she thinks she has more than nine outs. In the actual hand, Erica bet 5,000 and the under-the-gun player raised 9,000 more, leaving himself only 13,000 behind. Normally, this would be a very scary raise representing a set, A-K, or A-A. However, Erica was able to pick up a good read on her inexperienced opponent and correctly deduced that he was not that strong, so she raised all in. Astonishingly, the under-the-gun player called all in with just deuces and won, although Erica had the best hand with a 54.4 percent chance of winning. Now let's get back to Erica's bet size. We saw that betting 5,000 put her in a tough spot when her opponent check-raised. So, the other options were: (1) Check behind. I would do this if I thought there was a decent chance that the under-the-gun player was trapping. (2) Bet a larger amount, which I generally don't like because it just prices you into calling an all-in bet when you are often behind. For example, making a pot-sized bet would lay you 2.3-to-1 if the under-the-gun player moved in, which is a gross marginal spot that you would like to avoid. (3) Bet an oddly small amount, like 2,000 or 3,000, get a read on your opponent, and proceed from there.

Erica Schoenberg's Rebuttal
In retrospect, I wish that I had played the hand slower. It's always easy to say, "I should have done this, etc." after the fact, but oftentimes the right play still gets the wrong result. I sometimes make the mistake of being too results-oriented, when I should just focus on the correct move. So, while my read was spot on, I think the right play was to slow down. With both players' stacks around 40 big blinds, coupled with the fact that I had position, I believe that taking my free card on the flop was a much better play. When a 10 pops up on the turn, giving me a gutshot in addition to my flush and overcard outs, I might have been compelled to raise the turn if he bet; however, checking the flop keeps the pot smaller and gives me more options on the later streets.

Pro Conclusions
Winston says: Erica played the hand aggressively and perhaps risked her tournament when she didn't have to. That being said, I kind of liked her play, but she needs to learn how to control the turn and/or river better. Binger says: I would often either check behind or underbet the pot, depending on whether I thought the under-the-gun player was strong or not. In the actual hand, I cannot fault Erica, since she got her money in well.