Getting Lucky With a Lady

"That's the worst play I've ever seen you make," my friend Jade Lane declared.

In my last column, I noted that sometimes a given play seems brilliant when it works, yet looks foolish when it doesn't. This play was one of those "looks foolish" scenarios, even though I drew out and won the pot. It was World Series of Poker time, and I was playing $30-$60 limit hold'em. Preflop, a loose player limped, a solid-passive player behind him raised, and a player who was brand-new to both the game and me called. One player folded. I held the Q Q and three-bet. The big blind called, as did all remaining players; we took the flop off five-handed!

The dealer turned the A 5 3, which was not a quality flop for my hand. The field checked to me, and I bet, looking to get a feel for where I stood, not wanting to give a free card, and seeking possible value should my mitt be good. With this field, an ace didn't necessarily have to be out there.

Mr. Loose Limper called, as did Mr. Solid-Passive. Mr. New Player thought for a second and flat-called. Mr. New Player handled his cards and chips like a reasonably experienced player. I thought he was weak, but I didn't really have a hand range to put him on, as I had no prior experiences from which to draw any conclusion. I had little clue regarding what Mr. Loose Limper held. I thought it likely that Mr.

Solid-Passive held a medium ace, something like A-J, or was taking one off with a medium pair.

The turn card was the 5, pairing the board and putting a three-flush out there, to which I held the Q. Mr. Loose Limper and Mr. Solid-Passive checked. Surprisingly, Mr. New Player bet. I thought about his probable range of hands. He could have a flush, though I thought that was unlikely. I thought he might have a weak ace and was playing his hand in such a way as not to give a free card. I also thought he could have a hand that contained the K♥ and was betting as a semibluff. Or, it might be a total bluff. Could he have a 5? Yeah, there was some chance of that, but from the way he acted, my "poker feel" said no.

I analyzed my best play. Would he fold a weak ace if I raised? I wasn't sure, but I thought there was some chance. If he was bluffing, betting the K, or would fold a weak ace, could I fold Mr. Loose Limper and Mr. Solid-Passive if they had me beat? Because Mr. Loose Limper hadn't put in any action and was the type to play back at me with top pair or a big draw, I didn't think he held much of a hand. Mr. Solid-Passive was not the sort to call two bets cold without a huge hand or a nut draw, and I didn't think he held either. If I pushed either Mr. Solid-Passive or Mr. New Player off an ace that was the winning hand, I would increase the equity of my holding greatly. I was going to call one bet anyway, thinking I most likely had 11 outs over the bettor. So, the equity loss of a called raise was significantly less than if I were making a naked bluff-raise in which I possessed only fold equity and couldn't win if called.

The pot had grown to be a meaty bone, one worth taking some risk for. Conceptually, increasing the chance of winning the pot is often more important in large pots than making or saving bets. It seemed like scenarios existed in this pot in which raising might fold hands justified in calling, thereby increasing my equity. It didn't figure to work most of the time, but it didn't have to in order to make the play profitable overall. I fired a raise into the pot.

Mr. Loose Limper and Mr. Solid-Passive both threw their hands away, but Mr. New Player hesitated and called. I thought he was going to reluctantly pay off on the river, and I had to make a hand to win. Thinking I might be in deep doo-doo, I rooted for a heart or, better yet, a queen.

Swish, nothing but net! The Q hit on the river, giving me queens full. I bet when he checked, and turned my hand over when he called. Mr. New Player disgustedly turned over the J 10, having turned the flush. It was not at all where I had put him, but it was a hand against which I was only a 3-1 dog with the river card to come.



I chuckled within myself, knowing that I had just misread the situation and gotten very lucky with the lady. My opponent wasn't chuckling at all. Yes, I had misread Mr. New Player's hand, but I wasn't beating myself up for making the play.

If, based on my reads, a play makes logical sense at the time, I don't get down on myself because it didn't attain positive expectation. Even if it turns out that, based on complete information after the fact, I had miscalculated, what matters is whether or not I played it as best I could based on my analysis of the incomplete information available. Sometimes my reads are wrong. Sometimes my analysis is wrong. But, my job is to make the best decisions I can and to always act consistently with them. You must trust yourself and your judgment, because when you start doubting yourself, your days as a winning poker player are likely to be over.

Plays don't have to be favorites to work to have positive expectation; the price the pot is laying you just needs to be right. More importantly, you don't want to shut yourself down from making plays based on reads, even though you misread your fair share of hands, assuming that you're right often enough to make the blended expectation of all of those plays positive. Creative plays also produce additional value by putting suspicious doubts in opponents' minds whenever you play a hand in the future.

All that said, Jade still thinks my play sucked!

Roy Cooke and his longtime collaborator John Bond have written for Card Player since 1992. Please see Roy's real estate ad on this page. Their poker books are published by www.ConJelCo.com.