The Point of the Decision

Poker, like life, is all about decisions. At each decision point in the game, you have a goal. Contrary to popular belief, the goal is not to win the pot — or even to win money. Your decisions must maximize, manipulate, and exploit your edge against individual opponents and the field — an ongoing exercise with innumerable variables. Your goal is to get your money into the pot with the greatest positive expectation, and your opponents’ money into the pot with the greatest negative expectation.

I held the A 6 in the small blind of a $30-$60 limit hold’em game. A loose-passive player called to open the pot in late position. Everyone else folded to me. Oftentimes in this situation, I raise to blow out the big blind and isolate the limper, particularly if Mr. Limper is a player on whom I have a good read. That way, if the big blind folds, I’m getting 3-2 on my hand against a player I’m going to outplay more often than he will be able to outplay me.

But in this situation, the big blind was unlikely to fold, removing much of the value of a raise. Also, neither player was the type to fold on the flop; they both tended to peel every turn card, with as little as a draw to a draw or even a high-card pair draw. If I raised, I would be out of position with a marginal hand, and unlikely to be able to win the pot with a bet on the flop. I knew that I would have to fire twice in order to have any chance of a bluff. And inasmuch as both were almost certain to call a preflop raise, building a pot would favorably adjust their price to chase draws. This was a combination of reasons not to make the pot bigger. With the pot offering me 8-1, I tossed in a chip to see the flop. The big blind knuckled, and we took the flop three-handed for $30.

The dealer flopped the A 7 3, a non-threatening enough board, with no flush draw and limited straight draws. I thought about leading, since I was likely to get bad calls from both players. But I felt that if I checked, Mr. Limper would auto-bet. Many players auto-bet in small pots when it is checked to them in position, and Mr. Limper was one of them. I checked, the big blind checked, and Mr. Limper bet.

In most cases, I would check-raise Mr. Limper and knock out the big blind, so as not to give him a chance to suck out. But in this case, because he took off so many turn cards very badly, and the pot was so small and laying him such a small price, I wanted to generate the call when he was in horrible shape in terms of edge. I didn’t want to alarm him into making a correct fold. By flat-calling, I also had the advantage of not revealing the strength of my hand, thus increasing the chance of acquiring action on the turn.

The 5 turned; I had picked up a gutshot draw. I chose to lead, not wanting to risk Mr. Limper checking, a play that I thought he might make after receiving two calls on the flop. The big blind called and Mr. Limper mucked.

The river brought the 4, making my straight. I fired out a bet and was insta-raised by the big blind. Since he raised tight and 8-6 was in his range, I flat-called. He showed me the Q 6 for the same straight.

“You should have raised the flop,” a young pro said to me condescendingly, happy to point out an error that he was sure I had made. But winning or losing the pot is not indicative of whether or not you played your hand correctly. Rather, that is a function of whether or not you created the largest expectation that you could, including all plausible scenarios and their likelihood in the equation. And while the result seemed to support the young pro’s assertion, he was wrong.

In large pots, blending the equity of all potential scenarios, when you take an extra risk that may lose you the pot in order to gain a bet(s), you often lose too much equity/value the times you lose the large pot that is not made up for in any extra bet(s) equity/value gains, which are likely to be small or nonexistent due to the size of the pot. The larger the pot and the greater the risk you are taking, the less you should try to obtain extra bets and the more you should focus on playing your hand in a manner to win the pot with as little risk taken as possible. Given that this pot was so small, it was worth taking extra risks in order to acquire extra bets, as the risks were greatly diminished. By checking and flat-calling Mr. Limper on the flop, I had induced him to bet a blank hand and the big blind to take the turn in a small pot with only backdoor draws, which was a terrible call from an expectation standpoint. Plus, I picked up a turn bet when he was drawing dead to 10-1 to split. By playing my hand in a deceptive manner, I manipulated my opponents into putting their money in very badly.

Conceptually, you should be much less concerned about getting extra bets into the pot when the pot is large, and focus more on how to play your hand in a manner that increases your possibilities of winning. In large pots, you don’t want to give opponents correct/cheap drawing opportunities. But in small pots, those extra bets gained have much more value, as the price your opponents are taking is greatly reduced. You want opponents to take the worst of it, and if you can play your hand in a manner that manipulates them into making those incorrect calls, you have gained positive expectation, and that is in fact the point of the game. Get your money in with the best of it. Get their money in with the worst of it.

Sometimes they’re gonna take the worst of it and catch a card on you; that’s inherent in the decision matrix. When that happens, remember that you’re glad you had them running uphill, and you want them chasing that card.

Longtime poker pro and author Roy Cooke’s Card Player column has appeared since 1992. A successful Las Vegas real estate broker since 1990, his website is www.roycooke.com. Should you wish to inquire regarding real-estate matters — including purchase, sale, or mortgage — his phone number is (702) 396-6575. Roy’s longtime collaborator John Bond’s website is www.johnbondwriting.com. Find John and Roy on Facebook.