Inducing Action With Deception

Poker is played with emotional and deliberating people. Their decisions, both present and future, count in your current poker equations. Making plays that induce future bad decisions from your opponents adds value to future hands that you will play. Sometimes that value is so great, it is worth making plays that have dreadful expectation because the lost value will be more than recouped by the increase of bad plays from your opponent in the future. Timing these plays to have the greatest effect on your opponents at the least cost to you in the way of lost equity will produce the greatest value.

Labor Day weekend is a jammin’ time for poker in Las Vegas. I sat down in a $30-$60 limit hold’em game, posted in front of the button, and looked down to see the A 2. A tourist with whom I had never played before, who seemed uncomfortable at the table, opened with a raise from under the gun and was called by several players. Having posted, I called. The small blind called, and the big blind, a loose-aggressive player with whom I had played several times previously, three-bet. Everyone called.

The flop came 9 8 7, giving me the nut-flush draw. I checked into the coordinated board, thinking there wasn’t much chance of everyone folding if I bet. Plus, I didn’t want to lead into a preflop raiser who was highly likely to raise and cut off my action. My hand would win more by keeping players in to give me action if I happened to make my flush. Mr. Loose-Aggressive bet, and was raised by the tourist. Two players called, I called, and Mr. Loose-Aggressive called.

The turn card was the 10, putting a four-straight on the board. It was checked to the tourist, who contemplated for a moment and bet. I thought his hesitation was genuine, and that he likely didn’t have a jack. Both players between us folded, and it was up to me. This time, I thought a raise might possibly take the pot down. However, I was brand-new to the game. I’d never played with this particular opponent before, and had no knowledge of his tendencies.

Even if a raise didn’t win the pot now, a raise here followed by leading the river might. And if that didn’t work, at least I might create some value in a future hand. The circumstances for a deception play were ideal, as I had just sat down in the game and this player appeared to be unsure of himself and one whom I could confuse in future action.

I raised. To my disappointment, Mr. Loose-Aggressive called, as did the tourist. I still planned to fire again on the river, but I knew that the raise play had lost much of its value.

None of that mattered a bit when the 6 hit on the river, putting a straight on the board and giving me the nut flush. I gleefully fired a wager. Both opponents called. The tourist gave me a bizarre look and turned over pocket tens; he’d turned top set. Mr. Loose-Aggressive shook his head and showed pocket nines, having flopped top set.

It was a great start to my session. I won a bunch in my first pot. I had two opponents mentally where I wanted them — confused and emotionally unhinged. When a seat opened up behind both of them, I moved to it and spent the entire evening making every reasonable effort to get involved in their pots. Neither one folded any remotely marginal hand against me. More importantly, I knew that they wouldn’t, and adjusted my play accordingly. I played the session until they both went broke, and booked a monster win!

Yeah, I got lucky in my opening hand and ran well later. But, a large part of my win was set up by the play I made in my opening hand. The value of the turn-raise play was increased by the fact that I had made it early in my session and played with both players throughout the night. Certain that I played every draw fast and bluffed a lot, they paid off every hand that I made.

When I made the turn raise, the combination of bluff value and deception value made it a huge positive-expectation play, regardless of the outcome. Though unbeknownst to me at the time, the bluff value was certainly diminished by the fact that I was facing two sets. That said, it was increased by the presence of the four-straight on the board. Although it’s hard to quantify, the bluff alone may have been valuable enough to make the turn raise a positive-expectation play.

The deception value was increased by the fact that I was new to the game, and impressions made early in your session, when players have a higher awareness of you, have a longer time to acquire value. That I got lucky and hit one of the seven cards that made my hand enhanced initial impressions even more. That added effect on those two opponents made it a hugely positive play.

Some poker theorists suggest that you should make highly unusual plays for deception, believing that the negative edge can come back to you in the form of bad calls from your opponents. But a much more effective method is to utilize unusual plays, like this one, that have value beyond deception. The effect is the same, and you lose much less in the way of negative expectation.

It’s a key principle of the game that you want to induce your opponents to call when they should fold, and fold when they should call. You can’t rely on just the deck to create the right conditions for this. You have to manipulate the situations that the deck presents to encourage your opponents to do the wrong thing — in not just the current hand, but in future hands. And once you have your opponents dazed and confused, you know that you are in the right game.

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.