Action Junkies and Shorthanded Tables

Given the insanely high-stakes online games that have taken place recently, I think 2009 will be looked back on as the year of the poker action junkie. Even though only a few players participate in those nosebleed games, I think action lovers are sprouting up at all levels of online play, and they have two noteworthy characteristics.

The first is that they play at too many tables simultaneously. This is an issue that I’ve discussed in several columns, so I’m not going to rehash it here, but it’s clear that the majority of players are playing in more than their optimal number of games.
The second is that they purposely seek out shorthanded games (SHGs) rather than full ones. SHGs have become such an accepted part of online poker culture that I don’t think players have really stopped to question them. SHGs clearly benefit the sites. Instead of putting 60 players at six tables, they can now place them at 10 tables and collect twice the rake, if not more, given the speed of the SHGs. And when games are being played four-handed, three-handed, and even heads up, the sites can often prosper that much more.

The real question is: Do these SHGs benefit you? If you’ve never stopped to ask yourself that question, now would be a great time to do so. Below, I will give you some arguments to consider.

Why Do You Play Shorthanded?
Before online poker, SHGs were rarely planned. In most cases, they just happened. It would be late at night, a full game would start breaking down, and pretty soon, the only players left would be the ones willing to continue. And if you were better prepared to play under those conditions, you had a clear advantage. Many of your opponents would be drunk, tired, or trying to get even, and possibly all of these things. And even though they might not have been comfortable playing in a SHG, they usually didn’t want to go home, either. So, they stayed and lost to the players who adjusted properly.

That’s not the case now. The vast majority of online games are SHGs, and players sit down knowing what they are getting into. The preparedness advantage is no longer there, because now, players are aware that they will be playing six-handed or shorter. Of course, some are more prepared than others, but they don’t have the edge that some late-night brick-and-mortar players used to have.

Are there “shorthanded specialists” online? Without a doubt. But I think that too many players convince themselves that they fit that description, when in reality they simply crave action, and label their “specialty” as the game that will best satisfy that desire. Since SHGs enable players to correctly play more hands, the players who crave action will decide that SHGs fit their skill set. In reality, they might be better off simply playing fewer hands.

Other players seek out SHGs because of their rakeback programs. You usually earn rakeback as a percentage of what you contribute to the total rake, so the fewer players there are per table, the larger the percentage of the rake that you pay. Therefore, you can earn rakeback faster. That’s all fine and dandy, but I still can’t understand how players overlook the obvious — that they are paying more rake in their effort to earn more rakeback! Without a doubt, if you can break even in a six-handed game, you’ll be better off than if you break even in a 10-handed one, in terms of rakeback earned. But given how much more rake you stand to pay, it’s a much harder thing to do.

If you don’t believe me, calculate how much rake you pay in 10 hours in a $3-$6 six-handed game. Then, see how it compares to how much you pay 10-handed. You’ll find that you will pay at least twice as much in the SHG. Yes, that equates to more rakeback, but does it equate to a better bottom line? That’s another good question to ask yourself. If you fare better in SHGs, they clearly suit you. If not, however, there’s no law against switching to fuller games.

Here’s another question, specifically for the action junkies: How long does it take you to learn about a new opponent? If you are constantly in a hand, with no downtime to watch your opponents, how can you follow their tendencies and properly adjust? Maybe once you’ve played a hand or two with them, you’ll have a better idea, but by then you might have lost a bet or two, or maybe even an entire pot.

I understand that all of the available tracking and statistics programs enable you to have a good idea of how your opponents play without explicitly watching them. But none of that applies if you are facing an opponent for the first time. Most of us face at least one or two new opponents every time we play, and we want to know about them before encountering them.

At 10-handed tables, you have the downtime necessary to learn about new adversaries, even if you are playing multiple tables. If you have to be in action every second, which is usually the case when playing multiple SHGs, you can’t help but make mistakes. At some point, you will make a loose call against the rock who bets only big hands on the river, or you will lay down middle pair to the guy playing every hand, because you never had the chance to learn about each of them without being involved.

I’m not saying that SHGs are inherently worse than full ones, just that both have their pluses and minuses. If you are a solid SHG player, you can take much better advantage of a bad player in a SHG than in a full game. On the other hand, the more players there are at the table, the more likely you are to get one or more live ones. Also, the most common mistake that bad players make is to overplay their hands, but that’s less of a mistake in a SHG and much more harmful in a full one.

In a nutshell, I’m simply questioning why SHGs have so overwhelmingly taken over in popularity. At the ripe old age of 35, I’m one of the dinosaurs who still prefers 10-handed play, even though I play in plenty of six-handed games out of necessity. But that necessity stems from all of the new players who flock to six-handed as if it’s the only way to play.

Is it that they are too hungry for action? For many, I’d say so. The only question is whether or not that goes for you, too.

Matt Lessinger is the author of The Book of Bluffs: How to Bluff and Win at Poker, available everywhere. You can find other articles of his at www.CardPlayer.com.