Crushing Live Poker With Twitter

Stack to pot size ratio is critical when optimizing lines in 3 and 4 bet pots with effective stacks <100BBs

Most of the advice in the training material I produce relates to games with deeper stacks. My favorite level to play is $5-$10 uncapped no-limit where you still get a fair amount of weak, recreational players and the game gets very juicy when deep. However, I acknowledge that most of you wanting to improve your game normally play at capped games at or below the $5 big blind level. Usually, especially in southern California, where I am from, these games are heavily capped. In fact, the most common blind structure in $200 max buy-in games in southern California is $2-$5. This commonly creates situations where, if the pot has been reraised preflop, players have effective stacks of less than one pot-sized bet.

These spots create some difficult situations. They also create awkward hands where we become so pot committed after one bet that it is difficult for us to get away from a medium-strength holding. Even though I am very rarely an advocate of slow playing, trappy plays are sometimes best in these spots even with hands that are not monsters.

Let us take a look at a hand I recently played at the Bike a few weeks ago. The game was $5-$5 and the effective stacks were $280. After one limper a recreational, loose, player raised to $35 and I looked down at A K immediately to his right from the cutoff. I three bet him to $80, everyone folded and he called. The flop came out K 7 2 and he checked. The pot had $170 in it and he had $200 left in his stack. At this point there was absolutely no chance I was ever getting away from my hand and figured that I would gain more value from him bluffing a later street or catching something that made him continue on, so I checked the flop back. The turn was the 8. He now bet $90. Obviously I could have put him all in right there. However, even though a backdoor-flush draw appeared, I still thought I was way ahead in the hand and wanted to give him a little bit more rope to hang himself if he was bluffing. I also thought that if he had a hand like say 10-10 or J-J and the river bricked out, he might call me thinking that I missed the heart draw. If I moved all-in now he may fold. I called once again. The river was the 5 and he now moved in for the last of his money. I called and he said, “Do you have a set?” I indicated that I did not and he tapped the table and showed A Q.

Why did he think I had a set? It is because most other people in the player pool would not check a single-paired hand, even on a board as dry as this, because they would not want a free card to come giving them a bad beat. Most in this situation, after checking the flop and just calling the turn, would have three kings. I, however, realized that the optimal line in this hand was to check one street. I do not recommend this play to beginners, but in reality, when you have a top pair hand that is not very vulnerable with less than two pot-sized bets left, that is a monster.

One of the other common situations that arise is when you three or four-bet a hand like A-A from out of the blinds. Say player A raises to $20 at $5-$5, player B makes it $65 and you make it $145 out of the blinds with $500 effective stacks. Player B calls in position. The board comes out J 2 2. You think that player B either has a pocket pair or a hand like A-K or A-Q. What is the best play here? Because it is so rare for others to check one-pair hands after making an aggressive action preflop, we can check and induce our opponent to commit his stack with a hand that he might fold to our continuation bet like, say 10-10. We also may induce him to bluff away his money with A-K, tricking him into thinking that we have the same hand. I have made truckloads of money noticing short, effective stack sizes in relation to the pot size and taking a tricky line.

Another useful tip is to sometimes check back the turn in position when you know you can get all of the money in on the river. Say for example a player with $300 opens to $20, two people call, and you make it $85 with K-K. All fold but the initial raiser. The board comes out Q 4 5. He checks and you bet $75. He thinks about for a long time before finally calling. You think he squarely has a hand like 6-6 to J-J. The turn is a 4. The pot is $350 and he has $140 left in his stack. You decide to check back. The river is an 8 and he checks once again. You now move all-in and he calls with 9-9. Now, I’m not necessarily saying that he would not have committed his money on the turn if you had bet, but against tighter players you can actually play a bit tricky in order to maximize you rvalue. Of course this play could backfire on you if an overcard comes to his pair on the river.

Sometimes playing in a bigger game is just not worth it (especially in PLO)

I truly believe one of the key elements in becoming a great professional gambler is having balance in your life. I have never been one for playing very long sessions and think that after a certain amount of time at the table your sharpness goes down. I find that I play my best poker usually only putting in 25-30 hours per week. Luckily for me, I have built up some nice auxiliary income through commentating and poker training where I don’t have to worry about grinding for 200 hours a month to pay rent. I find that if I get on to a regular sleep, eating and workout schedule, my life is considerably happier than when I am stuck playing in long sessions. I also find that playing in smaller, less stressful games improves the quality of my life.

Recently, during the WSOPC, I have been playing a very large pot-limit Omaha game at the Bicycle Casino. The blinds are $5-$5 but there are unlimited straddles of any amount from any position. The game plays more like a $20-$40 pot-limit Omaha where people commonly win and lose over five figures per session. I think that I am highly plus expected value (EV) in the game. Should I absolutely play it then?

My normal game is a controlled style of no-limit at $5-$10 and below. I feel like I am miles ahead of most of the other competition. It is rarely stressful and the variance is low. I do not have a chance to win five figures in one session like the pot-limit Omaha game. In that big game, however, even if I have a shot to win a ton of money in one night, what about the times when the game is good, I am stuck, and it goes into the next day? I am supposed to stay around and continue playing — but what does that do to the rest of my life? If my winrate might be 30 percent higher in that game but I am going through four times the variance, is the extra money (which by the way I may not ever see if I run below expectation and the game breaks within a few months) really worth the sacrifice of happiness in my life?

As recently as a few months ago I would say “Yes it is! I am a professional poker player and have to take the most plus EV situations”. But now this big pot-limit Omaha game has really taught me that playing poker for money over the long haul is a balance. I do not want to be in a job that I absolutely loathe no matter how much money I make. I think that happiness is a very important attribute in my life. The next time you take big shots in a game ask yourself “Will the loss hurt more than he happiness that I will gain from the win?” ♠

Want Card Player and Bart to provide analysis on a cash game hand you played? Send full hand details (blinds, stacks, street-by-street action) to @CardPlayerMedia. If we choose your hand, we’ll send you a Card Player subscription.

Follow Bart for daily strategy tips on twitter @barthanson. Check out his podcast “The Seat Open Podcast” on seatopenpoker.net and his video training site specifically for live No Limit players ­—CrushLivePoker.com. He also hosts Live at the Bike every Tuesday and Friday at 10:30 pm ET at LivettheBike.com