Poker

Apparently not. However, on an only very slimly related topic, Swingers was on at the weekend and I loved the scene where they played 21 at the $100 minimum bet table and it was suggested to them that they might be more at home at one of the other tables... nice panning shot of various old ladies and deadbeats at an adjacent table.
Simon

I hope you intend to blog your gambling activities. Whilst I hope you do well, there's nothing like a bit of shameful joy to start the morning, and www.pulpracing.com has got slow of late.

Mekon -- I did wonder about starting a blog. But then I wonder about starting a blog about once a week until I remember how my last one just sort of petered out like all the others.

Simon -- Have you seen Rounders? Even though it has Matt Damon in it this is more than made up by the presence of John Malcovich. Guaranteed to get you playing Poker (or at leat thinking about it)

Alan -- You have excellent judgement. For a Scotch.

An update: 1100 hands in and I got hammered again for 50 or so BB and am currently $41.75 down. My worse performing hands are TT, KK, AT, AJ which might indicate a problem playing big cards too aggressively in multi-way pots or might just be hte normal ebb and flow. Certainly at PartyPoker I find it very hard to get anyone off a draw even with check-raises so I frequently end up with big pairs against 6 or 7 people going all the way to the river.

Hopefully things will pick up this evening.

Matthew

Matthew,
I was up till 3am New Year's Day (very late for me - I usually rise by 645am) playing poker, and managed to win most of the Risk soldiers we were playing for (where one cannon = 5p etc). It doesn't get much more exciting in the Swindon area.

Can you point me in the direction of a suitable starter book on the subject? I feel I have an aptitude for it.

I will check out Rounders Matthew. I guess that a novel part of playing poker over the internet is that there is no need to assume a poker face... there can be much punching of the air if you've got strong hand whilst the game is still on.

Chris -- There are two books that are widely recommended: Lee Jones' "Winning Low Limit Hold Em" and Sklanksy & Malmouth's "Hold Em Poker".

The Lee Jones' book is much better written and easier to understand than S&M and is an ideal introduction to play in typical low stakes games. Ultimately (so goes the general opinion) they give some slightly iffy advice and in particular are too loose pre-flop in some situations. But reading this book will make you not a bad player (if you see what I mean) very quickly.

Sklansky & Malmouth are the pre-eminent poker theorists and pretty much everything they say is gospel. However, they do tend to talk mainly about how to play in tougher mid-limit games where you make plays that rely on the other people basically having at least some clue about how to respond. In typical loose/passive low-limit games their advice probably needs modifying slightly. The other problem with S&M is that they need a good editor as the books are rambling and unstructured and require a bit of a read and re-read approach for it all to make sense and sink in.

Once you've read those and played a bit and are playing a basically sound game there is S&M's "Hold Em Poker for Advanced Players" (basically *the* bible) and David Sklansky's The Theory of Poker (which covers all Poker games not just Hold Em). There's enough in these two books that you will still be learning from them after years of serious play. HEPFAP has a good section on playing low limit loose/passive games that is requried reading for online play.

If you want to play online then I can highly recommend www.partypoker.com. If you do want to register please let me know so I can refer you for a bonus (which I'd happy to split with you, naturally).

A word of caution about social games: correct play will make you very unpopular with your mates as winning involves folding a lot (like 80% of the time) and then being utterly ruthless and aggressive in making your opponents pay for their bad play. Correct play is anti-social and not even that exciting as you basically don't get to gamble very often.

Good luck.

Simon -- As a seasoned veteran of the card rooms of Nevada I rarely do more than raise a quizzical eyebrow when I my nut flush hits on the river.

BTW In typical online play if you are any good there is virtually no bluffing whatsoever. The opponents are rarely skilled enough for it to be profitable.

Matthew

Powerballs sound alot safer he he he

Regards

NB

"Correct play is anti-social and not even that exciting as you basically don't get to gamble very often".

So in footballing terms a George Graham long ball approach is required to play proper poker, rather than yer Arsene tactics?
Simon

Yes -- the best analogy would be that your centre-half should stick it in Row Z rather than trying to play it out from the back on the off-chance of setting up a memorable goal.

Good play is essentially "tight/aggressive" which means you fold most hands and get out early when your hand misses (which makes you tight rather than loose) but when you do get a good hand and it hits you take the initiative and bet and raise rather than check and call (which makes you aggressive rather than passive).

Check-raising (ie you have the best hand, you check, your opponent sees weakness and bets, you raise and have him trapped for extra bets with you as a big favourite) is often considered bad form in friendly games but its considered a key skill in money games.

Matthew

[This message was edited by Matthew Robinson on THURSDAY 15 January 2004 at 13:19.]

I think I might like Poker. A friend described me the other day as reminding him of Mr Burns. Needless to say, I set the dogs on him.
Simon

If you deposit £200 at partypoker I'll happily give you lessons for free <evil grin>

It is a great game. It allows bleeding heart pinko liberals like myself to play the evil capitalist pig for once.

Matthew

What's to stop the unscrupulous from using a program to make their moves?

quote:

---

A word of caution about social games: correct play will make you very unpopular with your mates as winning involves folding a lot (like 80% of the time)

---

Doesn't this tactic sort of give away when you have a good/bad hand? The sort of tactic that says "if Matthew is staying in, I'm folding"

Also, the art in poker is the bluffing, how do you bluff an online game?

Jeremey said "What's to stop the unscrupulous from using a program to make their moves?"

People have tried it. The problem is that its quite a tough problem in AI terms (its a game of such incomplete information) and although you can get to the "not crap" stage its very hard to write a "Bot" that can compete with good human players. If you want to make serious money you need to play at mid to high limits. Which means you need to be able to beat good players.

But a widely available Bot capable of playing a basically winning game would be a big problem for the low limit games. Still its a $multi-billion industry so expect some serious counter measures

These people are the experts on the subject.

count.d said "Doesn't [folding 80% of the time] sort of give away when you have a good/bad hand? The sort of tactic that says "if Matthew is staying in, I'm folding"

In tough games (ie with good players) then yes. Everyone knows roughly what your bet or raise means in terms of your starting hand requirements and acts accordingly -- which for most of them will mean folding. Tough games have on average only 30-35% of players seeing each flop (which includes the forced bets who more or less see any unraisd flop).

And of course if someone calls your bet or raise then you in turn know roughly what sort of hand they need to have in order to call your bet and so on.

Becuase of this that you get really cool moves like preflop limp re-raises. Say you are dealt AA and you are first to act you should raise. But that does rather give the game away so an alternative -- particularly if you know that you have some aggressive players behind you who are very likely to raise -- is to limp in with a call hoping to get a raise which you can then re-raise. At this point everyone knows you are holding a killer hand but by this time the pot may well be so large that the raiser (and any callers) are trapped.

However, in typical low limit games most people don't even begin to watch what other players are doing and just play their cards. So if you fold 20 times in a row and than open with a raise from the first position (which is as strong a bet as you can make and implies hands like AKs, QQ, KK, AA, etc) and you will get people cold calling your 2 bets with any sort of hand (say any face card).

"Also, the art in poker is the bluffing, how do you bluff an online game?"

Well (contary to pipular belief) you don't bluff by affecting some brilliantly inscrutable but threatening expression that forces your opponent to fold. Good players bluff in situations where their action strongly implies they hold certain cards -- its not like you just bluff randomly for the hell of it. Everybody else knows it might be a bluff and the person who has to decide whether to call the bet knowing that if its not a bluff they are almost certainly beaten. Although an element of this does come down to body language and "tells" and all that, most of it is card and situation related and so works online alomst as well.

Again though this is in tough games. In typical low limit games there is no point in bluffing (you almost always get called) and how do you bluff someone who know matter how much you bet, raise and check raise them, and how sacry the flop looks, will still call your bets?

Which is why you get the old adage "You can only bluff a good player". It requires at least a certain amount of awareness on their part.

Besides -- the art of Poker is not bluffing IMHO. The Art of Poker is being able to get a quick and accurate read on your opponents and to be able to adopt your strategy accordingly (which may include when and who to bluff of course).

Matthew

My bad run continued through Friday night and my losses peaked (or is that troughed?) at $96. At least I hope it's as bad as its going to get as a 90+ BB losing streak is my worst run ever.

Saturday night things finally started to look up and despite an early pub start to watch West Ham's typically dramatic and entertaining 3-3 draw at Sheff Utd (which meant I was probably a bit too drunk to be playing cards) I had solid session for a $25 profit.

Hand of the Week

Probably not the most interesting hand but it was my biggest win this week and after enduring so much misery it deserves re-living. This is last night, I just sat down and none of the players are in my database so I have no reads. Table is $0.5/$1, probably loose/passive and there is an empty seat to my right (ie 9/10 players).

I have the button and am dealt A K

First two players fold, Middle Position (MP) bets, fold, fold, I raise, small blind folds, Big Blind raises. I want to re-raise here as I only really have to worry about AA or KK but my 90BB losing steak is making me nervous. So I call.

Flop comes:

10 9 7

Which I like a lot. I have a nut flush draw and two overcards and the flush and straight possibilities will probably keep the other two around. And I have position.

Early Position (EP) bets. He might have a flush draw but its unlikely since I reckon most players at party would check-call with a Q flush draw. If he's any good I know from his pre-flop re-raise and then a bet with this flop probably has a big overpair (AA, KK, etc). I suspect that actually my worse case is he has TT, 99 or 77 and has flopped a set. But basically I am more or less discounting my overcards (he may have a set or AA, KK) and playing my flush draw.

MP calls. I raise. EP calls. MP calls.

Turn comes 4

Woo! Yay! I have the nuts unless the board pairs on the river.

EP checks. MP checks. I bet. EP raises!

EP is check-raising the turn with a flush board and I'm now convinced he is fishy. At best I put him on JQ or trips looking for a Full House.

MP folds, I re-raise, EP calls.

River comes 8

Which is perfect as it can't have made a FH and might well have made his straight. I have the nuts.

EP bets. I raise. He re-raises (I put him on a straight or a losing flush). I cap it. He calls.

He shows J 10 for a 7 to J straight.

$19.25 Thank you and goodnight Jim from Indiana. Who gets added to me fish list.

Mattthew
Hands 1583; VP$IP 17.62%; PF Raise % 6.06; SD% 25.61; ($71.25); BB/100 (4.50)

[This message was edited by Matthew Robinson on SUNDAY 18 January 2004 at 14:00.]

quote:

---

Matthew, that's really interesting.

Now in English please?

---

It's the first sign that he's becoming a compulsive gamber. He'll be asking us to lend him money next, because he's on a lucky streak.

Just say no.

Position = Distance from the dealer which dictates how many players act in each betting round before you make a decision. The single most important strategic concept in Hold Em

Early Position (EP) = close to the left of the dealer = bad

Late Position (LP) = the dealer or to the right of the dealer = good

Middle Position (MP) = Middle position, between the two.

The Button = the position from which the hand was dealt in this hand. The most advantagous place to be sitting.

Small Bet / Big Bet = Limit Hold Em (the most common online) is structured in terms of betting. The Small Bet is the amount of each bet in the first two rounds of betting, the big bet the amount in the last two rounds of betting. In a $0.5/$1 game the small bet is 50c, the big bet is $1, in 2/4 the SB = $2, the BB = $4. You will see winnings/losses stated in units of BB as this tells you how well you are doing even if you play in games of different limits.

Cap = In Limit games there can only be 3 raises (ie you cannot keep raising forever). Hence the third raise "caps" the pot for that round.

Blinds = Compulsory bets made in each round to get the action going. There is Small Blind (SB) usually one half of the small bet and the Big Blind (BB) which is usually = to a small bet.

Therefore positions in a 10 handed game (the normal size of a table) are, from the left of the dealer, as follows: SB, BB, EP1, EP2, EP3, MP1, MP2, MP3, LP1 (aka CO or "the cutoff"), The Button (ie the dealer).

Hole cards = The two cards dealt to each player.

Pre-Flop = The round of betting before the flop when players are making decisions based on their hole cards alone.

Flop = The three community cards dealt after the first round of betting. There is then a round of betting after these cards are dealt.

Turn = The Fourth community card dealt after the flop betting. There is then another round of betting. AKA "Fourth Street".

River = The last community card and the final round of betting.

Lucky River = Winning a hand when you were a massive underdog at the turn but got an extremely unlikely river card to make your hand. You are said to have "rivered" the other player.

TPTK = Top Pair Top Kicker. You have made a pair with one of your hole cards and the highest ranked flop card (ie Top Pair) and your other hole card is big enough that you will probably beat (or "out kick") any other player who has the same top pair. e.g. You have AK and the flop is K, Q, 6 then you have TPTK. Also TPWK = Top pair, Weak Kicker.

Overpair = Hole cards that make a pair (aka a pocket pair) ranked higher than the highest card in the flop. Beats TPTK and is therefore a strong hand.

Overcard = Either a hole card ranked higher than the top ranked card in the flop or a turn or river card that ranks higher than current top pair or your overpair.

The Nuts = The best possible hand given the current community cards. I.e. if you have "the nuts" you cannot be beaten.

Draw = A chance of improving your hand when subsequent community cards are dealt. Hence if you have 2 hearts in your hand and the flop contains 2 more hearts you have a "flush draw". If you have the A in your hand you have a "nut flush draw" since the Ace flush is the best flush that can be made.

Fish = A bad poker player.

loose/tight = Players and games are either loose or tight. A loose player plays lots of hands, a tight player plays fewer, stronger hands. A tight game has lots of tight players, a loose game lots of loose players.

passive/aggressive = The other charateristic of players and games. A passive player responds to events, calls a lot and rarely raises (especially pre-flop). An aggressive player likes to bet and raise rather than call and loves to check-raise.

check-raise = To have the best hand in early position but check rather than bet in the expectation that another player will bet and you can therfore raise. A key skill for maximising winnings but risky as if nobody calls you end up giveing the other players a free look at the next card which may allow them to outdraw you.

Calling Station = A player who hates to fold but is still passive and will call virtually any bet.

Rock = A very tight/passive player

Maniac = A very aggressive/loose player

VP$IP = % of times a player has voluntarily put money into a pot (ie not including the blinds). A key indicator of how tight/loose a player is since it tells you the strength of the starting hands they play. Properly tight players have a VP$IP < 20%.

PF Raise % = The amount of times a player raises pre-flop. A key stat in determining how passive/aggressive the player is. Over 5% is a good thing (presuming you are playing the correct number of hands).

Matthew
Who has won $18 while typing this

A few more questions:
Are you just playing against other online punters or do you also play against the house?
What information is usually available about the opponents?
How do the online sites make money if (asI suspect) you are just playing against other people? Is there a fee to sit at the table?
John

John,

The house takes a rake which is usually something like 5% of each contested pot up to a maximum of about $3 per hand. This makes rake more of an issue at low limits but the lower standard of play more than makes up for this.

Bricks & Mortar casinos also charge a rake and it's usually higher than online rakes since their overheads are higher. Also B&M conventions usually require you to tip the dealer whenever you win a pot. All in all the rake should not be a problem if you are a winning player.

As for information about other players: most sites let you make notes via their client software so you can record what you learn and have it available next time you play them. Generally though if you play for half an hour or so at a particular table and pay attention even on hands where you have folded you can get a fairly good read on the other payers.

If you play a lot and get more serious you can download hand histories and analyse them using software like Poker Tracker. You do see the same players a lot so you quite quickly build up a good set of stats on people you are playing. Its also very useful for analysing and improving you own game.

BTW I think you'd like Poker John. Although you are not going to make significant amouts of money unless yo move up to medium and higher limits its huge fun and I suspect you have the right mindset for it (ie analytical and ruthless )

Matthew

BTW I think you'd like Poker John. Although you are not going to make significant amouts of money unless yo move up to medium and higher limits its huge fun and I suspect you have the right mindset for it (ie analytical and ruthless )

Yes, I think you may be right.

I've dabbled with Blackjack a bit, but I am not convinced it's worth playing online because you are only up against the house. Poker sounds a lot more interesting because of the competition against fellow punters.
John

Poker is to Blackjack as Chess is to Draughts.

If you want to sign up at partypoker.com let me know and I can refer you a we can split the refferal bonus.

Matthew

quote:

---

However, in typical low limit games most people don't even begin to watch what other players are doing and just play their cards. So if you fold 20 times in a row and than open with a raise from the first position (which is as strong a bet as you can make and implies hands like AKs, QQ, KK, AA, etc) and you will get people cold calling your 2 bets with any sort of hand (say any face card).

---

I'm sorry Matthew, but I have to disagree with you here. We had a group, playing cards every lunch break, at school at the age of fourteen and we watched each others every move. We still do. I don't know what games you played in, but when your group are next playing for money, can you let me know?

quote:

---

Well (contary to pipular belief) you don't bluff by affecting some brilliantly inscrutable but threatening expression that forces your opponent to fold

---

I didn't mean one acted like Robert Shaw to get your opponent to fold, I meant the real art in a Poker game is to bet, raise and fold at determined times to bewilder the others. Your 80% drop out (and therefore winnings) are surely just based on the law of probability. Everyone will generally be dealt the same good/bad hands throughout the game.

quote:

---

Again though this is in tough games. In typical low limit games there is no point in bluffing (you almost always get called) and how do you bluff someone who know matter how much you bet, raise and check raise them, and how sacry the flop looks, will still call your bets?

---

But they wouldn't see your bet if you raised them so much and they had no idea what you had.

quote:

---

Besides -- the art of Poker is not bluffing IMHO. The Art of Poker is being able to get a quick and accurate read on your opponents and to be able to adopt your strategy accordingly (which may include when and who to bluff of course).

---

A contradiction in the same paragraph and how would you read your opponent if he wasn't predictable?

A good Poker player will always lose a lot to gain a lot.

"I'm sorry Matthew, but I have to disagree with you here"

Fair enough. But in my expereince of typical low limit online games most people do not watch what their opponents do. Sure they remember things like being check-raised but these games are full of players who will cold call you with a random hand even if you have been folding solidly for two hours.

If you find your early position raises are getting too much respect you can loosen up and play some marginal hands but its rarely appropriate in typical games in my experience.

"but when your group are next playing for money, can you let me know?"

I play online at partypoker.com. Party does private rooms and if we can get a few people together we can probably have a Naim forum game from time to time.

"the real art in a Poker game is to bet, raise and fold at determined times to bewilder the others"

Bluffing and deception by random play is only really useful against good players in tough games. Against the poor and average players found at low limits play the most profitable way to play to to play percentages and bet aggressively for value.

"Your 80% drop out (and therefore winnings) are surely just based on the law of probability. Everyone will generally be dealt the same good/bad hands throughout the game"

The correct strategy is to play starting hands that, over the long term, make money. Or, to use the poker parlance, have a positive Expectation (EV). Which hands these are is well understood (more or less) and if you follow these rules you end up playing, once you've played enough hands for it to average out, somewhere around 20% of hands (not including hands played for the Big Blind). Good players can play a few extra hands and might up their % a few points but 20% is a good benchmark for a tough player.

By contrast playing too many hands is the single most common and the single most expensive mistake you can make. You are playing hands with a negative expectation and, over time, these extra hands will cost you money.

BTW This is not just some arcane poker theory -- if you look at long term stats then any player when analaysd over 10,000+ hands will either be playing <20% of hands or they will be losing money.

"But they wouldn't see your bet if you raised them so much and they had no idea what you had"

The style of play you describe is called Loose/Aggressive and is the easiest way to burn large amounts of money nad all it really does is just guarnetee you high levels of variance (ie ups and downs).

The correct strategy against such players is to tighten up and play less hands. I.e. You know he must be playing bad cards but not when, so throw away your marginals and just play your best hands very aggressively. Its a bit frustrating throwing away what may well be winning hands but its all worth it when your patience is rewarded and the LAG starts betting and raising into your monster hand.

"and how would you read your opponent if he wasn't predictable?"

Becuase the only way you can be so unpredictable is effectively by taking bad and unprofitable decisions getting a read on such an opponent is not really neccesary in order to beat them. Besides (assuming you are not going to confuse your opponent by throwing away winning hands) really unpredictable just seems to mean more aggressive in this case.

Matthew

Patrick,

Hold Em is the both the most popular variant and the most exciting/interesting to play. The whole "Internet Poker Boom" (Copyright Lazy Sunday Jounalists Short of a Real Story) is fueled by Hold Em.

Also the nature of the game with only 2 private cards and 5 community cards mean you get a lot of action (ie betting) and swings of fortune as a big favourite can suddenly get beat out when someone's draw hits. This helps create the impression that you are playing well even when you are losing money -- since you will still regularly have big wins and a profitable evening. This makes it fun and keeps people playing.

You won't get in trouble for winning as the house profit comes from a percentage rake from winning pots. So even if you win a fortune you are still paying them their profit.

Matthew

PS perhaps I should point out that I know about as much about this game as anyone would if they took a reasonalby serious interest in it for 6 months, read the right books, played a few hands, etc. I am still very much at the beginner stage and am far from the second coming of Doyle Brunson.

Matthew

Sent you a PM.