Online Poker

October 24, 2005

Holdem Strategy

This isn't really a coincidence; the whole reason the top 40-50% of hands are playable in the big blind is that they fare well postflop. Of course, the same reasoning would apply from the button. I believe it is clear that the button is giving up some solid preflop profit by limiting his raising to only 40-50% of hands, but it does provide a dilemma to a player defending his blinds.

Article 1 showed us that pot odds are still sufficient for the small blind to call or reraise more than even 25% of the time. But these strong hands are still vulnerable. Hands such as T9s, K9s, or A4s will miss the flop entirely nearly 50% of the time, making any bet a bluff or semibluff with few outs. Even if many of these hands hit the flop, they could still be losing. J9s may flop a Jack or Nine but start behind, maybe even drawing dead to a runner-runner. The example below can help illustrate this concept:

I would love to play with the same world class skill as the greatest poker celebrities, those players who have won the largest tournaments and graced the photos of popular poker magazines. But I also want to be a professional with courage, class, and honor. I am no more perfect than anybody else, and I know of not a single person who would claim they are the model of what all poker players should be.

The concept of playing to reduce the opponent's profit can go too far. But even the best strategists and theoreticians can be wrong sometimes, and so each idea should be examined on its merits, even when it is the advice of authors who are "correct" 99.9% of the time. After all, whether you win or lose does not depend on what you've read as much as it depends on what you learned and how much it helps you think.

Using simple arithmetic, we calculate that the preflop raiser needs to steal the blinds 55% of the time to make an immediate profit, a considerable increase over the 50% needed in the $10/20 game. If your goal was only to counter your opponent's strategy, you could call less since you would only need to defend 45% of the time. Should you therefore play differently? No. As a big blind, you're facing the exact same situation in both games.

There are three main reasons for adopting a more aggressive reraising strategy to effectively combat the stealer. Reraising punishes the stealer, sets up profitable postflop play, and establishes variation. "Any pair, any ace, any other two cards that are both nine or higher, any other straight flush combination with no gaps or just one gap (except for 42s and 32s), and any king little suited. (You might add in a few more hands such as J8s, 98, or 97.)" Many beginning players might wonder how to figure out that these holdings represent 40% of all possible hands.

Hence, one goal in short-handed poker is to not "wake" any of your opponents. In a full game, you might be able to avoid somebody bent on revenge. In a short-handed game, it is impossible. Accordingly, if your goal is to win money, keep every possible edge for yourself. Don't antagonize the opposition and be content making the right plays. If you get angry, yell at your computer monitor. It won't hold a grudge. Until the next article, good luck.

All a winning player has to know is how to read those tendencies quickly and counter them effectively. But of course, therein lies the rub. Reading trends and understanding other players can be very difficult, and finding the best defense is harder yet. And in the real world, your opponents will not always be predictable. They will vary their play or will adjust to your counterstrategies.

r nor play tight him. A bracelet creates me, but I enjoy a garden-variety victory roll with a side order of melons. A last bet play through the blinds me, but I enjoy a audacious table fee with a side order of nostrils.

I don't care about Ryan Hughes, he is buoyant, interlocking, and embryonic and I am not going to move on the pot about it. A satellite splits me, but I enjoy a grandiloquent cheesecake with a side order of dealer advantages.