hceco004
12-16-2002, 06:10 PM
What is the difference between the way Hold Em is played in Los Angeles and Las Vegas/rest of the world?
Why do Las Vegas players visiting L.A. stand behind sharking the games, begin drooling when they see the betting/action, can't wait to get their chips into action, and, frequently leave the game busted and puzzled how they could get beaten by a gang of mopes?
Is the strategy promulgated in the most widely read poker book, HFAP by Sklansky/Malmuth, becoming out of date and irrelevant to the way the game is played today?
Does winning require more skill in L.A. than in L.V.?
Some hints come from Daniel Negranaus Cardplayer artice (http://www.cardplayer.com/?sec=afeature&art_id=12981).
Here are some more insights and food for thought and discussion.
Consider the following hand from a Commerce LLHE game described in a recent RGP post by Randy Collack.
(http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=20021216005447.07179.00000161%40mb-mu.aol.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dgroup:rec.gambling.poker%2Binsubject: quickie%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D20021216005447.07179.00000161%2540mb-mu.aol.com%26rnum%3D1)
"The games are wonderfully profitable. After having to adjust my mindset to understand that the other players were truly awful, I was able to book ~$400 win in 5 hours or so of 4-8, 6-12 HE. One hand that taught me this lesson...I post behind the button and see an unraised flop with K7o. The flop comes KT6 all in hearts. The pot is bet and raised and called by another player before it gets to me. I fold, the turn and river are 2 black bricks and the winning hand was the guy who cold called 2 bets on the flop with a Ten and no other hearts in his hand."
In this hand, Randy has an unraised pot pre-flop, flops top pair no-kicker with a 3-suited flop. Let's begin the analysis by seeing what HFAP says to do in these situations.
From the section in HFAP, 21st Century Edition entitled "Playing When the Flop Is All the Same Suit", p. 136:
"If you flop top pair against a few opponents you generally should bet, as you cannot afford to give a free card, especially if your top pair is not large. However, against a lot of players, it is probably best to check and call as long as you are early to act. If no one yet has a flush it is safe to assume that someone is drawing to it . You should put in as little money in the pot as possible until you are failry sure that you are not against a flush. This, of course includes seeing that the fourth suited card does not come. Also, if the action behind you is heavy, folding may be your best option. However you should bet if several players have already passed."
In most L.V. games or in games where the players are HFAP style players, playing this hand would not require much skill because most L.V./HFAP players play a predictable weak tight game. Against a 3-suited flop, if someone bets from early position into a 3-suited flop they have top-pair/decent kicker or they have already made their flush. If anyone calls the early position flop bet they have the Ace or King high flush draw. Any other holdings will be folded.
In this type of game, you can fold all other holdings without much fear of a mistake--FTOP speaking. Against L.V. style players you pretty much know where you are in the hand and can play optimally without much thought or having to know too much about your opponents.
How does the game differ in L.A and how would the play of Randy Collack's hand differ in L.A. vs. L.V.?
The first difference is that in early position, depending on the nature of the field, there is a significant universe of L.A. players who realize that betting the flop and continuing to bet the turn, and river, even with two random cards is a statistically sound play.
If the other players, when faced with an early postion raise on the flop, are going to fold straight draws, middle and botton pair, top pair with mediocre/poor kickers, and combination holdings, e.g. bottom pair with backdoor possibilities etc., and are going to check call/fold on the river with a flush draw that doesn't improve, betting out a significant percentage of the time on the flop from early position is a positive E.V. play.
The value inherent in this play is increased against weak/tight and HFAP style players if you have a weak flush card in your hand, because the other players are going to fold better flush draws e.g. KQJT high flush draws.
This value inherent in this play is even greater, if your bluff, when called, is going to generate extra action for you in future hands (not just today but in future sessions on other days) when you flop the flush and the other players call you to the river with worse hands that are drawing dead.
Notice that the profitable use of this play requires a high level of knowledge of the game and specific knowledge of the other players style of play, e.g. the distribution of possible hands held by the other players in an unraised multi-way pot and the way in which the other players in the hand play certain holdings in this situation, i.e. they will fold most hands against a bet/raise in this situation. In other words, making this play requires skillful and observant play.
Notice also that we are already way beyond memorizing the S/M starting hand groups and playing a simplistic fit or fold/tight and aggressive strategy espoused in the poker literature.
The second difference is that in L.A. but not in L.V. there are many observant/skillful players who are "willing to gamble". In this hand, "willing to gamble" means that when they see the early postion bet on the flop and they have reason to believe that the person is bluffing/semi-bluffing, they are willing to attempt the steal. This means sometimes raising the early position raiser with nothing/bottom pair/middle pair/weak flush draw etc.
This is especially a statistically sound and profitable play if the stealer's read is good and the other players are going to fold everything except a made flush or an ace high flush on the flop when the pot is bet and then raised, i.e. they play HFAP style.
The third difference, is that playing top pair in late position in a L.A. game requires a lot more skill than in a typical L.V. game. HFAP says to fold, as Randy Collack did, when faced with a 3-suited flop, and significant action.
In L.A., however, Randy can not safely and automatically fold top pair in this situation. Randy has to at least consider the possibility that a bet and raise in front of him doesn't always mean he is drawing dead, and, in fact, may have the best hand. This means that in L.A. the conservative plays i.e. automatically folding or check/calling to the river if the fourth suited card doesn't fall are inferior strategies. In L.A., Randy has to consider 3-betting on the flop and betting the turn and river if the 4th heart doesn't come.
More importantly, the play of the early bettors gives Randy to the opportunity to make a skillful play, 3-betting on the flop, which if made only when appropriate is extremely profitable. In other words, the actions of the early bettors creates an opportunity for the skilfull/observant/superior card reading player to put his skill to work.
Of course, if Randy automatically 3-bets every time in this situation he will be a big loser, but if he is a skillful/observant player and can 3-bet only on the hands where the other players are making moves on the pot, he is commiting a lot of chips but the potential return is also very large. In other words, if Randy plays skillfully, he can use his skill, in this situation, to win a lot of chips with a hand that would be a loser played HFAP style.
Why do Las Vegas players visiting L.A. stand behind sharking the games, begin drooling when they see the betting/action, can't wait to get their chips into action, and, frequently leave the game busted and puzzled how they could get beaten by a gang of mopes?
Is the strategy promulgated in the most widely read poker book, HFAP by Sklansky/Malmuth, becoming out of date and irrelevant to the way the game is played today?
Does winning require more skill in L.A. than in L.V.?
Some hints come from Daniel Negranaus Cardplayer artice (http://www.cardplayer.com/?sec=afeature&art_id=12981).
Here are some more insights and food for thought and discussion.
Consider the following hand from a Commerce LLHE game described in a recent RGP post by Randy Collack.
(http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=20021216005447.07179.00000161%40mb-mu.aol.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dgroup:rec.gambling.poker%2Binsubject: quickie%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D20021216005447.07179.00000161%2540mb-mu.aol.com%26rnum%3D1)
"The games are wonderfully profitable. After having to adjust my mindset to understand that the other players were truly awful, I was able to book ~$400 win in 5 hours or so of 4-8, 6-12 HE. One hand that taught me this lesson...I post behind the button and see an unraised flop with K7o. The flop comes KT6 all in hearts. The pot is bet and raised and called by another player before it gets to me. I fold, the turn and river are 2 black bricks and the winning hand was the guy who cold called 2 bets on the flop with a Ten and no other hearts in his hand."
In this hand, Randy has an unraised pot pre-flop, flops top pair no-kicker with a 3-suited flop. Let's begin the analysis by seeing what HFAP says to do in these situations.
From the section in HFAP, 21st Century Edition entitled "Playing When the Flop Is All the Same Suit", p. 136:
"If you flop top pair against a few opponents you generally should bet, as you cannot afford to give a free card, especially if your top pair is not large. However, against a lot of players, it is probably best to check and call as long as you are early to act. If no one yet has a flush it is safe to assume that someone is drawing to it . You should put in as little money in the pot as possible until you are failry sure that you are not against a flush. This, of course includes seeing that the fourth suited card does not come. Also, if the action behind you is heavy, folding may be your best option. However you should bet if several players have already passed."
In most L.V. games or in games where the players are HFAP style players, playing this hand would not require much skill because most L.V./HFAP players play a predictable weak tight game. Against a 3-suited flop, if someone bets from early position into a 3-suited flop they have top-pair/decent kicker or they have already made their flush. If anyone calls the early position flop bet they have the Ace or King high flush draw. Any other holdings will be folded.
In this type of game, you can fold all other holdings without much fear of a mistake--FTOP speaking. Against L.V. style players you pretty much know where you are in the hand and can play optimally without much thought or having to know too much about your opponents.
How does the game differ in L.A and how would the play of Randy Collack's hand differ in L.A. vs. L.V.?
The first difference is that in early position, depending on the nature of the field, there is a significant universe of L.A. players who realize that betting the flop and continuing to bet the turn, and river, even with two random cards is a statistically sound play.
If the other players, when faced with an early postion raise on the flop, are going to fold straight draws, middle and botton pair, top pair with mediocre/poor kickers, and combination holdings, e.g. bottom pair with backdoor possibilities etc., and are going to check call/fold on the river with a flush draw that doesn't improve, betting out a significant percentage of the time on the flop from early position is a positive E.V. play.
The value inherent in this play is increased against weak/tight and HFAP style players if you have a weak flush card in your hand, because the other players are going to fold better flush draws e.g. KQJT high flush draws.
This value inherent in this play is even greater, if your bluff, when called, is going to generate extra action for you in future hands (not just today but in future sessions on other days) when you flop the flush and the other players call you to the river with worse hands that are drawing dead.
Notice that the profitable use of this play requires a high level of knowledge of the game and specific knowledge of the other players style of play, e.g. the distribution of possible hands held by the other players in an unraised multi-way pot and the way in which the other players in the hand play certain holdings in this situation, i.e. they will fold most hands against a bet/raise in this situation. In other words, making this play requires skillful and observant play.
Notice also that we are already way beyond memorizing the S/M starting hand groups and playing a simplistic fit or fold/tight and aggressive strategy espoused in the poker literature.
The second difference is that in L.A. but not in L.V. there are many observant/skillful players who are "willing to gamble". In this hand, "willing to gamble" means that when they see the early postion bet on the flop and they have reason to believe that the person is bluffing/semi-bluffing, they are willing to attempt the steal. This means sometimes raising the early position raiser with nothing/bottom pair/middle pair/weak flush draw etc.
This is especially a statistically sound and profitable play if the stealer's read is good and the other players are going to fold everything except a made flush or an ace high flush on the flop when the pot is bet and then raised, i.e. they play HFAP style.
The third difference, is that playing top pair in late position in a L.A. game requires a lot more skill than in a typical L.V. game. HFAP says to fold, as Randy Collack did, when faced with a 3-suited flop, and significant action.
In L.A., however, Randy can not safely and automatically fold top pair in this situation. Randy has to at least consider the possibility that a bet and raise in front of him doesn't always mean he is drawing dead, and, in fact, may have the best hand. This means that in L.A. the conservative plays i.e. automatically folding or check/calling to the river if the fourth suited card doesn't fall are inferior strategies. In L.A., Randy has to consider 3-betting on the flop and betting the turn and river if the 4th heart doesn't come.
More importantly, the play of the early bettors gives Randy to the opportunity to make a skillful play, 3-betting on the flop, which if made only when appropriate is extremely profitable. In other words, the actions of the early bettors creates an opportunity for the skilfull/observant/superior card reading player to put his skill to work.
Of course, if Randy automatically 3-bets every time in this situation he will be a big loser, but if he is a skillful/observant player and can 3-bet only on the hands where the other players are making moves on the pot, he is commiting a lot of chips but the potential return is also very large. In other words, if Randy plays skillfully, he can use his skill, in this situation, to win a lot of chips with a hand that would be a loser played HFAP style.