J_V
11-02-2005, 04:25 AM
I believe that there is an epidemic spreading in the ranks of mid-high level poker. I have been afflicted for many months now. Cookie Cutter poker is simply taking shortcuts in order to avoid having to make tough decision later on.
Now this is partly caused by reading too much 2+2, where we always looking for default lines and cheap gimmicks in hand analysis - only because so often we are without reads and player knowledge.
We need to remember, that they call it poker for a reason, I sometimes forget that you always have the option to actually play poker.
Here are a few quick examples. The first is from limit holdem. While cookie cutter syndrome is a problem in limit poker, it's more of an ailment than a disease.
You raise two black Queens in early position. Only the BB calls. The flop comes A94. Your opponent checks and you bet. The turn is a 4. Instead of deciding if your opponent has an Ace or not, you elect to check the turn and call a river bet and bet if checked to. You don't even consider the possibility of trying to make 2 bets when ahead and lose 0 when behind.
In no limit tournaments and cash games, the problem is more serious because you give up more EV and its more prevalent because the of the gravity of the decisions. Those afflicted tend to take sub-par lines in order to avoid having to make difficult decisions on later streets. They also might tend to tighten up preflop so that they aren't stuck trying to figure out what to do with one pair in a big pot. In doing this, they are passing up +EV situations. A good example is that when players flop hands such as a flush draw and two overs they almost always are looking to get it in on the flop, instead of calling a bet and using position to perhaps take the pot away on the turn or river from there opponent (or making their disguised hand and getting paid off). Committing themselves on the flop with a hand that is close to 50-50 if called is not necessarily bad, but other lines are often better, particularly if you are more skilled than your opponent.
Another example is making too large of raises w/ AA and KK fearing that you may actually have to fold the hand on later streets if you make a smaller raise. If you raise enough (more than 1/8) of your opponents stack, your opponent won't have odds to try to outdraw you. Why are we avoiding tough decisions? That's supposed to be fun and profitable right?
So you make the big raise and your opponent alls preflop and pushes on the flop into you. You instantly call, even though deep down you know you're clearly behind, and later, pat yourself on the back for making a +EV long run play. Where if you had thought about the flop and been able to fold, the Aces situation woulda been a gazillion times more +EV. It's embarrasing that that has been my preflop thought process with AA and KK in some hands.
Here are two examples from NL tournaments. The first I don't remember all the details, but was the hand from this year's WSOP ME. An unknown player makes a standard raise with QQ and Phil Hellmuth calls his raise either in the blind or he had limped in, either way he is out of position. The flop comes AJx and the unknown gets sizeable bets in on every street and beats Phil's J-10.
The second hand is a hand played by Michael Gracz against Shaniac at a WSOP final table this year.
Shaniac raises in EP with KJs, Michael Gracz calls the reasonable raise in the bb with A-10o. Flop 862. Check, check. Turn rag. Check, Shaniac announces all in for about 1.25x the pot, Gracz deliberates calls.
While I think both plays are debateable (though correct IMO), they show the willingness to make difficult decisions and act on them. In the QQ hand against Hellmuth it would have been easy to check the turn and call a small river bet from Phil (or more likely, check,check), or even easier to check the river behind.
In the Gracz-Shaniac hand, how many players are even calling and EP raise from a tight player with A-10o, (eventhough its probably correct - based on that particular tourney situation). It would be very easy to shy away with that hand, eventhough its probably correct to play it.
Obviously the turn call is read dependent, but are you willing to go broke with Ace high on tv at a final table in that spot. I'm pretty sure, I'd fold eventhough I'd want to call. This my friends is a very bad disease if you are looking to reach the pinnacle of the poker world.
Now this is partly caused by reading too much 2+2, where we always looking for default lines and cheap gimmicks in hand analysis - only because so often we are without reads and player knowledge.
We need to remember, that they call it poker for a reason, I sometimes forget that you always have the option to actually play poker.
Here are a few quick examples. The first is from limit holdem. While cookie cutter syndrome is a problem in limit poker, it's more of an ailment than a disease.
You raise two black Queens in early position. Only the BB calls. The flop comes A94. Your opponent checks and you bet. The turn is a 4. Instead of deciding if your opponent has an Ace or not, you elect to check the turn and call a river bet and bet if checked to. You don't even consider the possibility of trying to make 2 bets when ahead and lose 0 when behind.
In no limit tournaments and cash games, the problem is more serious because you give up more EV and its more prevalent because the of the gravity of the decisions. Those afflicted tend to take sub-par lines in order to avoid having to make difficult decisions on later streets. They also might tend to tighten up preflop so that they aren't stuck trying to figure out what to do with one pair in a big pot. In doing this, they are passing up +EV situations. A good example is that when players flop hands such as a flush draw and two overs they almost always are looking to get it in on the flop, instead of calling a bet and using position to perhaps take the pot away on the turn or river from there opponent (or making their disguised hand and getting paid off). Committing themselves on the flop with a hand that is close to 50-50 if called is not necessarily bad, but other lines are often better, particularly if you are more skilled than your opponent.
Another example is making too large of raises w/ AA and KK fearing that you may actually have to fold the hand on later streets if you make a smaller raise. If you raise enough (more than 1/8) of your opponents stack, your opponent won't have odds to try to outdraw you. Why are we avoiding tough decisions? That's supposed to be fun and profitable right?
So you make the big raise and your opponent alls preflop and pushes on the flop into you. You instantly call, even though deep down you know you're clearly behind, and later, pat yourself on the back for making a +EV long run play. Where if you had thought about the flop and been able to fold, the Aces situation woulda been a gazillion times more +EV. It's embarrasing that that has been my preflop thought process with AA and KK in some hands.
Here are two examples from NL tournaments. The first I don't remember all the details, but was the hand from this year's WSOP ME. An unknown player makes a standard raise with QQ and Phil Hellmuth calls his raise either in the blind or he had limped in, either way he is out of position. The flop comes AJx and the unknown gets sizeable bets in on every street and beats Phil's J-10.
The second hand is a hand played by Michael Gracz against Shaniac at a WSOP final table this year.
Shaniac raises in EP with KJs, Michael Gracz calls the reasonable raise in the bb with A-10o. Flop 862. Check, check. Turn rag. Check, Shaniac announces all in for about 1.25x the pot, Gracz deliberates calls.
While I think both plays are debateable (though correct IMO), they show the willingness to make difficult decisions and act on them. In the QQ hand against Hellmuth it would have been easy to check the turn and call a small river bet from Phil (or more likely, check,check), or even easier to check the river behind.
In the Gracz-Shaniac hand, how many players are even calling and EP raise from a tight player with A-10o, (eventhough its probably correct - based on that particular tourney situation). It would be very easy to shy away with that hand, eventhough its probably correct to play it.
Obviously the turn call is read dependent, but are you willing to go broke with Ace high on tv at a final table in that spot. I'm pretty sure, I'd fold eventhough I'd want to call. This my friends is a very bad disease if you are looking to reach the pinnacle of the poker world.