Painless poker

[Tommy Angelo]

Would you rather miss a bet or a step?

I've had about 40 sessions in a row now without any of them starting out with that yucky feeling I've tried so hard to eliminate from my life. It's a realization that hits me when I start a session at my best. It comes right away, after just one or two preflop folds, and it hits hardest if one of those is a borderline yet routine fold. I realize that, despite what I had tried to convince myself of in the car on the way home, I realize undeniably that I had been leaking at the end of the prior session.

I might never feel that feeling again if I keep going how I'm going. But hey, you never can know for sure when you’ve smoked or tilted for the last time. And so what. That’s future stuff, non-existent stuff.

I’ve been dismantling my opponents most recently by playing and thinking efficiently to the end, as in this hand from five-hours into a $15-30 session at AJ’s:

Full game. I had AQ UTG. I raised and everyone folded to the button. He made it three bets. Both blinds folded and it was back to me. I called and it was headsup. The flop came A-J-9 rainbow. I checked, he bet, I called. The turn was an 8. I checked, he bet, I called. The river was a blank. I checked, he bet, I folded.

Breakdown:

Preflop when it was back to me: His range was pocket pairs and big aces. He would muck KQ. He’d hem haw a little. But he’d muck it.

Flop check: This was essentially a dark check except that I waited for the flop to get flopped.

Flop call: I’m a contender.

Turn check: I was bearing down on the inside of his head.

His turn bet: No read yet.

My turn call: He’s got me. Way got me. Prepare now to muck after a river miss.

My river check: Maybe just maybe I was wrong and I have the best hand. Go to school. Watch him now. Feel him now.

His river bet: He for sure wants me to call.

My river fold: Neener neener.

I played an uneventful round after that hand and went home, unafraid yet again of any yucky realizations at the start of the next session. Poker doesn’t have to hurt.


Tommy

[mike l.]

"His river bet: He for sure wants me to call."

this concept is very powerful. when thinking about whether to call or not ask yourself: "did this opponent make that bet (or raise) because they want me to call or they want me to fold?" it's so simple, but a very helpful way to think about it.

[DiamondDave]

If there is no rake, poker is a zero-sum game.

If your opponent doesn't like what you did, it must have been a good play.

[stripsqueez]

[ QUOTE ]
Poker doesn’t have to hurt

[/ QUOTE ]

not too sure if this is meant seriously or tongue in cheek - its wrong - poker does have to hurt

not too sure if i got all of this post - if i did then i want the i told you so rights when it hurts within a handful of sessions of posting this

like most things any belief that you have mastered what is going on precedes failure

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[King Yao]

I think this decision should be based on what he would do with ATs.

Here's what I came up with:
Hand / Combinations / Usable combinations that he would 3 bet with and continue to bet til the river:
AA 1 / 1
KK 6 / 0
QQ 3 / 0
JJ 3 / 3
AK 8 / 8
AQ 4 / 4
AJ 4 / 4
AT 8 / ?
TT 6 / 0
99 3 / 3

The "possible combination of hands that he would 3 bet and keep playing the same way" column, used information gathered from your own hand (You have AQ, which reduces his chances of having AQ himself), also having AJ on the board reduces his chances of having AJ given that he would have played AQ, AK, AJ the same way (that is, keep betting through the river). I counted KK and QQ as zero because it is clear you highly doubt he would keep betting all the way through with an Ace on board. I put in a ? for the number of times that he would bet the way he did with AT, even though there are 8 possible combinations for this hand, he may not have been as aggressive with this hand as with AJ, AQ, etc. Only you can fill in the details. How often would he play it this way (given your check/calling status as well) with AT?

Taking out AT for now, you will lose to AA (1), JJ (3), AK (8), AJ (4) and 99 (3) for a total of 19 combinations. AQ you will tie 4 combinations.

There is 6.75 Big Bets in the pot.
if there is no way he would play the hand the way he did with AT, then you lose 1 BB 19 times (if you call) and win 3.375 BB 4 times when you tie with AQ, and you expect to lose .24 BB when you make the call (-1 x 19/23) + (3.375 x 4/23) in that case, its a good fold.

but what if he would have played AT suited with a three bet and kept on betting. lets count that as 2 combinations (since there are two other aces left, there are only two other ATs possible combinations left) and see the value:

ATs value = 2/25 x 6.75
AQ value = 4/25 x 3.375
losing hand value = 19/25 x -1

Net value +0.32 BB.
Now its definitely worth a call if he would play the hand the same way with ATs.

if there is any chance he plays it that way with ATo, then it just becomes even more profitable to call.

so it all hinges on what he does with ATs

[Mikey]

I don't think Tommy ever puts odds or probabilities in his posts, for him it is intuition, its patterns, its feel, its gut.

He knew he was beat.
Hence the fold on the river.

That's what makes Tommy, Tommy.

[DeucesUp]

King Yao, this is how I'd look at the hand too, but I think you missed the point of Tommy's post. I think that even if Tommy knew his opponent would play AT this way, heck even if he knew his opponent would push KK and QQ the same way, he knew that ON THIS PARTICULAR HAND that his opponent was not holding one of these hands no matter what the math says.

He might even go so far as to say his opponent wasn't holding AK and that he had a minimum of AJ but more likely a set because "He for sure wants me to call". If I'm holding AK I'm not entirely certain I want a river call for fear of chopping with another AK or losing to AJ or J9s (surely any better hand would've raised somewhere).

I get these feelings sometimes. I never listen to them. That's one of the many reasons Tommy is a far far superior player.

[Uston]

Yeah, I think Tommy does a very good job of hiding the fact that he's good with numbers. You, on the other hand, do not do a very good job of hiding the fact that you're not.

[SoBeDude]

I don't get how...

My turn call: He’s got me. Way got me. Prepare now to muck after a river miss.

...is a good call to try to spike a 3 outer.

There are only 5.25 BBs in the pot when he bets the turn. And it seems clear you will only be able to extract exactly one bet on the river from him if you do hit. (I doubt he'd call your river check-raise)

UNLESS...
You KNOW he might play JJ/QQ/KK this way, firing on the turn but would then check-behind on the river with a hand you beat. So you KNOW you're beat when he bets the river, but couldn't know that just because he bet the turn.

But then, if he knows you know that, wouldn't he then bet the river with those hands as well?

-Scott

[King Yao]

"He for sure wants me to call".


if he had AQ would he have "for sure wanted Tommy to call"?

I say YES ... because Tommy hasn't shown any resistance, his opponent has probably put Tommy on AT, KK or QQ...so if his opponent held AQ, he's hoping that Tommy calls, since he has likely put Tommy on a weaker hand

If his opponent had AT and all Tommy did was check/call, check/call .. check, would his opponent bet and want Tommy to call? I say "Yes" because Tommy hasn't shown him any signs that he had AT beat, so his opponent is thinking (albeit incorrectly), "please call, please call with your KK, QQ". But not all opponents are like that. Some would three bet preflop with ATs, others wouldn't. Some would keep betting it til the river in the face of none resistance, others wouldn't. Tommy is obviously very good at identifying what his opponent would or would not do.

just because Tommy may be right that his opponent wants Tommy to call does not mean that his opponent was actually right in thinking that...because the way this hand played out, and the weakness that Tommy showed, it could clearly have given his opponent the feel that he was way ahead, when he may not actually be.

by the way, I've played with Tommy many times before. he's a very good player, I'm not saying he isn't, nor am I saying a fold here is incorrect...all I am saying is that this decision does not have to be an intuition driven only decision. and that it boils down to the simple question of "would he play ATs and AQ the same way as he did?"

of course, even if one can do the math, one is not doing the math like this at the table in the heat of the battle. but it is still useful to think about it after the fact and store the information to help in future battles.