Just Poker Talk

• Global Poker Strategic Thinking Societies (GPSTS)

I previously posted about GPSTS at Harvard Law School. GPSTS is the brainchild of Law Professor Charles Nesson and was developed in August of 2007. GPSTS is designed to promote Poker Strategy as a vehicle for learning. Poker clubs are being formed at six other universities with plans for competition within Collegiate Conferences and a National Tournament next year.  Charles Nesson, who has been a tenured member of the Harvard Faculty for over 40 years, had this to say:

“Poker teaches many lessons that are transferable to the challenges of life, including strategic understanding of risk, resource management and self control, When to hold’em, when to fold ‘em, as the song says”.  Source

Formal acknowledgement of GPSTS at Harvard Law School was achieved on October 1st, 2007. To date 62 students have joined GPSTS. Other Universities that have founded GPSTS chapters include USC, UCLA, Stanford, Penn State, Brown, Tufts and Boston University.

Your ‘Dead Money’ blogger knows that if GPSTS was available so many years ago when I was of University age I would have joined. In my previous post I tried a little humor about the NCAA Tournament for Poker and the ‘Poker Tonight’ each night on ESPN. But after more investigation about GPSTS, it is not something to be made light of. Anything that can increase the intelligence of the Universities students has to be a good thing. And if along the way you participate in some Poker than it is all good. Also I think I would have done much better with those Story problems if they involved Poker and whether to call or fold instead of the trains.

Click the Lions Banner or =====> Detroit Lions to go to my other blog.

Your ‘Dead Money’ blogger Michael and how he looked when he got accepted to Harvard Law School to enroll in Poker Strategy.

Feel free to add any Poker related comments, they are welcome always.

Harvard Law School, GPSTS, Charles Nesson,

• Poker Calculators
  • Texas Hold ‘Em
  • Omaha

• Poker Podcasts

• Poker Forums

• WSOP 2007 Main Event Hevad Khan on ESPN

Watching the ESPN broadcast of the WSOP 2007 Main Event over the last few weeks I have noticed a few things:

1. ESPN has not showed much bad behavior that was so prevalent on the broadcasts last year. Maybe that means there wasn’t as much such behavior.
2. Lots of the Hollywood crowd made it a long way in the Main Event.
3. Norman Chad is as funny as ever to Your ‘Dead Money’ blogger.
4. Lots of recognized Poker ‘names’ made very long runs in the Main Event.
5. Hevad ‘Rain’ Khan got way too much ESPN time.

Yes, Hevad Khan did finish 6th in the Main Event and won almost $1,000,000 in prize money. So he deserved a lot of ESPN air time finishing that well in the WSOP Main Event. If what you read on the Internet is even partially accurate, he is an outstanding Online Poker player. Just like Humberto Brenes with the Shark, Hevad Khan with the screams and dancing around and fist pumps is an act I only needed to see once. I would much rather see more hands shown on the ESPN broadcasts instead of the ‘Act’ that Hevad Khan puts on seemingly every time he wins a hand. I understand getting excited when you win a hand especially as the Main Event was getting near the Final Table. But Khan was doing this ‘Act’ as early as day 3 on the ESPN broadcasts. I have tried to figure out what this did for Khan. Did it help him play better? Did it put other players on Tilt? Did it make other players try to take him out with marginal hands just to get some peace and quiet? I have a hard time believing that he puts on this act in his home games. I guess I am left with, it is Khan that is on Tilt, maybe not the Poker Tilt but some type of Tilt for the 30 to 45 seconds the act lasts. I do have to give Khan credit for consistency though, he did go into the act everytime. In this earlier post I discussed some of the behaviors that take the fun out of poker for me. I will have to go back and update the post to include Shark and ‘Rain’.

Click the Lions Banner or =====> Detroit Lions to go to my other blog.

Your ‘Dead Money’ blogger Michael probably will never be in a poker game with either the Shark or ‘Rain’ but you never know I might find myself contributing to their chip-stack and having to put up with their shtick.

Feel free to add any Poker related comments, they are welcome always.

WSOP, WSOP Main Event, Hevad Khan, Humberto Brenes,

• Poker Calculators
  • Texas Hold ‘Em
  • Omaha

• Poker Podcasts

• Poker Forums

• Beware the Garbage Ace - PokerPro Magazine

This story gives excellent views on the ‘Perils of Ace Rag’. Sam O’Connor wrote the story and goes through different scenarios on playing Hold ‘Em with an Ace and another hold card that he describes as garbarge. Your ‘Dead Money’ blogger plays with a friend that plays every hand when either of his Hold cards is an Ace. Everybody that plays with him knows their big pocket pair is no good as soon as an Ace hits the board, but conversely if they have a Big Ace they know they will probably get a lot of his chips.

Sam talks about:

• What if we Play the Garbage Ace?
• When the hand is checked around
• Position Play
• Should we ever Play the Garbage Ace

Here is the link for the complete story:

you might see yourself in some of the cases he describes. I know I did.

Sam had a quote in the story that is very true:

The Ace-Junk Hand Is Intended Mostly for the Inexperienced Player So He can Lose His Stack to Us

Feel free to add any Poker related comments, they are welcome always.

Poker, Hold ‘Em, PokerPro Magazine, Sam O’Connor,

• Poker Calculators
  • Texas Hold ‘Em
  • Omaha

• Poker Podcasts

• Poker Forums

• The Stages of a Poker Player - Ray Zee

Two Plus Two Internet Magazine reprinted this story from author Ray Zee in the August issue. Ray originally authored the story in 2001 before the massive Poker boon. He had many requests to re-print the story and the requesters indicated how much the article had helped their Poker game.
The beginning of the story discusses how important it is to pay attention to the game. No headphones because those make you less attentive to the surroundings. Ray also indicates how he went through all the stages in his Poker career. Ray talks about how important each action in the hand is as it has a direct effect on whether you win or lose the hand and ultimately whether you are a profitable Poker Player. Ray indicates how it is paramount to get or save a bet during the hand. Even now 6 years after originally writing the story he still sees players just calling or checking and missing bets. Click ====> here to read the article.

Stages of a Poker Player

• Total Beginner

Plays too many hands and too loosely, raises foolishly, calls when they should raise. Takes these players a while to learn Poker is more than catching cards.

• Tight Player

Almost all successful Poker Players go through this stage. These players win a fair amount of time due only to their tight play and bad opponents. It is in this stage that the emerging good Poker Player learns that making good plays adds to the profits. Bluffs, speculative raises and some experiments gets the Tight Player headed to the next stage.

• Advanced Stage

Player wins more often, pushes marginal hands and every hand looks like it has value. The Tight Player is long gone. Winning the pots are easy with skillful manipulation. Ray indicates here the player has taken a big step back and long leap forwards at the same time.  The advanced stage, if the player plays too loose, might cause the player to lose his bankroll and never recover. But if the player gets through this stage successfully they move on to the next and final stage.

• Expert Stage

Incorporates tight play with imagination win pots without the best hand. The player has become tight and aggressive. Bluffs, Semi Bluffs and Raises to knock out better hands, good calls at the end are traits shown in this stage that were missing in previous stages.

Ray ends the article by letting the reader know that very few players achieve the Expert level and it takes much work.

Your ‘Dead Money’ blogger can only be classified as a Total Beginner. Take a look at the story and see what you think. I know I will have to get to work to move up from ‘Dead Money’ to Donkey as the summer ends and Poker Tournaments get back on the front burner.

Feel free to add any Poker related comments, they are welcome always.

Poker, Two Plus Two Internet Magazine, Stages of a Poker Player,

• Poker Calculators
  • Texas Hold ‘Em
  • Omaha

• Poker Podcasts

• Poker Forums

• Sports Podcasts
  • Suicide Fan Podcast for the Die Hard Sports Fan

• PokerStars Guide to Bluffs and Tells

Here is a PokerTubevideo with PokerStars spokesmen Chris Moneymaker, Greg Raymer and Joe Hachem. The video in 7 minutes tries to give the basic information about Bluffs and Tells. All 3 have make good points. Raymer discusses how the Bluff has to tell a story that is believable. For example you can’t begin a hand like you have Pocket Aces and when 3 suited cards come on the board all of a sudden bet like you hit a flush. Of course we have all played against somebody that tries to pull that off. Raymer goes on to talk about observing how players bet when they have a hand or when they are bluffing. Hachem talks about since he won the Main Event he isn’t able to bluff much anymore because he always gets called. Moneymaker and Raymer agree that they are no longer able to bluff much.

• Your ‘Dead Money’ blogger Michael doesn’t bluff because he always gives away his bluffs as he gives away all his chips.

Feel free to add any Poker related comments, they are welcome always.

Poker, PokerStars, Chris Moneymaker, Greg Raymer, Joe Hachem, PokerTube,

• Poker Calculators
  • Texas Hold ‘Em
  • Omaha

• Poker Podcasts

• Poker Forums

• Sports Podcasts
  • Suicide Fan Podcast for the Die Hard Sports Fan

Do Poker Rushes Exist?

had a story by Arthur Reber Playing the Rush recently that your ‘Dead Money’ blogger not only found fascinating but made me really get lost in this whole ‘Rushes’ question and if they really exist.

Since I started playing poker I have always believed in the Rush concept. You know what I mean. You win a couple hands and all of sudden you are not mucking that 7-2 off suit you were just dealt and you hit a set of ducks. I know I have fell into that situation often and I always thought it got me some chips. Now after reading Arthur’s story I am not so sure about the Rush. 

Arthur makes to me very convincing points that the concept of a Rush is wrong mathematically. That the Rush is more a outgrowth of your own play improving when you win some hands and of other players at the table believing you are on a Rush and staying out of your way.

He made a comparison to athletes that seem to hit every shot or go on a tear at the plate. He discussed the ‘Hot Hand’ concept of a coach that feeds a shooter who seems to hit every shot. Also he mentioned the manager that adjusts the lineup to get the hot bat higher in the lineup so they might get more at bats.

Arthur talked about three reasons why a player would play a Rush.

1. Playing my rush because I’m ‘running good’

He details that most players believe this is accurate but they are wrong. He explains that what you are really saying is:

‘that you believe what happened in the past will continue into the future’

Mathematically this is wrong as each hand is independent of earlier hands Arthur explains.

Arthur wraps up the 1st reason by saying:

‘There is no increased likelihood of winning the next hand because you’ve been running good - just like there is no increased likelihood of losing the next hand if you’ve been running bad.

Arthur discusses the 2nd reason players play rushes.

2. Playing my Rush because I’m sharper when I’m winning

Arthur tells us that this reason is closer to a good reason. He lets us know that most players play better when winning. Winning increases confidence and aggressiveness.

So there is some reason to play a rush if your game is sharper than usual when you do. ‘this argument has nothing to do with being on a rush, if you are like most recreational players, your game is better when you are winning’

Arthur moves on to the 3rd reason players play rushes.

3. Playing my Rush because I can dominate the table.

Arthur tells us that this reason is the one that makes the most sense.

The key is that most players believe that rushes are real, that they will continue and that the ‘rusher’ is going to ride his wave of good fortune as long as he can. When someone goes on a serious rush a chorus of refrains will be heard from others at the table. ‘Man, you’re really on a roll no way am I playing a hand against you’ or ‘I am just going to stay out of your way for a while’

Essentially players will fear the ‘Rush’ and not be playing optimal poker and you can take advantage of it. But it is not because of the ‘Rush’.

Arthur ends the Rush discussion by telling of a study psychologist Amos Tversky did some years ago. Tversky was trying to analyze the ‘Hot Hand’ theory by charting every shot several basketball players took over a full season. He found little evidence of the ‘Hot Hand’ theory.

Players got hot about as often as a random number generator got hot. If a player shoots about 50% overall, we would expect to see a run of shots made and missed - and we can calculate just how many runs we ought to see and how long the runs should be.

The source for all the quotes in this blog is: Playing the Rush

The study by Tversky was really fascinating to me because it took your ‘Dead Money’ blogger back to his childhood when ‘Grandpa Joe’ introduced me to Lifetime averages. I was beside myself with worry when one of the veterans on my favorite Major League Baseball team was only barely hitting above the ‘Mendoza’ line about 2 weeks into the season one year. ‘Grandpa Joe’ showed me the Lifetime Average on the back of the player’s baseball card and told me that by the end of the season the player would hit pretty close to his Lifetime Average. Sure enough the player did and I remembered that reading Arthur’s discussion of the ‘Hot Hand’ study by Amos Tversky.
Sadly, it also reminded your ‘Dead Money’ blogger that he will always be the ‘Dead Money’ at the poker table because my ‘Lifetime Average’ is ‘Dead Money’.

Feel free to add any Poker related comments, they are welcome always.

Poker, Just Poker Talk, Poker Rushes, Arthur Reber, Amos Tversky,

• Poker Calculators
  • Texas Hold ‘Em
  • Omaha

• Poker Podcasts

• Poker Forums

• Sports Podcasts
  • Suicide Fan Podcast for the Die Hard Sports Fan

If you haven’t already voted in the Just Poker Talk Pocket Aces poll just click and vote. 

• Why show your Hole Cards?

Is there any reason to ever show your hole cards if you win the pot because nobody calls your bet?

• Show the big bluff to the hated opponent?
• Mis-direct so they think they know your tendencies, then play differently?
• Show the nuts?
• Show you were’nt just stealing?

In your ‘Dead Money’ bloggers poker playing time, I have heard all of the above as a reason to show hole cards. In fact I even play with one close friend who shows his hole cards everytime. If you are like your ‘Dead Money’ blogger, you never show your hole cards. I developed this philosophy a long time ago when I was at a final table of a tournament I eventually ended up winning. Two hands in particular the watchers of the final table saw my hole cards. I instantly regretted that I had let them see the pockets.

1. I decided to bluff, trying to steal, with a pretty weak hand from the button and bet enough to put both blinds All-In. The reaction behind me, by somebody that had seen my hole cards, was seen by the big blind who called with a hand that he should not have called with, something like J-4 off. Of course he had my weak hand dominated and doubled up.
2. Down to heads up and my opponent is all in pre-flop and my read on him, after playing him for a while, was he had a big Ace at least. I peeked at my cards and saw KQ suited. At the time we were pretty close in chips and I decided to muck my cards. The viewers behind me, who had been imbibing somewhat heavily, yelled ‘I can’t believe you didn’t call’.

• Reasons to not Show them 
  • Consider that in Poker one of the most important skills to possess is to be able to ‘read’ other players. If players often show their hole cards they are providing valuable information to their opponents that assists them with their reading skills. Do you really want to help them ‘Put you on a hand’?
  • When you show that bluff to the hated opponent you think you are putting them on ‘Tilt’. Maybe your ‘Tells’ with that big bluff might hurt you later on. Not necessarily with the hated opponent but with other observant players at the table. 
  • That mis-direction rarely works, especially in tournaments because you are not at a table with the same players long enough for it to be effective. Also good players see right through this ploy.
  • How you play should be guarded like a state secret and should not be provided to anybody that doesn’t pay for it. The good players don’t need any free help in reading you.

Being your ‘Dead Money’ blogger, I can’t afford to provide this valuable information (my hole cards) when I don’t have to. I don’t want my opponents to know that I sometimes 3 - bet with 9-4 offsuit or that I  just smooth called with ‘Big Slick’. Plus the additional ‘embarassment factor’ of ‘did he really play that’? When I play a hand I have no business playing.  Nope my cards always go into the muck when I bet and nobody calls. The hole cards also go into the muck in the hopefully rare times I get into a showdown and an opponent shows a hand that I can’t beat. Even when I have that ‘monster’ that suffered a ‘bad beat’ on the river.

Ok, so possibly some of you might disagree with your ‘Dead Money’ blogger, so please vote in the poll and don’t hesitate to blast my poker views with a comment.

Hole Cards, Poker, Just Poker Talk,

• Poker Podcasts

• Poker Forums

If you haven’t already done so please go to this Just Poker Talk post and select your favorite players to watch on Televised Poker.

• How to Play Pocket Rockets in Hold ‘Em

The current issue of magazine had a article by Katie Lindsay titled ‘Aces: A Pocketful of Trouble’ and queried the Top Pros on  ’How to Play Pocket Aces’

I picked a few of pro’s responses and included them here for your review. I also added a poll at the end of this post asking how you most often play Pocket Rockets.

• Daniel Negreanu
  

  I say that you get them so rarely that I’m OK with gambling with them. When I say gamble, I mean setting traps before the flop by not re-raising in spots where some players would go all in. source When you gamble with aces like that you tend to have a lot more difficult decisions than you would if you just go all in before the flop.

• Clonie Gowen  
  

  I think you should always bring them in for a raise because if you don’t, then you are going to either win a very small pot or lose a big one because someone could flop two small pair and you are just not going to be able to get away from it. You just have to know what types of hands your opponents could be playing. source

• Huck Seed
  

  I don’t like to get too much money in with aces when the blinds are small. Aces are hard to play because usually you just end up with aces. When the river comes there is always straights and flushes, two pair, a lot of possibilities. If someone makes a big bet on the river, you are in a tough spot with aces. I don’t really like to push them for value that much. Sometimes I will limp in early position and hope that someone will raise so that I can re-raise and get some extra money in there. source 

• Mike Sexton
  

  The most famous quote about aces comes from Stu Ungar. He said, “All aces are good for is to win a small pot or lose a big one.� It is so true because it is very difficult to get away from two aces when you raise before the flop and someone calls you. It doesn’t matter what comes out, even if it is a scary flop, most people can’t lay down two aces after the flop. It is tough to do, it’s not easy and that’s the problem with two aces – you can’t get away from them. source I come in for three or four times the blind. I don’t slow-play them; I raise it and hope someone comes over the top of me.

• Chip Jett
  

  I like to play them very fast; I don’t like to get tricky with them. I just try to win a small pot, not lose a big one. source

• Scott Fischman 
  

  Generally, I never slow-play them, and if I get a lot of callers I am ready to fold them. I am not committed – it is one pair. I am definitely of the mindset that aces is one pair and if I am willing to go all in and someone is willing to call, that means that he has more than one pair and I am in trouble. Basically, I like to keep the pot small. I like to make the pot big when I have better than one pair. source

• Your ‘Dead Money’blogger likes to limp from early position, figuring some maniac behind me will raise and I can re-raise them. From Late position and a Family pot, I prefer to make a pot size raise. If only 1 or 2 other callers I will most of the time just call unless I am short stacked and then it is All-In. All things being equal I will certainly put in the 3 to 5 times the big blind raise from middle or late position.
• So essentially it all depends on position, # of players and type of players yet to act, stack size, blind size, table image, etc….. 
• Please take a minute and select how you most often play Pocket Aces pre-flop in Hold ‘Em.

Hold ‘Em, Pocket Aces, Pocket Rockets, Poker Pro Magazine, Katie Lindsay, Daniel Negreanu, Clonie Gowen,  Huck Seed, Mike Sexton, Chip Jett, Scott Fischman 

• Poker Podcasts

• Poker Forums

• Your Just Poker Talk blogger found the Podcasts and Forums below the most informative and interesting to frequent. I will have these sites at the bottom of all my future posts.

• Poker Podcasts

• Poker Forums

Poker Podcasts, Poker Forums, Poker 

• Just in case you are playing in the WSOP Main Event starting Friday, here are odds if you are All In preflop for many of the Races you might face.

Pocket Pair vs Lower Pair                     Dominating             
82%             71%    

Pocket Pair vs Overcards                    Suited Over vs    Pair
55%            34%      

Pocket Pair vs 1 Over                          1 Over vs Suited Connector
69%            52%    

Pocket Pair vs Low Connect                 1 Over vs Unsuited Connect
81%             56%   

Pocket Pair vs Low S Connect               2 Over vs Unders
77%             68%    

Pocket Pair vs High S Connect              Pair vs Unders
50%            89%     

2 Overs vs Suited Connectors         Mixed: Hi-Con vs Low not Con
58%            64%      

2 Overs vs Unsuited Connect         Mixed: Hi not Con vs Low-Con
62%      58%       

So use this as your cheat sheet and you will know what your odds are when the cards are turned over. Hopefully you will have the best hand when the chips go All In. This chart was in Poker Pro Magazine July Issue.

WSOP, WSOP Main Event, Races, Poker, Hold ‘Em

Whenever I come upon a Daniel Negreanu article, I always take a lot of interest in reading it. And I also always hope to gain some knowledge to improve my game, which I admit needs improvement, despite my being a winning player. I’m under the impression that most players can be a winning player, especially at the lower limits, but it takes a lot more skill to be a true winning player, someone that can take on the best and come out ahead in the long-run. Negreanu has an article from the Falls Church News-Press about betting and check-raising.

The topic actually goes well with my last post about playing out of position, because that certainly effects when you want to bet or check-raise. In fact one of the criteria that Negreanu suggests that a player take into account, is table position. Here is what he had to say on that:

From Falls Church News-Press:

Table Position and the Number of Players in the Pot

This is an extremely important. Obviously, the more players there are to act behind you, the more likely it is that one of them will bet. So, if you’re in the small blind with a powerful hand, and there are five players behind, checking is a smart move. One of those players will likely take a stab at the pot; then you can pounce with a raise.

However, if you have that same hand but are the second to last player to act, going for a check-raise would be extremely risky. You’d be counting on the last player to bet. If he doesn’t, all of your opponents get a free shot to beat you on the next card.

This is solid advice, which I should have listened to when I was playing last week. Granted, Negreanu is only detail a situation when the player has a strong hand, rather than nothing. Mainly, I was the guy that Negreanu is referring to who will take a stab at the pot. And sure enough I got raised quite a few times last week.

You can read the rest of the article at Falls Church News-Press. The advice is solid. The hard part is implementing those ideas during game situations.

Negreanu, bet, check-raise, poker

Last week was rough in terms of poker. I took two big losing session before quitting for the week. One of the problems I encountered was that I neglected the importance of position.

My tilt didn’t help matters either. I wasn’t thinking at all. I mean I was thinking, but not thinking thoroughly. I was playing with a one tract mind. My only goal was to win back what I’d lost. Basically I wanted to continue playing bad, even worse poker, to recoup the money I’d lost by playing bad in the first place.

Position is important in poker and allows a player to outmaneuver one’s opponent without a hand in some cases, depending on one’s read. That is, of course, if one has position on their opponent, if one acts from a later position than their opponents. Acting later allows one to get a better read on their opponent, while, on the other hand, acting earlier, one has less information to work with, and it is not wise to bluff much from early position or even bet with a marginal hand.

Bluffing out of position was what I did a lot of last week. I didn’t even pay attention to the cards on the flop, if they made logical sense; I just bet the pot whenever I was playing three handed or less. My success rate was not high, and I ended up getting called every time.

I’m not saying that bluffing out of position in a three handed hand is negative EV all the time. It is also important to take into account an opponent’s aggressiveness. Passive players fold to big bets pretty often. Aggressive players may call with any pair or a draw. And even more daring players may call with nothing, hoping to catch a hand or to bluff on the turn if a favorable card comes up.

Sometimes, things just aren’t going right and everyone is hitting against you every hand. You should keep in mind that you can’t get passive and start checking in hopes that everyone will do the same. But you also shouldn’t be aggressive just to be aggressive, ie. don’t bluff out of position, especially when it’s not logical to do so.

Previous Poker Tips:
Poker Tip #6: Cheaper is not Alway Better or Worse Depending on how You Look at it
Poker Tip #5: Flash Back to the Schoolyard Dynamic
Poker Tip #4: The Lay Down
Poker Tip #3: Faith in the Rush

poker, strategy, position, tilt

It’s been a while since my last poker tip; I just haven’t had time to play poker and, in turn, can’t learn anything new from mistakes or what not. In the past month I’ve played one session of NL Hold’em and two $5 dollar SNG’s, making about $60 in three hours of play, so I’m anxious to play more, in hopes that I’m really starting to understand the game, however, in all likelihood, I’m in the midst of a hot streak and should be playing it out instead of wasting my good fortune, but sometimes there are more important things than poker.

What I’ve noticed in the two $5 dollar SNG’s that I played last month is the surprising passiveness of the players compared to the $3 SNG’s that I occasionally played at Doyle’s Room. Maybe the passiveness has to do with the culture at Full Tilt Poker, I’m not sure, but what I do know is that these $5 SNG’s can be lucrative if the passiveness of the players is a norm. I’d also like to say that the blind structure at Full Tilt Poker is the best I’ve come across during my migrations to and from various poker sites.

Looking at the $3 SNG’s at Doyle’s Room, the players call any raise no matter what the size of the bet, especially in the early rounds. At the same time these are not exactly maniac tables, like you’d find at the $1 and below SNG’s; the players seem to last longer and by the time most of the players are eliminated, I’ll usually be short-stacked and forced to go all-in with less than stellar holdings. Then all I can do is hope and pray that I catch a good hand.

Compare this to the $5 SNG’s at Full Tilt, where everyone folds to preflop raises and, if they do call, will fold to a continuation bet on the flop. It’s easy to steal blinds and bluff players out of pots. This keeps my stack at a decent amount until I hit a hand. The other positive that comes out of this is that I’m able to withstand a bad beat and take gambles on coin flip situations. None of this was possible at Doyle’s Room, mostly because I could only win with a good hand.

I’m aware at that I’ve only played two $5 SNG’s so far. That is hardly enough data to judge if this is true, and I will write a follow up post once I play more poker again. I could very well lose the next three I play and make this all moot. But logically it makes sense that a $5 SNG would be easier and less luck oriented than a $3 SNG, since players at the upper micro-limits (25NL and 50NL) play tighter, but are not necessarily good players on account that many of them are tight-passive rather than tight-aggressive. Granted this differs depending on the poker room, but my suggestion is to avoid the lower level SNGs; they’re a crapshoot and not a good way to improve your SNG play.

Previous Poker Tips:
Poker Tip #5: Flash Back to the Schoolyard Dynamic
Poker Tip #4: The Lay Down
Poker Tip #3: Faith in the Rush
Poker Tip #2: Check Raise

poker, strategy, SNG, Full Tilt Poker

Daniel Negreanu’s most impressive skill, at least to me, is his ability to read other players. It amazes me how close he is when calls out what his opponent may have. Reading players is a difficult skill to learn and requires astute observation. Tools like Poker Tracker and HUDS may help with reads, but it can’t replace your own observations.

The most difficult part about observation is knowing what to look for and what to disregard. There are so many things happening at once that it’s hard to notice everything, let alone find a tell or a betting pattern. More often than not, making a conscious effort to observe is a futile exercise. It’s almost better to just let the observations come to you, however this only works if you know what to look for.

Daniel Negreanu has an article in the Falls Church News-Press on how to spot a bluff. He offers five things to look for when deciding whether an opponent is bluffing or not. You can read the article here.

Daniel Negreanu, bluffing, poker, how to spot a bluff, poker strategy, poker tips

I’m not a much of a tournament player. I used to play the $1000 free rolls at Royal Vegas Poker everyday. It was easy to cash in those tournaments since 80 spots were paid and if you played the late night tournaments there’d be five to six hundred entrants, half of whom would be eliminated in the first twenty minutes. Sometimes ghost players would make it into the money without playing a single hand. My best finishes were 2nd and 3rd, along with a handful of top ten finishes. With that said, free roll strategy differs from real money tournament strategy.

I haven’t had much success in the real money tournaments, though I did win a 60 cent tournament a few months ago. Part of my lack of success is that I just don’t play many. I’m afraid to make the investment and take the bumps needed to improve and develop a winning strategy. The losing wouldn’t discourage me. It’s more that I’m afraid to lose money, so I stick with my comfort zone, which is 25NL ring games.

Lately, I’ve been trying to break out of that habit, since I know that I have to take a risk to improve, and so far it has paid off, my endeavor into 50NL and 100NL ring games. At first I lost $150 but then I adjusted, calmed down, and started winning. If my winning will last, I’m not sure, but from now on I’m making an effort to push myself. Winning can come later. And hopefully pay dividends.

I’m contemplating entering more tournaments, that after I figure out how to enter tournaments at FTP. Also I probably won’t be playing for a few more weeks because I’m kind of busy with other projects right now. So for now I plan to read up on tournament strategy. I’m strongly thinking about purchasing Harrington’s books, since many people have told me that it’s a great read in terms of strategy.

Gambling911.com has an article on multi-table poker tournaments, which you can read here. It’s geared towards beginners, people who haven’t played many poker tournaments. Intermediate and experienced players will roll their eyes or scoff at the tips. Some of the strategy presented is also debatable. But for beginners I think the tips are good to keep in mind. I’m certainly taking the advice to heart. It may be completely wrong or partially right. It doesn’t matter. I’m here to listen and learn. I will discard faulty strategies when necessary, but not without giving them a chance.

poker, mult-table tournament, Full Tilt Poker, strategy