Weatherford (March 29)

With only eight players showing up for my weekly tournament last night the winnings weren't expected to be too great, so losing a  massive chip lead and going out in sixth wasn't too crushing of an experience. Besides, I still profited $120 for the night from the cash game afterward.

Speaking of the cash game, I had one hand I wanted to get down on paper. I don't think I misplayed it or anything like that, except maybe making an overcall at one point, but it was an interesting situation to be in and I question whether I should have gambled a little bit more in this particular situation.

We were playing $1-3 hold'em and there were six of us at the table. I was in the cutoff spot. Everyone limped into a family pot and with 7-5 of spades I saw a flop against five opponents. The pot has $18 in it.

The flop was 2d-3s-4s and it checked around to me. Sometimes I bet these kinds of hands when I have multiple draws and overcards to the board, but with five opponents I elected to check and see if a free card would be available. After checking the button player bet $15. The small and big blinds fold. The under-the-gun player puts in a minimum raise of $15, making it $30. The player on my right folds.

There is now $63 in the pot and it is $30 to call. I obviously don't have the best hand right now, but if I hit a 6 or an ace I am sitting pretty and a spade gives me a mediocre flush (unless it is the 6 of spades, in which case "YAHTZEE!!!"). I probably have to rule out winning if I hit just a five or a seven and I'm probably not good hitting two pair or three fives (since a lone ace would make the straight). Even going runner-runner sevens might not be a good thing as one of the two players I am against could have flopped a set of twos, threes, or fours.

Drawing to a straight flush is always fun, but I don't want to commit everything I have right now to a straight draw I know will be good and a flush draw I can't be too sure is going to hold up. I decided to simply flat call the $30 and see what developed from the button or how the under-the-gun player decided to play the turn. So I call $30 and action moves back to the button.

Well, the fun of a possible straight flush ends when the button re-raises $50 more. And things get even more clear when the under-the-gun player moves all in for $85 total ($35 on top of the $50). So it comes back to me. Let's recap the betting really quick. After the pre-flop limp-fest, we have $18 in the pot. It checks around to the button, who bets $15 (pot is $33). Under-the-gun check-raises to $30 (pot is $63). I call $30 ($93). Button re-raises to $80 ($158). Under-the-gun goes all in for $85 ($243).

It is now $85 to me and I am covered by the button. I had another $150 behind the $85 and was pretty confident I would have to call an all-in from the button if I simply called the $85 before seeing a turn card, much less a river. At this point I am 100% sure I am beat by either a set or a flopped straight (most likely from the under-the-gun player) and the other player (probably the button) either has two pair, a set, a straight, or a better flush draw than me. This is a pretty easy fold at this point, but I know it is going to hurt if I end up folding the winning hand after all is said and done.

After I fold, the button calls the $35 (pot now has $278). He said he was going to move all in had I called. The under-the-gun player shows a set of threes and the button shows queen of spades and four of hearts (not expected). He said he put us both on drawing hands and thought he had the best hand at that point. The turn was the queen of hearts, which created more drama by giving the button more outs, and the river was an inconsequential eight of hearts. I ended up missing all my draws and the set of threes took it down.

I was correct in thinking I needed a straight or flush to win, but I was wrong in thinking my flush might not have been good had I needed it.

Benbrook (March 17)

It's been nearly two weeks since I played poker and I am still haunted by a hand I misplayed at a home game in Benbrook on St. Patrick's Day. This is an example of not paying attention to the amount of money in the pot and only focusing on the opponent's bet size.

It was a $1-3 game and I was the big blind with 7-6 of hearts. I ended up calling a raise of $10 from the button and going against two opponents (the other being the small blind). $30 was in the pot. I was second in chips among the three of us, with the button having about $75-100 less than me and the small blind having about $100 more than me.

The flop came out 8s-5d-2c and it went check, check, and the button bet $20. The small blind called and I passively called with my open-ended straight draw (probably my first mistake for not raising). Pot now had $90.

The turn was the queen of diamonds. Again, the small blind checked and I checked (possibly my second mistake in not leading out). The button bet $50 and the small blind folded. I called (again, another mistake in not raising or folding). Pot now has $190.

The river was the jack of diamonds, making a back-door flush and straight possible. I checked, with the intention to fold my seven-high hand when he checked behind or raise if he put in another bet and try to scare him into thinking I rivered a big hand. He bet $75 and I almost immediately raised it to $175. The biggest mistake of the entire hand was not waiting a little longer to calculate what was in the pot and going all in (which really would have meant I was putting my opponent all in since he had less money than me).

At the time of my raise, I made it the amount I did because I wanted him to think I was making such a small raise because I had a hand I knew to be best and I wanted him to make a crying call, which was reverse psychology because he would know I was doing that and he would make the "correct" play, which was folding and saving $100. He ended up turning his cards over while thinking and showed me A-Q for top pair, top kicker. He took so long that the clock was called by another player at the table. He ended up being counted down to 10 seconds and finally threw in the $100. I didn't even show my hand and said it was a good call.

I am 100% sure that had I put him all in for the additional $75-100 he had behind the $100 raise he would have folded. I didn't take my time and factor in how much was already in the pot after his river bet and my raise. It was only $100 to call and there was $440 in the pot after my raise. There was just too much money out there to fold for $100. However, if I had gone all in, that would have resulted in him having to call $175-200 to win $515-540. That is a little tougher to do, especially considering he was having such a hard time calling for such a little wager.

I wanted to type this out as a lesson to myself that I need to take a little bit longer before making my bets to actually calculate what is already in the pot and how much my bet is in proportion to the pot. It is also a lesson in controlling my emotions after a big loss because this hand sent me into a downward spiral of depression that resulted in only winning $65 for the evening, which I was up about $450 prior to this hand.

WinStar (March 14)

With the reignited flame of poker in my life thanks to a quick start in profits in 2018, I made a trip to WinStar last night. I didn't get many great hands to start. The best I had was kings that nearly doubled me up when a guy hit top pair on the flop and a flush draw. He missed the flush and didn't improve on the pair of jacks.

The best hand of the night for me was when I held A-4 of diamonds and called a guy down with just the pair of aces on the flop. He raised pre-flop and bet every street, but I kept hanging with him. Normally that isn't the best strategy and I would be compared to a call station, however, the hands I had seen my opponent play before had been aggressive with weak holdings and I believed my pair of aces was the best. I ended up winning about $140 on that hand alone when I called his pre-flop raise, flop bet of $20, turn bet of $35, and river bet of something like $80. I never even asked for a count when he put the tall column of chips in the middle on the river. I simply said call, pushed a similar stack to the middle and figured if I had misread the hand I would complete the bet. Thankfully my read was correct and I simply pulled back both columns of chips and started stacking the other chips the dealer pushed my way.

In the past my trips to WinStar have not been very profitable, but since I've started taking poker more seriously and listening to strategy podcasts, my game has improved considerably. I hope this trend continues and I keep growing my bankroll to meet the yearly goals I've set for myself.

2017 Year-End Weatherford Tournament And 2018 Goals

Last month I took part in my year-end Weatherford Tournament Series of Poker event. Following my 2016 play I qualified with 4,150 points, needing 3,000 to get a seat in the tournament, and this was good enough to be 12 out of 18 players. This year my point value (which is also your chip value) increased to 6,800 and I was starting third in chips out fo 22 players.

Despite starting with below the average chip count last year, I was able to make the final table and finished ninth. This year wasn't much better despite the higher starting chip stack. I ended up in 8th place.

Ramping up toward this tournament I had been eager to learn new strategies and implement more aggressive tendencies in recent games, but I told myself to play my normal game as it usually gets me  deep into tournaments. Although, the downside to my normal style of play is that I am struggling with a short stack near the end and am hardly ever one of the chip leaders. I had hoped with the third-highest starting stack in the tournament that defect would be overcome, but unfortunately it didn't help very much.

I have noticed that it seems the more I try new tactics, the more uncertain I get in specific situations. I think I am overloading myself with new strategies and need to focus on only one or two new tips to master before taking on another.

Things have started well for me so far this year in poker. I have built my bankroll up to more than $1,000 in the first two months, which is an hourly rate that I will not be able to sustain. I am hoping by the end of the year to have played approximately 150 hours and logged an hourly rate of $17. Those amounts should equate to an annual earning of $2,550 in poker. Although not everything I make from poker stays in the bankroll, I do hope to have approximately $1,500 in a poker-only account.

2017 Results

Over the course of this year I played at WinStar's poker room only three times. The other 50 games played were either tournaments or cash games in Weatherford. I ended the year in the black again, this time finishing up $1,215. After a total of 135.5 hours of play I made $8.97 an hour.

My largest single win was $690 and the largest loss at one game was $350. The longest time played in a single sitting was 4.75 hours, so I am not staying long at the games I play.

Since setting goals early in 2015 (I think that is when I put forth the goals of a certain number of hours played, an hourly rate to meet, and some strategies to attempt) I haven't been very consistent in posting how I have played. After some winning sessions in December I have been bitten by the poker bug and want to play more. And it isn't just about playing poker, but learning the game on another level and ingesting more knowledge and strategies about the game.

Something that was new for 2017 is I started playing Omaha Hold'em at my home game in Weatherford. We've started learning both regular Omaha Hold'em and Omaha Hi/Lo. So at least I can say I've been learning a new game in the past year.

With a new year coming I would like to make the same goals as I did in 2015. Therefore, I would like to play 150 hours, average $15 an hour at poker games (both tournament and cash combined), implement new strategies, and read two poker books.

As for how I have done at poker since keeping detailed statistics, I have profited at total of $9,345 and my total hourly rate is $10.36. If I am able to meet the goals I've set for myself this year those totals will increase. Here is to 2018.

Still Learning How To Play Omaha High-Low

A situation came up last night at my weekly poker game that still has me curious as to whether I made the correct play or not.  If you go by results only, then no, I made a poor decision that cost me about $250.  Yet, in the moment I felt it was the correct decision, despite being told by a better player whom I respect that I made an incorrect decision.

Here are the details.  We are seven-handed and alternating between hold'em and Omaha (with the dealer choosing the game and whether it is high only or high-low).  I am seated in the big blind with $315 in front of me and the game is Omaha high-low with blinds of $1-2 and it is $5 to come in.  I am dealt As-Qs-8c-3h.  The two players after me fold and the guy in the highjack seat raises to $15 (with a starting stack of $450).  The cutoff and button both call (starting stacks are $775 and $625, respectively).  The small blind folds and I call.  There is $61 in the pot.

The flop comes 9s-5d-3s.  I am first to act and have bottom pair, a nut-flush draw, and only three cards to a low.  I feel I have two options and that is to either make a blocking bet and hope it doesn't get raised or check and see what it is going to cost me to hang around for the flush draw.  Being first to act with three players behind me, one of which raised pre-flop, I didn't think I wanted to put any unnecessary money in the pot and a blocking bet of $20-30 wouldn't accomplish much.  I would either be raised by the original raiser or the other two players who had big chip stacks would put some pressure on me with sizable raises sniffing out my weakness.  I elected to check.

The original raiser also checked sending action to the cutoff.  Whether being the chip leader influenced his decision or not, he led out for a bet of $50, which is pretty normal for this guy as he likes to make big bets and put opponents to the test for large amounts of money (side story: on the final hand of the night the same guy made an all-in flop bet of $300 into a pot of about $100; that's just his style of play and he usually is either the big winner or big loser for the night).

The button thought for well over a minute about what he wanted to do and he decided to call the $50.  With $161 in the pot and a player behind me who initially raised pre-flop and checked the flop, it is $50 to me to call with my bottom pair, nut flush draw, and low hand that needs runner-runner to qualify (eight or lower that doesn't match what is already out there).  At this point I have $300 left.  I have to figure even if I do ever make it to the low it likely isn't going to be good unless the turn or river is a two.  So that means the best-case scenario I can hope for is I improve on my pair of threes (by hitting another three) or hit a spade for the nut flush to win the entire pot if a low doesn't qualify.  The worst-case scenario with still winning money is the same as best-case scenario but a low does qualify and I win half the pot (I just can't realistically think that I will win the low even with a two coming on the turn/river and another low card coming as well; remember, I need runner-runner low cards to qualify).

Although I am still learning how to play Omaha, I have figured out rather quickly that people don't slow play big hands, but they also bet draws pretty frequently as well since you have four cards in your hand to work with and there are so many possibilities to hit something for a big hand.  It is not unusual for two pair to be a horrible winning hand and it normally takes a straight or better to win.  With that being said, I've frequently seen people get all the money in with one player having a flush draw and another having a set (which is quite frequent to see with so many players holding so many cards).

After rambling on for this long, I think you can tell that I am trying to convince all my readers that calling or raising is a bold play here with such slim odds to win the full pot and risking so much to win half usually isn't a winning strategy in the long term.  I elected to fold my hand since I was worried that even if I hit a spade for the nut flush I would likely still have to avoid the board pairing to give someone a full house, since with that big of a bet and call I couldn't fathom one of the two players to have acted already not having a set.

Before I proceed with what happened after that I would like you to reflect on whether my fold was incorrect, correct, horrible, or a pretty standard fold that shouldn't have even made it on this website for discussion.

Okay, have you berated me enough?  Let's move on.

The original raiser decided to implement the check-raise and he made it $175 total.  The cutoff and button both thought for a bit and decided to call.  There is now $586 in the pot.

It should be noted, had I decided to call the $50 I probably would have been forced to go the distance with it because that would have meant there was $636 in the pot and it was $125 to me to call and if I do call I would have been left with $125 behind.  In all likelihood, if I called the $50 I probably would have moved all in after the pre-flop raiser's check-raise.  What reason would I have to hang on to the final $125?  If the other three players are willing to put in nearly $200 each at this point, what is another $125 to win a giant pot (or at least half of it)?

The turn was the seven of spades, creating a board of 9s-5d-3s-7s.  I have now completed my nut flush and am one step closer to making a low hand (except I have folded and cannot win anything).  Interestingly, the original pre-flop raiser who check-raised the flop decides to check the turn.  Normally I would think he is scared of the flush and was trying to push people out of drawing to the spade on the flop with something like a set or top two pair, but if you were going to price people out of drawing, why check the flop and risk it going check-check behind you for a free card or allowing the players to build a bigger pot so that when you do make your check-raise you have enticed more action by building a bigger pot and giving them the idea that they need to defend the money they have already put out there with their flop bet?  So, with that in mind I figured he had hit a big hand and was trying to show weakness so that he could string his opponents along for a little longer, which really doesn't make a ton of sense either because he only has $260 left and going all in with his hand is likely going to get called by at least one player, if not both.  That sort of makes me now question the line of thinking I have had up to this point.

So the pre-flop raiser/flop check-raiser checks the turn and the cutoff (who, remember, is chip leader) goes all in for his remaining $585.  The cutoff doesn't take too long to call for his remaining $435.  There is now $1,456 in the pot (really it is $1,606, but $150 of the chip leaders bet is coming back since he has everyone covered).  I am absolutely positive one of them has the nut low and I assume the other has at least a set, maybe a straight, and possibly the king-high flush (since I'm the dumb-dumb who folded the nut flush).

With that much money in the pot and only $260 left, I'm not sure what the pre-flop raiser was thinking, but he folds.  I understand that there are times when if you think you are beat you should fold and save your money, but there are also times when you are getting five-and-a-half-to-one odds on your money to win a huge pot and you should take a risk.  He had already risked nearly half his starting stack and if he had tried to aggressively push players out of the pot with nothing but a bluff on the flop then it was a poor decision as both players had already shown that they were pretty happy with their hands when they made a pot-sized bet and call.

So the action is done and we have a river to come.  It is the king of clubs.  The pre-flop raiser who just folded now throws a fit (which I don't understand and you won't either when I reveal his hand).

The board is 9s-5d-3s-7s-Kc and the two players remaining flip their cards.  The chip leader shows Ah-10d-8c-2d for a nut low and nothing for a high.  The button players shows Ac-Jc-9h-2h.  This gives him a tying hand for the low and a winning high hand of a pair of nines.  The pre-flop raiser shows Ks-Kd and said one of his other two cards was a spade giving him the second-nut flush.  So if he had the flush on the turn, why did a third king matter?  Baffling!

Ultimately I would have won half the pot with my nut flush, which would have resulted in turning my $315 stack into a $565 stack.  You might say I was too timid in my play and should have taken a chance with the nut flush, but I just couldn't fathom with such a big bet and a call on the flop that I wasn't drawing to a flush that could end up being bested by a boat if the board paired anything, and that's assuming I even get there with a third spade.

I'm curious to know what others think of this because so far I have only the opinion of one other player and he said I should have called, which would have committed me to everything once the check-raise, call, call happened on the flop.  Had I called the $50 bet and then re-raised all in after the pre-flop raiser made his check-raise I likely would have gotten him to come along for the extra $125, which would have increased my winning half to $630.

Despite folding this monster hand, I did end up winning for the night.  I took home a profit of $350 ($400 of which came from the cash game).  Last night's win puts me back in the black for the year and I am on pace to reach some of my financial goals for 2017.

Am I Too Amateurish To Understand This Play?

Last week I was involved in a hand that I felt was a bit reckless(I folded pre-flop, but was still at the table when the events to be transcribed on this blog happened), but after contemplating it and considering it from other angles I'm starting to question whether it was a brilliant play and I'm just not a good enough player to recognize its genius.

We were playing a tournament and there were seven players at the table.  The blinds were $300-600.  After the blinds posted and the cards were dealt, the player under the gun called for $600.  The next player raised it to $1,800.  The player to the immediate left of the raiser called the $1,800.  I then folded and the player on my left (who was dealing) called the $1,800.

This gets the action back to the small blind and there is currently $6,900 in the pot.  The small blind announces a re-raise for $6,000 more, making the total bet $7,800.  This puts $14,400 in the pot.  The big blind immediately folded.  So now action is back on the player under the gun who limped for $600.

Unless he is trying to be really sneaky with aces or kings by limping and waiting for an aggressive player behind him to raise it so he can do a re-raise, it is pretty obvious he is folding.  While he took his time to do so, he did eventually fold.

With $14,400 in the pot, it is now up to three players to call for $6,000,  re-raise an additional $6,000 or more, or fold.  The original raiser thought for about two minutes and eventually folded.  The player to my right also thought for about an additional minute and folded.  Both stated that had they been last to act and not had to worry about the players behind them they would have called.  The dealer then made a quick fold.

So the re-raise from the small blind was a profitable play with little stress as nobody called.  Without revealing the hands just yet, I'm curious what kind of hand you would need to make the play that the small blind made.  Obviously if you are holding aces, kings, queens, and possibly A-K, then that re-raise is in the wheelhouse of most poker players.  But past that, you are getting into a deeper level of hold'em than the ABC's of poker that many game theory books profess.  On the surface, making a re-raise into five players, three of which have shown initial strength, requires a premium hand.  However, now that I've thought things through a little longer I am starting to wonder whether making a squeeze play wouldn't be beneficial with dang near any decent hand.

The reason I've had this change of heart is because you really only have to get past the initial raiser to probably win the hand.  Let me explain a little further.  When the small blind made his re-raise to $7,800, he had the big blind (who is likely folding as they have any two random cards and the likelihood of lucking into a top quality hand at this moment is pretty slim) and the under-the-gun limper (who, again, likely was wanting to see a cheap flop and didn't take his position into mind when calling), who both were likely folding for the reasons explained previously in this sentence.  Now we get to the initial raiser.

I don't remember exactly what the chip counts were, but let's assume that everyone is near the same amount and the $6,000 re-raise wouldn't put anyone all in.  It would be a large dent to your tournament livelihood, but if you call and fold on the flop there is still enough in your stack to survive.  You'll have to be pickier with hand selection, but it isn't completely crippling.

Unless the original raiser has a premium, top-tier hand, with two players behind he probably isn't calling the $6,000.  He has to assume somebody has him beat of the three players remaining and will likely fold.  And then you get to the two players who simply called the $1,800 raise.  They can't have hands they are particularly in love with because they would likely have re-raised themselves following the initial $1,800 raise.

So from the perspective of the small blind, you really only have to avoid one of about three or four hands from the initial raiser to make this play profitable.  And if you do happen to run into a really big hand from the initial raiser, he will either get cute and smooth call, allowing you to possibly hit a big hand, or put in a third raise and let you know immediately where you stand.

Therefore, you don't necessarily need a big hand to make this play.  It can be profitable by just showing great strength and avoiding a big hand from the initial raiser.  No one else has shown that they are willing to put a ton of chips in the pot with their medium-strength hands.

I've talked myself into this squeeze play being well-executed and I don't utilize that strategy enough in my own play.

For those interested in results, the small blind made his re-raise with pocket nines.  The under-the-gun player had something like A-10 offsuit.  The initial raiser had pocket tens.  The player to the left of the initial raiser had A-K offsuit.  And the dealer was just hoping for an $1,800 flop with J-9 suited.

The nines weren't in a great spot had he simply called the raise and the pocket tens would have tripped up on the flop.  Well done squeeze play.  Well done.