C’Mon Now
Villain is clearly bluffing on the river- his line makes no sense with any strong hand except 44, and even that may not call a river shove (it’s a lot more plausible for me to check a set on the river than for him to do so, given that I could be going for a check-raise whereas he is closing the action.) The problem is that so am I, and I am pretty sure he’s bluffing with a pair. That doesn’t mean I have to let him get away with it, though:
PokerStars No-Limit Hold’em, $6.00 BB (6 handed) – PokerStars Converter Tool from PokerSavvyPlus.com
SB ($1959.40)
BB ($628)
UTG ($1069.20)
MP ($1539.40)
Hero (CO) ($1464.60)
Button ($1522.80)
Preflop: Hero is CO with K
, A
2 folds, Hero bets $18, Button calls $18, 2 folds
Flop: ($52.20) 2, 5, J
(2 players)
Hero bets $33, Button calls $33
Turn: ($118.20) 10 (2 players)
Hero checks, Button checks
River: ($118.20) 4
(2 players)
Hero bets $99, Button raises to $360, Hero raises to $1412.40 (All-In), 1 fold
Total pot: $838.20 | Rake: $3
Results:
Hero didn’t show K, A (nothing).
Outcome: Hero won $835.20
Villain floats a lot, so I was actually planning to check-raise the turn expecting him to bet a lot of draws and such. When he doesn’t bet, he announces that he has showdown value, almost surely a pair. Thus, I bet the river to rep a whiffed check-raise or a one-pair hand playing pot control. Apparently I convinced him, because he turned his middle pair into a bluff. Would be pretty sick if he had tanked and called me with like 33 turned into a bluff and then a bluff-catcher!
The Poker Ethicist: Heads-Up Displays
As “The Poker Philosopher”, and in honor of one of my favorite non-poker blogs, I occasionally consider the ethical dimensions of a high-profile controversy in the poker community. In this edition, I address a long-standing controversy in the online poker world, in response to a question about Heads-Up Displays (HUD’s) posed in a recent comment. Older editions of The Poker Ethicist are available in the archives.
In response to a recent post I made about using a HUD, commenter “Elmer Fudd” asked,
“I would like you to comment on the ethics of using a HUD in the first place. It most certainly gives you an edge over players that don’t use such software and provides you with stats that you couldn’t readily obtain during a live game. I guess I’m an old-fashioned poker purist, but anything that gives you a slight edge over other players is cheating. “
I would say anything that gives you an unfair edge is cheating. Sleeping and eating better than my opponents gives me an edge. Reading more books than they do gives me an edge. Using a second monitor gives me an edge over opponents attempting to multi-table on a single monitor. Yet none of these is unfair, because my opponents have equal opportunity to take advantage of them.
An edge becomes unfair when it violates the rules of the game as defined by the casino or site hosting the game. Even if you disagree with a particular rule or believe that other players are violating it, violating it yourself is unethical because it is essentially dishonest. By playing on a particular online poker site or at a particular casino, you are promising your fellow players that you will abide by a particular set of rules. This defines the parameters of the game, the ways in which players may and may not seek an edge.
When I sit down at a live game, I accept and agree that physical tells will be part of the game, and that signaling to a partner at the table will not. My opponents, in turn, agree to the same. They know that to keep up with me in this contest, they will need to practice their face-reading skills but not their sign language. If I were colluding with another player, this would gain me an unfair advantage, because it is one my opponents are not expecting me to have and one that they have themselves agreed not to pursue.
On sites that allow them, HUD’s are a legitimate part of the game. Insofar as they do not violate a site’s terms and conditions, then everyone playing on the site implicitly agrees that they are allowed. Some may use them more than others, and some may choose not to use them at all. Similarly, I might choose not to attempt to pick up physical tells during a live game, but this does not make it unethical for my opponents to do so. As long as I have the same opportunity, the playing field is level.
Using a HUD on a site that prohibits it, even if you were to find a way to make the HUD work and to evade detection, would not be ethical. Doing so would violate your agreement with the site and with your fellow players on that site. It would give you an edge that your honest opponents would not enjoy, and this would be unethical.
Online poker is not merely a derivative form of live poker. It bears many similarities, but also many differences. Just because something would not be allowed or possible in a live setting does not mean that it is unethical when done online, any more than a rule prohibiting cell phones at the table at the Rio would it make unethical to use a cell phone at the table at MGM. Different venues have the right to establish their own rules. Some players may prefer the rules generally found in a live setting to those found online, but they may not impose their preferred rules as an ethical obligation on their online competitors.
What’s Your Play? HUD Edition: Results
Thanks to everyone who sounded off on the special HUD edition of “What’s Your Play?”. As always your comments were thought-provoking, and I was actually led to conclude that the answer isn’t as open-and-shut as I thought.
I’ll start by giving you the results, and then I’ll let you know how and why I made the decision that I did and what my thinking is on the most relevant HUD statistics.
UTG ($1570)
MP ($1124)
Button ($2200)
Hero (SB) ($1000)
BB ($1017)
Preflop: Hero is SB with 7, K
3 folds, Hero bets $40, BB calls $30
Flop: ($80) 6, 8, 6 (2 players)
Hero bets $55, BB calls $55
Turn: ($190) K (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets $150, Hero calls $150
River: ($490) 3 (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets $772 (All-In), Hero calls $755 (All-In)
Total pot: $2000 | Rake: $3
Results:
Hero had 7, K (two pair, Kings and sixes).
BB had A, 10 (one pair, sixes).
Outcome: Hero won $1997
When I checked the river, it was with the intention of calling a reasonably sized bet. If Villain bets something in the neighborhood of $300, he can conceivably be value betting as wide as A8, and my K7 is an easy call. As many of you pointed out, the overbet almost certainly polarizes him to air or hands that are better than mine. I suppose he could be shoving a worse K, in which case we’d chop, but that’s not going to be a major consideration.
I don’t know enough about this player to tell you just how wide he’s value betting the river or whether he’s capable of overbetting as a bluff- some people just don’t do it.
When someone is representing a narrow range, a key question for me is how wide his range is for getting to this point in the hand. Without knowing anything a player’s specific river tendencies, I’m comfortable assuming that the likelihood of his bluffing a particular street increases considerably when he can get to that point in the hand with a lot of air.
Good players are almost always capable of having relatively wide ranges for betting. In other words, I rarely take a bet as evidence that a guy has a hand. Likewise, most good players will recognize that they can call a raise in position blind vs. blind with a lot of hands, so regardless of what his pre-flop statistics look like, I’m going to assume his range isn’t all that narrow pre-flop. As Chris M. points out, his 3B% is potentially relevant for ruling out some of his thin value range such as KQ/KJ/KT. This is potentially a tough decision even we can rule out KT+, as many commenters did, and I also don’t know that a number would actually give us that information. I can tell you that my 3B% is generally pretty high in Villain’s shoes but that I often flat-call KT and KJ.
The decision point that is most likely to narrow Villain’s range is the flop. Moreso than betting or raising, calling is generally an indication that a player likes his hand at least a little bit.
I take it as a given that any good player with a wide flop calling range is going to be aggressive on the turn. Presumably if he calls the flop with a weak hand, it’s with the intention of bluffing the turn, so I rule out TAFq as a deciding factor.
RAFq is problematic for a few reasons. For one, the deeper we get into the hand, the less reliable our statistics become. Compounding the problem is the fact that this is a rather unique situation. Thus, I don’t expect to find much useful information in this statistic, nor did many of you.
When I posted this question, I intended for FCB to be the correct answer. However, several people made a compelling case for FAFq, enough so that if this were a test I’d give credit for either answer. I may have been biased because Villains FCB was actually extraordinarily low, such that it was even more of a determining factor for me than it otherwise would have been. Over nearly 400 hands, I’d seen him fold just 10% of the time to a continuation bet.
What this tells me is that he is fighting hand, probably too hard, for every pot in which he is involved. As soon as I saw that, I clicked “Call”. Not only does this very low number suggest that Villain can get to the river with a wide range, but it also tells me something about his approach to the game. He is clearly willing to put players to the test, and that seems to be exactly what was going on here.
I took it for granted that a low FCB would imply a lot of floating, but the people arguing for FAFq, primarily Shawn and Drew, raised a good point. It’s possible that he prefers attacking continuation bets by bluff-raising rather than by floating. Thus, it’s theoretically possible that even if he has a low FCB, he nevertheless does not get to the river this way with air because he would have raised rather than called his air on the flop. The FAFq statistic would help us figure out whether this was the case.
I think that would be more relevant if his FCB weren’t so absurdly low, which of course is information that you all did not have. Had his FCB been more like 40%, I would definitely want to look next to FAFq to figure out whether he was raising or calling his air on the flop.
As an aside, I find it odd that Villain chose to turn AT into a bluff on the turn. Perhaps he thought that my checking a good barreling card indicated that I could beat A-high. I’m sure he realized that he would have the best hand more often than not on the flop, and I’d expect a lot of people just to check it down.
Thanks again to everyone who participated.
PS If you’re interested in learning more about floating, I recommend Float On, a strategy article that I wrote on the subject.
What’s Your Play? HUD Edition
The first video in my new four-part series about HUD-based decision making and using statistics to exploit opponents has just gone live at Poker Savvy Plus. In conjunction with that, I’ve got a twist on the old “What’s Your Play?” series. In this hand, calling or folding are your only options, and it’s an extremely read-dependent decision.
Take a look at the hand, and then sound off on the question I’ve got for you at the end:
Full Tilt No-Limit Hold’em, $10.00 BB (5 handed) – Full-Tilt Converter Tool from PokerSavvyPlus.com
UTG ($1570)
MP ($1124)
Button ($2200)
Hero (SB) ($1000)
BB ($1017)
Preflop: Hero is SB with 7, K
3 folds, Hero bets $40, BB calls $30
Flop: ($80) 6, 8, 6 (2 players)
Hero bets $55, BB calls $55
Turn: ($190) K (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets $150, Hero calls $150
River: ($490) 3 (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets $772 (All-In)
Suppose that you were going to have to make this decision. I tell you that he is a winning regular at these stakes, and I offer to give you just ONE of the following statistics that I have on him, based on a sample size of 397 hands played in 6-max games. Which would you choose and why?
Voluntarily Put Money In Pot (VP$IP)
Pre-Flop Raise (PFR)
Three-Bet Percent (3B%)
Aggression Factor (AF)
Fold to Continuation Bet (FCB)
Flop Aggression Frequency (FAFq)
Turn Aggression Frequency (TAFq)
River Aggression Frequency (RAFq)
I want to wait a few days to give everyone a chance to comment, so I’ll post my thoughts on Sunday.
Poker Stars Team Online
A few weeks ago, I hinted at a big announcement. It got delayed by a few weeks, but today I am proud to announce that I will be a member of Poker Stars Team Online this year.
I can honestly say that it an honor to represent Poker Stars. Not only do they offer the best games and the best customer service of any site I’ve ever played on, but they are by far the most trustworthy and upstanding. To the Poker Ethicist, that stuff is important.
When I see Poker Stars reps soliciting players’ opinions on poker forums or talking about recent game changes on theTwo Plus Two Pokercast, I am always impressed by the level of thoughtfulness that goes into their decisions. Even when there are changes that don’t benefit me personally, it is reassuring to see that they are not made arbitrarily. There are people who understand poker and look out for the interests of all of their players, not just those who play high stakes or high volume, calling the shots, and the result is the best online poker site on the internet.
So if you see me at the tables (soon to be sporting a headshot of yours truly as my avatar), be sure to say hi- I’m now contractually obligated to talk to you!
Setting Effective New Year’s Resolutions for Poker Success
Happy New Year!
The beginning of a new year is the perfect time to re-evaluate your priorities, set new goals for yourself, and start planning for how you will achieve those goals. This is the first in a series of posts about using goal-setting to help you achieve poker success.
Dream Big- Start with some lofty aspirations that you may or may not be able to achieve this year: “Become a winning player”, “Learn Pot-Limit Omaha”, “Move up to 2/4″, etc. These generally aren’t things that are entirely under your control, and you should be ambitious in setting them. Think of it like winning the pot in a poker game: it’s something you’d like to do, but you can’t just will it to happen, and sometimes it’s something you won’t achieve. Still, it is the aspiration that motivates the rest of what you do.
Plan Concretely- The resolutions that you make should be specific and concrete: “Play X hands”, “Spend X hours/week reviewing your play”, “Start using a HUD”, etc. Such resolutions are the ones most likely to influence your behavior, which is the ultimate goal. If you simply resolve to “Get better at poker”, that probably won’t motivate you to do anything in particular. Think about how you want to get better at poker and what steps you need to take to make that happen.
Aim Reasonably- Your resolutions should encourage you to stretch yourself, but they should not be unattainable. If you only played 100K hands last year, you probably shouldn’t resolve to make SuperNova Elite this year.
Keep It Under Control- Unlike your goals, your resolutions should be entirely within your control. Don’t resolve to earn a certain amount of money or maintain a certain win rate. That’s nearly as foolish as resolving to take fewer bad beats this year. You can’t guarantee those things, and building your resolutions around them is setting yourself up for failure. Recognize the things that are under your control and think about how you can use them to maximize your chances of seeing the results you want.
Keep a Timetable- If your resolutions are year-long, which I recommend, track your progress along the way and set benchmarks. Know how many hands you need to play each week, and be aware of whether you are still on track. If some of your resolutions depend on others (“Buy Hold ‘Em Manager” and “Learn to Use a HUD”, for instance), set a deadline for completing the first that allows you time to complete the second.
Have Consequences- Like a lab rat, you are motivated by punishments and rewards. If you are falling behind on one of your resolutions, you must have a course of action for correcting yourself. For instance, if you fall behind on your resolution to watch three training videos each week, perhaps you will stop watching television and use that time to get caught up. Conversely, when you reach key benchmarks, give yourself a reward. If you are on pace for all of your resolutions after three months, treat yourself to a new monitor, a buy-in to the Sunday Million, or a massage.
Be Creative- There is more to getting good results than improving your strategy. Perhaps you also need to improve your eating habits, exercise more regularly, clean up your workspace, or make your accounts more secure.
Don’t Neglect the Rest of Your Life- It takes more than a successful poker career to be a happy and complete person. So be sure that you are also setting goals and setting aside time for other things that are important in your life: friends, family, hobbies, volunteering, etc. You shouldn’t do these things just to improve your poker game, though you may well find that that’s a happy side effect!
Tomorrow, I’ll post my resolutions for the new year to provide some examples of the above concepts. I’ll be asking you about your resolutions, as well, so start thinking about it now!