When you play poker sometimes luck is with you and sometimes it’s not. Take this hand played by my friend Scott. We were in a $2-$5 blind no-limit hold’em game at the Venetian in Las Vegas. Scott looked at pocket threes in the small blind. There was a limp and the button raised to $25. Scott and the limper called.
The flop came Ad-Af-3d giving Scott threes full. Scott checked, the limper checked, the button bet $40, and Scott raised to $120. The limper re-raised to $250, the button called, and Scott pushed to $620 (total). The limper hesitated for a few moments and folded, but the button called with Ah-Js. Scott was far ahead until the turn and river produced two running sixes that gave the button the huge pot.
Later, two other players at the table had a similar outcome. It was aces versus kings in a raising war before the flop. In fact, all the money went in before the flop. The player with aces felt great when he flopped a set, but the guy with kings had a backdoor flush draw. Running clubs gave him that huge pot, and the guy with the aces stormed away from the table.
Scott’s own bad luck continued. Later, he limped with Kc-Ks from under-the-gun, I raised to $25, with just Scott calling. The flop was Qa-8s-3f. Scott checked, I bet $30, the button folded, and Scott check-raised to $90, I re-raised to $200, and Scott was put to the test. The effective stack sizes were about $450, and Scott was ahead of one of my likely hands, A-Q. However, he was behind other hands in my range (A-A, Q-Q, 8-8, and possibly 3-3). There was also the possibility I was raising with a combination hand such as Ja-10a. If I held that kind of two-way hand, Scott was only a 53 percent favorite.
Scott elected to shove, I insta-called with Qs-Qd, and Scott didn’t hit his two outer.
Scott’s play during the session was generally good. Hopefully, we all want to get our money in as an 80 percent favorite—I know I do. His limp in early position with pocket kings was a good play. Scott is definitely good enough to fold if an ace came on the flop, and at a table with generally weak players it’s likely none of those players would be expecting such a play. In both of Scott’s plays he got the resulted he wanted. With apologies to Fred Karpin, the operation was a success but the patient died.
On the surface, Scott’s second play looks wrong. However, when we evaluate my probable range of hands versus Scott’s hand we find that his all-in isn’t a bad play. Let’s assume I could hold T-T, J-J, Q-Q, K-K, or A-A, 8-8, Kh-Jh, Jh-10h, or Jh-9h. Using PokerStove to evaluate the hands, I’m only a 50 percent favorite. Of course, I happened to hold one of the two hands where Scott was way behind, but that’s the reality of poker.
Good players do not evaluate opponent’s holdings as a single hand. We look at the range of hands they could hold. When I talked with Scott after the session, his idea of my range of holdings was similar to what I think I’d do with those holdings. I was putting Scott on A-A, K-K, Ah-Kh, 8-8, 3-3, or a bluff. Of course, when you hold the nuts it’s easy to make a call. Scott’s inventive plays have served him well in the past and I hope he doesn’t stop doing them just because the patient died last night.
Russell Fox is the co-author of “Mastering No-Limit Hold’em,” “Why You Lose at Poker,” and “Winning Strategies for No-Limit Hold’em.” He’s a federally licensed tax preparer specializing in gambling, with a blog at taxabletalk.com. E-mail Russ at rcfox@claytontax.com
»
