Counterintuitive Poker Strategies
COUNTERINTUITIVE STRATEGIES
by: Lou Krieger©
All great hold'em players have a feel for the game. Whether you
call it card sense or intuition, it's clear there's more to hold'em
than knowing the odds, and reading your opponents. While you
can't see it, touch it, or bottle it, poker intuition is like a
sixth sense. But it's not really exotic; it's more like poker-specific
common sense. And it's not limited to poker, either. Crafty
boxers are described as "ring-wise," and clever basketball
players are said to possess great "court sense."
But in hold'em, there's a lot of strategy that's counterintuitive.
Until recently I'd never thought much about this. Frankly,
I don't think most other players have either. But once I became
aware of this and the gates opened, a veritable flood of ideas poured
in. Here are some you might want to ponder.
With a weak hand you frequently have to bet in order to win; with
a stronger hand, you can afford to check: This is certainly
counterintuitive. After all, most of the time you bet the
strong ones and fold the weak ones. But not all the time,
and not all that infrequently either. Consider this:
You hold A-K and raise before the flop. Three rags fall and
you've got two opponents. What do you do? Bet.
How else are you going to get anyone holding a small pair to credit
you with an overpair and release their hand? When the turn
is also a blank you bet again. Once again both of your opponents
call. The river card is a king. Now you've got top pair
and the best possible kicker.
You could come out betting, but you were called on the flop and
the turn by two opponents. One of them must have something.
And if that something is two pair or a set, you'll lose two bets
instead of one. But here's counterintuitive strategy at work.
You made a legitimate hand, and now you can afford to check.
If everyone checks, you'll win the showdown. If your check
induces one of your adversaries to bluff, your call will snap that
bluff off. This enables you to win a bet you wouldn't have
if you came out betting and your opponents released their hands.
This gives you the best of both worlds. You save a bet whenever
an opponent holds a better hand and is planning to raise; and you
earn an additional bet if your opponent bluffs in a situation where
he would have folded if you were the bettor.
Weaker kickers can be preferable to bigger ones:
Suppose you're the big blind and the pot's been raised. Five
players call. So do you. Would you rather be holding:
A-7 suited or A-3 suited? Common sense suggests A-7,
since it would be a heavy favorite in a heads-up confrontation.
That's intuitive, but not counterintuitive. Think about this.
Your kicker won't matter if you make a flush. You'll have
the nuts regardless of your side card. If an ace flops and
there's any appreciable action, either side card is probably outkicked.
But you can make a straight A-3 suited. You can't with A-7 suited
It's a real long shot, I'll grant you that, but it is enough of
an out to make counterintuitive strategy preferable to surface logic.
You don't necessarily want to make the biggest hand:
This concept takes a variety of shapes. Suppose you're holding
A-J, when suddenly the skies darken, there's a loud clap of thunder,
a shaft of light pierces the sky, a hand the size of a cloud points
directly at you, and a deep voice intones, "Sinner, I
offer you two flops: J-7-4 or A-7-4. Choose between them."
What would you do? A pair of aces is certainly bigger than
jacks. But consider this. With
A-J you won't be sure you have the best hand anytime an ace flops.
And if the pot was raised before the flop, your doubts would be
magnified.
But with J-7-4 you have top pair and the best possible kicker.
Concerns about straights and flushes not withstanding, your only
worry is a king or queen appearing on the turn or river. If an ace
comes up you'll have two pair, and will be a heavy favorite.
I realize that if there was a preflop raise your opponent could
have a pair of aces, kings, or queens, but if he's the type of player
who raises with any pair of nines or higher, as well as AK, AQ,
AJ, or KQ you probably have the best hand right now.
In hold'em, you don't necessarily want to make the best possible
hand, you want to make a hand with the best possible chance of winning
- and in many circumstances that means a big pair with the an ace
kicker, rather than aces with a weaker side card.
This concept comes up quite often with straight and flushes.
Suppose you're holding 8h-7h on the button with seven active players
in an unraised pot. You call and miraculously flop the nut
straight when you see 6h-9c-Th hit the board. Not only have
you flopped the nut straight, you also have a draw to a flush.
Even a straight flush is a possibility, though it's quite a long
shot.
CLICK
HERE TO PLAY ONLINE TEXAS HOLDEM FOR REAL MONEY!
You'd be happy seeing a couple of blanks on the turn and river.
Anyone else who might have flopped a flush draw will pay you off
until the river, and you can expect action from anyone holding J-10,
A-10, overpairs, sets, or two pair. But if a flush were to
come and someone bet, you'd be on the defensive. Sure, a flush
is higher than a straight, but in relative terms, your hand just
decreased in value - going from the nuts to the fifth best flush.
Now you won't be able to raise, and any call you make will be with
a certain amount of trepidation. Unless you get very lucky
and catch the nine of hearts for a straight flush, you'll be on
the defensive for the remainder of the hand.
With strong starting hands you want few players, with weak ones
you want many:
Doesn't this seem strange when you first think about it. It
seems logical that you'd want all the opponents you could gather
with big hands. In fact, the opposite is true. Here's
why. With two starting hands the biggest hand you can be dealt
is a pair of aces. Pretty as they are, aces aren't that big.
The flop can easily take someone from underdog to favorite, and
the more opponents you have, the better the chance that at least
one of them will leave you in his lurch by the hand's conclusion.
By eliminating opponents, you are increasing your chances that your
big pair can win without improving at all.
But with hands like 9s-8s you want a large number of opponents
to provide money odds sufficient to offset your rather long odds
against improving to the best hand. In other words, with 9s-8s
you want to make absolutely certain at you'll get paid off if you
make your hand - because you won't make it that often. Most
of these hands, if fact, will be thrown away on the flop.
Flopping sets is another example of this phenomenon. If the
flop is A-9-4 and someone came out betting, you'd probably just
call on the flop if you held A-A. 9-9, or 4-4. But if you
held a hand like A-3 or J-J you'd have to think about raising for
two reasons. First, raising might force someone who holds
a slightly better hand to throw it away. Second, raising on
the flop helps define your hand in comparison to your opponent's
while the betting is still inexpensive. With a set, the last
thing you want to do is chase customers away before you've extracted
your pound of flesh. This holds true even if there are two
suited cards on the flop. After all, your raise is unlikely
to eliminate anyone with a flush draw. It will only succeed
in chasing the cash cows home.
We've just scratched the tip of the iceberg in this article.
Look around. You'll find numerous other examples of counterintuitive
strategies in hold'em. Who knows, maybe there's a follow-up
hit for Kenny Rogers in all of this - something about betting like
you're holding 'em, and checking like you're planning to fold'em.
The lyrics will fall right out of this article. All we need
now is a singable, syncopated, country tune.
|
