"Damn it, he only had four – – – – – – – outs!" The young primadonna cussed out loud as he threw his hand at the muck. "I don't expect that from a good player," he added, with a dirty look at me. The truth be told, I had only three outs, as another hand had one of my outs blocked. A guy with almost enough knowledge to beat the game, the primadonna failed to recognize that good players do draw too thin when the situation calls for it. And I thought it mighty kind of the young fella to refer to me as a good player.
I had just made a gutshot to draw out on his three queens, and the young wannabe lacked the emotional maturity to handle the situation. Of course, suspecting that hitting the hand might set him off added some incremental value to the draw. He played fairly well, but was likely to be off his game for the rest of the night, and much of that negative energy was going to be directed at me in the form of some predictable plays.
A loose-passive tourist had opened the pot and I had raised from two off the button with A-10 offsuit, looking to isolate the opener, as I thought I had good control over him, position, and a hand that had the best of it. The isolation play failed, alas, and the primadonna three-bet me from the small blind. When he raised, he was very shaky in an excited sort of way, so I was confident he had a big hand. The tourist called, as did I.
The flop came down Q-J-4 rainbow. The primadonna bet, the tourist called, and getting 12-1 odds with the nut gutshot draw, an overcard, and no flush draw on board, I had an easy call, which I made. The turn was the 7
, bringing a flush draw. The small blind led into the field again, the tourist called, and the action was once again on me.
I went into the "Cooke Huddle." There was $510 in the pot, and it was $60 to call. The pot was laying me 8.5-1 odds. The chances of making a straight were only 42-4 (four cards making the straight out of 46 unseen cards); 10.5-1 was not good enough for a call based on the current odds. And the presence of the spade draw reduced the value of my gutshot draw.
But, comparing the price the pot is laying you at the point of a call to the chance of making your hand is not the correct way to analyze risk-versus-reward poker problems. Other factors come into play. What additional monetary value will your hand have should you make it? What is the chance you will make your hand and still lose the pot? What effect will the play of this hand have on the play of future hands? Are there any other scenarios in which you could win the pot other than by making a hand?
I put the small blind on a big holding, so if I caught an offsuit king, he was almost sure to bet again and would be extremely likely to have a hand with which he would pay off a raise. Also, if the player in between us called on the river, I would make an extra bet or maybe two if he called the raise. And there was some chance the small blind might reraise and I would get more bets in. I reckoned the small blind most likely held a wired pair, and might even have hit on the flop, thereby reducing the backdoor threat to just the tourist, and that was very unlikely. I figured if I could get two extra bets in if I hit the straight draw, calling would be about neutral.
Other factors added value. It was possible that the small blind held two kings, and an ace might be good. In marginal situations, making the play that gives action can create action on future hands by disguising more hands. Since I was the last to act, nobody could raise behind me after I called. And, of course, there was the suck out-and-put-him-on-tilt factor. I thought a call was a small overlay overall, and I slid $60 into the pot.
The rest is history. I caught my nonspade king. The small blind led, the tourist called, I raised, and was called by both players. I turned my straight over and the small blind started his tirade.
The play netted me 12.5-1, more than a good enough price to justify the call on the turn, assuming four outs. That said, the tourist told me after folding that he held the K 10, eliminating the potential for me to catch the K. If an ace had come, I would have finished in third place behind the small blind's three queens and the tourist's straight, although it would have been two bets to me and I almost certainly would not have called. The hand was as trapped up as it could be.
Still, I was in the worst possible scenario, and the turn call laid me 12.5-1. Yes, the price the pot laid me at that moment was less than the 43-3 (14.3-1) that the raw card math dictated. But that doesn't make the call an incorrect one. I have often noted that edge includes a number of unquantifiable variables that nonetheless affect the equation. There were many much more likely scenarios in which the call would have had positive expectation and my worst-case scenario was not that bad a negative expectation bet. As I often say, the vast majority of poker decisions are close to neutral, but you have to squeeze every little bit of positive expectation you can out of them if you expect the game to help pay your bills.
When you are contemplating a call with the worst hand, but are drawing to a hand that you think will be good, you need to determine all plausible scenarios, how your hand plays against them all, and which is the best play. Keep in mind that the most common scenario is not necessarily the one against which you should design your play. If the most common scenario is almost neutral and an uncommon scenario has a large edge (either negative or positive), the play needs to be weighed. You need to assess the value of the play based on the value of all combined scenarios.
As for the primadonna, not only did he fail to read the situation correctly, he made the fundamental poker errors of educating the table (albeit wrongly), negatively affecting the mood of the other players with his outburst (particularly the rather nice loose-passive recreational player who was the best spot in the game), and reacting personally and emotionally to the random fall of a card (affecting his judgment on future plays). He's got some knowledge and some talent, but he's also got a lot to learn.
Roy Cooke played winning professional poker for more than 16 years. He is a successful real estate broker/salesperson in Las Vegas – please see his ad below. If you would like to ask Roy poker-related questions, you may do so online at www.UnitedPokerForum.com.