The Free Look

Three hours into a recent no-limit hold'em tournament, an interesting hand came up. With about $6,000 in chips and the blinds at $300-$600, I was in the small blind, and everyone folded around to me. I looked down at my cards, and the first card I saw was the A. I snapped my cards so that my opponent in the big blind would think I had looked at both cards, but in reality, I didn't care what the second card was. I made it $1,800 to go. The big blind called, with a slightly bigger stack than mine.

Heads up, the flop came A 6 4. I knew I had at least a pair of aces, but I still didn't know what my second card was, and, truthfully, didn't care. I checked, the big blind pushed all in, and I called. He immediately flipped up the A K. My first thought was that I couldn't believe he didn't reraise all in before the flop. My second thought was that it would be nice to find a 6 or a 4 sitting underneath my A. In that cardroom, the cards need to be turned faceup anytime a player is all in, so without further ado, I flipped my cards up, and was as shocked as anyone else to see that I had the A A!

The double-up from that hand turned out to be crucial, as it turned out to be the last major confrontation I won. I ran card-dead for the rest of the tournament, but still managed to squeak into the final table, and all things considered, I was happy with my results.

The aftermath

A day later, I called fellow Card Player columnist Alan Schoonmaker, and mentioned the unusual hand that transpired. Alan and I are very good friends, and as such, we have no problem letting the other one know if we think he did something stupid. And on this occasion, Alan was very adamant. "Matt, poker is a game of limited information. We expend so much effort trying to gain information about our opponents' hands. Why would you deprive yourself of information about your own hand? It doesn't make any sense!"

Alan has always given me good advice, and this was no exception. When I first started playing lowball, I watched players open the pot without looking at their last card, and I always wondered: What's the point? So now, Alan was posing the same question to me: What's the point? His argument was that I have nothing to gain by not looking at my other card, but I deprive myself of information, and there's no way that can be a good thing.

I'm pretty sure I agree with him. In 99 percent of situations, I would never dream of looking at only one card. But, just to play devil's advocate, let me see if I can make a case for not looking at my other card.

What do I lose?

In this particular situation, I don't think I lose anything. Once everyone folds to me in the small blind, and I see that I have an ace, I will raise to $1,800 preflop whether I have A-2, A-A, or anything in between. If the big blind reraises, I have to look at my other card and make a decision, but once he flat-calls, there is still no reason to look at my other card.

Once I see that I flopped an ace, I know that I am going the distance with this hand, regardless of what my kicker is. With almost a third of my stack already invested, folding is not an option. I check the flop because even if he also decides to check, it's unlikely that a free card will hurt me. Once he moves in, I've already made up my mind to call. The bottom line is, I don't think depriving myself of information hurt me in any way, and it definitely did not change the way I would have played the hand.

What do I gain?

If nothing else, I know that my opponent can't glean any information about my hand, since I don't have that information myself! You might wonder what kind of tells my opponent could possibly spot. The thing is, many players are compulsively deceptive. They cannot help acting weak when they are strong, and vice versa. Such players put their chips into the pot differently when they raise preflop with A-A than they do when raising with A-2. With A-A, they gently push their chips forward in a non-threatening manner, hoping to get action. With A-2, they fire the chips in, knowing they'd rather not get called.

Do I fit this description? I hope not. I try my best to bet my chips the same way whether I have a strong hand or not. But, I know I'm not perfect. I might look down and see A-A, and not be able to stop myself from betting my chips differently. If my opponent in the big blind is observant, he might pick up on that, and bring himself to fold a semistrong hand. By not looking to see whether I have A-A or A-2, I can concentrate on betting my chips in a neutral manner. My opponent can't possibly get a read on me, because there is nothing to read! I don't even know what I have, so how can he hope to deduce what I have?

What's the verdict?

All in all, there shouldn't be a need to give yourself a "free look." You should be able to control the way you bet your chips. You should be able to stop yourself from giving off unnecessary tells. But, if the situation is just right, and you truly will not play your hand any differently no matter what your second card is, I guess it's OK. You have nothing to lose, and maybe a little to gain.

Plus, I guess it's kind of a rush to play blind, right? There's nothing like a "free look" now and then to keep the game interesting. Just pick your spots carefully.

Matt Lessinger also writes for the Online Poker News, which can be found at www.cardplayer.com.