It depends! That's my answer to most poker questions. Usually, the questioner thinks I am avoiding the question. I'm really not! Each poker situation is a unique problem with innumerable variables, making the answer a conclusion that's drawn from logical analysis of correct concepts, not a set standard. Those players who seek and utilize set standards invariably make mistakes when the answer to a poker situation falls outside those standards and the analysis required to formulate the answer has not been thought through.
An example is the way most people play A-K offsuit before the flop. The vast majority of players will hit it with a preflop raise, regardless of the situation. It is that sort of automatic thinking that costs lots of otherwise good players big chunks of their edge. As is the case with all other poker decisions, whether one ought to raise preflop with A-K depends on the situation at the time.
I recently wandered into the Mirage poker room seeking to help a friend who was struggling with his game. It had been quite a while since I had frequented my old stomping grounds. The Mirage does not spread the high-limit games that it used to prior to the opening of Bellagio. However, it still has the same nice aesthetics, friendly and competent management, and some great action at the middle and lower limits. I took a seat in a fired-up $20-$40 hold'em game and waited for my friend to arrive.
A couple of laps into the session, I picked up an A-K offsuit in the small blind. Two loose players had called preflop and the button had raised. Often in this spot I will reraise with an A-K type of hand – an unsuited high card with an ace. The hand is often good in this situation, and I am hoping to fold the big blind and the limpers, thereby both putting dead money into the pot and getting the pot heads up with an inferior hand. That play would not have worked in this particular instance, however, because none of my opponents who had already put chips into the pot were likely to fold once they had done so. Other factors applied to the situation. I would be first to act throughout the hand, which is usually a disadvantage. However, in this case, if I checked and everyone checked to the raiser (which these types of players were prone to do), I would then act immediately after the preflop raiser. My position therefore could be used as an advantage if I were to hit the flop and be able to check-raise the button, thereby forcing my other opponents to call two bets cold if they wanted to draw, thus reducing the price the pot was giving them. I could protect my one-pair hand in a volume pot and prevent other players from drawing at me. I flat-called the button's raise, as did the rest of the field. Any small edge that I gave up in not raising inferior hands out before the flop would be more than made up for in an increased advantage later in the hand if I paired the flop.
The flop came down A-9-7 with two clubs. I checked, intent on check-raising the button. (There are four kinds of checks when action remains to be made behind you: checking with the intention of folding, with the intention of calling, with the intention of raising, and with the intention of evaluating what to do when the action gets back to you based on a new and higher level of information.) The field checked to the preflop raiser and he bet. I check-raised, clearing the remaining field. I bet the turn and river, and got paid off by the button, who showed me two jacks.
Anytime the pot gets big and you hold a hand that could easily be outdrawn by your opponents, you need to either make them pay too large a price to correctly draw to their hands or make them fold in a situation where drawing at that price would be correct. Applying this concept at the table can get tricky. Often, risks must be taken because the rewards of protecting the hand are so great. Sometimes you will plan a great check-raise, having positioned yourself correctly in the hand, only to have the expected bettor give the field a free card. Planning moves ahead if you hit or miss your hand and combining the styles of your opponents to the equation produces the right play. Evaluating the likelihood of the play working is accurately deduced only with experience.
Pay attention and think in conceptual terms. Your bankroll will love you for it!
Editor's note: Roy Cooke played winning professional poker for 16 years. He is a successful real estate broker/salesperson in Las Vegas – please see his ad on Page 123.
Casino San Pablo Vol. 14, No. 13
-
Shooting the Bull With 'Amarillo Slim' Preston
-
Dealer Compensation
-
Calling on the End
by Jim Brier
-
No-Limit Omaha High-Low
-
Things I've Never Done, Sometimes Done, and Always Done in Poker
by Mike Caro
-
Faster Play
by Bob Ciaffone
-
Playing A-K Out of Position
by Roy Cooke
-
Bad Beats at the World Series of Poker
by Nolan Dalla
-
Training for the Olympics
by Jan Shulman
-
A Poker Nickname for a Lady?
by Dear Acey
-
A Father's Day Bad Beat – But Did He Capitalize?
by Greg Dinkin
-
Poker 101
by Jan Fisher
-
$1,500 Limit Omaha: 'I Must … Break You'
-
World Series Offers Memories for a Lifetime
-
Coming to My Senses
-
Focus
by Jeff Shulman
-
Betting Marginal Hands
by Lee H. Jones
-
Learning New Games
by Lou Krieger
-
'He Might as Well Bet $100,000 in the Dark!'
by Tom McEvoy
-
Backup
-
Well, Mom, I'm a Professional Poker Player
-
You Make the Call
-
2001 Players Poll – Part II (Live-Action Play)
by Jeff Shulman
-
This and That About Poker
by Roy West
-
Tournament Structures
-
Beware, IRS Crackdown on Gamblers is Now in Full Force!
-
State Can Bar Some Adults From Gambling
-
The Cream Rises
by Mike Sexton
-
All in the Family
by Max Shapiro
-
Grading the NFC Coaches
by Chuck Sippl
-
Nani Dollison
by Dana Smith
-
Playing the Same in Lowball