Metagame - What It Is, and Why It’s Important

Introduction

In this article

• What Metagame is
  
• Why it is important
  
• How you use it in your game
  

Metagame is neither a new game show nor what passes for baseball in Queens. In the poker world, metagame is any and all information one might consider about an opponent when playing a hand. Moreover, the play in one hand will have broad implications on all future hands.

For example, Gus Hanson gets paid off when he has the nuts, because he has a loose image, playing even 2-7. Understanding how the actions during a single hand or game will factor into future decisions is crucial.

My peers describe me as a "thinking player", "non-standard", and "tricky". I assume I am pegged with these tags because I am constantly evaluating what my opponents think and what they think I am thinking. I calculate how my previous actions will influence their present decisions. A skillfully managed metagame has added a lot of expected value to my game.

Metagame was first brought to my attention while watching the 2004 WSOP Main Event. Dan Harrington was at the final table holding six-deuce, which caused two pros already in the pot to fold their hands. Harrington knew his opponents Josh Arieh and Greg Raymer were aggressive, smart players. He also knew they perceived him as a tight, smart player. When Arieh made a preflop raise to 250k and Raymer called, Harrington seized the opportunity to use the metagame to his advantage.

WSOP 2004 Final Table Hand #57

Blinds $40.000/$80.000, $10.000 Ante

Stacks
UTG - Josh Arieh (3.890.000)
UTG+1 - Al Krux (2.175.000)
MP - Greg Raymer (7.920.00)
CO - Matt Dean (3.435.00)
BU - Dan Harrington (2.320.000)
SB - Glenn Hughes (2.375.000)
BB - David Williams (3.250.00)

Preflop: Dan Harrington is BU with
UTG bets 225.000, UTG+1 folds, MP calls, CO folds, BU raises 1.200.000, 4 folds

He re-raised to a 1.200.000 chips from BU, an extremely aggressive move. Both opponents folded and he increased his chip stack by 25%. Harrington firmly believed his opponents viewed him as a tight, smart player. He viewed his opponents as aggressive players with the ability to raise a wide range of hands. Most importantly, he thought of Aireh and Raymer as smart, aware players.

Harrington knew their thought processes would deduce that he could only make this move with the best of hands. Combining this knowledge with his read of the two players' aggressive style of raising a wide range of hands and his perception of both men being aware and smart players, Harrington concluded both would fold their hands a high percentage of the time.

You do not have to be playing in the WSOP for metagame manipulation to be effective. The ability to control the metagame will be useful any time you are playing more than one hand with the same player. Your table image, your opponent's image, and what they think about what you are thinking, are all facets of the game that can be managed so you can reap future rewards.

Your image

Opponents will develop a table image of you from the moment you play your first hand together. Some players pay little attention to your actions, while others analyze every move you make. Every call, raise, and fold you make will affect your image at the poker table.

Gradually, your image will be established and your astute opponents will react accordingly. If you have been playing loosely, they will start to play back at you. You must counter their reaction. If you have been bluffing a lot, ease off the gas and start betting for value. Use their adjustment to your advantage.

By changing up your style mid-game, you increase the chances of getting paid off by either an opponent's bad bluff or bad call. At the very least, you will diminish their ability to read you correctly. You can also manage your table image with misinformation. Making a singular key play or two can leave a lasting impression. Sometimes you will want to take an action that might have minimal expected value in the current hand but will give you an advantage in the metagame.

I was playing a 6-man Single Table Tournament with one of the better regulars at the $100 level. He was the chip leader on the bubble with 25BB. A random player and I both had 10BB and were fighting to get into the money. The regular was skillfully wielding his chip stack by pushing or raising every hand. He predictably open pushed from the small blind and I had K-10 in the big blind. If I was playing this as a single hand, I would have folded but in poker, all the hands are connected.

$100 6-max SnG

Stacks
BU 10BB
SB 25BB
BB 10BB (Hero)

Preflop: Hero is BB with
1 folds, SB raises 25BB All-In, BB calls

We have played hundreds of games together and we will play hundreds more. I called here so that he would credit me with a wide calling range in future bubbles. He flipped over 9-2 and sucked out. As the cards came he wrote "nice call" in the chat box, clearly surprised I called. In the games since this hand I have noticed he no longer pushes so wide. Mission accomplished!

Opponents' images

Understanding your opponents' playing styles will assist you in making decisions against them in the future. Most players have a general pattern to their play that will classify them as a fishy player, a loose-aggressive player (LAG) or a tight-aggressive player (TAG). In order to make a basic determination of their playing style, consider the number of hands they play, their use of position and whether they come in for a raise or a limp.

Generally speaking, playing a lot of hands, disregarding position and coming in for limps, reeks of a fishy player. Fish like to play a wide range of hands and play them very passively. Once they see the flop they will usually fold their bad hands to a bet, call with a medium hand or draw and bet or raise with a good hand. Losing players have no understanding of metagame and no awareness that their cards are basically face up due to their past actions.

If all the competition were fish, everybody would be a winner. Unfortunately, we have to consider players who are more aggressive. These guys open many pots with a raise in late position, make continuation bets, double-barrel and float as part of their arsenal. They are the standard, hard-to-play-against, loose-aggressive (LAG) players.

So how will knowing that a player is a LAG help you in future hands? LAGs use their position, board reading and player reading as their tools. They play many pots; therefore their average hand strength will be weaker. They rely on putting enough pressure on their opponents to win pots without going to a showdown. These types of players generally play their misses strongly, so the value of your medium hands increases against them. Calling down with middle pair, as well as check raising good hands and slow-playing monsters are all profitable strategies against LAGs. Your understanding of metagame will make his play more predictable and therefore easier to counter.

Finally we have the tight aggressive players (TAGs). They tend to play fewer hands than LAGs, but still open with a raise and play the hand strongly. Their starting hand ranges are going to be a lot narrower than a LAG’s and on the flop the value of their hand usually shrinks considerably. When they miss, they usually give up on a wet board, or make a continuation bet (cbet) if the flop is dry. When in position, floating them on a dry flop or betting them on a wet flop are optimal strategies. TAGs will try to take a pot down, but will give up on the hand if they think they are beat.

Analyzing an opponent's table image has obvious benefits. Grasping his overall approach to playing will give you information for the metagame. I am not advocating using his image as the sole justification for making a play; I certainly would not want you to bluff just because you label the guy as tight. But use your opponent's image as a confirming indicator. For instance, if you are on the fence as to whether to push or fold, then by all means use your opponent's tight image to help you make the decision to push.

Your opponents' awareness matters

Reading your opponents' playing style is important, but qualifying their awareness of the game is crucial. When I first learned about metagame, I felt there was a whole new world of information I was tapping into. I wondered how well I could manipulate others into making plays by exploiting their preconceived notions.

The effectiveness of metagame management is directly related to your awareness of your opponents. Astute players pay attention to the action at the table. They follow each hand to varying degrees and even after they fold, they keep track of past hands. They are very good candidates for manipulation through metagame because they are factoring in your past plays when making a decision.

Playing a $2,500 No Limit event at the World Series, I was seated at the same table as Brandon Cantu - a terrific tournament player. He was building a nice chip stack and winning a lot of hands without a showdown. He was giving considerable attention to providing a new home for the chips of the passive, older gentleman chips seated two seats to his left. Then a hand came where Cantu open raised from the button, the small blind folded and the passive older guy smooth called in the big blind. The flop came A-K-8 rainbow.

WSOP $2.500 No-Limit

Stacks
UTG
UTG+1
MP1
MP2
CO
BU - Brandon Cantu
SB
BB

Preflop: Brandon Cantu is BU with
5 folds, BU raises, SB folds, BB calls

Flop: (2 Players)
BB checks, BU bets, BB calls

Turn: (2 Players)
BB checks, BU bets Potsize, BB raises All-In, BU folds

The older guy checked and called a bet by Cantu. The turn was a blank, the big blind checked again and Cantu fired a pot sized bet, building a considerable pot. I thought the guy would fold yet again, instead he pushed all-in. I was really surprised and Cantu was dumbfounded. Cantu thought about it for a moment, then folded AK face up saying "let’s see the set of 8's". The older guy smiled and flipped over 9-10. As the next hand was being dealt, the older gentleman said, "take that as a compliment, I could not make that move against a lunkhead." Brandon did not find any solace in that but understood the man's reasoning.

However, many players focus solely on their current hand. They have no idea what image they are portraying and are surely oblivious to the other players’ actions during previous hands. Changing up your style or making negative EV plays for future results against this type of player is like making beds in a burning house.

A good example of what happens when you do not properly factor in your opponent's awareness occurs whenever you hear or see something in the chat box like: "How can you call there? I haven't played a hand in the last hour!" The answer is that there are some players who pay no attention to anything but their own hand. If a player must point out his playing style, then he is not doing a good job of handling the metagame. It is his responsibility to figure out whether his opponent will understand his intentions before making the play. You can be sure that Dan Harrington knew that Raymer and Arieh were aware of his image.

A parting thought

In this age of poker when strategy material is widely available and anybody with more than a social interest in the game uses hand-tracking software, gaining edge whenever you can makes the difference between a winning and losing player. All the objective facets of the game, like math and logic, can be learned in books or videos. The subjective part of the game, the psychology, has to be refined with practice, using trial and error.

Developing a sound metagame approach to poker will keep your opponents off balance. The lack of confidence in their decisions will cause them to make mistakes. David Sklansky's poker theories are based on opponents making mistakes. His belief is that when your opponent errs, you win, regardless of whether you lose the hand or not. When you can manipulate your opponents into thinking the way you want them too, they will make mistakes and you will eventually be the winner: you can be sure of it.