How to avoid major mistakes part 1

» COLUMN

How to avoid major Mistakes #1

from firsttsunami

It is, without a doubt, very important that you constantly develop your skills. The best ways to gain knowledge are by reading articles, posting sample hands, through self-analysis and by talking to other players.

Apart from dealing with theory, experience is an important factor which influences your success immensly. By dealing with theoretical concepts, you'll notice that you're able to apply them more and more often at the poker table.

If you don't understand all the important concepts because you either don't have the necessary status to access all the articles or you lack experience because you have only started playing poker recently, you could potenially make quite costly mistakes.

There are some concepts which are absolutely vital to your game. If you should misunderstand them and apply them in the wrong way the results could be disasterous. These are the sort of typical situations which will be discussed in this column, where these concepts will be explained in order to help you avoid these costly mistakes and misunderstandings.

One mistake, which is made over and over again, is to slow play in situations which are not suitable for slow playing. We are talking about situations such as when we have flopped a strong hand while being out of position on a drawy board aganst 3 or more players. You will notice that many players will frequently only call in this situation.

Example:

2.00/4.00 Fixed-Limit Hold'em (6 handed)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 6, 6
MP2 folds, MP3 raises, CO calls, BU calls, SB folds, Hero calls.

Flop: (8.50 SB) J, 9, 6 (4 players)
Hero checks, MP3 bets, CO calls, BU calls, Hero calls.

Turn: (6.25 BB) 4 (4 players)
Hero checks, MP3 bets, CO calls, BU folds, Hero raises.

Final Pot: 10.25 BB

In this situation, just calling the flop instead of raising, is a huge mistake. It is questionable whether a check raise is the correct line here. A donk bet would be possible as well but we are assuming that we are taking the risk to try a check raise.

The passive call is mostly due to the fear that the opponents would fold to any action. They don't raise to keep the other players in the hand. It is coherent that you don't want the players to fold in order to induce another (bluff-)bet.

But even if we are passive on the flop, the other opponents will rarely invest more money into the hand if they have nothing in a 3- or 4-handed situation. You rarely benefit from slow playing on the flop in these situations.

Your fear is unjustified. After you have analysed your hand in relation to the flop and couldn't find a good reason to fold, you have to ask yourself whether there is a good reason to raise or call. Fundamentally it is correct to raise with an equity advantage to collect as many bets as possible.

Board: Jh 9h 6d
Dead:

Equity Win Draw Lost Hand
Hand 0:71.309% 71.31% 00.00% 374171 11.50 { 6c6h }
Hand
1:09.773% 09.41% 00.37% 49354 1927.83 { 66+, A6s+, Ah5h, Ah4h, K8s+,
Q8s+, Q6s-Q5s, Qh4h, J8s+, J6s, T8s+, T6s, 98s, 87s, 76s, A6o+, K9o+,
Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 2:10.152% 09.79% 00.36% 51364 1906.83 { 77+, A8s+, Ah5h, A4s-A2s,
K9s+, K5s-K4s, Q8s+, Q6s, J8s+, T8s+, 97s+, 87s, A9o+, K9o+, Q9o+,
J9o+, T9o }
Hand 3: 08.766% 08.46% 00.31% 44393 1604.83 { 55+, A9s+, K9s+, Q9s+,
J8s+, T9s, 98s, A8o+, KJo+, QJo }

About the ranges: Hand 3 is MP with a standard open raising range from middle position. The other two ranges are from the cold call fish. Such opponents sometimes call with nothing, but they mostly call pairs, gut shots or flush draws.

As you can see we have a very clear equity advantage with which we have to collect as many bets as possible. The problem is:

If we just call, we will win 1SB from every player. If we raise, someone could reraise enabling us to win a total of 4SB on the flop. If we can reraise and even cap, we can win up to 12SB on the flop.

Poker is all about exploiting your equity edge the most, trying to make hands with outs against us to fold as early as possible.

To show you that protection through an aggressive style is important I want to go through the following example: Lets assume the BU holds 77. Would you prefer him to pay an additional SB on the flop or would you like to see him fold?

Board: Jh 9h 6d
Dead:

Equity Win Tie Pots Won Pots Tied
Hand 0: 69.851% 69.85% 00.00% 1279050 0.00 { 66 }
Hand
1: 10.666% 10.36% 00.31% 189684 5631.67 { 66+, A6s+, Ah5h, Ah4h, K8s+,
Q8s+, Q6s-Q5s, Qh4h, J8s+, J6s, T8s+, T6s, 98s, 87s, 76s, A6o+, K9o+,
Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 2: 10.943% 10.67% 00.27% 195423 4959.67 { 77+, A8s+, Ah5h,
A4s-A2s, K9s+, K5s-K4s, Q8s+, Q6s, J8s+, T8s+, 97s+, 87s, A9o+, K9o+,
Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 3: 08.540% 08.47% 00.07% 155099 1283.67 { 7c7d }

We have 70% equity on the flop. Our additional profit, if all three players pay the raise, would be:

Additional profit by raising = EQ * winnings - (1-EQ) * costs
This adds up to 70% * 3 SB - 30% * 1 SB = 1.8 SB.

If the BU would fold, our equity would rise.

Board: Jh 9h 6d
Dead:

Equity Win Tie Pots Won Pots Tied
Hand 0: 78.157% 78.16% 00.01% 7908620 699.00 { 66 }
Hand 1: 10.726% 10.48% 00.25% 1060417 25069.00 { 66+, A6s+, Ah5h, Ah4h,
K8s+, Q8s+, Q6s-Q5s, Qh4h, J8s+, J6s, T8s+, T6s, 98s, 87s, 76s, A6o+,
K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 2: 11.117% 10.87% 00.24% 1100345 24650.00 { 77+, A8s+, Ah5h,
A4s-A2s, K9s+, K5s-K4s, Q8s+, Q6s, J8s+, T8s+, 97s+, 87s, A9o+, K9o+,
Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }

Our equity has increased by 8%, basically the total equity that the BU had is now ours. This aspect is also dealt with in the Protection-Article. The best hand will always profit if anyone folds because the equity of the folding hand is mostly added to the best hand. The BU would fold to our raise with pot odds of 15:1. An increase of 8% equity would be worth 1.2 SB in a pot of 15 SB.

Our total profit is: 78% * 2 SB - 22% * 1SB + 1.2 SB = 2.54 SB.

If someone surrenders his equity we will lose set value on the one hand because he won't be paying our value bets any more, but on the other hand our equity increases. Even if it only increases by a couple of percent, it is worth a lot in a big pot.

Our profit is much higher if one opponent folds a hand with a couple of outs against us, even if the hand only had very few outs. If one gut shot folds it would be even better for us. We would even profit if one backdoor draw A folds.

Conclusion: On a drawy flop with straight and flush draws, aggressive play with a strong hand pays off if the opponents give up their equity by folding.

Another mistake is confusing equity and the concept of odds & outs. Some users make use of the equilator and determine the equity for a situation in which it is unclear whether to call the flop or fold.

Example:

Preflop: Hero is BB with A, J
MP3 calls, CO folds, BU raises, SB folds, Hero 3-bets, MP3 folds, BU caps, Hero calls.

Flop: (9.50 SB) 6, 9, K (2 players)
Hero checks, BU bets, Hero ?

We know that the BU is a rather tight and reasonable opponent. His capping range is TT+, AQs+, AK.

Board: Ks 9c 6s
Dead:

Equity Win Tie Pots Won Pots Tied
Hand 0: 90.318% 90.13% 00.19% 29445 62.00 { TT+, AQs+, AKo }
Hand 1: 09.682% 09.49% 00.19% 3101 62.00 { AdJd }

We have 9.7% equity with pot odds of 10.5:1. Some might think that an equity of 1/11.5 = 8.7% would be sufficient to call the flop profitably. However, the problem is that we are not all-in on the flop. You can't think from one street to the other (flop to the turn) and use a number which includes both the turn and the river but only includes the costs to see another card on the next street. We have to include the costs which arise on the turn and the river.

So what happens if we include the additional investment on the turn and the river?

Assuming that our opponent makes a continuation bet on the turn and plays the river intelligently, we have to pay 2.5 BB to see the showdown if we are behind. We would win 1.5 BB + the pot if we are ahead.

EV(Calldown) > 0, if EQ > losses / (profit + losses)

Applying it to our example it means:

EV (Calldown) > 0, if EQ > 2.5 BB / [4.75 BB (pot on the flop) +
1.5 BB (postflop investment Villain) + 2.5 BB (Heros costs)] = 28.5%.

As hero will make some good folds in some cases, villain will check behind better hands or bluff with worse hands and because hero has implied odds if he improves, you can subtract another 3% from the equity.

=> You can call down profitably with 25% equity or more. Hero definitely doesn't have enough equity. What would it look like in the following hand?

Example:

Preflop: Hero is SB with Q, J
MP3 folds, CO folds, BU raises, Hero 3-bets, BB folds, BU caps, Hero calls.

Flop: (9.50 SB) 6, 9, K (2 players)
Hero checks, BU bets, Hero ?

Again, we put BU on a rather tight but reasonable range of TT+, AQs+, AK. Some opponents will cap a little looser and include some deception-caps as well, but we are assuming that we know the BU and estimate his range as stated above.

Board: Ks 9c 6s
Dead:

Equity Win Tie Pots Won Pots Tied
Hand 0: 79.377% 79.28% 00.10% 28256 34.00 { TT+, AQs+, AKo }
Hand 1: 20.623% 20.53% 00.10% 7316 34.00 { QhJh }

We have a little more equity in this situation but it is still only 20.6%. Some might think that hero should play check/fold on the flop because he needs at least 25% equity for a call down. That would be wrong though.

The equity doesn't help us here because we don't even want to see a showdown unimproved. We don't have any showdown value and our only hope is the gut shot. If we are still unimproved on the turn we don't want to pay any more bets on the turn or the river. If we improve our hand to make a straight on the turn, we will win the hand most of the time. We have at least 4 outs enabling us to profitably call due to the odds & outs. Especially if you consider that you still have implied odds.

Conclusion: You look at your equity if you have a hand with showdown value and aren't sure if you can call the hand down profitably. You have to be prepared to pay additional bets on the turn and the river even if you are unimproved. Therefore a call down is more about reverse implied odds. Due to this you will need much more equity than the pot odds suggest you have because you are not all-in on the flop.

In contrary you will look at the odds&outs if you are pretty sure not to be able to win unimproved and have the intention to fold if you don't hit one of your outs on the turn. You can also include implied odds, as long as the outs are clean.

The effects and the logical consequence of certain decisions are often not recognised. If I reach a decision, other decisions will be predetermined (logical consequences) by the initial decision. However, if I reach a decision and then decide not to consider the logical consequences, I am making a mistake. The following two examples should explain this theory more thoroughly.

Prerequisite: The opponent is unknown to us

Hand 1:

2.00/4.00 Fixed-Limit Hold'em (6 handed)

Preflop: Hero is BU with 5, 5
3 folds, Hero raises, SB folds, BB calls.

Flop: (4.50 SB) J, 9, 4 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, BB raises, Hero calls.

Turn: (4.25 BB) 6 (2 players)
BB bets, Hero folds.

Final Pot: 5.25 BB

We raised 55 from the button. The BB defends and check raises us on a J94 rainbow board. Hero calls the flop and folds the turn. The Hero's decisions are illogical!

You have to consider the effects of the call on the flop. We cannot make an isolated decision. We have a pair which might be the best hand. A call on the flop might have two purposes:

• a) We call due to our outs and fold the turn unimproved.
• b) We call the flop because we have a hand which has enough equity to see a showdown unimproved. (equity call(-down))

If a) is out of the question, b is left. In this situation we have 2 outs to hit our set. As we can see the pot is only at 1:7. We would need 6 outs to call in this position.

We can see that the odds are clearly insufficent to justify a call just to see the next card. A call would be justifiable with a hand like KQ.

If we call the flop, the logical consequence is that we want to see the showdown if a good turn and river hits the board. A good turn, respectively a good river means that no cards hit the board that complete any draws, like (QT, T8, KT), which your opponent could be holding. Call flop, fold turn is illogical and therefore wrong.

Hand 2:

2.00/4.00 Fixed-Limit Hold'em (6 handed)

Preflop: Hero is BU with A, T
3 folds, Hero raises, SB folds, BB calls.

Flop: (4.50 SB) 8, 6, 2 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, BB calls.

Turn: (3.25 BB) J (2 players)
BB bets, Hero calls.

River: (5.25 BB) 2 (2 players)
BB bets, Hero folds.

Final Pot: 6.25 BB

This is a similar situation. We raise with AT and make a continuation bet. The opponent check/calls the flop and the turn brings a jack. The opponent donks into us. The pot is only 4.25 BB and we would therefore need nearly 11 outs to be able to call.

We don't have these outs. We have 3-4 discounted outs and have to fold. However, we have ace high which is a hand with showdown value. We could be ahead against some draws.

a) is out of the question again, therefore b) applies. We call the turn because we have showdown value and he is capable of donking many flops. The logical consequence would be calling a river which doesn't complete any draws. If we are going to fold the river on a blank, we could have folded earlier on the turn.

These situations are based upon the fact that the opponent is unknown. There are exceptions though. If we knew that the opponent rarely bluff bets the river, the line: call turn, fold river would be a possibility.

Hand 3:

2.00/4.00 Fixed-Limit Hold'em (6 handed)

Preflop: Hero is SB with 8, 8
4 folds, Hero raises, BB calls.

Flop: (4.00 SB) Q, J, T (2 players)
Hero bets, BB calls.

Turn: (3.00 BB) 5 (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets, Hero calls.

River: (5.00 BB) 7 (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets, Hero folds.

Final Pot: 6.00 BB

We are in a special situation here. We have the read that our opponent is a TAG. We don't have sufficient outs on the turn to be able to see the river, but we have some showdown value with a pair because he could only be holding a draw.

We don't want to bet in this situation because we don't want to make a bad fold. We also want to see the showdown with our gut shot.

However, it is very unlikely that a TAG will bluff on both streets. He will give up his semi-bluff after a check/call on the turn most of the time. We can therefore fold the river after a turn and a following river bet. He will mostly bet a middle- or top pair for value because QJT are within his range as well.

Conclusion: Decisions cannot be viewed separately. You have to be aware of the logical consequence before the decision (e.g. call) to really advance instead of going one step forward and then one step back only to be at the same spot as you started from. The goal is improvement, not stagnation.