User Articles

I'm Going Pro...

TiltinShoes — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:07:10 GMT

Believe it or not, I have actually attempted to never say this, though essentially it was what I tried to do this month. I try not to say it because it is extremely cliche and it is annoying when it comes from a low limit grinder. I know this has been done to death so if you don't want to hear another slant on it stop reading now.

Disclaimer: I would never attempt to follow up on AJK's article but it got me thinking.

I will start with some background info. I was having a decent amount of success playing MTTs and MTT SNGs at Full Tilt playing here and there. Basically, playing part time I was making more than I was at work while also having more fun than I was at work: imagine that. In December I had a good month, enough to take care of all of my living expenses for January and still have the roll to play the games I was beating, so I decided to take the plunge. I talked it over with my wife, who was only slightly skeptical, and called my family, for whom I worked in a retail shop while going to school, and told them all the news. Actually I was shocked at the support they were all giving me.

Before it could all start I had to think about my gameplan especially since I had to work around classes and it was simple. I won't get into what it was as it really has no bearing on the point of the article; the point is simply that I set up my plan based on my belief of an achievable ROI in a game I was currently crushing. Basically, as far as I could tell I had done my homework and this was all pretty fool proof, and everything was in place for the perfect job. Making good money for a hobby.

Now I will skip to the end of the month, to now. It is back to the work force making next to nothing, playing poker as nothing more than a hobby and I have to be honest; I couldn't be more relieved. January, simply put, kicked my ass. I didn't lose my money (actually only ended up stuck $100). So to be fair, my little experiment didn't really fail. Nothing hurt, nothing gained but a little perspective.

This is what being a professional poker player (I hate that phrase)consisted of for me: frustration, stress, exhaustion, and the inability to be anything but a dick. I was misserable. The game I loved turned into a grind and I no longer wonder why they call it that. I wasn't excited to play when I went to my computer, but rather felt like a zombie doing what was required of me at my job, only worse than at my old job, at least I was able to interact with people there.

There are a few secrets that everyone who has been there talks about but others don't seam to believe - myself included. It is a grind. It feels like work, not play. Over a full work day, you see a lot of shit that you can't believe, and it wears on you, or at least it did me. This last one is a tough one: for a lot of people, they aren't as good as they had hoped. This is me, or at least I think it is. Worstly for me because I hate hate it when people blame everything one circumstances, I was constantly bitching:

"Wow, shouldn't suprise me though."
"Why does FTP hate me?"
"Not rigged my ass."
"I hate this f'n lucksac game."
"Asjkldhjfioasdhyfuiohasdjkfhasuiodhfjisahdjkfhasuidfhjiashdfjkhajkh!!!!!!!!!!"

The truth is I probably just was not as good as I had thought. Silly me. Actually I lied, worstly for me, poker took over my personal life. It was frusterated all month, not just while playing. My wife and I were having rediculous arguments for no reason but my own irritation from poker. I carried it with me everywhere. This is the biggest problem. I am typically one of the most optimistic, happy go lucky guys I know. In January I didn't recognize me when I looked in the mirror. On a lighter note, even my dog like me less now. That is somewhat humerous but it is in no way false. She seriously fears me now, and I have no violent urges ever towards humans or animals. Only punching bags and bad guys in video games.

The point of all of this is not to discourage people for playing for rent. If you can do it and enjoy it, great. Good for you. But poker simply isn't cut out for everyone. This is coming from someone that thought people who said that simply didn't have the heart. I know better now. I love poker (well not at this exact moment), but now I know it is better to have as just a hobby. The people who can do it for a living have a special mentality, not better or worse than mine, just different. Hopefully I can get back to enjoying poker, but if not, no big deal. I do know this though, I am going to get back to enjoying my life.

Admissions to Myself

Hinderantz — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 01:20:59 GMT

“Admissions to Myself”

“Hello.” I say.

“Hello” says the group.

“My name is Hinderantz and I am a losing online poker player.”

And in one split second I came to a realization that has taken me years to say, that I am a losing poker player. It is something that I suppose I have known for awhile, but would never admit to. I am sure many of you reading this are in the exact same boat I was in. Many of you are currently in denial. Maybe this article will serve some purpose, and you will look in the mirror and realize the same thing.

I can tell you how I saw my poker career, and I bet a lot of it will sound familiar to what you tell yourselves. I always thought that I knew exactly what I was doing. I thought I could outplay anyone. I thought I could make it big. Sure I had made a few deposits online, only to play outside my BR and lose it all, but I knew that this next deposit was going to be the one. Oops……..use echeck again. “That was only $50…..if I deposit $200, then I will be able to play $2/$4 NL and I won’t get called by a gutshot straight draw and get sucked out on. Oops…….use echeck again.

Any of this sounding familiar? I can only imagine. I will continue.

So after making deposits of approximately $2,000 online, you would think that I could tell myself to quit. But the problem is that I wasn’t losing because I was bad at poker, I was losing because variance!!!! It had to be!!! I can’t even remember the last time I actually sucked out on someone, but yet it happens to me EVERY SINGLE DAY! At some point the tables will turn. Oops…….use debit card.

I think you understand what I am getting at here. And I know for a fact that many of you think the way I thought. Now fast forward to today (and a total of about $8K in losses). It was not too long ago that, through P5’s contacts, I was able to chat with a ranked P5’r on AIM one night. I had railed him recently after an OT’s told me about him, and was impressed with play. Through the railing and the AIM chats and HH’s over a few days, I realized very quickly that this guy was on a COMPLETELY different level than I was. He was making plays that I had never made, he had patience like I had never seen before, and yet aggressive when needed. I was blown away. I realized then (maybe 3 weeks ago) that I was a losing player for 2 reasons. 1) I was not a student of the game. Watching ESPN coverage of the WSOP is not the same as reading books, understanding BR management, talking poker with winning players, and “using your head” when playing. I haven’t read a book in probably 12 years, however I have read 6 in the last 2 weeks, including all 3 HoH and also “The Poker Mind” I still have 4 books here to read, which will be done in a week.

And the second reason………that’s right…….I thought I was better than everyone. The pure idiocy of that thought is humorous to me now, but yet, the thought was in my mind. The thought never crossed my mind in the past that someone could outplay me. I expected respect from my EP raises. I made spite calls so that I wouldn’t get shown a bluff. Plain and simple, I was dumb.

So why am I writing this? That’s a good question. I am not sure. Maybe to brag about chatting with a ranked player? No. I am writing this because I know that there are a TON of losing player out there that are in the same mindset that I was. Now, I have not changed 100%. I am still not a winning player. I still find myself trying to outplay someone instead of just laying it down and waiting for a better spot. But I am improving. And as a losing player, I know that I wish someone had pointed out to me long ago that I would never get better unless I made a true effort to learn and understand the game. So to all you losing players out there, I challenge you. I challenge you to :

1.) Keep a TRUE log of your play - Keep your details accurate, because staring at a negative number in a spreadsheet is a clear indicator that you are a losing player, and you won’t be able to say in your head……eh…..I’m about even.

2.) Read a book (or 10) – So many of us think we know it all, but I can guarantee that from every book you read, you will learn something. Could me a minor detail you never thought of, but any piece of information is important.

3.) Talk poker – How can having another perspective on a hand ever be a bad thing?

And

4.) Play within your bankroll (I am still working on this one) – Becoming a student takes time, and you can’t just double up and be “a winning player”

test

cjm — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 23:35:47 GMT

Time	Site	BuyIn	Description
4:30est	Poker Stars	$215	Sunday Million
5:00est	Ultimate Bet	$215	200k
6:00est	Full Tilt	$216	750k
6:30est	Poker Stars	$215	2nd Chance
7:05est	Full Tilt	$216	Mulligan

Sorry for the late start, next week we will be posting signups Sat morning,
and we will include the warm-up tournaments instead of the 2nd chances.

Please send your buyin to yellowsub86 (athens) on Poker Stars.

Please post your name for each site & if you are in flight 1 or both flight 1 & 2. Todays Entrys Flight 1:

Flight 2:

Late play in Tourneys

preston0505 — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 18:28:52 GMT

I have been cahsing in almost every MTT I play but never seem to make the big cash! I have made a few final tables in the past 2 months but never have enough chips to make a top 2-4 finish. My question is do you change your style up to be more aggressive once reaching the money and "Go for it"?? I usually seem to finsh 20-80th in MTT's and just cant figure out what im doing wrong once mid way through making the money. The blinds seem to get so big and with other players being allin happy this late do you just have to pick a hand and go with it? Ill wait for advice thanks

Are Your Site's Terms Fair?

Dick Famous — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:58:49 GMT

Internet poker players have a lot to cope with these days. First, there is the battle against the omnipresent cheating scams. Then, there is the US government’s current assault on online gaming in general via the ban on money transfers. If those things aren’t enough to chill you from playing poker online, let’s take a look at the terms under which players must agree to play!

If you are like most people, when the terms and conditions (T&C) for a software product come up on your computer screen, you just click on whatever version of “yes” they present to you and move on. For online poker players, it is no different. After a few conversations and interactions with other players online, it occurred to me that most people have very little idea just how much authority they grant to the gaming sites at which they play and place their money.

The typical T&C that poker players sign up to are outrageously one-sided and unfair in my opinion. We would never accept these terms from anyone else handling our money, but we do so from these guys. Why? Well, mostly it is because players do not take the time to understand them, and because together, the site providers form a united front. The various companies agree to non-compete on terms and only compete in other areas. The consumer has nowhere to go. Your choices are to play or not to play.

All of this is fair to a large degree, because playing poker is not a necessity. Sites have the right to create unreasonable terms. Players, on the other hand, have the right to understand the terms and start fighting against them. The purpose of this article is to educate players on the dangers in the T&C to which they agree and to encourage players to complain and grumble about them—loudly and frequently.

For the purposes of the notes below, I am summarizing the actual T&C from a site on which I have a small amount of cash in play. I have taken care to not reveal the name of the site, because I do not want to target them. My point is that the site name is irrelevant because most share the most disagreeable terms in one way of another—modified just enough for the lawyers to get paid. I will provide the site name for anyone who asks by email.

I am not a lawyer, but the T&C are, for the most part, written in plain language—perhaps the only comfort we can share. I feel confident in my interpretations of the wording.

Summary of T&C you probably have not read:

1) You agree that if you violate any part of the T&C, the site can close your account and take all your money. This applies to ALL parts of the T&C without regard for how small the infraction. Keep that in mind when you are reading this.

2) You agree to provide update your account information as necessary to keep it current. That means if you fail to keep you email current, they may suspend your account and use it for executive bonuses.

3) Rules of games are defined by the site and can vary from one site to another or between online and live play. The rules are not defined by any rule book you have in your bookshelf or by how it is done at the Rio or anywhere else. You don’t like it? Go play somewhere else.

4) The games are for entertainment only. You agree that you are only playing for your own personal enjoyment and non-professional use. Professional use is prohibited. This fact would be a surprise to many online professionals and serious amateurs.

5) If you are found to be under 18-years old, they can take your money.

6) You are responsible to know if your local area allows you to play or not. If it is illegal where you live, then you are violating the T&C. Imagine your local District Attorney charges you with illegal gambling and demands the money be turned over for evidence. Guess what? You violated the T&C, and the site will take your money and could give it to the court or just take it.

7) You are not allowed to send any information concerning anyone’s play (including yours) to anyone. Therefore, poker trackers and databases not getting explicit permission from the site to gather information are violations.

8) The site is allowed to look at your computer to see any programs that are running and even take screen shots in real time to verify you are not violating the T&C. Ever hear your hard drive start spinning up during game for apparently no reason? Well, now you know why.

9) You, on the other hand, are not allowed to take screen shots and send them to anyone or post them online as it is a violation of trademark and copyright terms.

10) The site reserves the right to reclaim any bonus amounts if you do not use them within the period of time specified. And they can change that time when they see fit.

11) Cash out fees can change at any time.

12) Payments can be made by any manner the site decides at THEIR discretion.

13) Time to pay out can be delayed by the site by any time the site feels is reasonable for security reviews. Security review procedures can be changed in real time at the site’s discretion.

14) Security reviews have no time limits, and may take as long as the site wants them to take. If you fail to comply with any security request, the site can void your account. The site can take your account balance if you refuse to sign any affidavits, releases of liability, or publicity authorizations. At any time, for no reason or any reason, the site is saying you will agree to sign a release of liability that you have never seen. If you don’t sign they can take your money. They are getting you to agree to terms of anything they write in some future agreement. Would you accept these terms from your bank?

15) Here is a nice catch-all: Poker sites can cancel your account for any justifiable reason. Do they have to give you notice? Nope. How about an appeal process? Sorry. Justifiable? Justifiable to whom?

16) If you don’t sign-in every 180 days or so, they can close your account and take your money. Glad my bank can’t do that with my savings account.

17) The TOP TEN infractions are those that are special in the sense that if you do them at one site, you can be penalized at another site. The site, using unfettered discretion, can void any winnings and confiscate your balance if you do any of these things:

i. Maintain multiple accounts;

ii. Registration name does not match your credit card;

iii. You start a promotion and withdraw early;

iv. Give bad registration information;

v. Not old enough where you live;

vi. You play from a jurisdiction where play is illegal;

vii. You charge back or deny any deposits that you make;

viii. You attempt to cheat;

ix. You do not comply with any of the terms and conditions;

DRUM ROLL PLEASE:

x. If the site becomes aware that you violated any of 1 to 9 above at another gaming site.

18) Oh, by the way, you also agree you can’t sue them—anywhere, or for any amount of damages. Even if you tried, the laws of a foreign land apply. And that may not be where you think it is. For example, the operations may be a Tribal operation in Canada, but they lay claim to the Laws of Curacao, Netherlands Antilles when you want to sue them. It’s a sweet deal for them--not so much for you.

19) You not only agree to these terms but any future modifications that come from time to time that you must discover by reading them yourself each time you play. No worries because they are only 30 pages long. When my bank changes terms, they must notify me each time and allow me an opportunity to close my account. This practice is too common in online commerce.

END OF BORING STUFF: Let me finish by admitting that I have money deposited at online poker sites. However, I would never keep more money deposited online than I would want to be taken unfairly and without due process. My advice to you, the reader, is to follow my lead and keep your balances low.

Additionally, I understand that poker sites maintain a separation from what they can legally do and what they can reasonably do without losing their client base. After all, the online poker community is very vocal and spreads information quickly. If poker sites started screwing around with player’s money left and right, they would start losing clients.

Still, do you want to sign up for these T&C and trust poker sites to act ethically with your money? And how does the site become aware of your failure to comply? There are no poker police are there? Where is the Due Process? Where is the appeal process?

The only thing the gaming sites will respond to is decreased revenue. That’s all. So when you terminate an account for any reason, always state the T&C as the main cause. Complain about these terms frequently online in forums and when corresponding with the sites. All of this is necessary as we move forward toward regulation of online poker—a necessary step in legalizing online poker in the United States.

It’s a long battle, but it has to start somewhere. I am drawing the starting line HERE.

--Dick Famous

richard@dickfamous.com

“It seems Dick is very popular these days.”

The Cautionary Tale of Dick and Jake

spankybabes — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 00:26:10 GMT

Jake was struggling to build a bankroll, but convinced of his potential to make it in the poker world. He started posting regularly at an online forum, bought five poker books, and subscribed to an online training site. After a month he took his first private lesson.

Dick was also struggling to build a bankroll and equally convinced of his potential to make it in the poker world. He bought five poker books, subscribed to an online training site and started to post at an online forum. After a month he took his first private lesson.

When they embarked on this journey they were identical in terms of play and skill.

Fast-forward one year to now. Jake is enjoying the game more than ever and making good money. The quality of Dick’s play, however, has not improved and his frustration has grown as he continues to barely break even long-term.

Superficially, each man took the same steps so to discover why their results are so different we must examine their paths more closely.

Dick wandered into his local Barnes and Noble, glanced over the titles and blurbs in the poker section and bought five books. When he got home he started reading the most interesting looking one and was proud to get halfway through it on the first day. He finished it later that week and put it away. He read bits of another three over the next few months, not finding them particularly applicable to, or useful in, the games he played. The fifth is still gathering dust.

Jake browsed through as many forums as possible, eventually choosing the one he thought he’d gain most benefit from being active in. One where he could post questions on hands knowing he’d get quality replies. A forum where he could reply to other people’s hands without fear of being made to look or feel stupid. There was a lot of advanced discussion he didn’t understand at first, but when he asked a question there was always someone willing to explain things a little more clearly. It was a place where he could admit, despite his playing experience, that he had weaknesses and even that he was, in terms of poker theory, effectively a beginner. It was a place where he could grow.

And he did. Jake posted a lot of hands himself and made a point of commenting in every strategy thread. Despite his constant analytical errors he was never flamed, only guided, and he gradually made the transition from naive posts to the point where he was the one handing out advice to the weaker members. He noted with pride that as time went on the players he respected most increasingly agreed with his posts.

Dick subscribed to a training site chosen at random. He watched a few videos while he was playing. He found most of them boring and often disagreed with the commentary. He began to doubt the ability of the people making the video and, as they were distracting him during play, he simply stopped watching them having barely started on the available content.

Along with the hands and strategy questions Jake asked his forum for advice on which books he should study. He read reviews of all the recommended books and narrowed the list down to five. He read through them all quickly, carrying one with him most places he went so he could read a few pages while waiting for a bus, with his lunch, any available slot of dead time. When he’d finished he set aside an hour each day for study. He reread the books slowly and made notes - much as he’d done at college with textbooks. Even after careful study there were several areas he didn’t quite understand and a couple where he thought the author was in error. He used his forum to discuss these issues and get deeper inside the subject matter.

Dick googled “poker forum” and joined one. He posted a couple of hands and replied to a couple of posts but the other members didn’t really seem interested. Those who did reply usually flamed him or showed in their reply that they didn’t know what they were doing. He stopped posting but kept reading – the soap-opera conflicts were funny. As was watching other people get flamed. After a while he started posting again but this time only to gossip or to flame other people.

Jake read reviews of all the available training sites and again sought advice on which one was not only the best, but also the most suitable for him. He would occasionally have a video playing in the background while he was playing a tournament but he also set aside time each week to watch some videos while making notes. Jake jotted down key hands, making special notes about things he didn’t understand or where he thought the player was wrong. He would rewatch these segments a week later. If he still didn’t understand/agree then he would post about the hand on his forum.

Dick was irritated by the end of the first month. The training site was a wash-out, the books unhelpful and he wasn’t making any extra money from his play. In fact the changes he’d made to his game immediately upon watching a certain video or reading a book usually cost him money. One day on his forum he saw another player recommend a coach.and declare a huge improvement in results after a lesson.. He contacted the coach, transferred him the fee and set up a session for later that evening. He played for 60 minutes while the coach watched and they discussed the hands. The next day Dick could barely remember the hands or what they’d talked about. He certainly couldn’t see any benefit or improvement in his game. He gave the whole deal up as a bad job and decided not to waste any more money learning poker. He would just keep playing. Until he got better.

Jake was thrilled with his progress after the first month. He realized there was much he still didn’t understand but his results were starting to show improvement. More importantly he was starting to understand some of the discussion on the forums and notice definite mistakes in other people’s play. He decided to build on his progress by taking some private lessons, obviously using his forums to ask around for an appropriate coach He found a player he respected at a reasonable price and set up a lesson. After the lesson Jake reviewed what had happened and made notes. He was excited by the differences in approach and thought and at the end of the lesson he felt as if he knew more. He was a little disappointed that there wasn’t any immediate improvement in his actual results but had learned enough now to realize why, that it took time to assimilate new ideas into an already established framework of practice. Jake scheduled another lesson to build upon the first. Now he takes a lesson every month or so to stay fresh and catch any new sprung leaks in his game before they become serious. He also takes additional lessons when learning a new game or going through a rough patch.

While Dick hasn’t improved his results and is starting to hate poker, Jake is considering quitting his job. For a while now he’s been making more from his “hobby” than he has from his career. If we visited Jake in another year’s time we can only envision him being successful. Dick on the other hand is unlikely to be doing any better than he is now. Indeed the kindest advice one could give him is to quit. As the players around him continue to improve he won’t even be able to break even anymore.

Why the difference? We could say that Dick gave up while Jake persevered, but while it’s true that perseverance is an important quality it isn’t the whole story here. If Dick had continued to do everything he did in the first month any improvement in his game would be negligible. The real difference is in their approach. Jake studied poker achieving a good balance between putting in playing time (gaining experience) and study hours (building knowledge). He also found that the increased knowledge from study made his playing hours more enjoyable and more profitable. Dick was too busy playing to ever put real effort into study.

So the moral of this tale is thus: Follow Jake’s example and don’t be a Dick.

test2

cjm — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:50:54 GMT

wcoop 3k contests

Standing	Player	# Played	Total	blank	blank	blank
Singles	Click Headers to Sort
2	sketchy1	8/9	299.93	blank	blank	blank
1	Riverloser	9/9	370.54	blank	blank	blank
3	pbdrunks	8/9	350.78	blank	blank	blank
4	HoosierAlum	7/9	345.84	blank	blank	blank
5	BeL0WaB0Ve	3/9	300.45	blank	blank	blank

Standing	Player	# Played	Total	blank	blank	blank
Team	Click Headers to Sort
2	sketchy1	8/9	400.54	blank	blank	blank
1	Riverloser	9/9	370.54	blank	blank	blank
3	pbdrunks	8/9	350.78	blank	blank	blank
4	HoosierAlum	7/9	345.84	blank	blank	blank
5	BeL0WaB0Ve	3/9	300.45	blank	blank	blank

Rules

wcoop3k: singles

- You can buyin to the contest for $3K
- Only your top 8 tournament finishes will count towards your overall score.
- The $5,200 HORSE event will not count towards scoring.
- Most points wins.
- You will be registered when you...
------ 1: Post your screen name
------ 2: Send the buyin to Tmay420 on Stars.

wcoop3k: teams

wcoop3k: rules

Scoring Rules:
- (How many people you out-lasted) / (Entrants of MTT) x 100 = Sub Total
- Sub Total + Any Bounses = (Total)
- Bonuses are only added if they are achieved.
- To achieve the ITM Bonus you must cash in the tournament.
- To achieve the FT Bonus you must make it to the final table of the tournament.
- To achieve the WIN Bonus you must come in first in the tournament.

1 - 9 Entrants: (1st-100%), (2nd-0%), (3rd-0%)
10 - 19 Entrants: (1st-70%), (2nd-30%), (3rd-0%)
20 - ? Entrants: (1st-60%), (2nd-25%), (3rd-15%)

Bonuses Bases on Entrants:

Entrants	ITM Bonus	FT Bonus	WIN Bonus
100-500	5.7	10.5	17.5
501-1000	5.65	11.5	20
1001-1500	5.6	12.5	22.5
1501-2000	5.55	13.5	25
2001-2500	5.5	14.5	27.5
2501-3000	5.45	15.5	30
3001-3500	5.4	16.5	32.5
3501-4000	5.35	17.5	35
4001-4500	5.3	18.5	37.5
4501-5000	5.25	19.5	40
5001-5500	5.2	20.5	42.5
5501-6000	5.15	21.5	45
6001-6500	5.1	22.5	47.5
6501-7000	5.05	23.5	50
7001+	5	24.5	52.5

Please post in this thread to sign up.

Making a case for the min raise...

lilprog79 — Sat, 11 Aug 2007 14:08:16 GMT

There are people in poker who feel that some plays in poker should never be done regardless of the situation. I often feel that these players are both less resiliant, and easier to read. One of the most hated plays you will find out there is the min raise. You will often find people making fun of players who min raise, degrading their play. I'm here to make a case for the min raise.

Why the min raise?

I began to be interested in min raise, during the late stages of tournaments. I found my self trying to steal blinds in the right situations and being more aggresive, but resteals were coming too frequent, and i felt like i was -EV when i was raising 3 x the bb. So I dicided to do an experiment and min raise to steal the blinds. Suprisingly I would steal the blinds at just about the same percentage i did raising 3x the bb, but i was risking less. This made it alot easier to get away from sub marginal hands(say raising with 99), when I was repopped especially by tag players. This was allowing me to both grow my stack faster and I got in less tough situations. From there I started experimenting with using it in my play through out all stages of tournaments, and I have found that when used correctly, the min raise can be vastly successful in tournament play.

Keys to the min raise

There are several keys to how and why the min raise works. One of the most surprising things I found was how much it pisses people off. This is a huge advantage! Sure your not going to make any friends at the tables, but when people are pissed at you your at an advantage. They are going to try too hard to knock you out, and they WILL make mistakes. It also makes people discredit your play. Min raising makes people think your clueless, and they underestimate your poker ability. Again, in discrediting you, they WILL at some point make mistakes.

Another way the min raise is successful is when using it with the theory of leverage. If you want a detailed and excellent explanation of leverage, Howard Lederrer does a phenominal job of explaining it in the Full Tilt Poker Tournament Strategy guide. I will give you the gist of it here. Leverage is the implied threat of future bets on future streets. If you make a history of betting on all streets along the way, then people begin to realize that if they are going to win hands against you, not only will they have to call the bet you have made on the flop, but they also know they will have to call 2 more bets on the turn and the river as well. Now obviously if they have a monster hand they will do so, but the point is that your getting credit for 3 bets on the flop, turn and river, while only making that intial bet on the flop. This adds pressure to your opponents, and that in turn gives you more fold equity and an advantage. When using a min raise strategy i strongly suggest making leveraged bets after the flop. Generally betting just less than 1/2 the pot is enough to apply pressure. It is also a scary bet because it looks like you want calls.

Now on the surface, the combination of min raises and consistant leveraged bets can look like its making you an idiot. This is exactly what you want. Have you ever been in the later stages of a tournament with an average stack and you look down to see pocket aces. With excitement you make a small raise only to have everyone fold and you only win blinds? While there will be times where you will wake up with Aces while everyone else is holding 2-7 3-8 offsuit, alot of people dont maximize their Aces holdings because they arent willing to get caught bluffing.

Once you start min raising and leverage betting with frequency, your opponents are going to start reraising you consistanly to apply pressure. In fact, not only will they reraise you, but they will over raise you, trying to prove a point. Now when you get your monster hands, like AA, KK, QQ, etc you will be able to make your standard raises, and expect to get repopped, allowing you to get more value for your premium hands.

In addition to leveraged betting, and extracting better hand value, this will allow you to expand your starting hands, and win more unopened pots, even when the cards arent strong. Once you have established your self as a "Min raising donk", you can start playing hands like suited connectors, ace rags, or even blackjack hands, as long as you do two things. One you need to keep a very good inventory of how each player at your table is playing. The frustrated players that are LAG will often try to catch you, and will even call leveraged bets with draws or 2nd or 3rd pair holdings. If you get a TAG player though that starts to pressure you or reraise you, dont be afraid to give up hands, even top pair, when you know your outkicked. Alot of people feel like if they bet out at a pot and get reraised and have to fold, that they have made a mistake. But that play is only a mistake if you dont capitalize on the fact that your play is less credible at that point, and when you get a big hand, ull be able to make that same bet at the pot and get reraised and get it in with the best.

The final Key to the min raise is sticking to it regardless of how good your hand it is. If your goingto min raise 90% of your hands but then raise 3x the bb with Aces, then you have lost your ability to disguise your raises. By making all your raises min raises regardless of your holdings, there is some good news and some bad news. The bad news is that there will be times where you min raise your kings, and a guy calls you with A 3 and hits an aces on the flop when perhaps you could have raised him off his hand. More often though whats going to happen is that you are going to take away your opponents ability to read your hands. While there is luck in poker, it is also about every advantage you can get. The more information you can gather, and the less that you can give off, the more of an advantage you can be. After you catch a few people with monster hands in a tournament, you will find that all of the sudden people are very perplexed by your min raises, and actually are less likely to get involved in hands with you because they cant get a read. This comes into play in the later stages because when you start stealing with min raises, they feel very uncomfortable repopping you with no clue as to what you have....

When to minraise?

I am not suggesting that you raise every single hand. That would be foolish. Generally when I am in a min raise strategy there are a couple rules I follow. First, in middle or late position I want to raise any unopened pot, regardless of my cards. This in general allows you to establish a LAG style which is important if you want to get repopped with your monster hands. Second, I never limp. Limping does not give you any information on your opponents hands, and if you NEVER limp, then you give no information on your hand either. The only time I don't raise preflop is in situations where im in the Big blind, I might just call because my range is wide open at that point. Finally I like to raise limpers. This is for 2 reasons, first raising limpers frequently will make them think twice before limping in the future(they know they will have to call an extra bet), and it also gives you more information on their hands by what they do. Players who are limping in early position with monster hands are likely to give a small reraise to your raise, where as small pair set miners will often be content to call your bet.

How often should you raise? generally if your in the 20-30% range with your pre flop raises you will be in a good position. As you get in the later stages of the tournament you may need to tighten to 10-20% or even expand to 30-40% depending on the image of your table.

Min raising in different stages of a tournament

Early Stages of a tournament

This is the place that I see min raises blasted the most. Why? because when the blinds are 10/20 and you raise from 20 to 40, you accomplish nothing. After all no one is going to fold to a 20 chip raise, and so you are throwing chips away. At least thats what people say :). In reality min raising even at the first level is accomplishing a couple things. First you are gaining information on your opponents hands and even more importantly their style of play. By making 40 chip raises early on your not risking any substantial part of your stack, but over the first 20-30 hands, you can start to see who the LAG players are who will attack you, and who are the TAG players who will fold, sometimes even literally folding that extra 20 chips(if that doesnt smack you and say TAG nothing will). Second, again your establishing yourself as a donk that doesn't know what your doing, discrediting your self with other people. Third, your telling people they need to reraise you so that when you hit your big hands you can get repopped and make bigger pots for yourself.

In early stages you will also find that leverage will help you start to build a decent stack. Even in first hour of a rebuy, where you adapt the rules slightly(im more willing to call all ins when I have the favorite), I have been able to double my stack just by making leveraged bets. This is because generally your table will slide into one of two ruts, one they get pissed and constantly try to reraise you, and you wait for your bigger hands and get paid off, or two they get timid and you end up in a constant state of betting half the pot or less to win the pot, and you get them folding half the time, thus getting pot odds and building your stack.

Remember that when your making leveraged bets, you will win more pots before showdown, and that is a HUGE statistic. The more hands you win before showdown, the less you have to win at showdown, and in turn the less bad beats your going to face. This adds to the skill and takes more of the luck out of the game. It also helps your tournament play to be more consistant.

Middle stages of a tournament

Once you reach the middle stages of the tournament, the min raise strategy starts to separate the men from the boys. You still need to be very aware of your table, and who the tag and lag players are. You want to be lag, stealing blinds and building your stack, but at the same time you need the sense not to raise a guy who reraises every time with moderate holdings. Likewise if the guy 2 to your left is waiting for that perfect hand, you need to raise him religiously.

One big thing people dont realize or understand in the middle and even late stages of the tournament, is pot odds in regards to stealing and restealing. Lets say that we are in the 100-200 level with 25 antes, and your in middle/ late position and everyone folds around to you. The standard raise would be to 600, 3x the bb. So essentially your betting 600 to win 400, meaning that you need to win 3 times out of 5 or 60% of the time to break even. With a min raise your matching the pot, 400 to win 400, and you only have to win 50% of the time on your steals. The other key here is the implied odds of the reraise. When you raise 400, the total comes to 800 in the pot. now to raise you off your min raise and make a statement(and people always seem to make over raises to make statements), people will often raise to 1200 to even 2000 chips, to take down that pot... This is exactly where you want your opponent. Even if they raise 1200, you have risked 400 chips, they have risked 1200. Your opponent is more exposed, and their pot odds are consistantly worse than you. At 1200 chips, they are risking 1200 to win 800. Now think about this. If your risking 400 to win 400,then for every 800 your risking 800. If you are consistantly risking 800 to win 800 and they are risking 1200 to win 800, then you are at an advantage. On top of that often times people will raise to 1600 or even 2000 making their pot odds greatly decreased, and putting themselves in a situation where they will get crushed when you wake up with your monster hands.

Late Stages or final tables of a tournament

In the late stages of a tournament, the min raise works similar to middle stages except for a couple things. First, at this point you are established in your play and style (if you have been consistant), most of the people at your tables have a good knowledge of how your playing. So what is just as important as figuring out what style each of your opponents are, is figuring out what strategy they are going to take to counteract your style of play.

One thing I have noticed with this style of play is that certain people try to constantly reraise you off your min raises late. Why is this important, because it makes hands like AK stronger. People will start repopping you with small pocket pairs and alot of Ax hands.

Once you get to the final table, and your play has been established this is one of the few places where I might stray from a min raise strategy just to get an extra advantage. If I have min raised the entire tournamentand people know that I have been doing that constantly, there may be a few key hands where throwing in a strange sized raise, can psych them out, or add confusion to their thought process.

In Conclusion

I realize I will get blasted for this article, but I'm telling you if you will be open minded you will find this strategy can work. Why a strategy that gives less information to your opponents, disguises your raises, wins more pots before showdown, makes people not take you seriously, and allows you to build bigger pots with your monster hands is considered a stupid strategy I will never know. Then again, Im sure there was a time and day where people criticized Loose Aggressive play too.....

Controlling Pot Size in No Limit Hold em

lefty2432 — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:47:52 GMT

Every poker player dreams about raking in a huge pot. They want to drag in a monstrous pile of chips towards them and have a big stack in front of them. In no limit, there are plenty of big pots to be won seeing that a player's entire stack can be bet at any time, but there are times when a player should look to keep the size of the pot relatively small.

Controlling pot size in a strategy that is rarely talked about in most poker strategy books ans is a key element in being a consistent winner in a no limit cash game.

There are certain hands in hold 'em that are considered very strong hands but are hands taht you may want to keep the pot small with if you don't hit the flop hard. I've seen too many players play a hand like pocket aces hard all the way to the river, failing to realize that if they don't improve they only have one pair.

Let's take a look at a hypothetical example of how controlling pot size can work in your favor. We will say that we are playing a $500 max buy in no limit game where the blinds are 2-5.

You are in the cutoff and hold AK and have worked our stack up to $800. There are two middle position limpers who you have very little information about and both have you covered. You decide to make a raise to $30 and the limpers are the only callers, making the pot $97.

The flop is A39.

This seems like you hit a huge flop for your hand as you have top pair top kicker and a backdoor club draw. Both blinds check and you lead out for a little less than pot sized bet of $80 and one of the limpers call making the pot $257. Here is where controlling the pot size comes into play.

The turn card is the 7, which appears to be a complete brick.

You have $790 left in your stack. The limper checks to you again and at this point you can start to narrow down his range of hands. He could have a weaker ace which is very likely since he limped and then called a raise or he could have limped with a pocket pair, flopped a set and is now trying to trap you.

If you decided to bet the turn, it would have to be a bet that would define your hand, which would be a bet of at least half the pot, and a good sized turn bet would be about $150, which may make a weaker ace fold and if we are raised there is the likelihood of being up against a set or two pair. After the bet of $150, the pot has now climbed to $407 and we have $640 in our stack. If raised the bare minimum the pot will be laying approximately 4.5/1 into a pot that is now $707 to make sure that AK is good. You are also likely to face a river bet of around $300 if not more. You are making the assumption that if our opponent was going to check raise the turn, he is going to bet the river.

If you were just to call the min raise on the turn, you would be leaving $490 in you stack for the river and the pot has now grown to $857. This means that we are problably going to be faced with a decision for almost your entire stack on the river hoping that just one pair is good.

Instead of betting the turn which appeared to be a brick, checking the turn in order to control pot size might be a wiser option. Keeping the pot samll since you only have one pair will allow us to keep hands in the pot that you still have beat. If we check the trun, there will only be $257 going to the river and if you were already beat on the turn, we will lose the minimum when we just call the river bet and if we were ahead, we may have eanred some extra money by keeping a weaker hand in there on the turn.

Sometimes players get caught up in protecting their hand, but they forget to protect their stacks of chips in front of them.

Getting Back to Where Poker is a Game

rocksolid124 — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 14:21:25 GMT

How many times do we find ourselves staring at our computer screen after devoting hour upon hour to a tournament, only to bust out because of a.) a bad beat or b.) a misread or a bad play on our parts. How frustrating is it to realize that all that time has gone down the drain, and several of your hard-earned dollars has been donated to a donkey who will only lose it days from now in a high-limit game that the biggest ballers on the Internet don't even have the bankroll for?

For me, this has been a common occurance, and from reading many articles and threads on the forums, I know without a doubt that I am not the only one. I am not a big game player; I am not a highly skilled player that could go out and dominate the World Series. All I am is a player who has done decently over his time playing poker, and that is all I intend to be.

But I was doing some thinking the other day, and I posed a simple question to myself.

Why did I get into poker in the first place? Was it for the money and fame, or was it for the sole purpose of having fun, playing a game on the Internet that could provide me with a time of rest and relaxation after a long hard day, whether at the job, or at home.

You see, I think that a lot of us, myself included, treat poker as a job, and that is why we stress out when the results aren't there. You look at your account, and you realize the dollars are slowly dwindling away when your goal was to make x amount of dollars on a certain day.

Poker is a game where you will take swings, whether positive or negative. It's a game where being results oriented will kill you. It's a game that you really will be doing yourself a great injustice if you tell yourself that you are going to make a set amount of dollars per day. Some may be able to do so, but I would contend that the vast majority cannot, no matter his or her skill level.

So what is the point I'm trying to make here? I am simply saying that I believe that poker should be treated as a game, a hobby, something to allow us to have fun. Sure, there are many of us that can make a living off this game, but even still I don't believe poker should be treated as a job. I can admit, I make enough money to support my bills/extra expenses. But when I start looking at poker as purely a way to make money, I lose more than I win. However, when I look at poker as a game, and I sit down to have fun, that is when I win tournaments; that is when I see money pouring into my account.

So again, I am not a great author, or a great poker player, but I believe that most of us could benefit by getting back to where poker is what it is...a game.