A lot of people think poker is a form of gambling. They don't see that it is a skill game. The hand above demonstrates the skill of poker. Phil Hellmuth, a professional, makes a great fold in this hand. It's a situation that most players in the world will go broke on. I'd say that 98% of people will push all-in with Phil's hand. 1.9999% of players will call down, losing most of their chips on that hand. Phil is one of the top players in the history of the game (he has 11 championships in the World Series of Poker, which is a record), but I'm going to explain how this fold is possible.
Phil raised with a very good hand, Ace-King (AK). AK is the best drawing hand in poker. It is ahead of every unpaired hand (there are 169 hold em starting hands, only 13 of which are pairs), is about 49% to win against pocket 2s, 3s, 4s, 5s, 6s, 7s, 8s, 9s, 10s, Jacks, and Queens. It is only dominated by pocket Kings and pocket Aces.
The other player in the hand re-raised with the BEST starting hand in poker: pocket Aces (AA). Aces dominate every starting hand by about 4:1. AA also crushes any unpaired starting hand with an Ace in it (except of course, if someone else also has AA). Against an unsuited Ace-King, Aces are 11.5 to 1 favorites to win the hand. Against Ace-King suited, AA is about 8:1 favorite to win.
Phil finds himself in an unlucky situation. He has a great starting hand, but is absolutely dominated by his opponent. This is worse than having a bad starting hand. Bad hands are easy to fold. Hands like AK are not easy to fold.
Phil raises to 1,500 in chips, his opponent re-raises to 3,000. This is a very small raise. In poker, weak means strong, and strong means weak. Small raises like this one typically mean an opponent is very strong. Furthermore, there are people left to act after the re-raise. So the opponent makes a small raise against Phil, with people behind him still left to make decisions. This denotes even more strength. The opponent is betting small, begging to get a call from Phil, or a re-raise from someone behind him. And why not, with Aces, you KNOW you have the best hand.
Everyone else folds, and Phil is put to a decision. By now, he has limited his opponent's hand strength. His opponent must have a high pocket pair in order to make a small raise with people behind him still to act. His range is probably pocket tens, or better. But as I said earlier, Ace-King has nearly a 50% chance to win against pocket tens, Jacks, or Queens.
At this point, the pot is 5,500 chips. Phil only needs to put in 1,500 chips in order to see a flop and continue the hand. He is getting 3.6667 to 1 pot odds in order to make the call with Ace-King.
Pot odds are a big part of poker. Basically, pot odds are how much is in the pot divided by how much it costs you to call. If there is 200 in a pot, and it costs you 100 to call, you are getting 2 to 1 pot odds.
Calculating pot odds may be easy, but making decisions based on them is not. Phil is getting very good odds with his hand, nearly 4:1. If he thinks his opponent has a pair like tens, Jacks, or Queens, Phil will win slightly less than half the time, which requires slightly higher than 1:1 pot odds. But here's the thing, Phil wins half the time if the hand goes to a river. Ace-King only hits the flop one out of three times, so he needs 2:1 pot odds or better in order to call, if he thinks his opponent has a pair smaller than Kings. But he's getting 3.7:1 pot odds, which are much better than 2:1. So he calls.
Not only is Phil getting good odds, his table image is at stake. If he allows someone to make a small raise and push hi out of a hand, other players might attempt to do it later on. In No-Limit hold em, it is vital to not let other players think they can bully you. A good player is a bully. A bad player gets bullied. If Phil folds before the flop, other players might make similar moves with absolutely nothing and either get Phil to fold the best hand, or force him to make tougher decisions. Also, in the back of Phil's mind will be the notion that his future opponents might be trying to bluff him, which will mean that their range of hands will be much wider.
Phil makes the call, and it isn't a horrible call. He has no idea that he's only 7% to win the hand. But he maintains his image, and sees a flop with a good hand. He hasn't figured out exactly what his opponent has had, but he's narrowed it down to 5 hands (tens, Jacks, Queens, Kings, Aces). Although Phil is a 13:1 underdog, he has the advantage. He has a very good idea as to what his opponent is holding. Knowing the strength of your opponents hand is EVERYTHING in no-limit.
Phil is out of position in this hand. Position is the order of betting. The dealer button determines position each hand. If you are first to act, you are out of position. If you are last to act, you are in position. You want to be in position because you see what your opponents do before you ever have to act. Last to act is the best position to bluff, and is the best position to maximize the value of a strong hand. Example: you have Queen-Jack and the flop comes Ten-9-8, giving you the best possible hand (a straight). If you're first to act, you might have to check to see if your opponents have a good hand. If you bet, everyone might fold. If you check, everyone might check and get a free card. It might let someone get a free chance to hit a full house and take all your chips. But if you're last and everyone checks, you can realize that everyone is weak, and check to let them get stronger hands so they pay you off. Or if someone bets in front of you, you can figure out what their hand is and raise if you think they have a monster, or call as if you are on a draw, and get paid off BIG TIME
Phil removes position out of the equation by checking in the dark. In other words, he decides what to do on the flop before the flop. Being first to act in this hand, he is at a disadvantage, but his check means that he has forfeited his options and will allow his opponent to act on the flop.
Phil is very good at reading other players, and he knows this. He knows he can check and allow his opponent to make a decision and be able to gauge the strength of his opponent's hand based on that decision. He also figures that if he's up against tens, Jacks, or Queens, his opponent will bet the flop no matter what. This means that if the flop comes with an Ace or King on it, his opponent will bet into Phil when Phil has the winning hand. Phil wants to maximize his good luck if he's fortunate enough to flop an Ace or King.
The flop comes 4-4-Ace, which is a great flop for both hands. Typically in poker, this means someone will win big and someone will lose big. Phil has Aces and fours with the best possible kicker. The only hands that beat him are hands with a 4, and pocket Aces. Since Phil has already narrowed down his opponent's hand to tens, Jacks, Queens, Kings, or Aces, he can safely eliminate the possibility that his opponent has a 4. So all he has to worry about is AA.
His opponent flops Aces full of fours. The only hand that beats him is pocket fours (four of a kind). The standard thing to do with a full house this strong (remember, Aces full of fours is the 33rd best 5 card hand in poker, only 9 hands behind quad 2s, only 22 hands behind a 5 high straight flush) is to check. This is slow-playing. You have a monstrous hand, and you want to get action by feigning weakness, checking, and hoping your opponent "catches up" and also makes a strong hand (that doesn't beat your monster), or hoping your opponent bluffs you.
Slow-playing is a standard thing with Aces full. But it's too standard. When someone raises preflop THEN checks a flop, it can be somewhat alarming. Remember, weak actions=strong hands, strong actions=weak hands.
When his opponent checks, Phil's mind begins to race. If his opponent has tens, Jacks, Queens, or Kings, Phil has the best hand. However, a player typically won't slow down with such large hands even if an Ace is out there. Most aggressive players will put out a feeler bet to try to gauge if their opponent has an Ace. Many players will still check there, and pray their opponent doesn't bet. Phil is now very confused about this hand. He has Aces and fours. He has Kings, Queens, Jacks, and Tens beat. The only hand in his opponent's range that beats him is pocket Aces. But in order for his opponent to have pocket Aces, he has to have the LAST TWO Aces in the deck. Possible, but unlikely.
Here's a difference between a cash game and a tournament. In cash games, you can rebuy and continue playing. In tournaments, if you lose all your chips, you lose; the tournament ends for you. In a cash game, Phil might play this hand differently, and might go broke. He might say to himself "if he has the last two Aces in the deck, oh well. Most likely, he doesn't so I'll push all-in." But in this tournament, Phil's #1 goal is to protect his chips.
The turn is a Queen, which is a good "getaway card" for Phil. Given the situation, he needs all the help he can get to escape this hand with his chip stack intact. The turn means that another hand in his opponent's range (pocket Queens) now has him beat. Phil checks, leaving his opponent with a decision.
His opponent bets 10,000. This is an overbet. It is larger than the pot (which is a little over 7,000 at this point). In no-limit, the ideal bets are usually around 2/3 to 3/4 the size of the pot.
Typically, an overbet means two things. It's either a bluff, or it's a bet disguised as a bluff.
This is an absolutely HORRIBLE bet made by Phil's opponent. He's trying to make it seems as though he's bluffing, AFTER he's tried to make it seem as though he's got nothing with his check on the flop. He's made contradictory actions in the hand. He's acted weakly and then strongly. This is a very confusing action. But what adds clarity is that it is INTENTIONALLY confusing. By now, Phil has realized that his opponent is trying to confuse him.
The hands that Phil has beat are tens, Jacks, and Kings. What Phil is probably thinking is: "If he had tens, Jacks, or Kings, why would he be trying to make it seems as though he was bluffing with an Ace on the board?"
Just ask yourself, if you had pocket Kings, and an Ace comes on the board, are you going to bet nearly twice the pot? Are you going to try to make it seem as though you have nothing? Why would you with an Ace out there? If your opponent has the Ace, he'll call you or raise you. If he DOESN'T have the Ace, but detects weakness, he will raise you. You're putting your opponent to a decision he will make if he has you beat AND if he doesn't have you beat. This leaves you completely lost in the hand.
Let's say Phil's opponent really did have KK and made the 10,000 chip bet. Phil's a smart and aggressive player. He re-raises the opponent. Now, he'll re-raise with an Ace AND with nothing. So when he re-raises, you're left with the unenviable task of trying to get a read on a world champion poker player based on nothing but instinct.
The bet also gives Phil horrible pot odds. He has to call 10,000 in order to win 17,000. That's 1.7:1 right there. That isn't all that good for pot odds. Furthermore, Phil might have to call ANOTHER bet on the river.
Phil's also getting terrible implied odds. Implied odds are a bit more intuitive than pot odds. Implied odds are basically pot odds, plus how much more you think you can make if you either have the winning hand or hit a card to make the winning hand. If Phil is up against Kings, Jacks, or tens, and calls the 10,000 chip bet, his opponent will most likely slow down on the river and either fold if Phil bets, or check if Phil checks. The only way more chips are going into the pot on the river is if his opponent has pocket Aces (which will beat him), his opponent has pocket Queens (which have him dominated right now. Phil wins with an Ace on the turn against QQ, but it means he has to call and hope for one of 2 cards left in the deck to come out), or is opponent has tens, Jacks, or Kings, and a ten, Jack, or King hits (which will beat him).
Phil knows that if he calls the 10,000 chip bet, the only way he is going to make more chips is if his opponent has pocket Queens, and Phil gets extremely lucky. Otherwise, he will make the 17,000 chips already in the pot, or lose chips. He'll also be committed to call a small bet on the river if his opponent has AA or QQ.
The fact that Phil's opponent goes from checking to overbetting tells Phil two things: His opponent either had him beat on the flop with Aces, or he hit the Queen and has him beat. No sane player would act this way with KK, JJ, or tens, the only hands Phil has beat.
Phil makes a great fold and saves his chips. He played the hand intelligently. He paid more attention to what his opponent had, as opposed to what he himself had. By doing so, he saved himself. And he didn't need much reading ability to figure out his opponent's hand. He just thought carefully, constructed a preflop range, used the range to reduce the possible hands he was up against, and made a correct decision. Meanwhile, his opponent had no clue he was up against Ace-King. Had his opponent known this, he could have bet the flop, or bet smaller on the turn, trying to represent pocket Kings, or maybe Ace-Jack. Instead, he shifted into low gear then all of a sudden shifted into 6th, going from checking to overbetting. He tried to confuse Phil about the strength of his hand, not realizing that Phil was not fooled, and if anything, was convinced of his opponent's hand by his attempts to befuddle him.
Phil also gets his opponent to talk to him. They don't really talk about the hand that much, but Phil gets information by getting his opponent to speak. Like an idiot, his opponent surrenders free information by opening his mouth and talking.
Poker is a game of luck. To win any hand requires luck. The skill in poker is to maximize the value of good luck and minimize the damage of bad luck. In this hand, we see how Phil Hellmuth minimized the damage of a very unlucky situation, and his opponent failed to maximize the value of a very lucky situation.
The End
PS: I could make this fold. I don't make it 100% of the time, but I'm capable of it. I'm good.
Phil raised with a very good hand, Ace-King (AK). AK is the best drawing hand in poker. It is ahead of every unpaired hand (there are 169 hold em starting hands, only 13 of which are pairs), is about 49% to win against pocket 2s, 3s, 4s, 5s, 6s, 7s, 8s, 9s, 10s, Jacks, and Queens. It is only dominated by pocket Kings and pocket Aces.
The other player in the hand re-raised with the BEST starting hand in poker: pocket Aces (AA). Aces dominate every starting hand by about 4:1. AA also crushes any unpaired starting hand with an Ace in it (except of course, if someone else also has AA). Against an unsuited Ace-King, Aces are 11.5 to 1 favorites to win the hand. Against Ace-King suited, AA is about 8:1 favorite to win.
Phil finds himself in an unlucky situation. He has a great starting hand, but is absolutely dominated by his opponent. This is worse than having a bad starting hand. Bad hands are easy to fold. Hands like AK are not easy to fold.
Phil raises to 1,500 in chips, his opponent re-raises to 3,000. This is a very small raise. In poker, weak means strong, and strong means weak. Small raises like this one typically mean an opponent is very strong. Furthermore, there are people left to act after the re-raise. So the opponent makes a small raise against Phil, with people behind him still left to make decisions. This denotes even more strength. The opponent is betting small, begging to get a call from Phil, or a re-raise from someone behind him. And why not, with Aces, you KNOW you have the best hand.
Everyone else folds, and Phil is put to a decision. By now, he has limited his opponent's hand strength. His opponent must have a high pocket pair in order to make a small raise with people behind him still to act. His range is probably pocket tens, or better. But as I said earlier, Ace-King has nearly a 50% chance to win against pocket tens, Jacks, or Queens.
At this point, the pot is 5,500 chips. Phil only needs to put in 1,500 chips in order to see a flop and continue the hand. He is getting 3.6667 to 1 pot odds in order to make the call with Ace-King.
Pot odds are a big part of poker. Basically, pot odds are how much is in the pot divided by how much it costs you to call. If there is 200 in a pot, and it costs you 100 to call, you are getting 2 to 1 pot odds.
Calculating pot odds may be easy, but making decisions based on them is not. Phil is getting very good odds with his hand, nearly 4:1. If he thinks his opponent has a pair like tens, Jacks, or Queens, Phil will win slightly less than half the time, which requires slightly higher than 1:1 pot odds. But here's the thing, Phil wins half the time if the hand goes to a river. Ace-King only hits the flop one out of three times, so he needs 2:1 pot odds or better in order to call, if he thinks his opponent has a pair smaller than Kings. But he's getting 3.7:1 pot odds, which are much better than 2:1. So he calls.
Not only is Phil getting good odds, his table image is at stake. If he allows someone to make a small raise and push hi out of a hand, other players might attempt to do it later on. In No-Limit hold em, it is vital to not let other players think they can bully you. A good player is a bully. A bad player gets bullied. If Phil folds before the flop, other players might make similar moves with absolutely nothing and either get Phil to fold the best hand, or force him to make tougher decisions. Also, in the back of Phil's mind will be the notion that his future opponents might be trying to bluff him, which will mean that their range of hands will be much wider.
Phil makes the call, and it isn't a horrible call. He has no idea that he's only 7% to win the hand. But he maintains his image, and sees a flop with a good hand. He hasn't figured out exactly what his opponent has had, but he's narrowed it down to 5 hands (tens, Jacks, Queens, Kings, Aces). Although Phil is a 13:1 underdog, he has the advantage. He has a very good idea as to what his opponent is holding. Knowing the strength of your opponents hand is EVERYTHING in no-limit.
Phil is out of position in this hand. Position is the order of betting. The dealer button determines position each hand. If you are first to act, you are out of position. If you are last to act, you are in position. You want to be in position because you see what your opponents do before you ever have to act. Last to act is the best position to bluff, and is the best position to maximize the value of a strong hand. Example: you have Queen-Jack and the flop comes Ten-9-8, giving you the best possible hand (a straight). If you're first to act, you might have to check to see if your opponents have a good hand. If you bet, everyone might fold. If you check, everyone might check and get a free card. It might let someone get a free chance to hit a full house and take all your chips. But if you're last and everyone checks, you can realize that everyone is weak, and check to let them get stronger hands so they pay you off. Or if someone bets in front of you, you can figure out what their hand is and raise if you think they have a monster, or call as if you are on a draw, and get paid off BIG TIME
Phil removes position out of the equation by checking in the dark. In other words, he decides what to do on the flop before the flop. Being first to act in this hand, he is at a disadvantage, but his check means that he has forfeited his options and will allow his opponent to act on the flop.
Phil is very good at reading other players, and he knows this. He knows he can check and allow his opponent to make a decision and be able to gauge the strength of his opponent's hand based on that decision. He also figures that if he's up against tens, Jacks, or Queens, his opponent will bet the flop no matter what. This means that if the flop comes with an Ace or King on it, his opponent will bet into Phil when Phil has the winning hand. Phil wants to maximize his good luck if he's fortunate enough to flop an Ace or King.
The flop comes 4-4-Ace, which is a great flop for both hands. Typically in poker, this means someone will win big and someone will lose big. Phil has Aces and fours with the best possible kicker. The only hands that beat him are hands with a 4, and pocket Aces. Since Phil has already narrowed down his opponent's hand to tens, Jacks, Queens, Kings, or Aces, he can safely eliminate the possibility that his opponent has a 4. So all he has to worry about is AA.
His opponent flops Aces full of fours. The only hand that beats him is pocket fours (four of a kind). The standard thing to do with a full house this strong (remember, Aces full of fours is the 33rd best 5 card hand in poker, only 9 hands behind quad 2s, only 22 hands behind a 5 high straight flush) is to check. This is slow-playing. You have a monstrous hand, and you want to get action by feigning weakness, checking, and hoping your opponent "catches up" and also makes a strong hand (that doesn't beat your monster), or hoping your opponent bluffs you.
Slow-playing is a standard thing with Aces full. But it's too standard. When someone raises preflop THEN checks a flop, it can be somewhat alarming. Remember, weak actions=strong hands, strong actions=weak hands.
When his opponent checks, Phil's mind begins to race. If his opponent has tens, Jacks, Queens, or Kings, Phil has the best hand. However, a player typically won't slow down with such large hands even if an Ace is out there. Most aggressive players will put out a feeler bet to try to gauge if their opponent has an Ace. Many players will still check there, and pray their opponent doesn't bet. Phil is now very confused about this hand. He has Aces and fours. He has Kings, Queens, Jacks, and Tens beat. The only hand in his opponent's range that beats him is pocket Aces. But in order for his opponent to have pocket Aces, he has to have the LAST TWO Aces in the deck. Possible, but unlikely.
Here's a difference between a cash game and a tournament. In cash games, you can rebuy and continue playing. In tournaments, if you lose all your chips, you lose; the tournament ends for you. In a cash game, Phil might play this hand differently, and might go broke. He might say to himself "if he has the last two Aces in the deck, oh well. Most likely, he doesn't so I'll push all-in." But in this tournament, Phil's #1 goal is to protect his chips.
The turn is a Queen, which is a good "getaway card" for Phil. Given the situation, he needs all the help he can get to escape this hand with his chip stack intact. The turn means that another hand in his opponent's range (pocket Queens) now has him beat. Phil checks, leaving his opponent with a decision.
His opponent bets 10,000. This is an overbet. It is larger than the pot (which is a little over 7,000 at this point). In no-limit, the ideal bets are usually around 2/3 to 3/4 the size of the pot.
Typically, an overbet means two things. It's either a bluff, or it's a bet disguised as a bluff.
This is an absolutely HORRIBLE bet made by Phil's opponent. He's trying to make it seems as though he's bluffing, AFTER he's tried to make it seem as though he's got nothing with his check on the flop. He's made contradictory actions in the hand. He's acted weakly and then strongly. This is a very confusing action. But what adds clarity is that it is INTENTIONALLY confusing. By now, Phil has realized that his opponent is trying to confuse him.
The hands that Phil has beat are tens, Jacks, and Kings. What Phil is probably thinking is: "If he had tens, Jacks, or Kings, why would he be trying to make it seems as though he was bluffing with an Ace on the board?"
Just ask yourself, if you had pocket Kings, and an Ace comes on the board, are you going to bet nearly twice the pot? Are you going to try to make it seem as though you have nothing? Why would you with an Ace out there? If your opponent has the Ace, he'll call you or raise you. If he DOESN'T have the Ace, but detects weakness, he will raise you. You're putting your opponent to a decision he will make if he has you beat AND if he doesn't have you beat. This leaves you completely lost in the hand.
Let's say Phil's opponent really did have KK and made the 10,000 chip bet. Phil's a smart and aggressive player. He re-raises the opponent. Now, he'll re-raise with an Ace AND with nothing. So when he re-raises, you're left with the unenviable task of trying to get a read on a world champion poker player based on nothing but instinct.
The bet also gives Phil horrible pot odds. He has to call 10,000 in order to win 17,000. That's 1.7:1 right there. That isn't all that good for pot odds. Furthermore, Phil might have to call ANOTHER bet on the river.
Phil's also getting terrible implied odds. Implied odds are a bit more intuitive than pot odds. Implied odds are basically pot odds, plus how much more you think you can make if you either have the winning hand or hit a card to make the winning hand. If Phil is up against Kings, Jacks, or tens, and calls the 10,000 chip bet, his opponent will most likely slow down on the river and either fold if Phil bets, or check if Phil checks. The only way more chips are going into the pot on the river is if his opponent has pocket Aces (which will beat him), his opponent has pocket Queens (which have him dominated right now. Phil wins with an Ace on the turn against QQ, but it means he has to call and hope for one of 2 cards left in the deck to come out), or is opponent has tens, Jacks, or Kings, and a ten, Jack, or King hits (which will beat him).
Phil knows that if he calls the 10,000 chip bet, the only way he is going to make more chips is if his opponent has pocket Queens, and Phil gets extremely lucky. Otherwise, he will make the 17,000 chips already in the pot, or lose chips. He'll also be committed to call a small bet on the river if his opponent has AA or QQ.
The fact that Phil's opponent goes from checking to overbetting tells Phil two things: His opponent either had him beat on the flop with Aces, or he hit the Queen and has him beat. No sane player would act this way with KK, JJ, or tens, the only hands Phil has beat.
Phil makes a great fold and saves his chips. He played the hand intelligently. He paid more attention to what his opponent had, as opposed to what he himself had. By doing so, he saved himself. And he didn't need much reading ability to figure out his opponent's hand. He just thought carefully, constructed a preflop range, used the range to reduce the possible hands he was up against, and made a correct decision. Meanwhile, his opponent had no clue he was up against Ace-King. Had his opponent known this, he could have bet the flop, or bet smaller on the turn, trying to represent pocket Kings, or maybe Ace-Jack. Instead, he shifted into low gear then all of a sudden shifted into 6th, going from checking to overbetting. He tried to confuse Phil about the strength of his hand, not realizing that Phil was not fooled, and if anything, was convinced of his opponent's hand by his attempts to befuddle him.
Phil also gets his opponent to talk to him. They don't really talk about the hand that much, but Phil gets information by getting his opponent to speak. Like an idiot, his opponent surrenders free information by opening his mouth and talking.
Poker is a game of luck. To win any hand requires luck. The skill in poker is to maximize the value of good luck and minimize the damage of bad luck. In this hand, we see how Phil Hellmuth minimized the damage of a very unlucky situation, and his opponent failed to maximize the value of a very lucky situation.
The End
PS: I could make this fold. I don't make it 100% of the time, but I'm capable of it. I'm good.
posted by rob | 10:34 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home