Promotions and Bad Play

One of the things I see a lot in my local card rooms are players who change their strategy in hopes of winning a promotional jackpot.  Many card rooms have a jackpot drop in addition to the rake.  One or two dollars is taken from every pot and put into a pool of money.  Card room management then comes up with contests to award this money to players.  One of the most common contests is a so called “Bad Beat.”  A particular strong hand (such as Aces full of Jacks) is named by the card room management and if that hand is beat a chunk of that jackpot pool is awarded.  Typically, with the Bad Beat, half is given to the looser of the hand, a quarter to the winner and the remaining is shared with the other players at the table.

A more common promotion is the “high hand” (or “Monte Carlo” in my area).  Big hands like four-of-a-kind (“quads”) or straight flushes are awarded bonuses from the jackpot pool above what they win from the pot.  Usually, there are rules associated with these bonuses.  A minimum number players must be in a hand, a minimum dollar amount must be in the pot (enough for the jackpot drop to be raked from the pot) and both hole cards must be used to make the player’s hand.

There are good and bad points to this bonus system.  The primary reason any card room uses them is to draw players in.  This is an obvious benefit.  The more players in a room the more action, the more action the more possibility of profit.  Another benefit is the potential for remediation of the rake.  As I’ve discussed earlier, at low stakes the rake a room takes represents a large percentage of the overall take for a winning player.  Winning a promotional jackpot once every six weeks or so can go a long way to recouping some of that lost money.

A significant drawback to promotions has to do with philosophy and influence over players decisions.  Philosophically, many advanced players object to promotions because they believe it arbitrarily rewards players based on chance, not on correct play.  They resent being made to pay a dollar or two out of every pot they win and given to other players who are simply lucky enough to be dealt a big hand.  Poker is expensive enough, they argue, having to play blinds and room rake.  The redistribution argument aside, the math may be on their side.  The cumulative amount a player pays in jackpot drop may be more (in the long run) than the potential winnings from a promotion depending on how a particular card room structures their bonus system.

A bigger issue, in my opinion, has to do with the influence promotions have on poker decissions players make.  An example is when players in the blinds collude to try and hit a jackpot.  Often, as a courtesy, the two players in the blinds will take back (i.e. “chop”) their blinds and fold their hands preflop if action is folded around to them.  The courtesy is extended to the table to get a hand over with that seldom has much potential for profit and get on with the game.  Most of the players I play with employ this “chop” courtesy.  Some don’t and want to play blind vs. blind.  In my opinion, either is fine so long as a player is consistent and understands their options.  Where promotions complicate this is when a player in the blind has suited connectors or a pocket pair and wants to try for a jackpot.  Often this confusing exception is employed and players will check down the hand in a hopeless attempt.  Not only is this technically a rule violation and even if the player hits a jackpot should not be awarded the money, but it’s a waste of time.  If two or three of these situations arise in a game an hour that could potentially be one less hand.  Six hands a session over the course of a year adds up fast and potentially robs players of opportunity.

Another situation I’ve commonly seen is when players slow play trying to hit a promotion.  Say for example a player has a pocket pair and makes a set on the flop.  A poker room has a promotion paying $50 for quads.  So many times I’ve seen players check and call with these hands hoping for their case card and win the jackpot.  They fear if they play aggressively that opponents will fold and they won’t see the turn or river and miss out on their chance.  These players fail to take into consideration the equity they are sacrificing and the potential reward.  The case card for a set on the flop to make quads by the river will come 1 time in 25.  The 24 other times a player misses his quads around 36 big bets in total are missed by slow playing.  Since a set does get beat around 20% of the time we can discount this amount to about 30 big bets.  So, even at the small 3/6 stakes fixed limit games I play in that’s $180 in missed profit, ALL FOR A $50 JACKPOT!

An often missed aspect of this issue is the impact on the action at the table.  An example would be if I had an open ended straight draw in the above example with my opponent making a set on the flop.  The other player in the hand has a gut shot draw to a higher straight.  So, unbeknownst to me four of my outs are “dirty” and would make my hand but also the third opponent’s better hand.  I would bet and/or raise this hand on the flop but the opponent with the set (hoping to hit his quads and $50 promotion) is just calling.  Had the set owner raised or re-raised correctly (given the strength of his hand) the gut shot opponent would not have been given odds to chase his draw and folded or mistakenly put the money in anyway.  Now my “dirty” straight card comes and the set holder not only loses his hand but I get beat too.  Or, my “clean” out card hits and I get less money than I should have because the gut shot opponent wasn’t given the opportunity to make his mistake.

The bottom line is that promotions (love ‘em or hate ‘em) are a big part of most card rooms.  Players are well advised to be aware of them, learn the rules that govern them and understand how they can impact play at the tables.

Smallish Pocket Pairs

Pocket pairs from 5’s to 8’s I have often played in set mining mode.  I’ve called one or even two raises hoping to hit my set on the flop and scoop a big pot.  I’ve been willing to forego a small bit of equity (folding or just plain value) for the benefit of a usually small initial investment.  Occasionally, these hands will hit big such as a flop like K-Q-6 while I’m holding pocket 6’s with a preflop raiser.  Even better is when I fill up with a flush or straight on board.  But, I’ve reconsidered this strategy recently and elected to take a more aggressive line that increases my short term variance but will net me more money in the long run.

The important element in my analysis has to do with how often those big hands come around when I not only hit my set (one time in eight) but the board also hits my opponents strongly enough to get paid off big.  Considering every flop will miss any random hand 2 out of three times, the math doesn’t look hopeful.  In fact, those two factors happening together doesn’t make up for the initial investment of limping and calling with these hands.  So, where can I make up the difference?  I think the answer is in thin value and folding equity.

About as often as I make my set AND the board hits my opponent a hand like pocket 6’s may win unimproved or (if played aggressively) may get a better hand to fold.  Example 1.) I raise in cutoff with 6-6 and only the big blind calls holding 6-7.  I the flop comes 7-J-2.  It checks to me and I bet.  The turn is a K, I bet and BB thinks about it and calls.  The river is an A, checks to me and I bet.  There are 5 big bets in the pot, so my opponent has to fold only 1 time in 6 to make this play profitable. Chances are he’s not going to think much of his 7’s.  This is fold equity that I have been missing by not playing my hands aggressively.

Example 2.) Say I have 5-5 and raise on the button.  The flop comes Q-9-7.  The big blind and cutoff called my preflop raise and both check to me on the flop.  I bet and both call.  The turn is a 2.  It checks to me and I bet, both call again.  On a board like this what could be calling me.  Well, possibly a Q or 9 but what about all the other hands.  There are so many straight draws with a flop like this, hands like J-10 and 8, 8-6 and 5, K-J, 5-6, 10-8 so many that will call all the way to the river and just end up folding when they brick out.  The same for two and three cards to a suit.  Much the same as the previous bluffing hand, these drawing hands will spike a pair, call the river and win.  They also will sometimes make their draw.  But given the odds with two callers, they only have to brick out and fold 1 time in 8 for this line to be profitable.

Example 3.) is when a pocket pair wins unimproved.  I have 7-7 in middle position and raise.  I’m called by the button and big blind.  The flop comes 6-3-J.  BB checks to me, I bet and am called by button and BB.  Turn is a 5.  Not a great card for me but it checks to me again and I bet and called in both spots again.  The river is a Q.  That card scares me a bit so I check behind when it’s check to me planning to make a crying call when button bets.  To my surprise he checks as well and shows 6-7 suited.  Big blind mucks and I scoop the pot. 

In the last example had I played in set mining mode I would have missed my set on the flop, checked and almost certainly the button would have bet, thinking his 6’s were good.  I would have been left thinking that I was only drawing to 2 outs with a tiny pot and would have (correctly) folded.  In example 2 a hand like this might check down and I could win but only a tiny pot and I would be vulnerable to a bluff by one of the broken draws.  In example 1 it’s very clear that I am not winning without an aggressive line.

Adding in all this missing equity along with the times I do hit my set make playing smaller pocket pairs aggressively a winning play.  On any one individual hand I may lose more then if I would have taken a more passive line but the rewards long term are greater.  Essentially, I’m risking 1 to win about 1.5 when I take an aggressive line and about breaking even with the passive set mining approach.  Accounting for the rake, when you break even in this game, you are losing money.

Clear Headed Evaluation

A hand I played recently went like this:

Hero in cutoff with K-10o

Folds to hero who raises

Called by sb.

Heads up, 2.5 big bets

Flop is 10d-5d-8s

Check to hero who bets

Sb makes a snide comment and calls

Heads up, 3.5 big bets

Turn Qd

Check to her who bets

Sb calls

Heads up, 5.5 big bets

River 2c

Check to hero who bets

Sb folds

The fellow in the small blind I hadn’t played with before but had been watching him closely for a couple hours before this hand.  He had a fairly big stack in front of him and was playing very aggressively.  He was playing a great many hands, probably closed to 70% and the cards I saw him show down with were pretty weak starting hands, things like A-rag and off suit one gap connectors.  It was clear to me that he was losing more showdowns than winning but was far more than making up for those losses with fold equity.  Player after player were folding to his aggression on the turn and river.  I was in good position to exploit this type of play, two players to his left.  When I started catching a few hands to play and he was open raising I began three betting, knowing I was likely ahead of him and also making it difficult for those behind me to call three cold in order to play.  Upon connecting with the flop I took several big pot from him.  I also showed down a few hands against other players, losing on the river with my busted draw hoping to get a fold.  Seeing these hands, this fellow assumed I played like him not realizing that my hand selection was really much tighter than he imagined and much more sensitive to position.  On the flop of the above hand, this guy blurted out loud, “I just don’t know what you have?  I’m gonna call.  You are one of those weird players that comes in here.” 

The session I played this hand in was one of my biggest.  I finished with five times my original my buyin.  But, the satisfaction from that win was not nearly as good as the glee I felt from this fellow’s comment.  He is a decent player, aggressive and observant.  Many times I’ve played against his ilk and felt intimated, like I was being targeted and made mistakes in my anxiety.  This time, however, I was able to calmly analysis what this fellow was up to.  I realized the logic of what he was doing and made adjustments to my strategy to exploit the weakness in his game, namely just playing too many hands.  He, on the other hand, was not able to figure out my play.  He failed to make adjustments to his strategy and consequently just kept losing to me.  I imagine his comment was an attempt to needle me.  As if to say, “you don’t play like I expect you to so you must be a poor player.”  But, the effect was the opposite.  I was proud and thrilled to be so confusing this guy.  I was pleased he could not or would not adjust to the game I was playing and profited from it.  It was an important step forward for me as I continue to try and derive some meaning from the habits of my opponents and avoiding my own insecurities and confidence issues that can blind me.

Card Death

A session I had a week ago gave led me to an important insight.  I’ve been trying to take note when emotion rises and falls with me at the table.  Trying to determine what triggers tilt in me will give me a good place to start in better managing my mental game.  It’s really hard to fix a problem if you can’t clearly define it.  With technical skills you would never see a player voicing a problem with their game with statements such as “I just can’t win, I suck!”  So too with the mental game there are lots of different facets and flavors of problems  and trying to get at the root of what’s going on isn’t always very easy.

One problem I’ve been having is coping with card death.  I’ve tried deep breathing, going for walks, changing seats, all with spotty results.  It’s a form of injustice tilt with me, I understand that getting “my fair share” of good starting hands means I should be playing one out of three or four dealt to me.  I also understand, rationally, that a nice distribution only happens over a large sample.  It’s crazy to think that I actually do play every third or fourth hand I get.  That’s not how distribution works; it’s very messy in the short term.  When I do coin flips I would never expect EVERY “heads” result would be followed by a “tails” and vice versa.

In a session of Hold’em I might play 100 hands and it’s possible that I would be dealt about 20 or 30 that are playable.  But, 100 hands is much too small of a sample to see an appropriate distribution.  Most of on line players recognize that 10,000 hands is the minimum sample size to obtain reliable statistics.  Anything smaller and you run the risk of results being influenced by chance.  The larger your sample size the more confident you can be in trends and not errors in calculation or just simple random occurrences in the data.

So, if over 10,000 hands my VPIP (voluntarily putting money into the pot) is still only 18% I’ve got a problem with too tight starting hand selection and I need to figure out where I’m missing equity.  If I’ve got a VPIP of 18% after only 100 hands, I may have a problem, I don’t really know.  It’s just as likely that I’m facing a cold deck as I am getting too nitty with my hand selection.  This is where my mind gets foggy at the table.  70 hands or so into a session getting playable hands maybe once every other orbit I start to attribute my low VIPIP to things that statistically I can have no confidence in.  I start to think that because there are 3 limpers in front of me I can play J-9 off suit because “I’m getting 5:1” and I think I’ve been playing too tight.  This sort of thinking will clearly spell disaster for me.

If I can rationally understand that card death and cold decks happen, quite frequently actually, then why am I allowing it to put me on tilt?  Much of it comes down to some of the intangible reasons I play cards.  I enjoy playing well, making good decisions and trying to think through situations.  I enjoy evaluating other players and just the mechanics of how poker works.  I enjoy winning.  I like the respect winning commands from others and I enjoy the banter and exchange of ideas with other strong players.  When I compare what sets most players off, bad beats and suckouts, to what upsets me there’s a difference.  No player likes getting outdrawn, the fall of an unlucky card and the pot shoved to a player without the same level of skill.  But, these situations generally do not put me on my ear the same way card death does.  Somehow I’ve equated conservative (i.e. winning) hand selection with not playing at all.  Folding hand after hand doesn’t feel like striking out, it feels like never even being allowed to come to bat.  When I get a strong hand and get drawn out on I feel like, “So be it!”  I tried my best and I got beat, I can live with that.  But when card death stretches into its second hour with me I feel impotent, like I’m wasting my time and jipped.  I didn’t even get a chance to try and use my skills.  I’m like a second stringer, begging the coach in the fourth quarter, “Put me in!  Give me the ball! I want to play!” but never getting my shot.

So, what is it about hand selection that makes it feel like a jip?  The adult learning model talks about levels of mastery starting with 1.) Subconscious incompetence (clueless, you don’t even know what you don’t know) 2.) Conscious incompetence (understanding your shortcomings) 3.)  Conscious competence (learned skills you still need to focus on in order to use) and 4.)  Subconscious competence (skills learned so well, they are employed without thinking about it).

When I was starting to learn to play poker, thinking about what cards to play was a big part of my learning curve.  I had a list in my head and it didn’t really matter my position, my table image, the pot size, the action, the number of players in the hand and the relative quality of those players.  I had to consciously match my hole cards with the list in my head in order to know what to do with them; fold, call or raise.  Card death wasn’t such a problem for me at that time because so much of my thought process was occupied with this one element of hand selection.  As hand selection has begun to receded into subconscious competence I’m no longer focused on it.  It’s more or less automatic.  Now my focus is much more on post flop play, evaluating my opponents and their range, calculating my equity and pot odds and other considerations that happen AFTER I’ve decided to play a hand.  Does this mean my skill at hand selection has gone away?  Heavens no!  It’s just that it’s being employed at a level I’m not aware of as much.

So, no wonder that card death is eating at me more and more.  It’s not so much that I’m not being dealt my “fair share” of cards.  It’s much more that the things I’m paying attention to I don’t get to apply as much as I want.  Understanding this aspect of tilt, what’s getting under my skin and why is going to go a long way to resolving this problem and will help me inject logic when I feel my frustration rising.

“You are playing your share of hands, it’s just that the skills you employ in selecting those hands is going on at a level you are less aware of.”

Confidence

I got some interesting insights from Jerrod Tendler’s book about poker psychology on confidence.  I’ve often suffered from lack of confidence at the tables.  I get intimidated by other players, I begin to doubt my decision making and make mistakes.  When my confidence is threatened the adrenalin rush blocks out my ability to think and I get kicked into fight or flight. I see threats that may or may not be there but clearly don’t pose the danger I think they do.  I over play hands feeling like I have to defend myself.  I play timidly and fail to bet in raise in spots I need to.  The biggest problems with this short circuit in my thinking is that I start to focus on the wrong things.  I start to worry about a meta game that probably doesn’t exist and even if it did, shouldn’t result in making too many changes in my play.  I fail to put players on a range of hands and make proper betting decisions based on that range, the strength of my hand and the size of the pot.

Jerrod points out that all humans in general and poker players in particular, are terrible psychics.  We make errors all the time in estimating our abilities.  Poker players love to envision themselves as dangerous players who can take on all comers.  We also frequently miss the mark in evaluating the strength of other players as well and envisioning them as clueless fish, waiting for us to come and take their money.  Evaluating my strength as a player and the strength of my opponents is very important to playing winning poker, but it’s not that easy to do, especially in live play.  Learning to accurately evaluate my play and the play of opponents is a skill that has to be learned and practiced.  It’s not just a feeling you get when you sit down at the table or a judgment you can make by watching one or two hands.

These errors in judgment, particularly in evaluating the strength of my own play is at the root of confidence issues.   I had a pretty good run earlier in the year.  I played fairly well but there’s no doubt I was touched by positive variance.  In the midst of it I erroneously assigned too much of my success to skillful play and also began to underestimate the skill of my opponents.  The truth is I’m a decent player but still very inexperienced and prone to making a lot of mistakes better players avoid.  I’m still a novice and it’s going to take a lot more work, study and experience to be an advanced player.  I’ve begun to grasp a lot of the fundamentals and this does give me an edge over a lot of my opponents but I’ve got a long way to go. 

Subconsciously, I knew that my confident stand was a sham.  I was overconfident.  When poker eventually slapped me down my confidence level collapsed like the house of cards it was.  The trouble is that my level then dropped below any semblance of reality.  I began to underestimate my ability “I suck, I’ll never be a decent player” and over estimate my opponents “That’s the second beat that guy gave me.  He’s targeting me!”

Cultivating certainty is the solution to confidence issues.  Learning and putting in the work to accurately assess my skill, to be able to consistently spot variance and learn to correctly evaluate my opponents abilities will enable me to put confidence issues behind me.

Game Notes

A tool I’m going to be using to help with my mental game is taking notes on how I'm feeling and what I’m thinking during my sessions.  I booked a nice 5 hour session yesterday morning.  There were two fairly drunk fellows at the table; leftovers from the night before from a game that broke an hour or so prior.  We started a three handed game.  I’ve been playing short handed games a lot on line lately.  These are play chip games so opponent ranges are wide open.  I didn’t compensate enough for my live play and so I got hammered a couple times with hands like 2^nd pair losing to top pair. 

Interestingly, one hand I won set me off a little bit.  Out of position I hit trip 9’s and turned quads.  There was very passive action so I was just checking and sure enough got a bet on the river, I raised and both called.  The room has a high hand promotion.  Hitting promotions are important to my win rate as they help compensate for the terrible rake at these low stakes.  Unfortunately, this room has a four player minimum to be eligible so I missed out on a $100 prize.  This room allows employees to play, especially when games are short handed to keep the action going.  There were two dealers sitting around chatting and not playing.  I was pretty pissed. 

The truth is, however, that I knew the rules when I sat down.  I could have waited until four players turned up to play.  I accepted the possibility of hitting a promotion but not getting paid when I agreed to play three handed.  AND, I’d do it again because I have a MUCH higher expectation playing against two drunks short handed compared to winning a promotion.  This is the equivalent of bad players slow playing sets trying to hit quads to win a promotion.  The amount of money you win on the extremely rare occasions your case card hits comes nowhere near making up for all the equity you miss by not betting and raising your sets.

I guess rationality finally won the battle because I was able to move on and keep a handle on my play.  I won a few hands and by the time the table filled up I had a decent stack and then “it” happened.

I have been struggling some with entitlement tilt, specifically to great feeling of injustice when I go through long stretches of being dealt nothing but unplayable hands.  I know the math says outside of the blinds I should be playing ¼ to 1/3 of the hands I’m dealt.  Any more than this range and I’m playing too loose; exposing myself to getting drawn out on and coolers.  Any less than ¼ and I’m too tight; risking losing equity and getting run over.  But, when a cold deck hits it and I enter the second hour of looking down at 8-3 and 10-2, I start to question my hand selection strategy.  This is easy to do since nearly all of my opponents at these low stakes will regularly play hands like these and occasionally win with them.  It’s tough to stomach folding hand after hand when my neighbors are raking in huge pots with 7-2.  Temptation comes calling when I get dealt A-rag UTG + 2 or suited trash in cutoff with 2 limpers in front. 

Another thing that compounds my “card death tilt” is that probability doesn’t take a break along with the trickle of hands I’m “supposed” to get.  Stewing in my entitlement I somehow believe that because I’ve waited “SO LONG!” for my pocket 10’s they should hold up.  But, as so often happens, the overcards come and I get played back at.  Instead of taking my foot off the gas I reraise trying to force the hand but only end up building a bigger pot for my opponent and I end up feeling even more spurned.

One or two of these overplayed hands can often emotionally swing me in the other direction and cause me to feel hopeless about my play.  One situation came up yesterday when I found KJ in the big blind with three limpers in front of me.  Instead of raising I just checked, I missed the flop and checked.  One of the limpers bet out and with such a small pot, I just folded.  As played, it wasn’t too bad, I lost the minimum.  But, because of my tilt I started feeling hopeless and deviated from my normal aggressive game.  My internal talk was, “Why raise?  I’m just going to miss anyway.  Why should I build a pot for an opponent again?”

The “Why raise, I’m just going to miss…” is very seductive because there’s a lot truth in it.  Yes, I am going to miss the flop, 2/3 of the time in fact.  It’s also some consolation (in a sick way) when I check fold the flop in these cases that “I lost the minimum there.”  When I’m this mode after my fold I’ll watch the turn and river very carefully and smugly gloat to myself as I would have missed those two cards too.

But, the definition of tilt is when emotion causes you to change a winning strategy.  Raising preflop with hands that likely have an edge over opponents is standard basic play.  Without it I have no chance of winning in the long term.  My entitlement and injustice tilt is causing me to play losing poker.

Finally, I caught pocket 8’s in early position.  I raised and got called in four spots.  The opponent to my right had folded and commented, “You waited a long time for that hand!”  Usually, I catch myself giving too much credit to opponents but I forget that sometimes they do pay attention.  My c-bet on the flop got raised, I called grumbling about my probable beat again but a sweet 8 fell on the turn.  I check raised and the board cooperated on the turn, pairing and giving me a fullhouse.

I could feel myself tilting and I did make some bad plays but my worst play yesterday was far better than the worst I’ve ever played when on tilt.  This is really important because while playing better is important, playing less worse is just as crucial.  I’m beginning to feel like my A game is improving slowly but I’ve got lots of opportunity improve the back end of my game.  Playing better when I’m not at my best is a very worthwhile goal.  Staying with a winning strategy, even when it doesn’t “feel” like its winning can be done.  What happened yesterday is a good example in staying disciplined, being sorely tempted to play bad hands but resisting.  That patience allowed me to stay in the game and eventually get a few of the hands I was looking for.

What is Tilt?

Jarrod Tendler in his book, The Mental Game of Poker, lays out the concept of tilt and how it costs players so much at the tables.  He suggests that normal advice on self help and poker such as breathing exercises, meditation, visualization and positive self talk may help in the moment of a tilt storm but don’t get at the root cause of tilt.  Tilt will continue to happen it’s just with these “tricks” you may be able to cope a little better with it.  Jerrod is interested in helping players uncover what causes players to tilt in the first place, find ways to resolve these issues and in this way stop tilt from happening.

Here is Jerrod’s equation:

Tilt = Anger + Bad Play

We are all familiar with bad players.  Folks play poorly for all sorts of reasons, ignorance, indifference, superstition.  But, it is when anger (frustration, indigence, envy, arrogance, etc) results in bad play that we have the recipe for tilt.  Notice that anger alone is not tilting.  The best players in the world get angry at the tables but they have learned to not allow emotion to negatively impact the decisions they make.

Trying to find out players beliefs about and meaning assigned to poker is at the root of what causes anger, and subsequently tilt.  It’s natural to think that I need to find out what’s pissing me off to resolve my feelings about it, not just try some tricks to stop feeling pissed off!  But, one tool Jerrod suggests turns this upside down.  I need to critically examine what success means for me in poker.  I get angry at the table when I feel like my attempts to achieve success are thwarted.  So, what does success look like for me?

It’s easy to think that success in poker means winning money.  Money is how we keep score in poker.  A big win rate, a string of positive sessions and a swelling bankroll would tend to make most players think they are on the right track.  But, when I sit down at the table there’s more at steak than just money.  Trying to find out what those things are, how to measure them and identifying the thing preventing me from achieving them would go a long way to start getting a handle on tilt.