Journal cyan's Journal: The Needle
So, I was playing $1/$2 no limit, my first real crack at a live cash game. Most of my cash game experience up until that point was limited to low-stakes games online ($0.01/$0.02 no limit), or small home cash games ($0.10/$0.20 no limit.) But, I decided to budget myself $100 for the no limit game at Edgewater and give it a try. Trust me, considering how much of a hard ass I am with money, $100 is high stakes compared to what I usually play with. Just for comparison, I've had about $100 total on deposit with UltimateBet for the better part of a year, now.
I sat down shortly after noon with a bunch of guys and had a great time. Granted, one doesn't exactly sit down at a table vying to win everyone's cash and expect to have fun, but it was my day off and I enjoy a great game of poker, so what the hell. But these guys knew how to have fun, telling jokes and friendly verbal jabs. It was sort of like how they do it on High Stakes Poker, but for far cheaper stakes. After about three hours of play, my $100 had turned into a healthy $240.
But then two jokers decided to sit down at the table. One guy, apparently, plays quite frequently at the $3/$5 no limit table, so everyone was wondering why he came to visit us plebs. He sure liked to talk a lot, though. For someone like me, out of his element, it's wise to just shut up and listen. Taking in all the information being given to you is simply invaluable. Like a nuclear attack sub sitting quietly in waiting, doing silent reconnaissance, I just take it all in as information to analyze later.
"It's better to stay silent and look a fool, rather than speak and remove all doubt." -- Mark Twain.
One hand in particular involved me getting good pot odds towards my flush draw. I had a middle pair or somesuch, so I was still able to defend my hand to some degree. When the river came, I didn't hit my flush, and loudmouth priced me out of calling with my lowly middle pair, so I folded. Later, trying to get a rise out of me, he would say things like, "Oh, if he hit his flush, I had him dominated." The question is, if he had me dominated, then why did he price me out of the hand? I suppose he figured I had hit my flush somehow and that I was going to pay him off. Either that, or he was on a stone cold bluff. My instincts were leaning towards the bluff, and his strutting after the fact about how he had me "dominated" only verified that.
Let's look at it another way. Everyone at that table knew I was playing super tight. They all knew that my $100 stack was a lot of gambling money in my eyes (unlike everyone else reaching into their pockets to rebuy for $200 every hour.) I think loudmouth was also on a flush draw, but missed. After he missed, he knew that if he bet high enough, it would force me out of the hand. This is where financial status plays a big role in No Limit Texas Hold'em: the $50 bet he made to price me out of a hand was nothing to him. Whatever profession he was involved in clearly paid well enough that $50 was like toilet paper to him. He knew that I was playing conservatively enough to fold with anything less than a straight. Most people would simply call this "bluffing", but it's important to debate semantics for a moment.
One final point. If he knew that I was playing super tight, why not place a small value bet at the end so that I would call even with a marginal hand? If he had me dominated that badly, and he knew the odds of me calling for a significant portion of my stack were quite low, then why not make a small bet and extract more money out of me? When you consider the 'meaninglessness' of the cash to him, a $15 bet is not financially different than a $50 bet. This is doubly true when you consider the odds of me calling $15 (to make it $30 total, which is the better part of $50) is far higher than calling $50. Anyone who feels like having a friendly debate with me about this particular hand, feel free to get ahold of me, and we'll talk.
Besides, I was still up over 200%, so I was more than content to fold the hand and go on to the next one.
Unfortunately, I let his saber-rattling get to me a little, and I think that this next hand proves that.
Another gentleman who sat down next to me was waiting for a $20/$40 limit game to open up. He kept going on about how he really hated no limit, which sparked a very "emacs vs. vi" sounding debate among all the players. I mean, could you imagine someone walking in on a Linux meeting and exclaiming, "damn, Linux sucks. Windows forever! Forever!!"? You get the idea
I got dealt 6-5 suited in the small blind. I take a page from Daniel Negreanu's book about loving to play these hands. In the right sorts of situations, you can see flops cheaply, and possibly win some big pots if you hit the flop. Thousand Dollar Man to my right, in the typical steal position, raised it up to $20. I called, everyone else folded, and Loudmouth called.
The flop came 6-6-2 rainbow. I was first to act and checked, hoping to trap someone into paying me off with my three of a kind. Loudmouth then immediately went all in for well over $300. To my right, Thousand Dollar Man also went all in for over $400. Not taking the time to think straight, I immediately called. Thousand Dollar Man then flipped over his cards and proudly said, "I've got a full house." I couldn't believe it, but had I took the time to think about the hand a little more, it would've made more sense. The turn came a queen, and the river was a seven. Any of the three remaining 5's in the deck would've won it for me.
Who raises to $20 with 6-2 off-suit, one of the worst starting hands in poker? Well, I can't exactly blame the guy for doing that. After all, I was playing tight, and he saw my blind as easy pickings. I could've easily put an end to it by raising it to $40 before the flop, but that's a tall order for someone with a lowly suited connector. Considering that $20/$40 Limit is his regular game, going in for $20 is like limping in cheaply to him. After flopping the nuts, there's not a soul in the Universe that can blame him for his play after that.
My primary mistake was in not sitting to think carefully about the hand. From what I saw, there was still one more 6 left in the deck, and any of my two opponents could've had it. My kicker, a five, made my hand look even worse. Anyone coming in with Ace-6 suited, for example (which, in steal position is a very respectable hand), would have me beat. Pocket 2's would've had me beat, which is also a raise-worthy hand on the button. Heck, had I thought about it for much longer, I would've realized that a real junk hand like 6-2 off-suit would've had me beat.
On the other hand, it was also likely that any or both of my opponents had a high pocket pair and were simply defending them against something silly. I was also getting some damn good odds to call (had I won the hand, I would have been up to $720, and it's guaranteed that I would've left the casino at that point.) Calling $240 to win $720 with three of a kind makes 3:1 odds on my money.
Everyone I've talked to about this hand seems to be split on what they'd do. Half (including Tom Grassick, the WPPT points leader) say that they would've also made the call. The other half say that it was dumb to go in with such a weak kicker. I think, in the end, it was very tough for anyone to call or fold. Either way, I was put in a tough situation, and it seems that there was no 'right' or 'wrong' answer to playing the hand 'correctly.'
However, this hand taught me a few invaluable things about how to improve my game:
* I need to play more loosely in a cash game. Yes, it may be for real money, but the tight image simply works against me in the long run. In particular, people feel that they can steal from me with garbage hands. A poker player's worst enemy is someone coming into a hand with garbage and then flopping something amazing. Garbage hands turned gold are extremely difficult to detect (as in the case of Thousand Dollar Man's 6-2 off-suit.)
* Time must be taken to think of every major play before committing to it. Nobody's going to call the clock or think me as violating poker etiquette for taking a minute or two to contemplate an action after two players go all in. Had I thought about the hand for 60 seconds or more, I would've lost all notion of trying to trap people into my three of a kind. Someone going all in after a check isn't falling into a trap, it's called a big red flag. Besides, had I folded, I would've still been up over 200%.
* Leaving the table after being up over 200% and feeling a little irritated from someone needling you all afternoon is perfectly acceptable. It is possible that the needling affected my ability to play and made me feel the need to show that I could play a real hand.
Oh, did I neglect to tell you what Loudmouth had? He had the Ace and Jack of spades, which was worth absolutely nothing in this hand. I went in for over $200 with a real hand that could've won, but lost. Loudmouth lost over $300 with absolutely nothing. At least now I know for sure that he was always full of shit.
