Online Poker Strategy Articles

Vaughn Sandman

I tend to be fairly critical of most television coverage of poker. Obviously, we've come a long way with the advent of the hole-card cam. I've seen those old broadcasts on ESPN Classic, and they're kind of interesting to me as a poker nut. But without knowing what cards folks are holding, you're pretty much just watching fat guys smoke. The most interesting thing may be looking at the clothes and guessing it's a broadcast from 1986, only to discover that it's actually 1994 and yes, poker pros were still wearing Members Only jackets. If you've been hanging around Commerce lately, you'll realize some still are.

But the game has gotten younger, cooler, better, faster, hipper and is now being played for a lot more cash. All that, combined with the hole card cam, makes for a much nicer show.

That said, I still have my issues with the way poker is shown on television.

Watching ESPN's coverage of Day Two of the U.S. Poker Championship, there were a couple hands that really caught my attention. The hands were interesting because of what they showed about how some big-name pros play the game, but also because they highlighted what I believe is missing from much of the coverage.

Both hands featured lesser-known players going heads up against a name player. In both cases, the pro came in trailing and had to make a choice to stay with the hand. And in both cases, in my ever-so-less-than-humble opinion, Lon McEron and Norman Chad (ESPN's poker commentators) failed to really break down for the viewer exactly what was happening in the minds of our heroes and why they did what they did.

FLACK ON THE ATTACK

In the first hand, Layne Flack comes in for a raise with QTs. He's got a big stack, position, decent if not great cards, and he's the first one into the pot. Nothing ground-breaking there. One of the short stacks at the table, a guy I had never heard of named J.R. takes a long time thinking before moving in with his pocket nines.

Lon and Norm agree it's the right move-glad we're all on the same page here.

At this point, Flack goes into the tank and ESPN's duo begins speculating on what he'll do-will he call knowing he likely has the worst of it etc.-but they fail to really get at what Layne is working over.

He knows his opponent has something. Yes, Layne knows that his opponent recognizes that Layne will raise with less than premium cards, but Layne also knows his opponent has been patient up until this point looking for a spot to move in with his short stack. Layne also likely knows that his opponent is smart enough to know that Layne may just call an all-in raise with junky cards for the sheer pot odds since he has the chips to afford it.

Conclusion: Layne knows his opponent either has a pocket pair or two decent high cards.

Layne knows where he stands against each of these possibilities. He's on the slightly short side of a horserace against a pair 99 or lower, and he's in big trouble against TT or JJ and huge trouble versus QQ, KK or AA. Against two high cards he is in big (almost huge) trouble against any combo that includes his T or Q but has a higher kicker, and is in decent shape against two other high cards.

Conclusion: Based on stack size, Layne should call if he thinks he's up against the smaller pocket pair or non-dominating high cards. He should fold if he thinks he's dominated or against the bigger pocket pairs.

Norm and Lon don't really get into this-which bugs me. But there's the next level they don't even approach.

Namely, how does Layne know which of these hands he's up against' Basically, he doesn't. It comes down to educated guessing and weighted percentages. High cards are more likely than pairs, because there are more combinations of them. Small and medium pairs are more likely than the monsters, not only because there are more of them, but also because there is some chance J.R. would have flat called looking to trap with AA or KK.

Layne looks at the size of the pot and the size of his stack, then he figures out where he'll be if he loses and decides that while he knows he is not ahead, he also knows that the possible hands against which he is only a slight-to moderate underdog far outnumber the ones which have him practically dead to rights.

Layne calls and says 'show me Ace-Jack.' When he sees the nines he exalts' something like 'Oh Baby!' as he knows it's his best-case scenario, once he's ruled out the possibility that he is up against a pure bluff. Predictably, Norm and Lon fail to mention why Layne wanted to see AJ and why he was thrilled to see the small pocket pair.

Just as predictably, Layne flops both a Queen and a Ten, and despite facing a straight draw on the turn, wins with his two pair. A Textbook decision for an action pro playing a big stack.

TOTO: HOW DANGEROUS IS TOO DANGEROUS''

The next hand worth pontificating on starts as a multiway pot with Toto Leonidas raising with Kh4h and getting action from two players with small pocket pairs as well as shorter-stacked, lesser-known Eric Haber, who is holding a suited ace (I think it was Ad8d) in one of the blinds.

Both Eric and Toto hit the flop as it contains the ace of hearts and one other low heart: Eric with top pair and Toto with the nut flush draw. Eric, on the shorter stack comes out betting and Toto with his mountain of chips and nut draw calls. By the turn, both small pairs are out, there are still only two hearts on the board, and Eric is all-in as Toto ponders a loose call.

Norm and Lon do a good job of pointing out that Toto is a very unpredictable player and keeps people very much off balance-this is the type of bizarre call he just might make. But let's be a little more specific.

How many outs does Toto think he has' We know he has nine hearts with one card to come, with 46 cards possible (assuming his opponent is not holding a heart). That makes him slightly worse than a five to one dog, and with Haber all-in, he is not getting proper odds to call. Does Toto think his king might be good, giving him three more outs' Probably not-he's smart enough to know Eric is betting the ace.

So why would he call' Basically, because Toto lives by different rules than the rest of us. Chris Ferguson, who was in the hand with one of those medium pocket pairs, would never make this call. Neither would Erik Seidel, Dan Harrington, Phil Hellmuth Jr. and a bunch of others, including myself. Does that make Toto wrong' Well, not when he rivers the flush to knock Eric Haber out.

Thing is, I believe in cerebral analysis, just as I believe results do not indicate whether a given decision was the correct one-winning the pot does not make Toto a genius and me an idiot (his bracelet does that). But while I am a brutally analytical player, I have to acknowledge that there are other factors, much less-quantifiable than pot odds, that can influence a great player's decisions. Toto has been watching Eric, saw him raise with QQ and then call Brian Haveson's all-in re-raise with KK, which cost Haber half his stack. Maybe Toto feels Haber's luck heading south and has a gut sense his heart is coming. Maybe Toto believes what he gains in winning all those chips is worth more than what he loses by calling off a sizable chunk of his stack without getting proper odds.

My guess is that over the long haul, Toto's unorthodox play yields more volatile results than other big-name pros. He might have longer droughts between wins, but since tournament prize structures are weighted so heavily to the top three places, he also might have a higher percentage of big wins even as he makes fewer money finishes. After all, he was the defending champ in this event!

Listening to other big-name pros talk about Toto, you might hear some grouse about him being a gambler who wins when he gets lucky, that others are better players. But if pushed, these same pros might admit that they would much rather see these 'better players' staring out at them from behind a condo of chips than have to sit and watch Toto methodically cut and restack his checks while he contemplates another move that leaves a player muttering to himself on the walk to the parking lot.

note by gank: Vaughn Sandman is an avid online poker player.