Texas Holdem Poker

Is there a great divide amongst poker players today? Are we subconsciously or consciously dividing our opponents into two distinct categories? This is the debate that took place last night through a war of words and chips.

On a whim I decided to head to the Seminole Indian Casino last night. As I signed up for the .50/1.00 No Limit Hold’em, I mentally prepared myself and switched on the ‘Maniac’ act. I was basically going to spend the first ten minutes at the table convincing everyone that I was an absolute lunatic with no regard for winning or money.

Within minutes I was seated with $100 in front of me and I made sure everyone knew I was there. I went with a blend of a rich, drunk, gambler who just came to have fun. After I broke the ice with back to back jokes aimed at my expense, I picked up my first hand in the big blind, 8h 4d. With two limpers and the small blind completing, I made it 4 times more the big blind. Everyone folded and I quickly flipped over the 8-4 offsuit with a huge laugh.

Sure enough the next hand I picked up two rags again, Js 3d. I made it 4 times the big blind and got only one caller, I guess they weren’t convinced of my act yet. The board fell Kh 9d 2s. I bet out six dollars into the pot of about nine. My opponent quickly mucked and almost before his cards hit the muck, I slapped over the J-3 offsuit exclaiming “I love GAMBLING!”

As I looked around the table I could see a mix of disbelief, anger, and one particular player who looked like he really wanted to hit me. As the cards hit the felt for the next hand, I noticed that the player who I had just bluffed, who ironically was the player who looked like he wanted to hit me, sat up in his seat and was ready for his turn to act. Thinking he must have a big pair, I peeked down to find the 7h 8s. After taking a second to think, I figured this was a great spot to put in my last maniac play before switching gears. I fired out a bet of four times the big blind, knowing if I hit the flop hard I could probably double through him and if I missed, I could still show my maniac play for advertisement.

When the action came to our opponent, he immediately raised it the minimum to 8 dollars. The rest of the table folded to me; I am calling with any hand I have here, as it’s only costing me 4 to win 13.50, that means the pots laying me about 3.37 to 1. I am only about a 2.7 to 1 underdog to AK offsuit and even if he has AA or KK I am only about a 5 to 1 underdog. Figuring the implied odds of the times I hit my hand, I can easily call here. One smooth call later and luck strikes the felt in the form of a board reading, 3d 7s 8c.

I paused and finally decide to bet out like I had the previous hand. I fired out a bet of 12 into the pot of about 17.50. Leaving me with about $80 behind, give or take a bit. My opponent took the bait and ran with it, instantly re-raising to $30. There’s now about $60 in the pot, my opponent has about $60 left and I have about $80, facing a call of $18. I decided my opponent wouldn’t be able to get away from his big hand and exclaimed, “All-In BABY!” He insta-called and I flipped over my cards after he showed his Ad Ac. The turn and river brought two blanks and I doubled my stack. My opponent was visibly furious and yelled, “I HATE gamblers, don’t they know this is a skill game.” I thought about putting him in his place with the statistics he laid me by raising the minimum, including the implied odds, but for the sake of my session I held off.

This session and encounter has had me thinking all night about the prospect of two separate players, gamblers and skill players. Is there a divide? Are gamblers players that chase draws against all the odds and call gutshot straight draws over and over? Do skill players always make the ‘smart’ decision? Are they the type of player that can lay down the big pair when the gambler sucks out on them?

I spent my early years as a poker player believing I was a skill player. I made the calculated decision at every opportunity, I was able to make big lay-downs and stay alive till I was in a better spot. I was killing micro-stakes games and steadily moving up the ladder of poker. Then I ran into players who were able to play all sorts of hands ranging from Q-3suited to AA in the same manner. They always seemed to get paid off when they had the nuts and were able to pick spots when to make moves with the 7-8 offsuit. Weren’t these in fact the players that are more skillful then myself?

This is an interesting debate that takes place on the tables through action at all levels, from the ‘bullies’ at the .5/.10 No Limit holdem Poker tables, to the Sammy Farha’s and the Dan Harrington’s of the elite levels. In my eyes the ultimate player and the player we should all strive to become is a mix of the two players. We have to be able to make other players believe that we are loose, wild players, therefore paying us off when we switch gears and tighten up.

I am not suggesting you should start re-raising and raising Under The Gun with any rags, I am simply giving you a glimpse into the game plan of some of the elite players. If you can achieve some “cheap” advertising, too go along with a wild table image, you will be paid off much more handsomely. I was able to walk away from the .50/1.00 table up over $300 because of advertising my image, luck, and intelligent play. The three key ingredients to combining the gambler and skill player. I hope you can gradually add these moves into your game.