Poker Perambulation

My last blog detailed playing what many Internet players would consider a Donk’s approach. And, there are at least two side to any issue. After doing the article, I got a bit of concurrence from a couple of pros.

Lee Watkins has an article up entitled, Weak Lead. I didn’t really cover this but it does go hand in hand with the idea. Here’s the paragraph that he continues to discuss in the article:

Using a weak lead, a player bets out a relatively small percentage of the pot. For example, if there’s 800 in the pot, the amateur would put out a bet of less than half - say 300. Looking at this bet, an aggressive pro may assume that his opponent doesn’t have much of a hand. He may guess that the bet indicates some sort of modest connection with the flop or even a poor bluff. The pro may look at this bet and come over the top with very little, or maybe nothing at all. Knowing that a player is on the lookout for these sorts of signals means you can offer up a weak bet when your hand is actually very strong.

It is the non-standard approach that goes along with my view in the previous blog.

We all know that the non-standard approach can be had. It has certainly happened to me. I’ll limp that big hand against an aggressive blind and get drawn out on a hand he’d have probably folded.

Daniel Negreanu provides an excerpt from his new book along the lines of the article:

Another bone of contention I have with certain authors is the theory that you should play your hands aggressively on the flop so as to better define your hand, and at the same time, to gain more information from your opponents. This theory is actually very effective in limit hold’em, but that theory doesn’t translate well to no limit tournaments.
The main reason for that, is simple: it’s too expensive. In limit hold’em, a raise represents just one extra unit, but in no limit hold’em, if you are going to raise someone on the flop to “find out where you are at” it will cost you a pretty penny.

And he goes into a very interesting discussion of his reasoning in solid detail.

OK, I didn’t really say either of those things. As I write this, the blog isn’t out yet. I guess I could look smarter by stealing. But, every blog isn’t going to say everything on a subject. Mine are often too long as it is.

A lot of my previous blog discussed the reasons to play a non-standard game early. That can also translate to later play against the more highly skilled. Both are talking about betting skills more than my blog did. I seemed to talk around the issue of betting. I have covered betting before and said that I thought it was the weakest part of online play – including mine. It is hard to work out just what will work when. But that isn’t an excuse when we get it all wrong.

All three of us are talking about thinking outside the box. We are looking for misdirection of our opponent. It is just too comfortable to use the basic tools all the time and be taken to the cleaners when it fails. We need to try to make that a two way street more than we do. It is just to easy to fall into the rut of ‘good poker’ and then bemoan our fate. And that touches on the flame posts of another recent blog when the clueless flamer screams, “What a donkey play to call my solid bet with Xxs!” and not realize there are multiple approaches to winning a hand.

I’ve also blogged about playing for smaller pots. That’s reasoning Daniel details well in his post. Online players gravitate to big pot poker. That is often to our benefit but as often to our demise. Races are late game moves. Too many play without the ability to change gears.

Remain flexible. It is a success key.

ADDENDUM:

Bill Rini has an affection for captioning blogs. Well, this isn’t poker but it does cry for captioning. You’re invited to post a comment with an appropriate caption, if so moved.

This does remind me of an old joke:

Three reasons I prefer Mother’s milk:

1. Fresher

2. Comes in such cute containers

3. High enough off the ground that cats can’t get to it

So much for that joke … today at least …

This entry was posted on Wednesday, March 28th, 2007 at 1:25 pm and is filed under Journal, Poker Philosophy, Poker Thoughts, Tournaments. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.