BEST 10 GAMING SITES.

ARTICLE PAGE

Poker - Don't Beat Yourself Up Over Marginal Decisions

Poker-Don't Beat Yourself Up Over Marginal Decisions

A poker article by Peter Birks at BETDIRECT POKER for Easy Play Games

I was screaming at myself early this morning. Furious. I had just laid down Aces on the flop in a multi-way pot, only for a pair of Kings in the hole to win more than $80.

However, after a 20-minute train ride and some thinking, I decided that I didn't need to be so harsh on myself.

First, the hand:

UTG calls ($3). MP3 calls ($3). I look down and find American Airlines. I raise. The Big Blind calls and UTG springs to life with a reraise. Now, at the times I normally play, this would normally be the equivalent of the sign "I have Aces too", or, at the very minimum, Kings. But I wasn't playing at the normal time. For reasons too tedious to mention, I was playing at 5.30am, which meant that many of the (mostly American) players were probably tired, annoyed, manic, drunk, on drugs, or just not paying attention. Hell, perhaps the man was just annoyed at me for having the temerity to raise his limp under the gun!

MP3 calls the two bets cold, which has me a bit concerned. That would normally indicate a pair of some kind or a suited connector in the JT down to 76 range. But, as I said, I was now operating in the twilight zone. Who knew what was going on?

Worse, I was approaching the time when I planned to quit the game and go to work. I was about $60 up. Anyway, rather than cap it, I called. Big Blind called also.

My call was a mistake. There is an argument for doing this in heads-up situations, but the deceptive value gained in a multi-wayer is insufficient compensation for the larger pot. Besides, I would rather have two opponents than three. A cap by me might push out the Big Blind. If it fails so to do, well, I tried, and the pot would be four small bets bigger as a result.

The flop came Jack-Four-Three rainbow. UTG checks (which also has me worried. I would expect a lead-out here). MP3 checks and I bet. Big Blind folds and UTG now raises. I really do think that the guy has Aces or Kings, but I can't rule out JJ in the hole. Things then got worse. MP3 three-bets it. If this were an afternoon game, I would throw my aces away in a flash. MP3 doubtless has a set of threes or fours. I am drawing to two outs.

But very little of the hand has made sense so far anyway. Are both my opponents perhaps clinically insane (although it must be remembered that this does not disbar you from getting a good hand)? I think for a couple of seconds and then I make my second mistake of the hand - I let the fact that I was planning to quit the game affect my judgment. I am sure that if I had been $300 up or $300 down I would have called here through gritted teeth. But I wasn't. I was $60 up, and I knew that if I got this hand wrong I would end up down for the session. I sighed, and I folded.

The turn brought a five. UTG checked and MP3 checked. I was already almost incandescent. The river brought a 10. Check, check. UTG showed a pair of Kings and MP3 mucked. I later checked the hand history and saw that he had 75.

So, I was cursing myself for throwing away a potential profit of about $80, solely because I was scared of shadows in the wind. It took the calming effect of a walk from Charing Cross Station to the office to put things in perspective.

As Sklansky points out, if a decision is only marginally right or marginally wrong, it is best not to spend too much time thinking about it, because it will not make much difference to your overall win rate. The one caveat here is that, if it is a decision that you make many many times, then it does become important to be on the right side of that decision. But this was not a case that would crop up all that often. Neither was it a decision which was obviously right or obviously wrong (oh, ok, I'm sure there are legions of "what a prat!" comments flying around). Suppose about 70% of the time my Aces get beaten and 30% of the time they win. Then over 100 occurrences, I lose (say) $42, 70 times and win $74, 30 times. That makes a call wrong to the tune of $7.40 a hand. But if you jiggle the figures just a little bit, you can make the call right to just the same degree.

The reason that I was fuming was not that I had made a serious error - it was at worst a marginal error in an uncommon situation - but that my decision had turned out to be wrong in a big pot. In other words, the variance of the profit and loss within the individual examples was very great.

This, however, is the wrong way to think. The decisions that the limit player should be worried about are those that are made frequently that are marginally wrong - even if the net gain or loss on those decisions is quite small. If you limp with QT off in MP1 after there has been a single caller on your right, I would guess that your $3 contribution has an expected net return of about $2.50. Now, you won't notice this, because as a rule you will fold the flop or, if you come in, you might win a decent amount. In, say 100 hands, you might lose $3 about 80 times, lose an average of $12, 12 times, and win an average of $40, 8 times. That gives you a loss of 68¢ a hand. But you never beat yourself up about these hands, because the variance is small.

So, the next time you stay in with the Aces and lose, or you fold with the Aces on the flop, but would have won, don't get too mad at yourself. The chances are that the decision was not that important, even if it was a mega-huge pot.