Question what you’ve learned
We spend our entire lives endeavoring to break bad habits. The journey as a poker player is no different. Much of the intrinsic human learning modality is counterproductive on the felt. So, we must forever dismantle the lessons of the past and repurpose their components in order to construct a stronger game for the future.
One of the most universal poker habits, relatable to virtually any player’s experience, is that of reading the board to identify the best possible hand. This is crucial, early on, as part of evaluating the rank of one’s hand without having the experience to make a contextual read on the opponent.
An unintended consequence of this is that, as we develop, it becomes difficult to recognize situations where our opponents cannot have top-ranking hands.
Recently, a friend of mine found himself exhibiting a less obvious but similarly bad habit — a holdover from his early learning. In an online no-limit hold ’em tournament, he was near the money at stakes of 1,0002,000 with a 200 chip ante, and had about 40,000 chips left in play. A tight but somewhat aggressive player open-raised to 4,400 from the cutoff, and our hero defended his big blind with Js 10s after the button and small blind folded.
On a f lop of Q♠ J♣ 4♥, our hero checked and saw the opponent fire a continuation bet of 5,000, which our hero called.
The turn brought the 6♠, giving our hero a pair with a flush draw. He checked again, and the villain bet 8,500 into a pot that held more than 21,000 in chips. This time, with about 22,000 more to raise, our hero went all in. His raise was called by A♦ Q♦, and after the river brought the K♣, our hero’s tournament run was over. He had failed to cash.
My friend remembered, in that moment, that a pair with a flush draw is a strong hand. This is especially true if all the money goes in on the flop, because with two more cards to come, the probability of improving to a hand stronger than top pair is about 50%. However, in this situation there was only one card left, and that brought his equity down to about 30%.
Nonetheless, getting over 3-to-1 odds, calling to see the river certainly would have been a profitable play. However, wagering 30,000 to win about the same amount could only be justified if there was a chance that the opponent would fold to the all-in bet rather than calling. When I asked whether he thought that to be the case, my friend said no, stating that he just knew a pair and a flush draw was strong, and that he felt he was committed to the pot anyway.
It is no easy task to constantly question that which one has long taken for granted. However, to succeed as a poker player, this may be the only strength that is really needed. In the ceaseless maelstrom of chips and cards, the only stronghold is the open mind.