Raising the Standard

Hi folks,

It's my first blog since the recent acquisition of Full Tilt Poker by PokerStars and whilst I'm mucho excited about that, I shall save writing about that for another day.

Today I want to discuss something that comes up quite often, particularly when discussing the local circuit, in this case being the Stoke Poker Scene. This last weekend saw the Genting Poker Series come to Genting Club - Stoke, when combined with the Anniversary Cup weekend perhaps made for the biggest week of Poker in history in Stoke-on-Trent!

By all accounts it seemed to have gone very well and from the few moments I got the opportunity to view it, the live webcast seemed to be good quality. It's very odd watching your local jaunt and familiar faces playing Poker via broadcast and good to see the Stoke Scene getting some props for what is a fairly well run room week on, week out.

Today's topic comes via local Stoke player, Wendy Rees. I have just discovered after chatting a little with Wendy (when getting her permission to write about her views contained within) that she is from the Isle of Man! Tis a small world, we appear to have rotated around to replace each one another in our respective home-lands!

In the popular Stoke Poker Chat room on Facebook, Wendy raised some concerns over the Genting Poker event this weekend. Whilst giving credit for a well organised event, she felt the event was let down by ... (queue the music...) the standard of play.

Anyone who has played with me long enough from Stoke knows a little piece of me dies every time I hear someone say that, LOL! So needless to say it ground my gears enough to want to write about it. I sought out Wendy's permission to base my blog on her point of view, which she has very kindly allowed me to do, providing that I quote her directly. She asked me to post the following as a direct quote from Wendy..

"Raising with two random cards and hoping to get lucky is not Poker in any way, shape or form".

Now, before I go on a rant saying how incorrect this statement is, I'll be sure to the point very clear that only 50% of the argument is incorrect, however the sentiment is entirely incorrect. Judging by the content of the chat transcript, Wendy appears to have been particular unlucky against someone she perceived to be a bit of a solid player but took a hefty chunk of her stack with a less than premium hand, perhaps getting lucky in the process (exact hand details unknown). Wendy confounds the fact she gave him too much credit for the mediocre hand and appears frustrated that people can play that way.

Well, in my book... that's mission successful if someone can raise with junk and get credit for something stronger... that IS what Poker is about afterall.

The chat generally renounced players who play out of position and raise with weaker holdings pre-flop as fish and ruining the game with their 'low standard of play'. The very notion of this is entirely ridiculous. What immediately came to my mind when reading Wendy's (and other's) remarks about this perceived lower standard of play is as follows;

* Loose aggressive player, opens the pot about 40% of hands, weaker tight players fold, fold fold fold fold and occasionally see the flop, miss and TAG takes many many pots almost uncontested.

*When our weaker tight players get hands to play back, our LAGs stay out of the way as they know you're only playing back at them with legit hands.

*Occasionally the LAG will open the pot and will either get called or 3-bet by the tighter player and will be getting insane implied odds to hit on the flop and potentially knock out a player who'd only play the type of hand they're willing to go all the way with.

Let's be clear here. Playing lots of hands does not make you a fish. Playing weak hands does not make you a fish. Playing lots of weak hands out of position does not make you a fish. A fish is someone who calls off light, can't fold a hand when it's pretty much certain they are beat, someone who over-values hands at showdown etc.

Unfortunately confusing the typical tournament LAG with a fish means you're probably not going to be winning many tournaments yourself. Wendy is from a school of the game that plays mostly premium hands, solid poker and perhaps doesn't leave herself in too many difficult spots. There is nothing wrong with this, it's a fairly stress-free way of playing Poker and you'll either win small or lose small, the swings are minimal.

However, the tournament LAG is there for the win. They are playing a high percentage of hands to steal blinds, outplay people on the majority of flops because most players are too timid to play back at them before the flop. That last statement is the key to this argument. If Wendy is sharp enough to detect numerous fish at her table, who are throwing chips around with reckless abandon, then she really is in a great position to benefit from this and needs to play back at them . Now this means making re-raises with hands you might not necessarily play as standard, INFACT your hand doesn't really matter at all if you KNOW that this guy is often messing around in pots without a premium holding.

That is Poker. Making moves on players when you don't have much, because you know they don't have much. Poker is not about all seeing flops and hoping to make a good hand into a better hand, please don't confuse Poker with Snap!

Wendy Lees is clearly a big fan of Poker and likes to see it played a particular way, whereby people all play fairly solid, perhaps only get out of line when they are getting short stack and the the money on the table circulates and everyone just has fun playing. Unfortunately this isn't a realistic view on real money Poker, particularly a tournament with a £400+ buy-in.

Another snippet from the chat room states;

"As a single parent that prize money would have transformed my life. I was taking the game very seriously!"

I'm fairly sure everyone was! The difference being however, that some of the others are playing under different circumstances. To a single parent playing a competition with a £400 can make every decision quite critical, even added in difficulty... HELL £400 is a lot of money for a working professional with few commitments such as myself and it's never easy to make the right moves in a Poker game when you're playing out of your comfort zone.

Being able to pull that trigger, BEFORE the flop, to shut down these zany pre-flop abusers is the key to building stacks and dominating your table. They soon slow down and you gain the respect of others at the table with your raises. THAT IS POKER.

I recall a particular tournament playing at the Grosvenor Stoke, I believe it was a £100 buy-in which at the time would have been very significant money for me. I got to the final table without showing down a single hand! This was done by making lots of raises, being aggressive in the blinds, being aggressive on any flop and re-raising people before the flop, often without a good hand. I seem to recall actually not getting a big pair until the final table and actually getting it smashed (oh the irony!).

The point is, in tournament Poker, you're playing against the clock, the luxury of sitting back to stack a LAG with a strong hand is not available to you. You need to play the person and the situations they create. This will mean you sometimes have to play a pot without a good hand and you need to be brave enough to make BIG plays without that tournament defining pocket-pair.

If we all played solid, ABC Poker... well their wouldn't be many winners in the game and their certainly wouldn't be any skill involved.

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Wendy for being a good sport and allowing me to use her recent chat on Stoke Poker Facebook as the source of my discussion today.

Needless to say, I do think playing a lot of hands (when done correctly) is a valid way of playing winning Poker and as the graphic above says...

Aggression wins pots!