Mike Caro writes in his book about a phenomenon that doesn’t quite qualify as a “tell” but still gives a pretty reliable bit of meta-information about someone’s actions: When someone wins a big pot, he is - according to Caro - often too busy stacking chips to play the next hand unless it’s a monster.

Conclusion? If someone who just won a big pot decides to play (or raise) the next hand, watch out - it’s probably something you don’t want to tangle with. This is all good; but it doesn’t apply to online poker, since there’s no stacking of any chips going on.

Caro mentions somewhere in his book that someone who’s just won a big pot is busy stacking chips and therefore less likely to play the next hand. In other words, a big pot is enough to transform the loosest maniac into a rock, if only for a hand or two. I’ve noticed that the same holds true for online poker, where no chips are stacked. The only explanation, then, would be that the phenomenon is psychological. Someone who’s won a big hand perhaps wants to savor the feeling of being hugely ahead for a little while, and doesn’t want to risk that feeling by losing a big pot on the very next hand.

I wrote awhile back about differentation in poker. A few days later, I started a thread with what I consider a typical differentiation practise, and what I feel is the most important difference between the two situations I described. Aysak posted and asked me to explain what I meant with “overcounting outs” which is a good question, and something that I don’t think people consider enough when they make poker decisions. Today, I’ll try to explain it.

This post is going to be a bit weird, but bear with me.

From www.m-w.com :

Main Entry: dif·fer·en·ti·ate
Pronunciation: “dif-&-’ren(t)-shE-”At
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -at·ed; -at·ing
transitive verb

And I’m especially using the meaning

2 : to mark or show a difference in : constitute a difference that distinguishes

Let me tell you why differentiation is important.

It is to find what separates one situation from the others. To find differences, or rather to specifically find what matters here. “How is A different from B?” or perhaps “What, in A, should I be focusing on?” To be able to think about the things that make a difference, like dismissing your own two cards and focusing on the overall strategy - like you would in the late stages of a tourney with a low M.

These two terms are sometimes used as if they are synonymous. They’re not.

Every starting hand sorted by position and opposition, comes with a price tag. Some of them cost money (-EV) and some win money (+EV). These price tags do not show how much money you will win or lose this particular hand, but how much money you can expect to win. Expected value. It’s that easy.

For instance, pocket aces figure to be worth about 3 big bets to me when they’re dealt to me on the button in limit hold ‘em. I win the most with pocket kings, overall. I’ve won more in total with AKo than with AKs, but that’s not because AKo is a better hand, it’s just that I get it a lot more often so the cumulative total is greater even if the price tag of the hand itself is smaller.

Alright, folks. Time to wrap this series up.

This is going to be loooooong.

Previous posts: Part I - Part II - Part III

Brief summary (again):

$1/$2 NLHE, with stacks over $200. MP opened to 3xBB with AQ preflop. Only Button made the (arguable) call with A9s. The flop was Q-7-3, two spades, giving MP top pair, top kicker and Button flopped the nut flush draw. MP opted to bet the pot ($12) and Button called.

The pot is $36.

Last time, in Part III, I looked at what I thought would be a likely outcome if the turn card was a brick and how Button should act. This time, Button hits his wanted flush. What’s MP supposed to do, first to act?

Links to Part I and Part II, for those who need to catch up.

Brief summary: $1/$2 NLHE, with stacks over $200. MP opened to 3xBB with AQ preflop. Only Button made the (arguable) call with A9s. The flop was Q-7-3, two spades, giving MP top pair, top kicker and Button flopped the nut flush draw. MP opted to bet the pot ($12) and Button called.

This part will look at what will happen if the turn card is a brick, i.e. doesn’t help either player. Let’s say it’s the trey of hearts, for a board of

Q♠ 7♠ 3♣ 3♥

The thought process of MP

Picking up where I left off, I want to first take a moment to address some of the questions and comments that came up in the discussion thread. First of all, I should say that I agree with Bombjack’s skepticism about the preflop call. It’s pretty thin.

Now, when it comes to the sizing of the bet on the flop, the point was - correctly - made that perhaps a smaller bet would have been preferable in order to keep the pot smaller with our vulnerable hand. That’s a good argument. I wouldn’t chastice anyone for betting a smaller amount than the full pot here, say $8 or $10. However, I think that betting the full pot size is better against all but the most weak-tight opponents. Unless we have a solid reputation of only betting very strong hands (I usually don’t), I have a hard time figuring that a hand like KQ is going to fold to $12, but call $8.

NineLions asked me,

“You’ve mentioned more than once about calling against pot odds because of implied odds in a cash NLHE game when having a strong draw like a nut flush. I wanted too look at it from two perspectives. One, someone with, say AQo who raises preflop, and two, someone calls in position with say, A9s (I wanted to remove the straight possibility if a face card lands). Flop comes Q73, with two cards of the A9s suit so he has the nut flush draw.

Player one has TPTK but a flush draw on the table. What does he bet? Player two has the nut flush draw. He calls any bets in the 1/2 - 1 pot range?

Posting a bad beat and wondering how you could have played it differently is a little like a fat guy posting a picture of himself eating a carrot and asking if he’s eating properly.

You know what I’m talking about, I’m sure. I refer to the posts asking a question of the kind “I lost this hand. How could I have played it differently?”

The implied question is “how should I have played this hand to win it?” and it shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the game of poker works. This game isn’t played hand-by-hand, it’s played lifetime-by-lifetime. The best players in the world, the Bobby Fishers of our game if you will, will still typically lose 8 or 9 hands out of 10 that they’re dealt. You don’t win at poker by winning hands, you win at poker by winning money.