Back to Books: The Theory of Poker (Sklansky)

[scubed]

Chapter 16: Loose and Tight Play

The Theory Of Poker, David Sklansky
Chapter 16: Loose and Tight Play

It is critical to adjust play according to the game and according to the individual players in the game. In a loose game bluff less, bet for value more. In a tight game bluff more, bet for value less.

Considerations for playing loose or tight...

1. The size of the pot. Larger pot = looser play. Smaller pot = tighter play. (re-read post for Chapter 04: The ante structure)
2. Play loose if opponents are playing tight. Play tight if opponents are playing loose. This is especially true with semi-bluffs.

The following comparisons illustrate different characteristics of a type of game OR type of opponent in a game so that adjustments our approach the can be considered:

Comparing Semi-Bluffs...

• Normal games - Semi-bluffs have a positive expectation because there are three ways to win: making opponents fold immediately, catching a scare card to make opponents fold, or make the best hand
• Loose Games - Semi-bluffs no longer have a positive expectation because loose players rarely fold immediately & often will call a semi-buff on a scare card. This means the only way to win is by making the best hand.
• Tight Games - Semi-bluffs increase in value because opponents are likely to fold

Comparing legitimate hands...

• Normal games - Players typically play hands that are stronger in value
• Loose Games - Players typically play hands that are lower in value (lower than in normal or tight games).
• Tight Games - Strong hands are not as valuable because anyone entering the pot also has a strong hand

Comparing drawing (come) hands...

• Normal games - Continue when the pot odds are favorable, fold when the pot odds are not favorable
• Loose Games - Drawing hands increase in value, especially in multiway pots so a player should consider playing more of them
• Tight Games - Continue only if the pot odds are favorable with the expectation that if you hit, you probably won't get paid off by a tight player

 

[scubed]

Chapter 17: Position

The Theory Of Poker, David Sklansky
Chapter 17: Position

In all poker variations acting last is best because in acting last a player has the most information to make a decision (opponents have already acted). Acting first is the worst position because the least amount of information is available. As a player when you have last position you should make the most of it.

Advantages of last position....

• End the action means no fear of a raise behind
• Can flat or raise when a bet from early position is made
• Can bet when checked to from early position
• Can get a free card when checked to from early position
• Can slowplay a monster hand
• More hands are playable

Threats to last position...

• Check-raise from an opponent in early position

Advantages of first position...

• Check-raising opportunity
• Betting out and then re-raising (3betting) to a raise (2bet)
• Drive players out by raising (2betting) a raise (1bet) from last position

Threats to first position....

• Checking a big hand hoping an opponent in last position will bet - but the opponent doesn't bet (takes the free card)
• Bet out with a calling hand and get raised by opponent in last position

 

[kowrip]

[/LIST]I have not performed deep analysis of my poker records to determine "if" I am successful winning bigger pots when I slow-play. That said, I personally can remember a ton of times that slow-playing a big hand got me into trouble, sometimes got me pot committed and busted out!

Do you feel that you are more successful winning big pots by slow-playing big hands? Do you have any data (that you are willing to share) about your poker hands to back up your feeling?

I personally do not care very much for slow-playing. I would rather raise pre-flop and then c-bet no matter how I hit the flop. Slow playing is counter productive in a lot of cases because you don't get more money into the pot by checking. Also, a pre-flop raise followed by a check on the flop can raise suspicion. I tend to only slow play if I flop extremely strong with almost no chance of being out drawn and there are very aggressive players in the hand with me. Otherwise, I think sticking to a pre-flop raising range and then usually (not always) following with a c-bet is the better play because it keeps your hand strength hidden.

 

[Shrops]

Yes

I like the book a lot. It's a good read !

 

[Maikychan]

Thank you so much for making these summaries about this Sklansky's book, scubed! I'm writing down every chapter here on wordpad!

 

[m0t22]

Keep it up, I'll see if I can find this translated book to buy.

How many chapters?

And you, do you enjoy reading? Did you get new thoughts on moves or strategies?

 

[braveslice]

With small pots when a player has a hand worth calling a possible semi-bluff, in most cases he should raise. Calling is not a defense against a semi-bluff.

Chapter 12: Defense Against the Semi-Bluff
This doesn't make sense. We are either behind or coin flipping thus getting it in would be -EV play. Can you open this a bit more scubed?

 

[scubed]

Chapter 12: Defense Against the Semi-Bluff With small pots when a player has a hand worth calling a possible semi-bluff, in most cases he should raise. Calling is not a defense against a semi-bluff.
.
This doesn't make sense. We are either behind or coin flipping thus getting it in would be -EV play. Can you open this a bit more scubed?

I think Sklansky's assertion is that the action of flat calling is NOT defending from or resisting attack by your opponent when he is semi-bluffing. Flat calling is taking an approach of "let the hand play itself" (let opponent draw) as opposed to raising which is forcing the opponent to make a decision to continue with their possible semi-bluff.

 

[scubed]

How many chapters? And you, do you enjoy reading? Did you get new thoughts on moves or strategies?

There are 25 chapters in total. I do enjoy reading; however, I am slow with processing the words so that I truly understand them. I have learned many new thoughts, moves, and strategies. I have also learned some ideas about why some of my existing strategies fail.

I am currently studying the next chapter and will continue posting as I finish my study.

 

[m0t22]

There are 25 chapters in total. I do enjoy reading; however, I am slow with processing the words so that I truly understand them. I have learned many new thoughts, moves, and strategies. I have also learned some ideas about why some of my existing strategies fail.

I am currently studying the next chapter and will continue posting as I finish my study.

Of course, all in its natural time.
We will not accelerate the process, even though I have been thinking of speeding up the process, but I stopped playing and will continue studying.

Its synthesis is excellent, congratulations. Continue with this initiative!:ridinghor


:ridinghor:ridinghor:ridinghor:ridinghor:ridinghor

 

[scubed]

Chapter 18: Bluffing

The Theory of Poker, David Sklansky
Chapter 18: Bluffing

Agreeing on the definition of a bluff: A bluff is a bet or a raise with a hand which a player (you) does not think is the best hand. Slansky, The Theory of Poker p.116

Instead of bluffing at the proper frequency, average players bluff too much. When it comes to deception, bluffing is as important as slow-playing. Bluffing is a method to keep opponents guessing.

When bluffing a player who...

• Rarely bluffs will never get much action
• Always bluffs will get a lot of action until he loses all his chips
• Correctly bluffs has disguised his hand and will force opponents to make tough decisions some of which will be wrong

Bluffs when there are more cards to come...

• Should RARELY be pure bluffs
• Should be semi-bluffs so that a player has three ways to win (see post for Chapter 11)
• Should be folded when a player is "caught" ( don't try to stick it out, just give up and move on to the next hand)

Bluffs when all the cards are out...

• Should NOT bluff if the opponent will call more often than the pot odds you are getting
• SHOULD bluff if you think your opponent will fold enough to make a profit
• Should NOT bluff against two or more opponents

 

[scubed]

Chapter 19: Game Theory and Bluffing

The Theory of Poker, David Sklansky
Chapter 19: Game Theory and Bluffing

Spoiler

I encourage all readers who are interested in game theory as a bluffing tool to study this chapter directly from Sklansky's book. There are many ideas that are complex. Instead of taking the risk of conveying confusing information - I have not included these advanced concepts in my chapter summary.

An optimum bluffing strategy is one where the opponent does badly no matter the decision he makes. This can be achieved when the chances that the player (you) are bluffing are the same as the pot odds your opponent is getting.

Against an opponent who is weaker than you game theory might not be the best strategy; instead, rely on your judgement. Conversely, if you are weaker than your opponent or you do not know your opponent tendencies then leveraging game theory is a good choice.

Steps to use game theory as a tool for bluffing...

1. Determine your chances of making your hand
2. Determine the odds your opponent is getting on your bet
3. Randomly bluff in a way that the odds against your bluffing are identical to your opponents pot odds

Steps to use game theory as a tool for calling a possible bluff (bluff catching)...

1. Figure out what odds your opponent is getting on his possible bluff
2. Make the ratio of your calls to your folds exactly the same as the ratio of the pot to your opponent's bet
3. Randomize the calls

 

[scubed]

Chapter 20: Inducing and Stopping Bluffs

The Theory of Poker, David Sklansky
Chapter 20: Inducing and Stopping Bluffs

Do not STOP bluffs by opponents who bluff too much. INDUCE bluffs from opponents who rarely bluff.

Per Sklansky there are two principles that should be obvious... (Sklansky, Theory of Poker, p. 192)

1. When a player (you) attempts to INDUCE a bluff and the opponent bets, the player (you) should always CALL
2. When a player (you) attempts to STOP a bluff and the opponent bets, the player (you) should always FOLD

Artificial methods to stop and induce bluffs... (won't work against experienced players)

• Reach for chips as though you're anxious to call. If the opponent bets, FOLD
• Give the impression you intend to fold your hand. If the opponent bets, CALL
• Pretending to be uninterested in the hand
• Pretending to be very interested in the hand

Strategic methods to stop and induce bluffs...

• When opponent bets then RAISE (suggests strength).
• Check - or check behind (suggests weakness) hoping that an opponent bets. WARNING: Be mindful when using this technique as a free card is an opportunity for an opponent to make the best hand.

 

[scubed]

Chapter 21: Heads-up On The End

The Theory of Poker, David Sklansky
Chapter 21: Heads-up On The End

Position and hand strength are the conditions that determine how a player (you) acts when heads-up on the end of a hand (most pots come down to 2 remaining players when the last card is dealt).

When a player (you) does NOT have a legitimate hand...

• Bluffing on the end is hard to get away with. A player needs to determine whether the attempt has positive expectation.
• Bluff-raise is even harder to get away with. After betting, only a strong opponent capable of tough lay downs will fold to a bluff-raise (unless the opponent was also bluffing when he bet)
• Most of the time when the opponent bets and the player (you) has nothing, the best strategy is to fold

When a player (you) are in last position...

• In last position and the opponent checks to you - it is not required to bet a good hand for value. Consider betting when you are the favorite to win if your opponent calls.
• In last position and the opponent bets to you - CALL if your chances of winning are greater than the pot odds
• In last position and the opponent bets to you - FOLD if your chances of winning are less than the pot odds
• In last position and the opponent bets to you - RAISE if you are are at least a 55% favorite to win the hand (be careful, you might face a re-raise)

When a player (you) are in first position...

• As a favorite then BET when your hand is worth a call (or almost worth a call) when your opponent would bet if checked to
• As a favorite then CHECK and CALL when your hand is worth a call AND your opponent will bet if checked to
• As a favorite then CHECK and FOLD when your hand is not the favorite and your opponent will almost always bet only with a hand that beats yours
• As an underdog then sometimes BET makes you less of an underdog then a CHECK would (hint - MUST be thinking long term in this scenario)
• CHECK-RAISE works bets against average to good opponents. Try it less often against weak or very strong opponents who likely won't bet when checked to.

 

[scubed]

Chapter 22: Reading Hands

The Theory of Poker, David Sklansky
Chapter 22: Reading Hands

Reading hands is an art because it is important for a player (you) to observe and come to know the opponents tendencies. Reading hands is a science because a player must use mathematics and logic to creating ranges.

Reading hands as an art...

• Observe opponents behavior and how they play against you
• Observe opponents behavior when you are NOT in the hand

Reading hands as a science...

• Analyze the meaning of an opponent's check/bet/raise
• Analyze the exposed cards to engineer what the hand might be (think combinatorics)
• Eliminate possible hands (narrow the range) as the hand develops and is played (again, combinatorics is helpful)
• Bayes' Theorem can be used to calculate the probability of an event based on prior knowledge of conditions

Combining the art and the science is what provides a player (you) with the evidence and information to determine the range of hands an opponent might have. Using this information a player (you) can determine if your hand is worth continuing.

 

[scubed]

Chapter 23: The Psychology of Poker

The Theory of Poker, David Sklansky
Chapter 23: The Psychology of Poker

The psychology of poker can be confused with "speech play" and other ploys which are not the thought process of poker; but, are instead psychological devices intended to generate a response from opponents (for example, put an opponent on tilt). The psychology of poker is the thought process by which poker is approached.

Categories of levels of thinking...

• Level 0: Complete amateur, or maybe someone drunk, the point is that they are NOT thinking
• Level 1: Player recognizes "This is my hand." (basic thinking, might include strength and position, but is rudimentary at best)
• Level 2: Player asks "What hand does my opponent have?" (most players fall into this category)
• Level 3: Player asks "What does my opponent think I have?" (more complicated, fewer players fall into this category)
• Level 4: Player asks "What does my opponent think that I think he has?" (complex thinking, very few players are in this category - and even if they are, it is unlikely their opponent is thinking at this level)
• Level 5: Player asks "What does my opponent think that I think he think that I have?" (elite thinkers in the game, useless to most average players)

Create a table image and use your table image to get paid off later. A challenge to this strategy is the level at which the opponent is thinking on. The lower the level the opponent things on, the more straightforward hands should be played. The more skilled the opponent is the more deceptive the player can become. When playing against experts, it is often best to stick with a game theory optimal strategy because the levels of thinking become too complex.

 

[57noona]

The Theory of Poker, David Sklansky
Chapter 04: The Ante Structure

All poker starts as a struggle for the forced bets (blinds and/or antes) without which there would be no reason to play. Players find themselves in trouble when they either play too many hands or too few hands in relation to the size of the forced bet. The amount of the forced bet suggests a general principle of play...

• The lower the forced bet, the tighter the play
• The higher the forced bet, the looser the play

Do NOT think in terms of the $$ YOU have already put in the pot and make a bad call. It is NOT relevant how much YOU have put in the pot because once the chips are in the pot they NO LONGER BELONG TO YOU (they belong to the pot). It is the TOTAL amount in the pot (thus the current pot odds you are getting to take the action) that matters, not what YOU personally have contributed into the pot.

When the forced bets (blinds and/or antes) are LARGE...

1. Loosen up your starting hand requirements because: better pot odds, cost is to great to wait for big hands, your opponents are playing weaker starting hands, observant opponents will notice your frequency of playing is too tight and steal (or not give you action)
2. Loosen up on later betting rounds (streets) because: your opponents starting hands are weaker, in multi-way pot drawing hands increase in value (mediocre pairs decrease in value)
3. Try to steal forced bets because: the play has a positive expectation (especially against weak players)
4. Raise with a good hand because: slow-playing gives proper odds to opponents and you do NOT want to let them in cheaply (many players will call without the odds which is exactly what you want according to The Fundamental Theorem!)

When the forced bets (blinds and/or antes) are SMALL...

1. Play fewer hands with an exception - when you are better than your opponents play hands with the intention of outplaying your opponent on later rounds (streets)
2. Steal fewer forced bets; when you do attempt to steal and are called or re-raised (especially by tight players) be prepared to give up
3. Slow-play big hands to draw people in and build larger pots
4. Allow aggressive players to "control the game" and have a false sense of security - then pounce on them when you have a big hand (you'll win back the forced bets they have stolen from you and more!)
5. Call marginal hands only in early rounds (streets) and if your hand doesn't improve, give up (fold) - when the hand does improve the small investment will pay off big

I agree with the large and small parts of the blinds and antes. This is the way to play Tournaments. Later in a Tournament you want to loosen up a little.

 

[scubed]

Chapter 24: Analysis at the Table

The Theory of Poker, David Sklansky
Chapter 24: Analysis at the Table

Analyzing a poker situation to decide on the best course of action...

1. Determine the possible hands that the opponent may hold
2. Of the possible opponents possible hands determine the likelihood that he holds each hand
3. Decide what the best play is against each of the opponent's possible hands
4. Pick the action that is correct the majority of the time

Consider a decision with two options where it might be best to take Option 2 even though it is the less favored play because it's consequences are not as bad

• Option 1: Favored play but with terrible bad consequences when it is wrong
• Option 2: Less favored play but with slightly bad consequences when it is wrong

An example when a decision like this might come up in NLHE is a scenario where a player has been dealt QQ. Preflop the player with QQ bets out (2bet) and is re-raised (3bet) by an opponent for a very large amount of the player's stack. The player puts his opponent on a range of AA (6 combos), KK (6 combos), AK (16 combos) where the opponent's most likely holding is AK. Sure the QQ is ahead of AK pre-flop but there is a 41% chance that an Ace or King will come on the flop. Though the player is mathematically favored pre-flop (so long as the opponent DOES INDEED have AK), the player has to fade an A/K on all streets AND hope that his opponent doesn't already have AA or KK. So this is a case where Option 1 is the favored play, but Option 2 might be the best play

 

[scubed]

Chapter 25: Evaluating the Game

The Theory of Poker, David Sklansky
Chapter 25: Evaluating the Game

Good players evaluate a game before joining.

Reasons for evaluating a game...

1. Determine if the game is worth playing (i.e. what would the expected hourly rate be?)
2. Determine how to play in the particular game

Important considerations when evaluating a game....

• The structure of the game
• The players in the game

Ensure that when you decide to join a game that you have a plan to adjust to the structure of game and also have a plan to adjust to each of the opponents playing styles.

 

[braveslice]

I think Sklansky's assertion is that the action of flat calling is NOT defending from or resisting attack by your opponent when he is semi-bluffing. Flat calling is taking an approach of "let the hand play itself" (let opponent draw) as opposed to raising which is forcing the opponent to make a decision to continue with their possible semi-bluff.

How about the text above: “When the pot is large and the opponent is semi-bluffing calling is almost always correct.” Here is uses term calling, but denies it later.

 

[m0t22]

Congratulations again.Today I had time to update myself with your update hehehe.
Gratitude for sharing this knowledge.

 

[pierreb292]

interesting to read thank you !

 

[m0t22]

Thanks for the updates, let's go!now I'm with a little more time because I'm crazy, I'll be following;:icon_bigs

 

[scubed]

How about the text above: “When the pot is large and the opponent is semi-bluffing calling is almost always correct.” Here is uses term calling, but denies it later.

I think the disconnect you might be having is that there are two separate, but related, ideas. Sklansky is suggesting that when the pot is large and you suspect the opponent is semi-bluffing that calling can be correct BUT in calling, the player is not defending (resisting) against the opponents semi-bluff in the given (current) round. When calling because the pot is large and the opponent might be semi-bluffing the player (you) should be planning to take the pot away in the next round on a scare card (delayed semi-bluff).

I encourage you to read Sklansky's words directly in his book (Chapter 11 and 12 for this topic). I am a student of his teachings (not an expert myself) and might be summarizing the information in a manner that is confusing you (as I am also not a professional writer so may not have good understandable sentence structure).

 

[okeedokalee]

I have that book, read it when I had little understanding, might read it again.
Trawl around online to improve your game. There is some real good advice.