Tournament Poker for Advanced Players (a book review)

I believe this was the latest book from Two Plus Two Publishing, by David Sklansky.  It was a badly needed addition to the Two Plus Two collection of poker books, addressing tournament poker.  David Sklansky is, in my opinion, one of the best poker authors.  His explanations are baed on facts and mathematics, and are very easy to understand.

Tournament poker is very different from cash games, and even No-Limit cash games.  I’ve written here before about the balance between aggression and risk that one must find in a tournament.  Pretty much all of the considerations that a tournament player must make are addressed here – from how to play at the beginning of the tournament, and how to manage your table image, to how to play on the bubble, and at the final table.

He assumes you already have a good foundation in cash no-limit poker, so he didn’t write much about hand selection or any of the basics.  He explained the rule of 4 and the rule of 2, and briefly talked about pot odds.  As with many of the TPT books, my favorite part is the hand quizzes at the back of the book.  In this particular book, the hand quizzes take up almost half of the book – that’s a good thing, because they are so important.  It helps you to make sure you actually understand what you’ve read.

Also like so many of the TPT books, I tend to read them once (sometimes twice) – and then go back as I play, reviewing specific chapters as they apply to situations that arise during games.

It’s a great book, and paired with Volumes I and II of “Harrington on Cash Games” makes for a great power course in no-limit cash games and tournaments.

Up & Down (but thankfully mostly up)

It’s been a crazy couple of weeks.  I’ve been playing less and less at The Caribbean, and instead, have been playing at Diamond Lil’s – the closest $8/$16 game I can find.  The differences between playing $3/$6 and $8/$16 have become more and more evident, especially as the $8/$16 players have gotten to know me better, and are better able to take advantage of my own weaknesses.

Playing $3/$6 limit poker at The Caribbean is, for the most part, ABC, or “By The Book” poker.  In other words, what it takes to be a winning player seems to be that you play tight and raise when you have pot equity, and don’t be surprised if/when players pay extensively for weak draws.  Most of the time you don’t have to be too tricky; just play the math and you’re doing pretty well.

I’ve noticed more people at Diamond Lil’s, at the $8/$16 tables, playing back at me and forcing me to make more difficult decisions.  Something my friend has mentioned as an area I need to work on, is when players get aggressive against me, and I tend to wimp out – both in terms of folding too early, and in terms of not maximizing value on later streets where the bets are bigger.  Some of the $8/$16 players have also picked up on this, and I’ve noticed them use that to their advantage.

Today there was one hand where I was dealt Ace Queen of Spades one off the button; an aggressive/tricky player in middle position raised preflop.  As it became evident that this was going to be a head’s up hand, I decided I would play back at him.  It’s kind of difficult to fold Ace Queen suited preflop, and against some players I will do this; however, I had seen this guy raise with hands that were significantly less valuable several times earlier.  So I reraised, and made it 3 bets to go, and thankfully, he just called.

The flop missed me entirely; I think it was 10 high, and only one of my own suit.  My opponent checked, and I also checked, in order to see a free turn card.

The turn gave me a flush draw with the 5 of Spades – it wasn’t the strongest hand, but certainly the best draw, so when my opponent checked, I bet hoping he would fold and I would just take the pot right there.  To my surprise he raised me!

That gave me pause; his raise seemed fishy, and I remember thinking there was a chance he might have raised preflop with a pair of 5s, and just made his set (3 of a kind) – that wouldn’t be out of the realm of possibility.  It didn’t seem right though; I know it’s easy to say in retrospect, but I felt he was trying to make a play at me.  In the end I wimped out and just called his raise.  Had I honestly felt he was trying to make a play, or bluff, I should have reraised him – but I just called.  I have to stop that!

The river brings a red  King, and he bets immediately.  Now I’m almost certain he has Ace King, and that my Ace Queen suited was in 2nd place all along.  I remember thinking that I should have bet the flop, but wimped out, and gave him enough information to feel that his Ace King was good.  I remember thinking that I should have been putting pressure on him the entire time.

Still, at this point the only thing I could possibly win was a bluff, so I fold.  My opponent graceously shows me King Queen offsuit.  Wow!  I actually was ahead until the river – he had, in fact, tried to bluff with the check/raise, holding nothing more than King high – the story now made sense.  He caught a lucky King on the river and took down the pot.

I definitely should have put more pressure on him, both on the flop and the turn – as my friend pointed out, I needed to give him the opportunity to fold, and instead, I gave him every reason to believe I was weak when in fact, I was actually ahead of him until the river.

In short, my opponent played me.  He had figured out that I had the tendency to wimp out on later, more expensive streets, and tried to take advantage of that information to bluff me out of the pot.  It just so happened he made his hand on the river – but even without that, I have to ask myself if I would have called a bet on the river with nothing more than Ace high, had he followed through with his bluff to the river.

I don’t get that kind of action at $3/$6 games – people don’t, on average, think as much about their opponents.  They don’t tend to find and exploit weaknesses.

So I know that right now, I’m in the right place.  I have a lot to learn playing $8/$16, especially getting used to exploiting weaknesses in my opponents, and also discovering and working on my own weaknesses.

Yesterday (or, more accurately) the day before yesterdaty I had a bad day at the $8/$16 tables – I was down $600 – I had reached my stop loss for one session.  That was an unusual night for me; I had been used to winning, and had even commented that I hadn’t had to withdraw any funds from my bankroll in a long time, that I had just been depositing over and over again.  Well, my winning streak ended yesterday.  It sounds worse than it is – $600 playing $8/$16 isn’t really that much, and truth be known I had made over $400 just the night prior to that.  And tonight I won $525, so my bankroll is up and down – but thankfully, mostly up.  :)

As long as I can keep growing my bankroll, I’m doing okay.  And I’m well over $6,000 right now.  It seemed like only a couple of weeks ago when I had reached the $4,800 mark and could justify playing at $8/$16.

Every once in a while, as I’m waiting for a seat I’ll watch the players at the $20/$40 tables and try to figure out who is playing who.  It’s actually not that difficult to figure out – there’s always 2, maybe 3 players with about $10,000 in front of them who seem to be making money.  Those are the professionals, for whom finding weaknesses in their opponents comes second nature.  Those are the players I want to learn from!

Next Page »