| Please understand that I'm not trying to be critical and demeaning here. I just want to point out for your benefit the flaws in so many players' logic -- perhaps yours. Here are some real-life examples that I observe over and over. See if you can figure out why these players did what they did. And, by the way, have you ever done these things? The fellow next to me had 9 against the dealer's 4 up for $25. He paused and thought about doubling down, but seemed afraid to put out the extra money on such an insecure gamble. Finally, he just motioned for a hit and caught a coveted 10. Winning with 19, he now put up $50 on the next hand. "How curious?" I thought. He didn't want to risk the extra $25 when he was a 3-to-2 favorite (with 9 against a 4), but he's willing to put up that extra quarter now on a totally blind hand. The next time you have what seems like a risky but proper double, think about that -- because you'll win the extra bet on the double more often than you'll win the next random hand. That's part of why it's a correct double down. Here's another curiosity that I see with surprising consistency. Most players will simply take a hit when they have 8 against a 5 or a 6, such as with 5/3 or 6/2 -- and that's the right basic play. But when they have 8 in the form of 4/4, they somehow seem to have this penchant for doubling down. Would somebody please explain to me how 4/4 can possibly be a better double than 5/3 or 6/2? The fact is, when you have 4/4 against a 5 or 6, the right play is to split (as long as the rules allow you to double on split pairs). That's because you will now have eight shots at an advantageous double down (by catching a 5, 6, 7 or Ace on either 4). Next comes what should be a classic example of what never to do. The player on my left had $100 bet and was dealt 11 against the dealer's 8 up. Being too conservative to double down all the way like he was supposed to, he slid a measly ten extra bucks out next to his hundred and doubled for less. Have you ever done anything like this?Whenever you're considering your pot odds to determine whether to continue playing your poker hand, you're probably not in the lead. Believe it or not, there's a certain advantage in that. The advantage is if you don't improve, you usually won't have to call a bet at the river. As a result, when you're chasing you're often getting better pot odds than the leader in the hand since you'll usually save the last bet when you miss. This factor does funny things to your pot odds in split-pot games. For example, if you're going to the river in a "high only" game and you're a 4-to-1 shot to make the winner, but will get 8-to-1 odds from the pot if you hit -- you should go for it. That's easy. But how about in high/low split? There, you'd get only half the pot. In that exact same situation you should probably fold! That's because getting 8 to 1 when you win the whole pot typically boils down to getting only about 3 to 1 when you have to split it. Sound wrong? It's not! To see how this works, let's look at an unusually clear-cut $50/$100 Omaha high/low split example. Suppose you're in a three-way pot and you hold: Ah/Ac/6h/Kc and on fourth street the board is: |
Tiger 1 home gamble1 gamble2 gamble3 gamble4 gamble5 gamble6 gamble7 Tiger 2 Tiger 3 Casino and other Advertisers |
||