On the Edge of Going Pro

By John Carlisle

For every poker player, poker starts as a diversion from the normal daily grind. In the beginning, poker is a nothing but a form of entertainment. This is not surprising, as the novice gets to play a game of skill and chance, meet interesting characters, and really enjoy himself in a loose environment. At some point, though, poker inevitably moves into a different realm as it envelops more and more of the attention and time in our lives. It somehow becomes a part of the fabric of who we are. We begin to depend on poker in our lives in many different ways. The money that comes in from our winnings moves away from being a surprising treat toward being an income expectation. We feel part of the poker "community," relying on that community to fill some of our personal and psychological needs. Everything in the world of poker begins to feel "right" and comfortable. Then we start to believe that we can do it ... we can be a pro.

As you read this article, hundreds of players are evaluating their lives while pondering making the "big" step into a full-fledged pro poker player. At the same time, hundreds of new pros are already faltering in casinos, online, and in cardrooms across the world. Ask any old time poker grinder or cardroom manager, and they will tell you tale after tale about the would-be pro that fell into poker oblivion. Their stories usually follow the same basic plot line. First, Joe Poker gets sucked into the game. He pours his heart and soul into the sport, learning each intricacy of pot odds, position, tells, and bluffs. He learns from the veterans at the table, funds his bankroll by busting the young guys at the table, and he reads Super System over and over again when not at the table. Before long, he is winning good money at a consistent pace. He bowls through his home games, turns profits at his local casino, and cashes at some tough big-time tournaments. When he realizes that his hourly rate at poker exceeds the pay at his normal 9 to 5 job, something changes within his heart and mind. More often that not, if we fast forward to 18-24 months later, we find a broken man who's trying to glue together pieces of a derailed life.

Scott "River Otter" Aigner is hoping that he can be one of the lucky few to survive in the pro lifestyle. He's put his successful, high-paying career on hold to take a shot at his poker dream. A few months ago he was a practicing Urologist, but now he explains, "I have changed my focus to poker. Medicine will just have to wait, maybe until next year, or maybe even forever." After a few years dabbling in low-limit games, learning and studying the game, and careful consideration, Dr. Aigner has thrust himself into a new adventure and a new world. "Call it a mid life crisis. Call it crazy," he says. "I really don't care what you end up calling it! It happened and I am not interested in turning back the clock." Rather than seeing patients in need, he now spends his days displaying patience as he plays online. His business trips are no longer medical conferences; they are high buy-in tournaments in Las Vegas. Rather than researching treatments through the medicine journals, he works to increase exposure to his new poker venture at an online Poker Forum.

Dr. Aigner is not alone as he embarks on his quest. The new pro on the scene today can appear in any form, from any background - dealers, waiters, college drop-outs, college professors, housewives, and business executives. No matter their background or their goals, they each face an intimidating foe - the psychological edge of being a pro.

The game and strategy of a $2/$4 game is essentially, at its roots, the same as a $100/$200. That being said, one would imagine that a consistently successful low-limit player should be successful at the higher levels. The thinking goes that if they know how to win, they know how to win! What we fail to realize is that the extreme psychological pressures of being a pro effects every aspect of the player's life, including his play at the table. Dr. Aigner says, "I am definitely a different player and a different person. My need to win to pay the bills has changed my strategy in poker. I think the changes have also reflected on my life and has been a very positive influence in my approach in handling life's difficulties that we all encounter. Whether it is poker that changed this or the change in my lifestyle that changed my poker game is irrelevant." He is wise to work so hard to understand how and why poker has affected him. For so many, it is easier to push on without such self-evaluations. This practice of self-imposed naivety is what leads to the downfall of so many would-be pro players.

New pros soon realize that this is not a "regular" profession, and they experience the pit-falls that accompany this fact. Human beings are naturally comfortable with the known and expected. We thrive, and feel safest, when within a set routine. We are conditioned to expect basic rituals, or rites of passage. When we start a new job, we have a need to hear, "You're hired." Likewise, we have a need to see that paycheck every two weeks. Daniel Negreanu, the 2004 WSOP all-around player of the year and host of fullcontactpoker.com, highlights this when he talks about his experience in turning pro. "There was no formal application I had to sign or interview to attend," he explains. He goes on to say, "My decision to turn pro was never really a conscious one. It just kind of happened."

It is clear that in our career and in life, we have a need to feel a part of "something," whether that something is building houses or practicing medicine. Professional poker can be devoid of all of these qualities. There is no pro poker player draft, no contract to sign, and no set hours. There are no paychecks and no co-workers. It can be a lonely, empty, yet extremely stressful endeavor.

Poker is not the roller-coaster excitement that people see on ESPN every week. It is a grind each and every day. It is a grind in which your emotions and energy can be drained slowly, but your bankroll could be emptied quickly. For those who are psychologically unprepared, it can be more stressful and less personally rewarding that the job they fled to get there. These unprepared souls are the ones the old-timers and cardroom managers can fill an entire day up talking about. This is why Negreanu warns prospective pros, "Despite the growth of poker, there is still just a small number of players who actually lead a healthy, successful lifestyle through poker."

For all of those who fail, though, there are always a select few who do indeed make it. These individuals have battled the psychological demons, managed their bankroll wisely, and beaten the odds. When I speak with them, I usually uncover an individual with unique blend of self-confidence, intelligence, and unrivaled determination. Basically, their unflappable hunger to succeed in poker has forced them through the toughest times. Through their experiences, most are rather introspective. They are excellent at self-evaluation of thoughts, emotions, and needs. They fill some of the emotional and social expectations by integrating themselves with a single casino, cardroom, or online site. This integration gives them the comfort of the routine at "their" tables. Oddly, their "co-workers" are their opponents and dealers. They find a way to handle the pressures of a losing streak. Likewise, they find a way to avoid the overzealous reactions of a winning streak.

Overall, the successful new pro is a special person and a special player. If you are on the edge of going pro, be sure to do an exhaustive self-evaluation before quitting your job. The next step isn't about your understanding of the playing strategies you've read in those poker books. If you are even considering going pro, you must have some solid playing skills. The true concern is if you truly have the psychological and emotional fortitude to avoid becoming that broken man in a year's time. If you are not sure, the answer is probably "no." If you have that unique, special mix that makes good players great, then go make it happen.

---

In addition to being a poker enthusiast, John is a certified Counselor in his home state of Pennsylvania and a National Certified Counselor (NCC). He has a Master of Arts degree in Counseling from West Virginia University, and a Bachelor's degree in Psychology with a minor in Sociology from Lock Haven University. You can find out more about the psychology of poker from the "Poker Counselor" in any of the magazines that he regularly contributes to, such as Bluff, 5th Street, Poker Player, Canadian Poker Player, and Gambling Online magazine.

Women and Poker

By Gary Carson

There was a time that poker was a man's game. Of course, that's not true anymore, poker is very much a coed game. There are many women poker players today, and they're welcome every place I've ever played. But, the majority of poker players are men and, whether they are poker players or not, men are still men. This works to the advantage of women who understand it and can exploit it. If you're a man, you should be aware of this and take defensive measures.

The majority of successful women poker players are more aggressive than their male counterparts. All successful poker players are aggressive players, but it sometimes seems that successful women tend to be almost hyper-aggressive. They often find success in adapting this style because it usually works well against almost any male poker player.

Aggression tends to work well for women because of the way most men perceive and react to hyper-aggressive women. You can categorize men poker players according to the way they to react to women at the table. One catogory of male opponent are chauvinistic men.

Chauvinists

There are chauvinistic men who tend to think all women are weak, predictable, tight players. Nothing they see at the table will sway them from this view. They think all women are bad poker players and that they are easy to read. They will assume that a bet or raise from a woman simply means that the woman has a very good hand because they think no woman would have the nerve to bet or raise without a near chinch hand. The result is that chauvinistic men tend to fold marginal hands whenever a hyper-aggressive woman player bets or raises.

But, at the same time, chauvinistic players do not think that women have good judgment. So, if he starts out thinking he has a good hand, he isn't likely to change that assessment of his own hand based on anything a woman player does.

One interesting characteristic of chauvinistic players is that they also tend to be tight players. This combination of tight and chauvinistic does make it easy for an alert aggressive woman to profit from his reaction to her aggression.

Playing chauvinistic men

When faced with an aggressive woman player, chauvinistic men tend to react with hyper-aggression of their own when they fear their hand is second best. They try to win by psychological domination and intimidation. When they think they do have the best hand, they'll often play aggressively, but not hyper-aggressive. They go on tilt and react predictably, over extending themselves with second best hands.

For example, say a tight, chauvinistic player has opened with a raise from early position. A woman should raise with most hands. Even a hand like 8s-5d is worth raising with. The reason for the raise is to begin a determination of whether he has a big pair, or two big cards. Because of his opening with a raise from early position he almost surely has one of those two hands. Either something like Ah-Ad or Ad-Ks. Whatever her hand is, she should just raise. He'll re-raise.

If the flop comes something like As-10d-2c and he bets, she should probably give it up right there. Just fold.

But, if the flop comes something like Jd-8c-4h and he bets, she should raise.

If he re-raises then she can be pretty sure he has two overcards and she has the best hand. But, she should just call. The reason she should just call is to encourage him to bet again on the turn and the river. Unless an ace or king comes on one of the last two cards she can be fairly sure her pair of eights is the best hand. If no big cards come by the river she can sometimes even raise for value on the river. He'll call her with an Ad-Ks.

If he just calls her raise, she should worry that he has a large overpair. But, the good thing that will probably happen now is that he'll check on the turn, thinking she'll bet and he can check-raise. She should disappoint him. She should check. If she doesn't improve to 3-of-a-kind or 2-pair then she should probably fold when he bets on the river.

This kind of behavior is very predicable with this kind of male, chauvinistic player when playing against an aggressive woman.

Internet Poker - Why you keep losing money with Ace-King

By Raphael Zimmerman

Welcome to my internet poker column! In this column, I will be discussing winning strategies for online holdem, stud, omaha hi/lo, and more. I have been playing regular online poker for over a year now, and it has been an interesting time for me, and an overall pleasant experience. In addition to providing mathematically-minded players with an opportunity to win at poker without having to maintain a “poker face”, internet poker also provides a lot of opportunities for people to play poker, even if they live nowhere near a casino or legal cardroom. I believe that internet poker is already playing a great role in the expansion of the game’s popularity across North America and Europe, and that people will continue to play it as the sites remain in business longer and become legitimized.

Now I would like to talk about a part of the game which, if you have been following the recent newsgroup postings, you should agree is an undeniably large issue in internet poker. I refer, of course, to bad beats. If you’re like me, you probably don’t enjoy taking bad beats very often. In low-limit holdem games, it is not all that uncommon to raise Ace-King under the gun, get smooth-called by an A6o, and stare down at a flop like A67 rainbow. With this flop, your opponent is going to most likely wait until the turn to raise you, and you’re going to call all the way and lose, then muck your cards without showing.

Here's the big question: did you play this hand poorly? Well, let’s examine some alternatives...

• You could have folded the Ace-King preflop, but I think that we can quickly agree that this was not a viable alternative.

• You could have check-called the turn and river after being called on the flop, which in this case, would have saved you one big bet. But then you would have run the risk of giving a free card to a worse hand, making it good enough to beat you. If the turn card is a Q, then you run a bigger risk of losing by giving a free river card than if the turn card is a 2, but most of the time, it’s not going to be a good idea to give this free card. Another problem with this approach is that against a very passive player holding something like AJ, you will actually lose a big bet when your opponent checks along with a hand that he/she would’ve called with.

• You could’ve check-raised the flop “for information”, but the quality of information that you receive will vary depending on the type of opponent you’re up against. Against a tight-aggressive player with a weaker holding, check-raising the flop is probably a worse alternative than check-calling the whole way, because you are likely to scare your opponent out of the pot on the flop, when you have the best of it by far, and he/she might have given you more action later on. When the pot is big, and your tight-aggressive opponent would have pot odds to call this check-raise even knowing about your powerful holding, then it becomes a good option to go ahead and check-raise, because you’re forcing your opponent to choose between making a call with the worst of it, and a “bad fold”.

• In a larger-limit game, you could wait until the turn and then check-raise with top pair, top kicker. But doing so when your opponent is holding this A6 in this low limit game is clearly disastrous, unless you are able to get off your hand on the turn when re-raised, or unless your opponent is timid enough to just call your check-raise with 2 pair instead of reraising.

The truth is that while you may have played your hand predictably by leading all of the way and then check-calling the river, you probably did not play the hand poorly.

“Then why do I keep having losing sessions after playing like that?” you ask?

It’s probably because you’re not really playing like that the whole time. After losing that hand with Ace-King, you’re finding yourself picking up ATo under the gun, and raising it to get back at that A6 player. You’re perfectly right about AT being just as effective against A6 as AK is, but then disaster strikes when you’re reraised by a dominating AQo and lose a big pot, knowing that things would have gone differently if you’d stuck to big hands in early position, such as AA-JJ, AK or AQ offsuit, or AKs-ATs. The real losses aren’t actually occurring “with” AK. They’re occurring during the several hands you spend on tilt, afterwards.

Low limit holdem is a game of extreme fluctuation, but whenever you start talking yourself into making obviously bad plays in order to “catch the fish at the table”, you’re usually giving up some of your edge instead of maximizing it. And you’re also growing fins.

In a game such as online poker where there are no nonverbal tells, lack of discipline can be especially suicidal to your bankroll.

I’ve lost a lot of big pots which I looked back upon and asked myself why I was in the pot to begin with. If you can’t answer that question preflop, then you’re looking to be in a world of trouble by the showdown.

No-Fold'em Hold'em

By Michael Wiesenberg

My turn to say a few words about low-limit no-fold'em hold'em, a game many beginners find themselves in. I don't play high-limit hold'em, so most of the hold'em games I've found myself in have been of the no-fold'em variety, mostly $3-$6 and $6-$12.

I keep hearing players saying they can't win in these games. They're right about that. They say they win at higher stakes. I'm not so sure about that, but I'll have to take their word for it. They say the reason they lose is they can't "protect a hand." Neither can they "put someone on a hand," and they can't "represent a hand." Well. Three potent weapons stolen from their arsenals.

As I say, I have played mainly in these smaller games, getting to higher stakes only in tournaments. I don't have a lot of fancy steps, so I suppose I'm ruined for higher stakes. I don't know. When I want to play higher, I'll learn the way I have small stakes: by reading the good books on the subject and by using the simulation software on my PC. (And here's a plug: Wilson Software's Turbo Texas Hold'em is the best I have ever seen for every aspect of the game. You can analyze hands and situations. You can test your own strategies without risk playing against players just like those in the games with which you're familiar, including, yes, no-fold'em hold'em. You can just have fun playing against a tableful of players, almost as much fun as the real thing, lacking only the smoke, the noise, and, oh yes, the money.) I may never play hold'em much higher, because if I want to play moderately big, the lowball games are still pretty good.

My point is that I have a good track record in these games, averaging more than one big bet per hour. Fluctuations are pretty high, so I probably need a larger sample to determine whether I'm good or just lucky. I know, but a statistician would want more hours. As many authors have stated in the august pages of poker publications and on line, you make most of your money in poker not from the cleverness of your play but from the bad play of the others. I would much rather play anytime against a bunch of drunks who have no conception of what they're doing and wouldn't know a semibluff from a Mack truck, than a tableful of experts against whom I can prove my prowess. I know I'll beat the idiots in the long run for more than I can get out of the knowledgeable players.

What's my strategy, then, if I can't make any fancy plays? Easy.

In aggressive, loose games, open early only with top-expectation hands. You know what they are, big pairs, AK, maybe AQ. Come in late if there's no raising with hands that play well against a large field, like suited connectors and small pairs. Get out on the flop if I don't get a good piece of it. Raise or otherwise push the betting whenever I think I have the best of it. This means I raise the opener, even if he's in first position, when I have AK, and I still get the same six people seeing the flop. Sure, I'll start with a large pocket pair, flop a set, and get drawn out sometimes by the clown who hangs in there all the way with 2-7 suited. So what? He'll lose more than he wins with those cards over any reasonable length of time. If there's aggressive betting, as there often is in these games, I fold whenever I think I'm behind. I rarely bluff. Both because it has a negative expectation--someone always calls--and because there's no need to advertise. They'll call the tightest player at the table all the way when it's obvious to smart players that he has pocket aces. Save the fancy plays for those who understand them, and those folks are rarely in these games.

In the passive games, I come in early with more speculative hands, because I know it won't get raised as often, and I don't want to waste those hands that play well against a large field. I still get out if the flop doesn't hit me.

Anecdotal evidence: I played in one of those games where this one player was in almost every hand, and he always raised when it was his turn. So I opened only with quality hands (I didn’t play a lot of hands), and reraised when it got back to me, or raised behind him, and then rereraised. If he had any kind of a draw, he would be in, raising on each round, till the end. If he missed, he'd bluff, and I picked him off a few times. Of course, if he made his hand, he also pushed it all the way. I got lucky, though and he didn't make any big hands when I was in. Three times I had pocket kings, the betting was capped before the flop, and two or three raises every round, against several players, some of whom exited as their hands failed to materialize. Two of the times the kings did not improve, but they stood up anyway. One time a pair of fours hit the board. Not really much of an improvement, but no one had a four. In two hours I made $400 in a $3-$6 game.

In another game, a drunk raised every hand before the flop without looking at his cards. It was almost always capped before the flop. He always made at least one bet after the flop still without having seen his cards. He made some monster pots by beating big hands. So did I, by choosing my hands carefully. No one else was gambling it up. They didn't have to. This guy made up for them. But they were staying in there on much lesser holdings than they normally would, so the game was still essentially no-fold'em. Same size game. I made $300 in an hour.

Sure, I was lucky both times, but I figure to make a lot more in such a game than I can lose.

I've also played in some pretty tight small games, where all the players figure they're world champions. Can't make anything there. I can make plays against them. I can bluff them. So what? The drop, one small bet per hand, is too much to overcome. Nope. I'll take no-fold'em hold'em any day.

The Ace: Don't Leave Home Without One

By Raphael Zimmerman

In a hold 'em ring game that I played in at the Turning Stone Casino in Verona, NY, there were two players who would regularly slow roll their hands by showing an ace first. Then, the other card if their opponents didn't muck. Their comments upon revealing the ace were always "Don't leave home without one."

I was a bit annoyed at the time because it appeared as though these two players were "giving lessons" to the rest of the table. But then I got to thinking about how strongly the comment applies to high-low poker on the internet.

In a low-limit online game of 9-handed Omaha 8, the typical players plays far too many of his/her starting hands. There is profit to be gained by being selective about one's own. Being able to recognize a good omaha/8 starting hand is critical to one's success at the game. One can just about show a profit at this game just by remembering the quote "Don't leave home without it", referring, of course, to the ace.

Let's make a comprehensive list of all aceless Omaha 8 hands that are typically playable out of the blinds. There's high-only hands like KKQJ, preferably with one or both of the kings being suited. There are very few of these hands, as conventional wisdom suggests that high-only hands should only be played when all four cards are ten or above, and one has a pair and a three-straight, or three-card one gapper. So we can come up with the list: KKQJ, KKQT, KKJT, KQQJ, KQQT, KQJJ, KJJT, QQJT, QJJT,QJTT

The hands on the bottom half of this list are questionable, because one cannot make a nut set with any pocket pair below queens. Also remember that any of these hands can be helped by having a flush draw. Now, for good aceless low hands:2345

Am I forgetting any? The hand "2345" can make nut low with double-counterfeit protection when any ace and two other low cards hit the board. A hand like 3456 can only make nut low if the board contains both an ace and a deuce. Hands that need "perfect flop" such as this one are usually unplayable because can't take any heat unless they get it.

If the flop comes down A67, the 3456 hand could be behind in both directions, and would probably fold if the flop was bet and raised. Even holdings such as 234K or 2356 are marginal at best, and should only be played short-handed, or when there is a decent chance to steal the blinds. In low-limit full-table internet Omaha 8, the blinds are virtually never stolen preflop. Now, let's make a list of playable, aceless two-way hands that haven't already been mentioned:23KK, 23QQ

If you're first to enter the pot on the button or one off it, you should play, and probably even raise with, weaker holdings such as 23JJ, or 24QQ. But once again, this situation is very uncommon at low-limit.

In short, you can just about count the total number of playable aceless Omaha-8 holdings on the fingers of your two hands. Regularly "leaving home" without an ace, or one of these specific hands, can be very detrimental to your bankroll.

I'm not saying that all hands containing an ace are playable, but I am saying that almost every playable hand contains one (or two). An ace will even help by serving as a kicker in some rare situations. Let's say that the board is: QT772. You shown down A24Q and your opponent shows down 23QK. This ace kicker has meant the difference between scooping with your 2 pair and mucking it.

In low-limit, patience is a virtue, and some online poker sites allow you to play two tables at once to overcome the boredom of waiting for playable hands. If you're doing this and still can't stand waiting for playable hands, go play roulette. There's a lot of action to be had there, but not much profit.

Becoming a Pro- Part 1

By Josh Arieh
(WSOP Poker Champion)
One of the most frequent questions I get is: “If you had $10,000 and had to start your career over, how would you do it? What would you play and do you think its actually possible to do?” The answer is yes, it is very possible and after thinking about it, I believe I will give it a try. My plan is to set aside a bankroll of $10,000, play 40 hrs a week online in lower limit games and see if I can earn $1500 a week, which should be very possible. Just kidding, I wish I had time to devote to a project like this, it seems like it would be a very interesting study. Instead of doing it myself, I will tell you how I would go about doing it and see if I can coach you on your road to professional poker.

Ok, lets say that you have your $2k in bills paid for the month and now you have $10k to work with. Lets not worry about playing the big tournaments right now. Lets concentrate on the tourist-rich cash games. Everyone and their mother thinks they have what it takes to play no limit these days, so lets expose em. Find a casino that offers $1-$2 or $2-$4 blind no limit games and always be sure to buy in for the max. Most of these games have a table buy-in limit set, so make sure to always buy-in for the max. If there is no max, don’t be afraid to sit with $1,000 of your $10,000 bankroll... You don’t want to show fear, players pick up on it and a small buy-in is the first sign of fear.

The key to becoming a pro is working your way up in limits. Every pro has started at the smaller limits and worked their way up. Even players like Phil Ivey and Daniel Negreanu played the small limits, so don’t get discouraged or embarrassed to start small. Another major ingredient to building that bankroll is game selection. Don’t be afraid to play a little bit higher if you see an amazingly soft game that you think you can push a few people around. Let me explain game selection a bit. I am the biggest sucker for a game with tons of chips flying. In many past experiences I have found myself walking back to the room with my tail between my legs and my chin on my chest because I got broke in a game like this. Be sure to shy away from fast paced games with big swings. We aren’t looking for games like that at this point. We are trying to keep our swings down and show small profit in each session.

At this point in your career, decision making is so important in every aspect of the game. Every hand you play and every minute at the table is valuable experience for your long road ahead. Be sure to pick up on tells and betting patterns that people at this level are unknowingly throwing at you throughout your entire session. After each session critique everything you did for an hour or so. Think about the weird situations that you found yourself in and think of how to avoid them from happening again.

Right about now you are probably wondering: when am I going to get to the moving up in limits part? Patience guys, patience!!! Moving up in limits is not so important right now. You can easily make $20-$25 an hour playing these low blind no limit games. The competition is weak and your hourly may be more down here in the lower levels. I would say when you get your bankroll up to about $13,000 is when you can move up to the $5-$10 blind no limit games and start playing some of the smaller buyin tournaments. But before you do this, make sure you scout the games and be sure that you can move up and still be comfortable playing for the bigger stakes. If you find yourself playing tighter and more cautious because of the inflated dollar amounts, go back down!!! I cant say this loud enough. Playing weak tight can be a disaster to your minimal bankroll and you will find your yourself working back at that 9-5 wishing you were those straights and flush draws again.

As you work your way up in limits you will find the competition getting more talented and you will find yourself in trickier situations than you ever before. Once again you need to find yourself evaluating your sessions and trying to improve all aspects of the game.

This is a great place to start and before you know it you will realize that you are good enough to play the higher limits. I will go into the next step on what you can do in a later article, but I think I have left you with plenty work on for the time being.

Here is a few of the finer points that you need to know and that have nothing to do with playing poker itself. When I first started making trips to the casino, a friend of mine told me a saying that I will never ever forget. He told me “Josh, when you go to the casino use tunnel vision.” The saying is pretty straight forward, but I will explain it anyway. Don’t be lured in by the free drinks, and definitely don’t fall for that roar you hear coming from the crap table. There are many great poker players that struggle because they never learned to stay away from the alcohol or the pit gambling. Be sure to walk thru that front door and go straight to the poker room and do the same when you leave. Don’t fall for that quick easy money, that’s not what this is about. Your road to professional poker is going to be a long grind, its not something that happens overnight. Take it from me, I’ve been broke a million times, but I learned a lesson every time I went broke. I made it a point to learn what NOT to do and evolve from those experiences. All of those horrendous experiences have molded me into the player and person that I am today.

Another important thing that you can work on right now is knowing when to play. Find good hours. Some of the best games are in strange hours. Adjust your schedule so that you are fresh when others are tired. No limit is a game that you can really take advantage of tired players and it will definitely help your bankroll to play against these people.

Play because you want to, don’t play because you have to. Everyday when you are riding into ‘work’ tell yourself how lucky you are for doing what you are doing and remind yourself of the alternative… THE 9 to 5 back at home, wherever you are from!!!!

One last aspect I want you to really focus on is always play your top game. Be honest with yourself and know when you are off your game. No one, not event the top players in the world, play their best every session. But what makes them the best is the fact that they are honest with themselves and know what to do to stop it or they know when to call it a day. If you find yourself playing bad its probably because you are losing or just flat out sick of playing…. That’s when its time to take a break and do something away from the casino to clear your mind.

Link to this article can be found here
Comments? Share them by emailing comments@josharieh.com

Can Aggressiveness be Learned?

I'm sure that at one time or another we all have questioned a hand that we lost, and wondered if we pushed too hard or not hard enough. Hindsight is always 20/20 but at least we can learn from questioning our success's or failures in poker. Are you aggressive in poker? Are you aggressive in your life? Can a person be aggressive in one and not the other? Over aggressiveness can get you in serious trouble in life, and can without a doubt do the same thing in poker. Let's take a look at the subject of this column.

Question,

Aggressiveness is very important in poker (and in life). But I think that it is very difficult for people who are not aggressive in life, to be aggressive in poker. If somebody believes that a person who is not aggressive by nature can learn to become aggressive in poker, I would appreciate hearing your ideas and advice about how one might become aggressive in poker, and the value of doing so.

Opinion 1

I agree that it is difficult for a player who is not naturally aggressive to play aggressively, but I do think it can be learned. There are two ways that this can happen that I am aware of;

1. Blind Faith (poor) -- If you are told enough times that you should be aggressive, and you totally believe what you are told, then you will do it because you want to win simple as that. The drawback is that you should not be aggressive all the time, but only selectively

2. Understanding (much better) -- If you understand why you should be aggressive, then you act that way purely as an intellectual exercise. It may go against your nature, but you do it because you know it is the right strategy to win the chips. What is more, you learn to be aggressive when you should be aggressive and passive when you should be passive. In short, the more you understand about the game, the more natural that the correct type of aggressiveness becomes. It'll become obvious that (selective) aggressiveness is the only way to play.

Sometimes it is correct to temporarily back off from an aggressive style against passive opponents. This occurs when you may be cornering them into a "fight or flight" reaction with your aggression. That is, if you mercilessly pound on them long enough, they may fight back with aggression of their own (which makes them tougher players), or they may just stand up and leave the "unfriendly" game. You want to control the game and have them fear & respect you, but you don't want to push them too far. You want to maintain the same magic formula that keeps the chips flowing your way, without killing the proverbial geese laying the golden eggs. I think a lot of "naturally aggressive" players do not understand this concept, and hurt themselves as a result.

A desire to win, and some inner confidence in your abilities go a long way toward backing up aggressive behavior. If you are trying to be aggressive, but are not confident, others can pick up on this and may just intimidate you back. Aggressiveness at poker can have as many faults as passiveness. Every time it is your turn to play at poker you have (at most) 3 choices: fold, call, or raise. Each time you should make the play that maximizes your EV, whatever that play is. Aggressiveness may or may not be a factor. If the best play is to raise then raise, if the best play is to fold, then fold. If you are in a very tight game then the best plays will often be bets or raises, and you will appear aggressive. In your next session if the game is very wild then calling/folding will be the norm and you will appear passive. If you feel that in general you are not betting or raising sufficiently then study the games that you play in. Identify the situations where an opponents raise is effective, and then try and incorporate the lessons of these plays into your own game. As soon as you see poker as a pure game where at each turn you are trying to make the best possible play, then the game becomes cerebral and your own inherent nature becomes irrelevant.

Arty's Opinion

Having just come off the worst 4-day streak of bad cards I have ever experienced, I can tell you that I sure questioned my playing tactics. I tried to be aggressive and failed. I tried being passive and failed. I tried selective aggressiveness and failed. I found that if the cards are not coming that you can try everything and it will fail. Having started with great hands pre-flop, and continuously missing the flop, or having hit the flop, and having the best hand caught on the river time after time, I started to forecast that if I held a powerful hand the flop would miss me by a mile. This became what seemed to me to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. I found that I started to stray from my regular selective aggressive game, to one that was unfamiliar to me. I tightened up to the point that I was now tight/passive, my worst nightmare. I had to force myself to quit several sessions, before I went completely into the Mega-Tilt abyss. I guess what I am trying to tell you is that everything is relative. You get into a game where aggressiveness should pay off and you can still take a beating. The opposite is also true. Aggressiveness can be a two edged sword, when used at the right time it can pay off big, and at the wrong time it can cost you. If I lost a hand, after raising, I would still feel better than loosing the hand because I did not raise. In closing I can only say that when the cards are not coming nothing will help, you can change styles, seats, tables, casinos or your name. I mentioned to a buddy, after one of my losing sessions, "You know it's unbelievable how unimaginative your game can become when you are losing." As my a friend of mine once said, "Its unbelievable how many times you hear poker players say 'Its unbelievable".

Now go win money.

By Art Santella

An Interesting Hand

By Nick Eisel

The past month has been crazy for me with Vegas and the World Series. I ended up finishing 450th when I was somewhat short-stacked and pushed in overtop a guy that was raising a lot when I found AQ. He called with AJ and when a Jack hit the flop that was it for me. All in all it was a good experience though and I felt like I played well and just didn't get the cards when I needed to.

Now that I'm back from Vegas and things have settled down, I've gotten back into my routine of playing lots of Shorthanded Online Poker. This month I have a very interesting hand that I want to share with all of you.

The reason this hand is so unique is that it was a tough decision for me based on the players involved, pot odds, and the fact that I knew I was beat at the time and was unsure as to how many outs I actually had. Let's take a closer look.

The stage is set in a $2/$4 six-handed game on Poker Stars.

The player under the gun opens the pot with a raise. From what I've seen of this guy so far, his raising standards are pretty liberal and he will basically raise any hand he wants to play before the flop. My notes showed that he had previously raised KTo (after a few limpers), QJo, J9s, 87s.

The player next to act was a complete calling station and called the raise. We'll call him Player A. The next player folded and quite possibly the loosest player I've ever seen, Player B, also called the raise. To define what I mean by "loosest I've ever seen," I'd seen him call a raise with 83 offsuit and then call a bet on a J22 flop in a multiway pot.

Get the picture?

The button and small blind folded their hands and I was in the big blind with K K. I put in the mandatory reraise and everyone called.

The Flop : 4 5 7 There is $25 in the pot

Clearly this isn't a very good flop for my kings. I considered going for a checkraise to possibly thin the field, but I didn't feel like it was likely that either of the calling stations in the last two positions would bet for sure. Even though I thought this was a flop that probably hit them in some way, they both played pretty peculiarly and I didn't want to issue a free card if two kings were still the best hand.

I bet and was called by the preflop raiser and Player A. Player B then raised and I had to try to put him on a hand.

Sometimes I'll just lay my hand down here against a loose/passive opponent like the one I was currently facing since they usually don't raise on draws and I'll never know if I'm drawing dead or possibly have some outs against two pair. Even if I am ahead, with this dangerous of a board, it's quite likely that I'll be outdrawn if all of my opponents stay until the River. Based on what I had seen from Player B in previous hands, he would sometimes make a raise on the flop with a flush draw or more likely, a pair and a flush draw. I also thought if he held the 6 and another heart giving him the flush and straight draws he would surely raise. Because of this, I knew I couldn't fold my hand just yet with all of that money in the pot.

Hopefully most of you already realize that the right play then is to reraise rather than call. The reasoning of course being that I want to try to get the two players in between out of the hand and give myself the best possible chance to win the pot. Calling to try and peel a safe card is a bad idea here for a few reasons. First off, there are a ton of cards that could come off of the deck and look very bad for a pair of kings in this spot. Because of that, you may check when you should have bet out on the turn and end up costing yourself the pot through a free card. You also don't want to let the two players in the middle see the turn cheaply like I said earlier. A final reason why it is basically obligatory to reraise the flop in this spot is that I felt like Player B would go ahead and cap it with a straight and not slowplay and wait to raise the turn like some stronger opponents might do. If he just had two pair or something, I'd already seen him slow down and just go into call down mode starting on the flop when someone else showed strength. I wanted to know immediately if he had the straight so that I could get off of my hand with minimal losses and a reraise is the best way to find out.

I reraised the pot, the preflop raiser folded, and Player A and B both just called my raise.

At least I got rid of the preflop raiser, right?

At this point I still wasn't sure where I was at in the hand since as I said earlier, Player B could have slowed down with two pair, or he could just be on some kind of draw or have a pair and a draw.

The Turn : 5 There is $45 in the pot

That was not a great card for me unless both players were on draws or Player B had specifically 74 for two pair and just got counterfeited. I figured I would certainly find out where I was at now as I currently had Player B on two pair or a draw, and his action on this round should tell me whether or not I am still leading.

I led out the turn and was instantly called by Player A and then raised by Player B.

Well, that's it for me, right?

Hold on now just a second. At this point, the pot has $61 in it and I'm being offered 15 to 1 on a call on the turn! It's not too often you're being given such good odds on taking off a card, especially in a shorthanded game.

If my read was right, and I strongly felt that it was, I would only have the two Kings as outs. A two outer is a 23 to 1 shot, and would've been a slightly marginal call in this situation. A couple of things that also factor in here are that I'm virtually guaranteed that Player A will call with any hand here giving me 16 to 1, and I'll likely make more money on the river when I do hit a King, so I have some implied odds there. Even that doesn't make it a correct though as I'm still not getting the 23 to 1 and there are some very unlikely scenarios where I will hit a King and run into Player B's Quad 5s.

The difficult part of this hand though is that if Player B is being tricky and did in fact flop a straight, I would have an additional two outs with the two 5s left in the deck to give me a full house. A four outer is a much more attractive 12 to 1 shot and I'm getting a big overlay to call if all of those outs are clean.

To be fair, I think it's probably best to assign this hand a value of 3 outs which is exactly a 15 to 1 shot. With that in mind, and my read that this player did in fact have a full house and I only had two outs, I think it's pretty clear why I elected to fold my hand here.

Player A called the raise.

The River : 5

Both players check and Player A shows Q J for a weak overcard draw that he couldn't let go of. I told you he was the loosest ever.

Player B shows 8 6 for the flopped straight and straight flush draw.

Turns out I would've made the winning hand on the river and did indeed have the necessary 4 outs to call. So, was I wrong in my laydown?

I really don't think that I made a bad fold because it was a close decision anyway and my read told me that I will usually be drawing to two outs in this spot. What actually happened here was that my opponent waited to raise the turn because he also had the straight flush draw in addition to the nut straight. I think that if he had just flopped the straight (and yes, he would call a raise with 86o), he would've just gone ahead and capped on the flop. It was the added flush possibility that caused him to wait for the turn and ended up costing me the pot in the process as I could've drawn cheaply had I known he held the straight on the flop (I would have pot odds to check call the turn when the 5 came off).

I also have a few other things I want to talk about regarding this hand. Let's say you were playing my cards in this hand and you elected to call the raise on the turn. Now, when a complete blank comes off on the river, Player B bets again. Are you the type of person that would pay off here "because the pot is so big?" If so, then you should definitely be folding your hand on the turn so you don't end up turning a close call/fold situation into a losing call by paying off on the river.

Let me reiterate that. If you call the turn and "miss" your full house on the river, you cannot pay off another bet! Go back to the turn and remember how sure I was that I was beaten at that point. There was absolutely no doubt in my mind as my opponent was passive and not capable of making all of those raises as bluffs. So basically, you have to treat the hand like you are drawing at a gutshot straight, you cannot call the river if you don't get there.

A final thing to talk about is that if you make your hand on the river, you should definitely lead out. Less so if you hit a 5 than a K, but you should be leading out regardless. The reason for this is that Player A will probably have enough hand to call in between and then Player B will pay you off with the straight if he has it. If you hit a K, it will look like a completely innocuous card (unless it's the K, completing the flush), and you should bet so that you can hopefully trap Player A in between and then get a 3bet in. Even if the K comes off you should still bet out because if Player B has a full house he will almost certainly go four bets with you, putting you on a flush. Finally, going for a checkraise here is wrong because of the loose Player A in the middle and you want to give him a chance to put some money in on the river with whatever garbage he has.

Hopefully you can get yourself to do the type of thinking process that this hand exemplifies as it will help you make tough decisions at the table like I had to do in the above hand. Also if you don't understand the logic behind any of the decisions I made, please feel free to email me about it.

Nick Eisel
Sun3urst@hotmail.com

Tools To Help Your Online Poker Game

Programs you can find online to strengthen your poker strategy, some working along with the software of your favorite online poker room.

There are plenty of ways to improve your poker game. The most recommended way to gain an edge on your opponents is to read every book ever written on poker. But for some online poker players, the advice you find in the most prestigious poker books isn't applicable to online play. Matthew Hilger has written a book for internet players called Internet Texas Holdem: Winning Strategies from an Internet Pro. It’s a great place to start if you are serious about improving your online game. Hilger includes plenty of tips for internet players that you won't find in any of David Sklansky's books.

There are several computer programs and software out there that you can install and download that can improve your poker game.

Poker Tracker (http://www.pokertracker.com/), a Windows-based program that analyzes, stores, and summarizes all of your hand histories. You can pore over the data and find leaks in your game. You can store both ring game and tournament hand histories. Poker Tracker works with the major online poker sites including Party Poker, Paradise Poker, Empire Poker, PokerStars, and Ultimate Bet.

With Poker Tracker, you have an option to playback your hands. It is similar to watching game film in the locker room as professional athletes do. You will see exactly where you made a mistake so you can make adjustments in your play from that point on. & Another excellent feature is being able to track your play by position and see if you are playing too many hands from early position or not defending your blinds enough against steal attempts. You can track your individual hand results and determine which hands are costing you the most money and which hands win you the most pots. My favorite feature is the ability to track your opponents. You can rate their style of play and keep accurate and detailed notes on how many times they see the flop, which hands they play and raise with preflop, or how often they fold on the river.

Poker Tracker is an overwhelming program because there is so much you can do with it to improve your game. Although there are suggestions on how to use Poker Tracker on their website, I found that the best supplement for the software is Poker Tracker Guide (http://www.pokertrackerguide.com/). Written by two well-known poker bloggers, HDouble and Iggy, Poker Tracker Guide is what the beginner online player needs to optimize the Poker Tracker software. The authors will teach you how to gain an informational advantage over your opponents. The best section in Poker Tracker Guide is the chapter on how to auto-rate players based on their system. They also show you how to auto-import player notes from Poker Tracker into your online poker site. Poker Tracker Guide definitely enhances your knowledge on how to use Poker Tracker and you should get these inexpensive tools as soon as possible.

Wilson Turbo (http://www.wilsonsw.com/) has simulation software for different poker games. Many experts feel that the artificial intelligence is well developed and that is part of the reason why Wilson Turbo is the best simulation software in the marketplace. You can choose from specific playing styles, or create your own set of playing styles to get a real-life experience while playing in a simulated game. An excellent feature of Wilson Turbo is being able to obtain instant pot odds and advice while you are playing. Their hand analyzer keeps track of what hands are your best winners or how often your big pairs lose. You can order versions for different types of games other than Texas Holdem. This is an amazing tool that lets you see plenty of flops before you ever step into a casino.

Poker Charts (http://www.pokercharts.com) is an exceptional tool for players who are meticulous record-keepers and prefer to analyze data in chart format instead of in a spreadsheet. Poker Charts is an advanced way to see the progress of your poker game. You are able to track your play session-by-session by uploading your information. You can quickly figure out random statistics like overall hourly win rate, average return standard deviation, average hourly win rate standard deviation, big bets won or lost per hour (BB/hr), return on investment as compared to an equal investment in the 30 stocks in the Dow Jones Industrials Average, and streak information. In addition, you can analyze this data by using different filters. Overall, Poker Charts is a well-organized journal and computational scorecard of your sessions.

Player View (http://www.playerview.net) is an innovative program that works in conjunction with Poker Tracker. It overlays realtime statistics on top of your Party Poker's (and Party Poker affiliates’) skin window. You can see the data on the poker table you're playing. This is a helpful tool that allows you to have the numbers and data clearly visible, to assist you in making those quick decisions.

Of course there are plenty of other websites and different forms of software that claim to pad your bankroll. The websites and programs I’ve listed above are reliable and inexpensive compared to the amount of money that you will save in plugging those leaks in your game. Every day your opponents are gaining an extra edge on you. It's time to close that gap. With so many different ways to improve your poker skills available on the internet, you will continue to hurt your game if you do not take advantage of these opportunities.~~

Playing Poker Professionally : Pros and Cons

Introduction

In "A Tale of Two Cities," Charles Dickens wrote, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times." I suppose that too goes for life as a professional poker player. Playing poker for a living can be either the best or the worst of lifestyles. Poker brings out the best and worst in us.

Some of what you are about to read first appeared on the Internet newsgroup, rec.gambling.poker (RGP). A question was asked by someone wanting to know what it's "really" like to play poker for a living. That question provoked several replies from members of the poker community -- both pro and con.

I selected the two most enlightening responses, so readers might get a broader perspective of the advantages and disadvantages of choosing poker as a full-time profession. Here, we have two thoughtful people, obviously poker players, looking at the same issue and coming to completely different conclusions. One sees the glass as half-empty. The other sees it half-full.

There are so many myths surrounding what constitutes professional poker playing, that's it's difficult to separate fact from fiction. A career as a professional poker player can be either blissful or miserable, or a strange combination thereof -- all depending on how you look at it. It's certainly not as portrayed in movies or according to old stereotypes. For the true professional, thrilling moments are few and far between, dwarfed by the endless monotony of the grind. Poker pros, usually absorbed in self-images of themselves as Runyonesc romanticists, gradually come to a more sobering reality that their livelihood depends on a fresh daily crop of hayseed suckers streaming in the door plucked out of the cornfield.

I spent three years a professional player -- and by that I mean the majority of my income came from poker playing. There were times I hated it and other times I loved what I was doing. I also spent a good number of years as a semi-professional, which means I used poker to supplement my income when I was employed in other occupations. In the 11 or so years I played poker as a semi-pro, I won in 10 of them. There were also a couple of years in my adult life when poker was not important to me -- when the game was merely a diversion and form of recreation. Hence, I've seen poker though the prism of all three perspectives -- novice, semi-pro, and pro and suffered both ups and downs -- which leads me to provide a final summation below.

As you will see, poker playing not a "game" so much as a state of mind. How you view poker is commonly a reflection of how you view yourself and your own life. It's not the game which is the cause of joy or despair, nor the origin of self-fulfillment or disappointment. The game is merely one reservoir of many, which magnifies human conditions which already exist. In a sense, a cardroom is like a giant greenhouse, where human evolution occurs before your very eyes. Players are seeded, they grow, they bloom, they blossom, they wilt, and eventually they die. Clearly, the game causes innumerable problems for many people along the way -- financial, social, psychological, and so forth. But the game also provides many positive things -- such as companionship, entertainment, intellectual stimulation, and money (for the winners).

In poker, there are pros who are miserable and also pros who can think of doing nothing else but playing poker for a living. Certainly, the typical attitude falls somewhere in between the two extremes, meandering through a revolving gambit of emotions, toils, and turmoil which sporadically grants us time to pause and reflect on our lives and our pursuit of happiness. Perhaps this column will allow more pros, and those who aspire to be pros, to do the same.

The Pros and Cons of Professional Poker Playing

Note Most of the PRO and CON arguments were taken from two sources -- "Anonymous" speaking as the "PRO," and edgayer@att.net speaking as the "CON." These are real people with completely opposing viewpoints I have taken the liberty of adding several comments to their arguments. My "FINAL ANALYSIS" seeks to be an objective overall assessment of the subject.

Income

PRO: Critics say that "poker players are always broke." Well, just about everyone I know with a regular job is "always broke." The rest of the world is living on their credit cards, barely surviving, going from paycheck to paycheck. They sweat small change. That's how most people live in this world. I don't sweat much. But everyone with a paycheck does. You tell me which is better?

CON: You might make $50,000 to $100,000 per year if you're a very good pro. You're probably not. Very few professionals make six-figures and up -- less than 1 percent. You might as well try to become a movie star or a pro athlete -- the odds are better. With a regular job you're guaranteed a paycheck every two weeks. That's a pretty good deal when the bills come due. With poker playing, there are no guarantees. You might even lose money. Most who try to become professionals, lose money. They fail. End of story.

FINAL ANALYSIS: Unlike most regular jobs where you are limited to a fixed income, with annual increases that barely keep ahead of cost-of-living, in poker you are limited only by the extent to which your talents and playing time will allow. You can play 30 hours a week or 60 hours. You get out of poker what you put into it. Furthermore, if you are really good enough and have the bankroll, you will win money. Trouble is, the vast majority of those who seek to play poker professionally have neither the talent, the discipline, or the disposition necessary to succeed.

Financial Matters

PRO: Poker players can establish good credit in the same manner as everyone else in society -- by paying their bills on time and being responsible with credit. There's no difference on credit reports between having a place of employment (i.e., a job) and being self-employed (playing cards for a living). I've never not paid a bill on time in my life. That's about all it takes. It's got nothing do with poker. Same thing with investing and conducting your business affairs. If you maintain good credit, you will have opportunities.

CON: Getting credit is difficult, if not impossible if you play poker for a living. Be prepared live on cash. You can't get simple things like a car loan, or a mortgage on a house. If you somehow get a loan, you will have to put down 5 or 10 times the amount of money than most people with regular jobs. Someone who works and belongs to a credit union can get a house with a few thousand down. You better have at least $20,000 or you'll end up paying rent the rest of your life.

FINAL ANALYSIS: Poker playing as a profession is certain to be a big disadvantage in some important financial matters -- like winning points on a mortgage or getting loans approved. However, it is just as easy for a poker player to secure good credit as any other person in society.

Tax Issues

PRO: There are big tax advantages to being a pro poker player. Most people in cash businesses can either report their income quarterly (and pay what is due at that time) or wait until the end of the year and pay their tax bill in full so long as the obligation is met. The government does not get to keep withholdings on earned income as in other professions. I also acquire interest on my own money and pay the tax bill according to the schedule I have set with the IRS.

CON: Tax problems are almost inevitable if you gamble for a living. If you get really good at poker and score $100,000 a year, you probably won't declare it properly and pay taxes on it. You simply won't. You're in a cash business and you will always find something else to do with the money. Gradually, the years will pass along and one day the IRS will get you. Especially with computers literally taking over our lives. You used to be able to run and/or hide. That won't be an option going forward. They will get you -- count on it.

FINAL ANALYSIS: According to the IRS, people who are self-employed and in cash business are more likely to be audited and have their finances scrutinized by tax authorities. Many pro players have had tax problems. If you play poker over a long length of time (years) and you under-report your income, the odds will eventually catch up with you and you will get caught. You better keep very good records and be able to explain everything. Unfortunately, the IRS seems to have a reverse mentality when it comes to guilt -- it's up to you to prove your innocence. Whether you play as a pro or semi-pro, KEEP GOOD RECORDS.

Benefits

PRO Benefits are things you buy. Benefits are not free. Either you buy them for yourself, or your employer buys them for you, essentially deducting it from your pay. I play cards for a living. I pay about $400 a month for health insurance for to cover myself, my wife, and kids. What difference does it make if you get $45,000 in salary and $5,000 in benefits -- versus a $50,000 salary and no benefits? It's all the same thing. There are advantages with a regular company, since group insurance is usually cheaper. But it's still a financial calculation, not a necessary lifestyle difference.

CON: Poker playing provides absolutely no benefits. No perks. None whatsoever. You have no idea how important these benefits are until you need them and don't have them. No 401K. No retirement income. No vacation. No sick leave. No disability coverage. And forget about getting a promotion.

FINAL ANALYSIS: This is one of the biggest disadvantages to being a poker pro. Since you do not get benefits, the money you earn at the table must be higher in order to compensate for this loss. In other words, you better be really good in order to justify the loss of additional perks from working a regular job.

Family Life

PRO: Many poker players are happily married. They have children and happy family lives. One thing is -- if done responsibly, poker allows you to spend lots of time with them. I spend more time with my family than almost any other husband I know. Families and marriages are what you make of them, and that's got little to do with your job, except insofar as your job reflects your personality. I have a wife and handsome, athletic, smart, educated kids, in a classic middle-class beach lifestyle. And, I play poker for a living. I know plenty of people doing the 9 to 5 routine who are bitter with no family life, divorced and lonely. It's all what you make of it.

CON: If you play poker, you probably work nights and sleep days. How are you going to attend soccer matches and ballet dances? You won't. Because you won't find a woman worth marrying. Who would want to hook up with a gambler?

FINAL ANALYSIS: Poker playing is more challenging to family life than most other occupations -- except in rare instances. The vocation is overwhelming comprised of males, which leads to fewer opportunities for courtship and matrimony than most other professions (except for male-dominated fields).

Social Status

PRO: As a poker player, I've made friends with doctors, lawyers, businessmen, teachers, cops, drug dealers, bookies, entertainers, cab drivers -- as well as Blacks, Latinos, Whites, Asians, and so forth. Yet people with jobs have friends almost only from the same profession, and that generally means of the same race. Anytime I want, I can go to the card room and find friends to hang out with. To drink with, watch a ball game with, have a coffee with, eat with. No appointment needed, no planning to get together. A place where everybody knows your name. People with jobs watch TV every night and then go to sleep.

CON: Society gives you no respect. In fact, much of the world looks down on you. Incorrectly perhaps, but that's the way it is. Many poker players are lowlifes. You may meet a lot of diverse people, but everyone is on the room for a reason -- to get your money and leave you destitute. So much for the social thing.

FINAL ANALYSIS: I can think of no other hobby or profession that provides people with as much opportunity to get to know their fellow citizens -- of all ages, races, religions, interests, and backgrounds -- than poker. Poker players who are open-minded to new ideas and experiences and who are generally interested in other people are the ones who will find poker the most rewarding. Poker after all, is "a game of people."

Lifestyle

PRO: Job goers are up at 6:30 in the morning to commute downtown for an hour, to work all day, to get back by 6:30, exhausted. That's 12 hours five days a week. In some jobs, more than that. One week I might play about 20 to 30 hours a week, or play only 7 to 9 months a year. It's all up to me. I also chose to live very close by the poker room, so there is no lost life spent in traffic. I wake and sleep when I want. Everyone else seems to carry an appointment book around, working out a schedule, using cell phones and e-mails and palm pilots, trying to stay organized. Me? Someone asks me "when's a good time for you to..." I always say, "anytime. It doesn't matter." Because it doesn't.

CON: You are constantly around a lot of miserable people. Life is a very short ride, and sharing the backseat with your typical casino gamblers for most of it is a prescription for despair and depression. There are exceptions and we all have poker friends who we like and admire, but really, how many? The vast majority of gamblers are of low character and are a big-time drag to share existence with for long periods of time.

FINAL ANALYSIS: Oddly enough, successful poker players must (try to) surround themselves with losers. It's probably the only profession where you seek to be around with people who are less talented than you are. This peculiarity must have a profound impact over the course of time. Of course, not all poker players are professionals and a "loser" at the table can be a big "winner" in life. We sometimes forget this. Many otherwise successful people from respected professions are losing poker players. One big advantage in favor of playing for a living does seem to be the fact a poker player can play whenever he wants -- night or day or any day of the week. Since most jobs fit the 9-5 routine, poker is a viable alternative to non-conformists who despise ritual and routine.

Physical Health

PRO Smoking and second-hand smoke was once a huge problem, but it's gone now in most rooms. Sure, poker is sedentary, but how many jobs aren't? I exercise almost every day and stay fit. I eat right. That's got nothing to do with or without poker. 60 percent of all Americans are overweight. Just look around.

CON: Poker is a sedentary job that frequently exposes you to second-hand smoke and unhealthy foods. You can overcome the sedentary part with a disciplined workout program, but the smoke is not something you can avoid if you want to play in really live games. All you have to do is look around the average poker room to see that poker players, as a class, are less healthy than the general public.

FINAL ANALYSIS: There are health risks that go along with with many professions, especially outdoor jobs. Some jobs are even dangerous. Poker playing is a relatively sedate profession, on par with working in an office. In some less comfortable cardrooms, working conditions may be more like a bar. Nevertheless, most jobs do not promote good health nor do they provide opportunities to take a break whenever the worker chooses. So, poker is not really a worse lifestyle and may actually be slightly advantageous.

Mental Health

PRO What job doesn't become a grind after a long time? You tell me. Selling insurance? Teaching fifth-graders? Appraising real estate? Clerking at Wal-Mart? What are the jobs that don't become grinds? Well, actually, POKER! If it does become a grind, your approach is wrong. So, take a break. The truth is -- if it's becoming a grind, your earn will drop. I pretty much net the same win on 25 hours a week as I will on 50. 25 well-played hours equals 50 mediocre-played hours, and if I start playing 50 hours, they'll be pretty damn mediocre. So, play less and play better -- if you can. Have fun, win more. I have a mantra I repeat to myself when I sit down: "Play calmly and aggressively; remember that good play begets good play; want to learn more than earn; have FUN!" Corny stuff, maybe, but it reminds me of the mindset I want to have. And it is fun. If you're not playing over your bankroll, and not playing too many hours, it's an endlessly interesting game. I make mistakes every day; that alone keeps my interest.

CON: It's boring. Poker turns into a horrible grind when you have to play correctly every day. You create nothing in poker, beyond grinding out your living. You help no one. You achieve nothing. You don't grow as a human being. Most of the conversation at the tables is confined to trivia or worse -- listening to bad beat stories and tales of misery. Sitting at a poker table for long periods of time is intellectual death. Talk to some of the poker pros -- they are human vegetables. Bring up something profound that's not related to gambling and they are like deer caught in the headlights.

FINAL ANALYSIS: Very few jobs can sustain one's intellectual curiosity over a period of years. For some people, poker seems to foster the pursuit of greater knowledge, while killing that same pursuit in others. People driven to do great things in other professions are, in fact, taking a step downward by playing poker for a living. Others, who were once destined to work menial jobs most of their lives and stumbled into success in the poker world found their salvation. Indeed, the grind of the poker life can either be death or salvation -- depending on the person.

Options

PRO: If I decide at some point that I don't want to play poker for a living, I have the freedom to go out look for a job anytime I want. I can go to school and take classes to improve my education. People with regular jobs usually don't have that luxury -- unless they go to night school or can arrange to do something part-time. In terms of poker's relevance to getting a regular job, my profession taught me things about investing, risk, finance, self-control, and human psychology than most people will ever know.

CON: Your options are extremely limited. Let's say 30 years goes by. You're 50 years old, you're tired, and you want to find a real job and hang with real people. Well guess what. You don't have a marketable skill in the world. You can work for Wal-Mart or flip burgers, if you can explain to them why you haven't had a job since high school. It's the same thing a convicted felon goes through after spending the first half of his life in a correctional institute. Your options are extremely limited if you later decide to do something different with your life.

FINAL ANALYSIS: Unfortunately, most of the world does not see poker the same way we do. Call them misguided, but if you tell a potential employer you played poker for a living for a significant part of your life, you are going to be met with skepticism and raised eyebrows. Most people simply fail to grasp what poker is all about. Sure, poker provides extraordinary opportunities to learn new things and creates experiences that most people will never have. But on a job resume, it will be a looked at as a negative by most companies.

Chances for Happiness

PRO: Looking back at the end of life with disappointment is an issue we all must deal with someday, and it's got nothing to do with poker. I think I'll look back and say -- I was a good husband and father and friend. I lived a long time in good health and with self-respect. Critics say poker playing is not productive. Maybe not. It's not like saving lives or curing cancer. But it's not counter-productive either, like so many other fields. Not counter-productive like so many lawyers, business executives/con-artists, or others who hurt the world more than they help it. I provide a "service." I provide a game in which people can be entertained by the challenge. I don't lie, cheat, or steal. How many lawyers, businessmen, politicians, doctors, or anyone else can really say that? I don't "sell" to anyone. I don't act nice to people I don't like. I don't stroke egos nor do I submit to other people's demands. I don't say "yes, this is a great price for this car," or "yes, this stock's going up" or "yes, you look skinny in that dress" or "yes, I finished teaching my class the district-demanded standardized-test prep" or any of the other million and one degradations those with jobs suffer to keep their jobs. I can look myself in the mirror at the end of the day and like what I see.

CON: Many poker players don't have family lives, don't have social lives, and can't get dates. They're still living in an apartment and paying rent since there was no reason to buy a house. They've pissed their lives away playing poker. At the end of the road, you're tired, you have nothing to show for your stay on the planet except the fact that you maybe managed to feed yourself. Maybe. If so, congratulations. Really impressive.

FINAL ANALYSIS: Happiness and quality of life are not necessarily achieved according to career choice. Many people working drab jobs in factories are very happy with their lives and consider themselves very successful because they have good families, are active in the community, do church work, or hundreds of other fulfilling good deeds. "Making a living" and "living life" are two completely different things. What you do in your free time is perhaps more important in making an impact on the world and contributing to society than what you do for a living to make money. Doing volunteer work or contributing to charity or doing any other noble deed is not predicated upon what one does for a living. There are blissful beer-drinking auto mechanics living in trailer parks, just as there are miserable champagne-swallowing socialites and suicidal investment bankers.

The Bottom Line

PRO: The best reason not to go pro is that you probably aren't good enough. That's really the best reason. That's the chief problem -- lack of skill. Almost everyone who tries, fails, and though they usually blame bad luck or lifestyle, they're completely missing the boat. They just weren't good enough, that's all. I have my share of bad luck. That's where the skill comes in -- not to be destroyed by it. To sum it all up, almost all the knocks on playing poker for a living can be leveled at other jobs, and are not poker-specific. They're a matter of choice, and life-success, is independent of the game. The other knocks are not really made about playing the game for a living, they're made about NOT SUCCEEDING in playing the game for a living. So, yes, if you're broke, that's not good. But that only happens from FAILING to play poker professionally. To me, by definition, a true pro NEVER goes broke. All the guys who do go broke aren't pros, they're wannabe-pros. And yeah, there's lots of them. But the problems come from FAILING to play poker for a living, not PLAYING poker for a living. There's a big difference.

CON: Get a real life, and treat poker as it was meant to be treated -- as an entertaining diversion. If you're young, life should be about big dreams and big plans. Anticipating a pro poker existence is setting the bar way too low.

FINAL ANALYSIS: For those who chose to play poker for a living and are successful at it, poker can be a dream come true. For those who aspire to play poker but fail, poker becomes a nightmare. Most dissent about professional poker playing comes from those who cannot achieve it and thus are reluctant to admit that it can be an immensely fun and rewarding occupation. But the odds of becoming a poker pro making a respectable income are terribly long, and most people should be advised it is not the right pursuit.

For additional reading on this subject, I strongly recommend David M. Hayano's astounding sociological study/book called "Poker Faces." Although this book was written in 1982, it is the best portrait of the life and work of professional cardplayers ever written.

Poker Expected Value

A successful Texas hold em player is one who maximizes his return or minimizes his loss with each decision he makes. Expected value (EV) is essentially the amount one would expect to win or lose if this decision were to be repeated millions of times. (rememer your precalculus "limit as n goes to infinity"??? didn't think so!)

Every poker decision, whether it be to bet, raise, check/call, check/fold, check/raise has an expectation of success or failure.

Those that will lose you money in the long run are said to have negative expected value (-EV). Folding always has an expected value of zero. You will never gain or lose money by folding. Folding, though it has an EV of zero, may often be your best decision from an EV perspective.

Let's look at a few examples. Expected value is not always easily calculable, even in limit texas holdem, but every time you play you should try to analyze your decisionmaking with EV in your mind. For instance, you're playing 1/2 and in the small blind with 84o on a flop of K96 rainbow. The small blind checks and only you and a tight player are left. There is three dollars in the pot. Should you bet? You are risking one dollar. Betting has a positive expectation if you can expect the other two to fold more than one in four times. If you try it four times and it succeeds once, you win a three dollar pot and lose your one dollar bet the three other times, making it a 0 EV play. (We're discounting the chance that you are called and catch runner runner or win in some other very unlikely way) Remember, we analyze each decision on its own Expected Value merits. If you are called and catch an 8 on the turn, you must again analyze your decisions based on their likelihood of success or failure in the long run. Poker, and Texas Holdem in particular, is a game of short term variations, but you must continue to make the correct EV decisions and you will be a winner in the long term.

Another example: You are holding A8 of spades, again playing 1/2. There are 3 limpers ahead of you and one behind you. The flop comes K96 with two spades. The first player bets and the other two in front of you call...you should raise! As we've seen in the Poker Odds section, you have about a 35 percent chance of hitting your flush. You will not win each time you hit it...perhaps someone has flopped a set or two pair and will hit a full house, etc. You may even occasionally win if you spike an Ace. Anyway, it is pretty clear that your odds of winning the hand are better than 25 percent, and with 3 players in the pot ahead of you, you want to get more money in the pot while you have an advantage from an expected value standpoint. Now, there are other factors that will enter your head and should be taken into account. If the original bettor reraises you and the other two fold, you've now put 2 dollars in and gotten the others to put 6 in. Now we may or may not be in positive EV territory, depending on what our opponent has. Also, we must consider the fact that our raise may have bought us a free card or may have gotten someone with an Ace and a better kicker or paired side card to fold. As you can see, there are many factors influencing the expected value of our decisions. We may not always be sure we've made the correct poker play, but it's extremely important that our thinking process runs along these lines.

Even preflop you must think along expected value lines. You may be holding AJs in the small blind. Six players, most of them very loose, limp before you. A raise is in order. Think in terms of expected value or pot equity. Your hand figures to win more than one in every seven times against the starting hands held by the others, so a raise is in order. Again, evaluate each decision on its own merits. If you miss the flop in this instance, checking and folding may be your best option from an expectation standpoint. Or, it may not...you may have an overcard, gutshot and back door flush draw...again, do the math in your head and arrive at the correct decision.

Finally, remember this...in general, a bet has a higher expectation than a check/call. You will sometimes win by forcing people to fold. Now, there are times when this is not correct due to the threat of a raise (if you're planning on calling), but always bear it in mind. In Texas Holdem, aggressive poker is winning poker.

About the Author: Gregg Dwyer is a professional online poker player. His Texas Holdem Poker tips, hints and lessons can be found at http://www.hittheflop.com