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