Western Strategy - "Are You Over-Playing Your Over-Pairs"

By Justin West

So just a few days ago, as I sat in a coffee shop desperately seeking a subject for my next article for PokerPages, I had what you might call a stroke of inspiration. Staring at a taunting cursor amidst a pale blank screen, that inspiration came from afar in the form of a friend calling for advice on a hand of poker.

I get these calls all the time, honestly, but I have to say that I don't enjoy them. Why? I feel as though my advice is rarely, if ever, taken to heart. The would-be learners know I've been playing poker a lot longer than they have, but they are usually so damned stubborn that they fit my advice into whatever master plan they've already envisioned, or simply ignore it entirely. Thankfully, this call was different.

So, my friends, I happily introduce you to a series of articles focusing on No-Limit Hold'em strategy.

--

"So I want to know," my friend, Fred, says to me as I step outside of the coffee shop, fresh smoke and a lighter in eager tow. "How would you play this hand?"

Fred was playing a local $100 buy-in No-Limit Hold'em tournament in which each player received 20,000 in starting chips. With approximately 17,000 left in front of him and the tournament blinds at 100-200, Fred looked down in the big blind to see K-K.

Three players, including the button, limped into the pot and the small blind folded, which gave Fred the option to check and see a "free" flop, or to raise. This is often a difficult situation for many players, and for good reason. Fred chose to raise to a total of 900. The button folded, meaning that with 3,000 in the pot just three players saw a flop of Q-6-6 (rainbow).

Fred, first to act, bet out at this point for an even 1,500 in chips. Much to his surprise, he was raised by the player immediately to his left to 4,000, and the last remaining player just smooth-called the bet.

My question to you is this: What would you do?

Think about it for a second. It's quite early in the tournament. You've got a pair of pocket kings and have shown aggression before the flop but were not re-raised, therefore you can't put the other two players (unless they're ridiculously sneaky) on a pair of pocket queens, kings, or aces. What, then, do you do?

Fred decided to move all-in for his entire stack.

Both players called, and the hands were turned over:

Fred: K-K
2nd guy: Q-J
3rd guy: Q-10

Most players would be patting themselves on the back at this point for a job well done. Pocket kings have both of those hands dominated unless a miracle card makes its appearance. Fred was in good shape to triple-up on this hand and start the tournament off on a heck of a nice kind of footing.

Put to this decision, and putting the smooth-caller on nothing but top-pair best kicker (A-Q), Fred decided to move all-in. Both players called, and I'm sure at this moment Fred was filled with both confirmation of his reading skills, and fear of the next card to come. (Don't we all feel this way?)

The fear proved founded...

The turn brought a queen.

With that card, Fred went from way ahead, to dead to rights; Fred now had a two-outer. With no chances for a flush or straight, Fred could only catch one of the two remaining kings for a better full house to win the hand. In the end, of course, neither of those kings came. Instead, a Jack came on the river to give the middle player the best full house and the sizable pot.

Fred's question to me - and it's the same question you should be asking yourself - was: did he make the right play?

Pre-flop, yes. Fred made the right move. He achieved his goal, managing to push one, possibly two limpers out of the pot, going on to see a three-way flop that looked entirely in his favor. A lot of people will just check in this pot to disguise the strength of their hand, but I'm way too aggressive and way to wary of crap hands that can sneak in a great flop to send me packing... like any hand in this situation with a six in it.

But after the flop I certainly would have played the hand differently. Fred played the hand in such a way as to disregard one of the basic tenants of No-Limit Hold'em. You've heard this many, many times, and you're about to hear it again: maximize your winnings, and minimize your losses.

Fred did not necessarily make a mistake in betting out on the flop for half the pot. No. The mistake happened after he had been re-raised by the player to his left, and after that bet had been smooth-called by the last-remaining player in the pot.

Assume for a moment we don't know what the other players' hole cards really were.

In this situation, after betting out for 1,500 on a Q-6-6 flop and having shown aggression pre-flop, only to be raised by the player to my left, I would put said player on a queen. But, after the smooth-call, I'd have to start questioning that. I can't rule out the possibility that one of them might have been playing a six. A lot of people love suited connectors. Ever heard that you should be more afraid of the call than of the raise? Believe it.

In this spot, my friends, I have to tell you - I'm out of this pot. I've only invested 2,400, which means I have 14,600 left in front of me. Still early in the tournament, I'm going to cut my losses and save my chips for a hand in which I know I have the best of it.

How many cards can you pick up to improve your hand, here? Not many. Up against, say, with K-K up against Q-J on a flop of Q-6-6, your opponent can still hit a few outs to improve his hand. You, with K-K, pretty much stuck where you're at, left dodging bullets on the turn and river. That's never a situation in which I want to get all of my money in the pot, especially early in a tournament when I'm nowhere near the felt.

Position here also was a considerable disadvantage. While Fred told me that while he was pretty sure at least one player had a queen, he was not positive that the other person did not have a six. He considered the chance unlikely, and thought he could push one of them out with his all-in raise and be in good position for a double-up. The point was that he couldn't be sure, so why should he then put all of his money into the pot? Given the size of the pot after the raise and call, one can be fairly certain that to stay in the hand would mean going all-in before the fat lady sang. And, looking at the cards, had Fred merely called the raise and seen the turn, he'd have been out of there faster than lightening when that second queen hit the board.

While I would have folded here, one can take a look at the pot odds and call me a fool. Well, truth be told you can call here, and see that scary turn, but wouldn't you rather keep that extra 2,500 in chips, especially when you can't be sure that one of the other players doesn't have three of a kind already?

The fact is that early in a tournament like this you don't want to put all your chips at risk on a hand with such little chance of improving, when its strength is questionable, and in such poor position. Wait. Be patient. Get it in when you know you can't lose, not when you're pretty sure you won't.

I know it's tough to stomach this and get past the "but he had them dominated!" mindset. I know. But what if he had been wrong? It's just these kinds of lay-downs that make the greatest professionals what they are.

All for now.

- J

Questions or comments on this article? Click here to send a letter to the editors

Justin West played poker since the age of 17, he spent more than a year earning a living on the green felt; a modest living, to be sure, but a living nonetheless. His aim was at one point to win the WSOP main event, thus causing Hell to freeze over. However, given his penchant for sin and his extreme dislike of cold weather, Justin has put that dream to rest.