A quick announcement - a new quarterly magazine is picking up this blog as a syndicated column, along with some additional content from yours truly. We're still negotiating, but watch this space for updates.

I don't have a theme to write about at the moment due to not playing too many hands lately, but some of the ones I've played have been interesting, anyway. In no particular order:

-Spot the mistake(s): 25/50 in the 650 WSOP sat on Stars (I have about 3K chips.) I open limp AA UTG+1 hoping to limp/RR (this isn't the mistake), 1 more limper, SB completes, BB checks. The flop comes K54 2 clubs (I don't have the Ac), it's checked to me and I bet 150. The last limper raises to 500, the others fold, and I call. The turn is an offsuit 8 and I check/call 3/4 pot, then check/call 1/2 pot all in on a jack river. Clear mistake #1: not 3 betting the flop. If he has 54, fine, but I should be willing to get it in against the vast majority of his range on that board. Clear mistake #2: calling the river. It hit one of the few hands that he can very well have (KJ) that I still beat, and he should really not be 3 barreling a bluff by this point. I'm just not good often enough.

-A similar "fancy play syndrome" type hand that, IMO, is actually not FPS'd at all: In the Bodog 50K 109 on Sunday, a very loose, very bad player who calls down with any piece limps in MP at 75/150 (I have about 4K; he has me well covered). In a previous hand, he limp/overcalled my isolation raise from EP (the button had also called), led 1/3 pot into me on a Qxx board, then got 50 BB in vs. the button with Q9o. In this hand, it's folded to me on the button with AKs. The blinds are both decent and one of whom is probably capable of making a move. I overlimp looking to shove on a blind raise. Almost nobody ever overlimp/reraises on purpose (fish do it with hands like 44 sometimes.) I think this play is underrated, especially when you have a medium strength postflop hand like AK-AQ, JJ-88 (and very rarely, only with the right table conditions, AA-QQ) that you want to stack off with on some flops but not others. Just don't ever do it with 44/this is probably best off never used in a cash game where you can't just bomb it all in. A good chunk of the value here comes from them putting you on exactly a small pair and never anything as good as AK, and calling light.

-Playing with bounties, jackpots, and other weird promos: Some day, I'm going to write a few blog entries on this in detail, because, to my knowledge, nothing in print on any of these is any good.

I: In any promo where you can win your buyin back or a significant amount of money relative to the pot, loose preflop calls are basically essential. This especially goes for bounty tournaments where someone has shoved in front of you and you are closing the action; in a 50% bounty structure, even when half your chips are at risk to the all in, your pot odds are lousy, and you think you're ~33% to win (in other words, you have something like 92o), there is a very good argument for calling. Like I said, someday, I'll do the math (which is pretty extensive), but this is a popular format at the lower limits and people don't really play them well.

II: WSEX "Aces never lose" hand that I posted on 2+2: at 10/20 limit (where you get $75 back if your aces lose at showdown), I raise red AA UTG and only the BB calls. The flop comes something like J 9 5 , BB checks, and I check behind. The turn comes something like the 3 , bet/call; river J, bet/call. BB shows J7o, no clubs, and takes it, but I make $15 on the hand (35 postflop), and unless he was going to checkraise this on the flop and maybe 4 bet, I played it optimally. After doublechecking on 2+2, I'm pretty sure it's optimal vs. his entire range, too. "Insurance" promos like this one also make for odd strategy decisions.

There should be one more update before the WSOP - starting around the 6th, I'll be shifting to daily updates with lots and lots of live hands/chip counts :)

Getting back to bread and butter for a while, until I get back from the WSOP I'm going to focus more on specific hands and tournament summaries.

To start off, I'm going to talk about a hand that was actually posted in BBV. I had a couple of people disagree with me in that thread about it, but I'm very, very sure I'm right. The hand in question:

PokerStars Game #10068071900: Hold'em No Limit ($2/$4) - 2025/05/23 - 15:26:24 (ET)
Table 'Errai' 6-max Seat #2 is the button
Seat 1: MrteddyKGB ($388 in chips)
Seat 2: XTBCX ($191.70 in chips)
Seat 3: gambler2k4 ($878.05 in chips)
Seat 4: 007james007 ($298.60 in chips)
Seat 5: MrDima ($425.80 in chips)
Seat 6: Stoffer77 ($209.40 in chips)
gambler2k4: posts small blind $2
007james007: posts big blind $4
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to gambler2k4 [Ks Qs]
MrDima: folds
Stoffer77: calls $4
MrteddyKGB: calls $4
XTBCX: folds
XTBCX leaves the table
gambler2k4: calls $2
007james007: checks
*** FLOP *** [Qd Qh 5c]
gambler2k4: checks
007james007: bets $4
Stoffer77: calls $4
MrteddyKGB: calls $4
gambler2k4: calls $4
*** TURN *** [Qd Qh 5c] [As]
gambler2k4: bets $20
007james007: folds
Stoffer77: folds
MrteddyKGB: raises $20 to $40
gambler2k4: calls $20
*** RIVER *** [Qd Qh 5c As] [Qc]
gambler2k4: checks
MrteddyKGB: checks
*** SHOW DOWN ***
gambler2k4: shows [Ks Qs] (four of a kind, Queens)
MrteddyKGB: mucks hand (AA)

gambler was frustrated that KGB checked behind the second nuts here. Now, there's no question KGB played it bad on three streets, but the river was actually quite good and this is a spot where people should frequently save themselves a lot of money (but rarely do). Consider the action:

-In a 4 way QQ5r pot, BB minbets (who cares), the first limper calls (this can be a 5, a pair, occasionally ace high), the second limper overcalls (this is usually *not* a 5 or worse, although really bad players will sometimes still have ace high, and occasionally something like 88 will show up here) and now the SB makes it call #3. What does SB, a regular actually dropping down from 5/10, have on this completely dry flop? Hint: it's not a 5. Even without any reads, you could check/fold unimproved AA on the next street here and be right 9/10 of the time - even if SB is bad enough to have nothing, there are still the other guys to worr about.

-The turn is an ace and now SB leads into the field with a large bet. This one's pretty simple: either he's a giant clown with an ace (if you're KGB holding two of them, that's sort of unlikely) or he's been badly slowplaying a Q (pretty much 90% of the time). When KGB raises and gambler calls, since even a complete idiot isn't likely to think A5o is still good here, that changes to around 95%.

-The river is a queen. Gambler puts his opponent on an ace and 'of course' checks. This is a terrible play as no opponent in his right mind would value bet this river with an ace (even the Zeebo theorem doesn't usually work on a guy with a 5 in this spot), but KGB has two aces. Does that change anything? A cursory look at this hand says 'not really' - there's just very little way for gambler to end up with the last ace in his hand at this point, and he's certainly getting checkraised by the last queen. Therefore, what KGB has is a crying check behind. In fact, if I were him, this is the rare spot where I don't even bother calling a river bet with the second nuts, either.

---

I recently played a 20/40 limit hand (yes, I know, bear with me) with the same idea. In a very good 8 handed game, 2 people limped, the button raised, SB called, I called with Kxs in the BB and 5 of us saw a flop, which came KJJr. It was checked to the button, who bet; SB called, I overcalled, and both people called behind me. The turn was another jack; if it were not disrespectful, I would have open folded.

Certainly, when the button bets, he often/usually has me beat here, but not always; it's a big pot, he might have raised some other suited king (giving me outs to split) or QTs, even if he has AK I'm only losing a small amount in equity by taking a card off for one bet, etc. When the SB calls, he can have QT, 99 (it was a good game), some sort of AQ/AT type hand, and so on. As long as he isn't slowplaying a jack *most of the time*, my overcall is still marginal either way. But when both limpers call after me, either we're playing a live game where everyone is drunk and hasn't looked at their cards yet, or at least one jack - and probably both the other kings - are out. It's simply almost mathematically impossible for me to have > 1 out. While the third jack makes my third nuts look pretty, it doesn't actually mean much except that I'm now drawing dead.

---

This leads me to the title of the article- in a game with thinking players, or at least players that understand the other guys have cards, too, overcalling on scary boards is a tell that cuts both ways. Note that in the second hand, I overcalled on a KJJ board with a king/no kicker, essentially a bluff catcher, counting on my overcall to shut down the action from anything worse and telling me whether I had the best hand; to some extent, you can use the 'implied strength' of this kind of overcall to your advantage. But after that point, on a board that scary, slowplaying is useless because your hand is just as face up whether you raise or call - and you really shouldn't be calling the bottom 95% of your range.

There is absolutely no need to make your opponent feel that acutely aware of his need to fold the second nuts.

Taking a long break always makes me want to play more poker right after getting back. I've been playing a decent amount since Thursday and should have a bunch of fun hands up soon. In the meantime, while I'm picking up material, I thought I'd throw up a quick post on where and how to play to build a bankroll. I'm not Jesus Ferguson and don't make a habit out of making $1 into 20K on a regular basis, but I do occasionally play lower stakes and like to look for spots to boost ROI "off the beaten track". It's not 2004 anymore and making high 4 figures a month from little to no risk casino whoring is a thing of the past, but if I had to make a few thousand dollars into 20,000 as fast as possible, here's what I would do:

1)Immediately move my roll onto as many sites as possible, *but* move it entirely off Stars. I love Stars and have made a lot of money there, but it's just not a good cash game site and the tournaments aren't conducive to a low budget. Even buyins as low as the 11r or the 20/180's get their share of good players, there are no overlays, and satelliting into a tournament only gives you T$ (or W$!!!), so if you're on a tight roll with little margin for error, what's the point?

2)Split the roll up as follows: 50% "cash game site", 50% "tournaments" - split up between Bodog and FTP. The cash game roll can technically be anywhere you have rakeback, but should be on the site with the softest games you can find. I recommend Cake for US players; Euros should look into places like Everest. Other places like UB, Absolute or even WSEX (if you're a limit player) are fine, too, but under no circumstances should your cash game site be Stars or FTP. The combination of bad or nonexistent rakeback + tough games isn't worth it.

3)Why Bodog and FTP for tournaments? Bodog has overlays on every guaranteed tourney they run and soft fields; FT has the best satellites, good SNG's (that aren't as nearly fully solved/12 tabled as Stars) and a good, but still fast-ish structure. Roll permitting, you should also look into some of the smaller sites, still focusing on game selection and overlays.

4)Play weird games. If a site has good NL, it will have great limit and fantastic Omaha. If a site's midlevel SNG's take too long and/or have an odd structure, the top level ones are a goldmine - because pros shun them - and you can probably take shots on a short roll. If you've ever read a book on stud, you already know more than most people playing small stakes HORSE. Those FTP sats where everyone starts with 3 BB? It's probably possible to break 100% ROI in them, because *no one* other than the rare SNG pro has memorized 3 BB ICM theory, much less bubble play when everyone has 5 big bets. Explore, explore, explore.

See you at the tables.

Note: Because of the nature of this post, it's more applicable to MSNL than HSNL, and won't help you much at nosebleed stakes.

Getting the most out of a guy telegraphing an overpair or a huge draw when you have a monster is pretty easy - just don't slowplay and all the chips will be in the pot soon enough. When you don't have a monster, your action is also pretty easy - just fold, unless you've got something with enough outs or implied odds to continue. Running big bluffs on people with big hands doesn't pay.

Of course, people don't always have a big hand when they bet, and rarely have a big hand when they check. Nevertheless, it also doesn't pay to blindly bet/raise trying to pick up every medium or large pot just because the villains aren't showing any strength - even bad players will eventually catch on, and decent ones will quickly start trapping you. So the trick here is to read villains' hands well enough to know when their hand is OK, but cannot stand much heat, and take away a decent portion (not all) of these.

This is a very broad topic and can't really be covered with one post, mostly because every player has a different set of tendencies. But almost everyone playing MSNL and even many HSNL players will telegraph their hands to you in their own way, especially in limped pots and given multiway action. (Limped pots are great for this because the average hand is weaker and people are less willing to contest them. You can often get a hand like JT to fold on a J64 board in a 10 BB pot, where the same bad player will happily stack off for 100 BB if you raised PF.)

When you are not the initial aggressor, the trick here is to recognize when somebody is trying to exercise pot control. In an MSNL 4 or 5 person limped multiway pot (generally, this will be a live game), when the first or second limper bets less than 2/3 of the pot on the J64, rainbow flop, they are very likely to have exactly a weak to decent jack. Most of the time they're called in one spot, they will either check or blocking bet (underbet) the turn; if they are raised, they will either call and check/fold the turn, or fold immediately. This is the type of board and hand on which a late position float is profitable; you can see if anyone else overcalls, the other guy doesn't typically have much, and unless you have 72o, your hand almost certainly has a decent number of outs if your planned turn bluff doesn't work. The more outs you have, the better a float is; keep in mind that something as weak looking as 87 with a backdoor flush draw might turn out to have 40% equity in the hand!

When you *are* the guy taking a stab at the pot in the first place, you should pay attention to how likely the people in the pot with you are to fold to second barrels and how likely they are to have draws. If everyone checks to you on that J64 flop when you have the button and you have a tight image, it's OK to bet with almost any two cards, as long as your opponents aren't so bad that they will call down with something like 76 over multiple streets (very few are.) There aren't many draws out there, the checks say nobody is likely to have a jack (but since you're on the button and overlimped, you very well might), and even if someone calls your flop bet, they will probably not call a turn bet. BTW, keep in mind that if one of the blinds calls your bet on this board, they are far more likely to have a jack than when a limper check/calls, instead. Limpers here will sometimes take cards off with very little, but because there are people behind them, the blinds have a tighter range. That doesn't mean they won't still check/fold lots of turns, though.

Some other things to look for to identify opponents with weak or medium strength hands that can be taken off them:

-people who will raise PF and cbet most flops, but usually will not bet the turn (and if they check the turn, usually check the river as well)

-people who limp a lot from early position and weak lead on the flop

-any sort of weakish looking bet (more applicable online than live, since live bets are undersized)

-when the player quickly checks any scare card (a third flush card, an ace, a straight completing card), especially on the turn - even if they call the turn, a river follow through is nearly always profitable (bonus points if you actually are merely semibluffing on the turn)

Against decent or good players who are unlikely to put in a full stack light, you should also consider otherwise rarely used alternate lines. Let's say you are in the blinds and defend a hand to a middle position raise in a full ring game. The flop comes 872, and you know that this player is unlikely to have hit this board. What is your plan?

Note that I didn't say what your hand is. No doubt, you'd probably check/call some hands, check/raise other hands and maybe bet out a few. But most of the time you check/call, you also check the turn, most of the time you check/raise, you will lead the turn, and if your bet on the flop gets called, you will probably check scary turns and bet random ones - again, regardless of your hand. These are all natural tendencies and your opponents get confused when you go against them - so, when you think they missed the flop, consider doing that. When you are against a thinking, but straightforward opponent, check/call, betting a board like 8723 with a hand like 65 will often get better hands to fold cheaper than checkraising the flop would have, and if you then follow through on any river, good players will frequently even talk themselves into folding overpairs.

I'll be on vacation for a while, but should be back posting in a couple of weeks.

In addition to sat strategy like the last post, over the years, I've made a couple of big satellite threads on 2+2. At one point, I promised I would update last year's thread and/or talk about how and where to qualify for the WSOP after I got a seat. Hopefully, I'm not done winning seats yet, but here's some things I'll throw out there:

-Just like last year, this year, winning on FTP or Stars gives you a bunch of bonuses if you make the final table or win the ME. The FT first place prize alone adds $1,000 in EV to the tournament if you have an exactly average shot of winning it with 10K entries, $2,000 if it only has 5K, and so on.

-This year, picking between FTP and Stars for qualifying is tricky. When you play an FTP sat, for example, you're basically just playing a regular tournament with a bunch of $12,000 payouts at the top. For a few reasons, this means a tougher field at FTP than normal; FTP also has 12 minute blind levels, where Stars has 30(!) minute blinds, and Stars throws in 1K (or a week's hotel stay) for the first package you win. That makes Stars the best place to win a package if you're only going for one, but the first Stars package is non-refundable or transferable (you must use the seat) and the second only pays out in W$, which are worth around .85 on the dollar. FTP also has the 'King of the WSOP' promo running - I probably won't be playing enough to get there, but clearly, if you're going for multiple seats, Full Tilt's the way to go. (I'm American so I have no idea what, if anything, Party and other non-US sites are doing.)

-Smaller sites remain a good option, but multiple seat satellites are such a huge advantage over winner take all sats that the latter are just about never worth it. The exception is sats with overlays, like the $250+20's at Bodog last year. This year, it looks like Bodog has some overlays again, but they're allowing people to win multiple packages if they're spaced > 30 days apart, which might eventually kill that. (Incidentally, this is a terrible rule.) There are a couple of other sites that might be good this year, too - I won't mention them in print, but you should be discreetly looking around a few out of the way tournament schedules.

Good luck in the WSOP.