A Hand from Poker After Dark

I was watching Monday night’s episode of Poker After Dark on DVR last night with Billy and my girlfriend Debbie. Debbie and I have had issues over poker in the past, but now that she’s playing in our home game, I’ve sort of taken her on as my protege. As part of her training, we were discussing the hands on the show as they were being played.

(Side note: DVR is freaking awesome! It really makes me wonder how much better TiVo is … anyone know? I was completely sold on digital recording within the first five minutes of playing around with it.)

Poker After Dark is a really great format for this kind of instruction, because they show so many hands and you get to listen to a lot of the table talk. The WSOP and WPT on TV generally only show the hands that have major impact, and the announcers often overshadow the talk of the players with their commentary. Poker After Dark and High Stakes Poker are much better in both regards, because you get to see how tight and loose the players are being, you get a better sense of what their table image is when they make certain plays, and you get to hear more of their thought processes when they’re faced with decisions. You get to see how they respond to more marginal situations than you would on other shows, instead of always just Jacks versus Ace-King all in preflop. Finally, you get to see what the players are puting each other on when they aren't in the hands, as they talk things over away from the action with Shana Hiatt.

For those unfamiliar, the format of Poker After Dark is as follows: It is an invitational Sit-n-Go with six players each buying in for $20,000 worth of chips. The winner takes everything. The blinds start low and increase fairly slowly at first, giving the players plenty of time to play a lot of deep-stack poker. After a few rounds however, the blinds increase more rapidly, and the field gets eliminated at a much faster rate.


A hand jumped out at me last night that turned out to be an excellent teaching example with Debbie, so I thought I would share it on the blog. The action went like this …

Action:

The blinds were $100 and $200, fairly early on in the tournament. Gabe Kaplan is the chip leader with about $24,000 in chips, Mike Sexton is down a bit, and everyone else is pretty much around the $20,000 that they started with. Gabe limps in with a suited King, as does Mike Sexton with a suited 9. Michael Konik folds, Phil Gordon limps on the button with a suited Ace-5. Howard Lederer also only calls with pocket 10’s in the small blind. Chad Brown, in the big blind with King-Queen of spades, starts counting out chips for a raise.

The players at the table see this, and collectively try to forestall Chad from raising it up. Other than Lederer, they all have suited rags and would like to see the flop cheaply. Phil Gordon especially whines about the imminent raise (can’t stand that guy, but I don’t have time to get into why at the moment. Maybe I’ll write a post about it some day). As a group, they pretty much give away that they aren’t all that strong, giving Chad even more incentive to pop it up on them. He makes a huge over-raise making it $1,600 to go, and watches as the table reluctantly folds back to Lederer.

Howard goes into the tank, which is understandable in his position. It’s fairly obvious that he’s not going to just lay down such a big pair, but Chad’s raise was so large that it gives Howard pause. He eventually decides to re-raise and make it $5,600 to go. Chad barely even thinks before coming back over the top all-in, and after a few moments of deliberation, Howard lays down his hand.

Analysis:

A)

Howard Lederer, a long-time professional poker player, played this hand horribly. He made a mistake (or at least a questionable move) each of the three times it was his turn to act.

The first and most obvious error was not raising initially with the 10’s. He should not have limped in that spot, not against four other players. There aren’t a lot of flops that are good for your hand with 10’s in a multi-way pot. He should raise here just to thin out the field a bit, and to get a better sense of where his opponents are at. This is just basic strategy.

(There is an argument for a more conservative approach, which would render his call acceptable. If the big blind checks and the flop is bad for you, you can get away cheaply and not face any tough decisions. You’ve kept the pot small, so it’s easier to fold and pick a better spot. I don’t like that route, but it’s one way to go. It is defensible enough that I would consider Lederer’s limp to merely be a questionable rather than an outright horrible play. But his play on the hand as a whole was unquestionably bad.)

B)

His second mistake happened after Chad’s raise, when the table folded back to him. He correctly decided to come back over the top – so I have no problem with that. But I think the size of his bet was incorrect for two key reasons.

1. 
   Lederer’s bet is so large that it pot-commits him. He has made it so that if Chad calls and they see a flop, it’s really difficult for Lederer to get away from his 10’s due to the pot size.


2. Lederer’s bet also makes it easier for the hands that he has dominated (like 9’s or 8’s) to fold. A smaller raise might get those hands to stick around, but the raise to $5,600 makes it so that only overcards or a bigger pair can stay in with him. Thus, he will likely only get action from hands that are a coinflip to win the pot, or hands that have him crushed.

C)

But ok, he makes the raise to $5,600, and Chad goes insane and decides that pushing all in with King-Queen suited is the right thing to do. Here, Howard drops the ball yet again. He made a mistake by putting in a raise that pot-committed him, but here he compounds that error by not staying committed to the pot! In order to take down a winner-take-all Sit-n-Go, you have to get in there and gamble a little bit. You can not do things like raising for a quarter of your stack without following through on it.

Howard Lederer is a legend, and he has earned his reputation by playing with some of the best poker players in the world. But even he is not immune to making significant mistakes at the table from time to time.

I guess what they say is true … there’s a little donkey in all of us.