Chicken Soup for the Poker Player's soul

**batgirl218** · 08-18-2010, 10:37 AM

Hey everyone, I decided that every so often I am going to put up a passage from a poker book I have that means something to me. It may not be how to play AA with two raises in front of you or something scientific like that. It may be something to just give you a little piece of mind for when this game stresses you out.

So I thought I would try this out and see how it goes.

Ok so the book I brought out today from the bowels of hell known as my closet O Junk is Winning Poker By David Skalansky with Roger Dionne. Pretty good read, it was written in 1983 and it's not a poker how to book. As the cover states "A professional poker player teaches you how to think like one". So it's more about how to keep your state of mind even and I really like this book esp. after a series of bad beats.

So this passage comes from Chapter 3: The Fundamental Theorem Of Poker.

"There is a Fundamental Theorem of Algebra and a Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. So it's about time to introduce The Fundamental Theorem of Poker. Poker, like all card games, is a game of incomplete information, which distinguishes it from board games like chess, backgammon and checkers, where you can always see what you opponent is doing. If everybody's cards were showing at all times, there would always be a precise, mathematically correct play for each player. Any player who deviated from his correct play would be reducing his mathematical expectation and increasing the expectation of his opponents.

Of course, if all cards were exposed at all times, there wouldn't be a game of poker. The art of poker is filling the gaps in the incomplete information provided by your opponent's betting and the exposed cards in the open-handed games, and at the same time preventing from your opponent's discovering any more than what you want them to know about your hand.

That leads us to the Fundamental Theorem Of Poker:

Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponent's cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose. Conversely, every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have if they could see all your cards you gain; and every time they play their hands the same way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you lose.

The Fundamental Theorem applies universally when a hand has been reduced to a contest between you and a single opponent. It nearly always applies to multi-way pots as well, but there are rare exceptions, which we will discuss at the end of the chapter.

What does the Fundamental Theorem mean? Realize that if somehow your opponent knew your hand, there would be a correct play for him to make. If, for instance, you were in a draw poker game your opponent saw you had a pat flush before the draw, his correct play would be to throw away his aces when you bet. Calling would be a mistake, but a special kind of mistake. We do not mean your opponent played the hand badly by calling with a pair of aces; we mean he played it differently from the way he could play it if he can see your cards.

This flush example is very obvious. In fact the whole theorem is obvious, which is its beauty; yet its applications are often not so obvious. Sometimes the amount of money in the pot makes it correct to call, even if you could see that your opponent's hand is better than yours. Let's look at several examples of the Fundamental Theorem of Poker in action."

I'll spare you the examples unless you all would like to see those.

I just thought this was a really good way to break down poker hands to it's truest form.

Any thoughts?

**Niccivan** · 08-18-2010, 10:53 AM

I like this idea.....

Good read.... and I look forward to reading more. Maybe I can even contribute my own in the future

**batgirl218** · 08-18-2010, 11:03 AM

Totally, I'm hoping we can kinda have like a small like poker book club type thing in this thread.

**Savannah D** · 08-20-2010, 10:49 AM

Good point.

**WinJStar** · 08-23-2010, 09:23 PM

I like this idea, and you picked a good first chapter.

Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponent's cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose. Conversely, every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have if they could see all your cards you gain; and every time they play their hands the same way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you lose.

I've read that 3 times. Its kind of a "duh, obviously" statement, but makes you think when you read it out loud.

**batgirl218** · 08-24-2010, 07:19 AM

Most of Skalansky's writing is kind of like that. He writes books where it's like you read it and feel like you got NOTHING new out of it. Then you go and play some more and re-read it and it's like wow...lightbulb.

**batgirl218** · 09-19-2010, 12:46 PM

Today's passages if from Phil Gordon's section of Full Tilt Poker's Strategy Guide: Tournament Edition Not a bad book even thought I am not a big fan of full tilt in general. It is kinda like the Brunson Super System book however the only difference is this is for tournaments where as Brunson was more geared to cash games. Anyways here ya go:

What is "Short-Stacked"?

It is generally agreed that if your stack is ten big blinds or less, you have only two options: all-in or fold. Understand the reason why: if you bet one-third of your chips (the approximate size of a standard raise of three times the big blind when you have ten big blinds), you are pot committed. Specifically you will be getting odds better than 2-to-1 to call a reraise, and even if you were attempting to steal the blinds with a pre-flop raise, you are usually not a 2-to-1 underdog. You have to call; you are committed to the pot. If you had 8 5 of diamonds and your opponent put you all in with Ace King of spades, you have to call; you are only a 62/38 dog and you'll be getting more than 2-to-1 on your call. Folding here would be a very bad, negative equity decision.

When you have ten times the big blind, why raise only three times the big blind when someone can easily put you all-in or call and force you to make a difficult decision if you miss the flop? You get several benefits being all-in. First it is more difficult to call the larger bet. If you move all in with 85s you will get called by AKs but there is a chance you will get a lot of hands nearly that good (or hands that have you dominated and in way worse shape than A-K) to lay down--K-9, J-T, Q-8. Second you eliminate any chance of getting outplayed after the flop. This is especially important if you are in the blinds and would have to play the hand out of position.

Even before your stack is small, you need to modify your strategy based on your stack size. You are still vulnerable even if you have a little more than ten times the big blind. If you can't get away from a hand if one-third of your chips are in the pot, then it's at least difficult to get away id you had to bet one-quarter of your chips. Even if you can get away from the hand, you will be limited to folding or moving all-in next time. In addition, barely being able to get away from a hand is, in some ways, worse than being pot committed.

Good players will know that you have just enough chips to fold. (You should be aware of this when other players are in this position and prepare to take advantage.) They will look for ways to put you to difficult decisions, like calling form the blind and moving all-in on the flop.

That's why I think to consider yourself as short-stacked at thirteen to fifteen big blinds. You generally should not be looking to steal blinds or see flops. Stealing blinds is problematic at thirteen to fifteen big blinds. You are investing a significant portion of your stack. If you have to fold to a reraise, then you aren't just short-stacked--you are short-stacked and are in danger of losing one of the most profitable strategies you had, the all-in resteal. You are not in danger or being anted or blinded away. You can look for opportunities but your goal has to be getting enough chips to extricate yourself from this vulnerable position.

Once you get above fifteen to eighteen big blinds. you have all your weapons available. You have enough chips to scare people and enough chips to fold and not materially damage yourself. Around fifteen big blinds, however, you have to play a different game.