Jun 24, 2005 14:26
Like every poker player, I've spent my share of time frustrated with
bad beats. The definition of "bad beat", of course, varies from
player to player. I've heard many people say crazy things like having
AQ in HE and ending up against AK as a "bad beat", because "how was I
supposed to know I was dominated?". That's not what a bad beat really
is, of course. When I use the term "bad beat" at all, which I really
don't use much anymore, I'd usually say that someone has to have seven
outs or less in HE for it to really be that "bad" of a beat.
But, I just don't think of them as "bad beats" anymore. Given that one has
to lose in poker -- and you can't play any game with an element of
chance and not lose some of the time -- I'd rather it be in a
so-called "bad beat" situation than any other.
There are basically two scenarios where you lose a non-trivial amount
of money in poker: either you make a serious mistake, or someone else
does but gets lucky anyway. The former can take two forms: (a) you
think you have the best hand and/or you think your opponent is too
weak to call, and you turn out to be mistaken, or (b) your opponent is
deceptive enough to convince you to put money in when you have the
worst of it. This is not how I want things to go. I don't want to be
outplayed, and I don't want to be tricked into giving money to players
who are better than me.
Given the two options -- giving money to strong players or weak players
-- it's much better to give money to players who make mistakes. If
someone takes your money and they are better than you, you have little
chance to win it back. Only pure luck will get you money from a stronger
player. If you opponent is a bad player, you can realistically visualize
that he is merely holding your chips for a while, until you get him in
another situation where the odds are against him but he fails to get
lucky.
If you've accepted that you can't win every pot you play, it's easy to
see a path of gaining a peace with "bad beats" if you frame the
situation in that way. That's the first step, and it's one that I
have at long-last achieved. I love games where the bad beats fly and
I ship chips around to weak players. The tough spot I still see is
when the fellow takes a big piece of your stack, and then gets up to
leave. Yeah, I admit that "hit and run" is one part of the "bad beat"
phenomenon that still can get past my new frustration-proof wall.
But, I'm starting to overcome that part, too. The way I'm doing it is
a viewing it as the advertising budget of my bankroll.
That's a strange choice of words, especially since most people think of
"advertising budgets" in poker as "money for bluffs that get called".
I'm not much for that, because I think it's usually wasted; I want all
my bluffs to succeed. In most games, people pay off enough that you
don't need to be caught bluffing -- not even once -- to induce
adequate action.
But the guy who hits a few three-outers and walks away a winner --
that's money well spent. While we see a large turnover of opponents
in most games, some people do come back. But, if they are to come
back, players who are steady losers have to win some of the
time. Why else would they return? It's pure Skinnerist psychology --
intermittent rewards are the most likely way to keep someone willing
to introduce themselves to situations that are overall bad for their
bankrolls.
Also, what's that guy going to say to his friends? He's going to say:
"games at that casino/club/site are easy". He'll entice others to
play at the same place. Word gets around. After all, why do we have
so much money flowing into the poker economy right now? Because lots
of people have heard it's easy to win at poker, and have found it's
fun. Most of them won't win over the long term, but as long as they
win sometimes, they'll keep coming back.
For these reasons, I urge everyone to love "bad beats": no matter when
they come, and no matter when someone leaves. It's part of the
economy that we all rely on, and we don't want to discourage it. Be
careful to play at limits where the bad beats are for amounts of money
you can tolerate without frustration, and love it when it happens.
I can't finish a treatise on "bad beats" without addressing the
constant arguments I hear about whether or not one takes fewer bad
beats in NL HE vs. limit HE. This is a downright silly argument. If
you are in a loose game -- which are almost always profitable for a
solid player -- you should be seeing lots of "bad beats". In NL HE,
these bad beats should, in fact, be for your whole stack! The whole
reason NL HE can be so profitable is because you can get people to bet
their whole stack when they have only a few outs. It's rare that
you'll find a player so bad, or a situation so special, that he'll
hand you his whole stack drawing dead. NL HE isn't a better game
because you can "protect your hand" and "get people to fold". The
whole idea of "protecting your hand" in NL HE is about winning small
pots, which you certainly do need for long term profitability. But
the real wins come when you get all of your chips in with the best of
it, and when you do, you want to get called by someone with only a few
outs.
So, my advice to all of you who are frustrated with "bad beats":
Make peace with them. When I finally did, my entire outlook
on poker has changed and it has made me a more profitable player. I
still have challenges ahead; namely, getting fully comfortable with
the bad-beat-giver leaving the game before I want him to, and my
thoughts expressed above are helping me along that road. Get used to
allowing some of your bankroll to be spread around the table, as long
as it is in the stacks of players who make lots of mistakes.
The beats that should frustrate and anger you are those where
you have made mistakes, or have been outplayed. That frustration is
healthy and can be constructively channeled into improving your game.
There is, however, no constructive outcome of "bad beat" frustration.
It can only serve to make you hate the game you actually love, or to
make you imitate that losing Skinnerist play. I know that pain and
frustration when the tenth two-outer hits the table and you've lost
three buy-ins already. Let it go. Drop down limits so that it
doesn't hurt as much, if that's what it takes. Learn to love the bad
beats; it's where you profit comes from.
limit he,
running bad,
didactic,
nl he