Betting big on KK pre flop: you still have to get lucky.

[Alan Mendelson]

There are so many ways to play pocket kings in poker. Sometimes you get lucky and sometimes you don't with KK. The other night I got lucky. Very lucky.

I was at a low limit cash game ($100 buy in) with several very aggressive players who always seemed to raise and re-reraise on just about every hand. I was in early position so I just called the $3 big blind being pretty sure that a couple of players would raise and reraise.

And sure enough they did.

One player raised to $10, another reraised to $25, and the big stack reraised again to $50. Yes, this happened at a $100 buy in game. It was "that kinda game."

So when the action came back to me naturally I pushed all in with my $130. I had only one called -- the fellow who reraised to $50 and he had JJ. My kings held up.

Ironically the board had four hearts, and neither I or the player with JJ had a heart, and both of the other players forced out of the hand had a heart.

So I dodged two bullets. I dodged a jack and I dodged that my opponent did not have a heart-- and the other players with hearts were forced out.

[arcimede$]

But, but, but ... you claimed poker had more skill that VP.

[redietz]

No luck there. KK is almost 4-1 to win that hand heads-up. Geez -- that was a lot of raising with JJ and less. Now there's a game I would have stayed at no matter how much money I was ahead.

[Vegas_lover]

It was a gamble but a calculated one. Good for you for winning the hand. In your position, whit the kind of action that was going on at the table I probably would have done the same. Somewhere along the game you have to make a statement because all the raising and re-raising can kill the game pretty fast.

[Alan Mendelson]

But, but, but ... you claimed poker had more skill that VP.

Poker does require more skills than VP but there is still a lot of luck required in poker. The biggest difference is this:

In VP your goal is to hold cards that will give you the best draw or hand. In live poker, not only must you play hands that will give you the best draws, but your final hand must be stronger than the hands of the other players, and you have to bet accordingly both when it is and when it isn't.

There are always hands in a poker game where, for example, two players have a full house -- and one of the players has a stronger full house. Or, one player has a flush and another player has a higher flush. These types of hands happen all the time. Or-- you might find a player thinking his three of a kind is the winning hand while another player has a flush. You have to be lucky and use your skills for reading players and the board for helping you decide where you stand.

Then there is the skill of betting in live poker. You can't raise a VP machine to get more money out of it or to make it fold.

And each time in VP that you push the button to play a hand you have to play your credits. In live poker, unless you are in a blind you don't have to pay to see the flop and you can fold. In a nine handed game, it only costs you to play two out of the nine hands, and seven of the nine hands you see your cards for free. The skill is knowing when the play and when to fold. (Know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em.) You don't need that skill in VP.

The list is almost endless. Reading plays, reading the board, bluffing, raising, folding, chopping the blinds, reading players and their "tells" -- live poker is a very complex game.

To be honest, while there is thinking in video poker, there is a lot less pressure when you are playing against an RNG and every hand costs you the same $$ bet. When you play live poker and you are holding JJ and two players before you have raised the $5 big blind to $25 and $50 you have some important thinking to do.

And that brings me to my absolute favorite poker story.

I'm player #3, the first to act (player after the big blind) and I have AA. I raise the big blind to $25.
Players 4 and 5 fold.
Player 6 raises to $50.
Player 7 calls the $50.
Player 8 calls the $50.
Players 9, 1 and 2 (button, big blind and small blind) all fold.
Action comes back to me with AA. I go all in for about $250.
The other three players all call with all-ins. The pot is now close to a thousand dollars. There is no more betting.

We flip over our cards. I show AA, player 6 shows KK, players 7 and 8 both show AK off suit. The risk of anyone hitting a flush are very, very slim. I'm counting the money -- it's all mine, I figure with my AA and the other players drawing dead.

The dealer puts the first three cards down for the flop. Small cards, rainbow. Then the turn, then the river. There is no flush, but.... the board is a 7-high straight.

It's a four-way chop. LOL LOL LOL

Edited to add: Arc, do they have live poker at your Indian casino? If so, go to a $1/$2 "limit game." The minimum buy-in should be $20. Thats only four hands at your $1 OEJ vp machine. It will cost you $3 per "round" or cycle to pay your blinds and just watch the action and without betting looking at your cards each and every hand for about 7 cycles or rounds, and think about what you would do and then see if you would have won or lost. It's the best $20 poker education you could ever have.

[arcimede$]

Alan, just to demonstrate that you really don't understand many of the skills it takes to be a good VP player, I'll simply note that you didn't list the most important ones. The big reason you think live poker is more skillful is you aren't a skilled VP player. Yes, you have to understand correct strategy. That is a necessary skill, but not sufficient.

I believe both games take skill and the skill set is mostly different. It sounds like you've become fairly well educated at live poker. VP ... not so much.

[Alan Mendelson]

Arc I don't deny there is a lot of skill playing VP it's just that there are more skills playing live poker. In VP there are "correct strategies" but in live poker your strategy not only changes on each and every hand but also with each and every bet. If you want a game to test your mental abilities try live poker. I promise you that you can't play 600 hands per hour. LOL

[arcimede$]

I suspect the slow pace of live poker would get to me. But, I'm not really interested in any event. Right now I have plenty to keep me going with VP. Of course, that could change at any time.

You also need to understand that some of the most important VP skills are not something you do at a machine.

[Rob.Singer]

"I suspect the slow pace of live poker would get to me"!!

Retired care giver with no one to go out to enjoy the world with, sits in front of a computer posting on multiple forums all day, religiously gets the same 8 hours of sleep every nite (some spent tossing and turning, of course ) plays the fast-paced game of golf, sits at the vp machines for as many hours as he can get away with every week....and live poker is BORING!!?

See what I mean by the entertainment provided by his creative lying?

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob, if I recall you don't play live poker either. So why are you criticizing him?

[Rob.Singer]

I've only played in two tournaments so that part's correct, but it's hardly because I think it's not exciting. When I gambled for profit I'm wasn't there to chat it up or "make acquaintances". Those are all built-in casino amenities there for the purpose of making you feel good about losing money. That's why I don't play any of the table games either. Plus personalities like Daniel N's are a complete turn-off to me. That Jesus guy is more to my liking, and there doesn't seem to be many like him around.

[arcimede$]

Retired care giver with no one to go out to enjoy the world with, sits in front of a computer posting on multiple forums all day, religiously gets the same 8 hours of sleep every nite (some spent tossing and turning, of course ) plays the fast-paced game of golf, sits at the vp machines for as many hours as he can get away with every week....and live poker is BORING!!?

See what I mean by the entertainment provided by his creative lying?

Once again we see Singer making up stories about my life. You just can't help but wonder why he is so taken with me. Why would anyone feel they need to make up lie after lie about another person? When you understand the answer to that question you start to realize exactly the type of person we are dealing with.

[Alan Mendelson]

In the public relations business (also in politics) when you can't argue the facts, you create new issues and diversions to the discussion of the facts. This is not a new strategy.

[Rob.Singer]

"Why would one feel the need to make up lie after lie about another person"?

What a PROJECTION!!

[arcimede$]

"Why would one feel the need to make up lie after lie about another person"?

What a PROJECTION!!

Trying to copy me again I see. Since I've pointed out hundreds of your projections over the years you hardly get any credit here. And, in fact, shows you can't even back up your claims. All you do is lie and it's getting more obvious all the time. Even Alan is starting to catch on ... " when you can't argue the facts, you create new issues and diversions to the discussion of the facts" ... it describes you to a tee.