Why You Can’t Beat Low-Limit Games.by Alan Schoonmaker | Published: Aug 20, 2014

Alan Schoonmaker

Many players complain bitterly that they can’t beat $2-$4, $3-$6, and $4-$8 fixed limit games. They insist that they play well, but lose because:

“There are too many idiots.”“They don’t respect my raises.”“They chase with weak draws.”“My good hands don’t hold up.”“I can’t push anybody off a hand.”

Some frustrated players have switched to no-limit. One joined our low-limit game and grumbled constantly about “this stupid game.” His silliest complaint was, “When I played here, I flopped top set and couldn’t push an idiot off a backdoor-flush draw. In no-limit I’d shove all in.”

Because I don’t teach while playing, I said nothing, but would tell a coaching client, “You don’t want him to fold. You’re a huge favorite. Why settle for a small pot?”Most clients would agree, but a few would say (or think), “You may be right, but bad beats are so frustrating.” Of course they are, but poker isn’t about avoiding frustration; it’s about winning money. You should risk frustration to increase your profits.

With top set against almost any hand you have — by far — the best of it, and you should make the most of it. When someone with only a backdoor-flush draw calls, he’s givingyou most of his bet. You want him to make stupid calls, even though you’ll occasionally lose.A few clients might say, “That’s OK if you’re heads up, butin my games four, five, or more people often chase me. Somebody usually draws out.”

That argument sounds reasonable, but it’s wrong. With bigger fields there’s a higher probability that someone will draw out, but you still want them to call with negative expected value (EV) draws. With top set and no obvious flush or straight draws, virtually every hand is a huge underdog.

A friend objected, “But if the pot is large, it’s often plus EVto call.”

Of course, it is, but you want them to make negative EV calls. Unless the pot is so large that they’re getting profitable odds, you want them to call.

Total Equity Is Always Exactly 100 Percent

If your equity is 60 percent with five opponents, their average equity is only 8 percent each. If and only if their chances of winning are worse than the price they’re getting,their calls increase your EV.

Your equity percentage goes down as the number of chasers

goes up, but the pot often increases faster than your percentage goes down. Therefore, if more people chase andyour hand is strong enough, your EV often increases. You win fewer pots, but they’re much bigger, which more than offsets the lost pots.

The Fundamental Theorem of Poker

Let’s consider one part of it: “Every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you gain.” (The Theory of Poker). After seeing your top set, any sane opponent would fold because the odds against him are so bad.

A wise guy might reply, “But some opponents are crazy. They’d call anyway.” I’d laugh and say, “Good. If they want to give you their money, take it.”

Opponents’ Mistakes Increase Your Profits.

Players complain bitterly about opponents’ stupidity because they don’t understand that – if everyone played properly – the rake and other costs would defeat everybody.Only the house would win.

They also don’t realize that “every cent of your long term profit playing poker comes from exploiting your opponents’ errors and predictable tendencies.” (Miller, Sklansky, and Malmuth (Small Stakes Hold’em) They emphasized this point by saying, “If you do not win in the

long term, it is not because your opponents are making too many mistakes; it is because you are.” (p. 18)

When I say that, some people go ballistic. “My mistakes? I played my hand perfectly, but this idiot…” If I reply that one, two or ten bad beat stories don’t prove they don’t make serious mistakes, they insist that they play just the way the books recommend, then angrily demand, “What mistakes do I make?”

The answer is simple: Virtually all low-limit players don’t give enough weight to costs. In fact, most of them don’t seriously think about costs, even though the rake, jackpot drop, and tokes cost so much that it’s extremely difficult to beat many low-limit games. Let’s digress briefly. Someone once told me, “My friend is a terrible craps player. He makes stupid bets.”

I asked, “Didn’t you say you’ve lost heavily at craps?”

“Yes, but I’ve had some great nights. My friend loses muchmore than me because I know how to play.”

I could hardly keep from laughing. He insisted he’s good even though he loses. He must lose because craps is unbeatable. The same principle applies whenever skill can’tovercome costs. Since costs have such dramatic effects upon their results, why don’t most serious low-limit playerscarefully analyze them?

Three reasons: First, some play for fun and don’t care about

costs. Second, they don’t understand how important costs are. They think, “What’s another dollar or two?” They’re making a huge mistake. That dollar or two comes out of every pot they win, which dramatically affects their edge, and edge “is the most important concept in poker… small differences in edge add up dramatically over time… you must emphasize edge, including the small edges, in all yourpoker decisions.” (Roy Cooke, “Understanding Edge In Poker, Part II,” Card Player, 1/22/14)

Third, analyzing and adjusting to costs is very hard work. The books don’t help because costs vary too much betweenrooms.

Factoring costs into your decisions fits right into the experts’ standard rule: The correct decision depends upon the situation, but we should add: including your costs. Since low-limit games’ costs are so high, many decisions which are correct without considering the costs are really serious mistakes. Therefore, you should carefully analyze your costs’ effects when you:

• Choose a game. You must be much better than your opponents to cover the huge costs.• Choose a seat. Choose seats with the biggest edge.• Decide whether to quit or stay. Frequently reevaluate youredge: If the game or your play has changed, do you have a large enough edge to beat this game with these players and costs now?• Decide whether to fold, check, call, bet, or raise. Factor your costs into every decision. A decision that’s plus EV in

low cost games is often minus EV in high cost games.

In other words, constantly ask, “Do I have a large enough edge to cover my costs?” Unless you’re playing just for fun, if the answer is, “No,” don’t do it.

Future articles will describe my crude, but fairly effective, methods. If you don’t properly evaluate and adjust to all your costs, you probably can’t beat most low-limit games. ♠

Why You Can’t Beat Low-Limit Games — Part IIby Alan Schoonmaker | Published: Oct 15, 2014

Alan Schoonmaker

Part I said many frustrated players blame their losses on “idiotic” opponents, but the main reason is often not correctly evaluating costs (rake, jackpot drop, tips). Decisions which are plus expected value (EV) in low cost games are often minus EV in high cost games.

They blame “idiots” because bad beats are so dramatic, but they rarely occur. Because the rake and other costs are a few dollars here and there, they hardly notice them, even though they cost thousands of dollars per year and can destroy your results. You Need A Big Edge.

Mike Caro once wrote about a 10 percent rake: “On a final-round bet into a lone opponent (assuming no cap on the rake), you’d need a 5-to-4 edge just to break even – assuming you’d always be called and there were no possibility of a raise.” In some low-limit games, the costs on that final bet are more than double 10 percent, and you need a much bigger edge than 5-to-4.

Why is there such a dramatic difference? The house doesn’ttake 10 percent of dollars in the pot; it takes $1 whenever pots reach certain sizes. Las Vegas rooms generally take $1 at $10, $20, $30, and $40. A few take another dollar at $50.

Many take a jackpot drop of $1 at $10, and a few take a second dollar at $20, $30, or $40.

Let’s say you’re playing $2-$4 in a Las Vegas room with a standard rake of $1 at $10, $20, $30, and $40 and a jackpot drop of $1 at $10 and $ $30. You open-raise with A♦ K♣, and only the blinds call. You bet the flop of A♥ 7♣ 2♦ and they both call. You bet the turn of 6♠, and only one calls. The river is the Q♣, so no flush or straight is possible. If you bet and get called, what odds are you laying that your hand is best?

You’re laying 2-to-1. You may not believe me, so let’s do the math.

• Preflop the pot was $12 (3 x $4). They took $2 for the rake and jackpot drop (R&JPD) • On the flop it became $18 (add 3 x $2). • On the turn it became $26 (add 2 x $4). They raked another dollar. • On the river, if you bet $4 and got called, the total pot became $34, so two more dollars went for R&JPD. You risked $4, but can win only $2.

Since he’ll fold his weakest hands, would you offer 2:1? Perhaps you would, but you should know that you’re offering 2:1.

Here’s another question: Can adding money to the pot make it smaller?

Yes, and it happens frequently when the blinds are $1 and $2 (in limit or no-limit hold’em). If three players limp, and the SB folds, the pot is $9, and nothing is taken. If the SB completes, the pot becomes $10, the house takes $2 for the R&JD, and the pot becomes $8. So the pot is smaller and you must beat one more opponent.

The Smaller The Stakes, The Bigger Your Edge Must Be.

In “Understanding Edge, Part I” (Card Player, 1/8/14) Roy Cooke wrote: “Smaller games generally have easier competition, but the playing costs relative to the amount betare significantly higher, requiring a larger edge to break even… you need a very wide spread in abilities between yourself and your opponents in order to make any sort of substantial sum if you’re playing in small-medium size games.”

Roy was too tactful. He played low-limit many years ago when his game’s maximum rake was only $2, and he didn’tplay in jackpot games. Now, because poker rooms’ costs have greatly increased and many low-limit players like jackpots, the maximum rake is much higher, and another dollar or two goes for jackpots. Those increases make it much harder to break even, and it’s almost impossible to win significantly.

Low-limit players pay an enormously higher rake proportionally than middle-limit players. Let’s compare $4-$8 at a room with a typical rake and a jackpot drop of $1 at $10 and $30 to a large Las Vegas room’s $10-$20 game.

The rake and JPD’s percentage is much lower for $10-$20, and most $10-$20 and bigger games don’t have jackpots.

$4-$8 $10-$20Total pot Rake JPD Total Percentage Total pot Rake Percentage$10 $1 $1 $2 20% $20 $1 5%$20 $2 $3 15% $50 $2 4%$30 $3 $2 $5 16.67% $80 $3 3.75%$40 $4 $6 15% $130 $4 3.1%

That jackpot money is mostly returned to the players, but many pay far more than they get back. Future articles will describe ways to get better value from your jackpot contributions.

And I haven’t included tips, which obviously increase your costs.

The Smaller The Pot, The Bigger Your Edge Must Be.

The R&JPD take a much higher percentage from small potsthan large ones. From a $100 pot in that $4-$8 game the house takes $6 (6 percent). From a $40 pot, it takes the same $6 (15 percent). From a $10 pot, it takes $2 (20 percent).

If you’re heads-up and have 6 percent costs, you need morethan 53/47 to break even. With 15 percent, you need more than 57/43. With 20 percent, you need more than 60/40. Let’s do the math:

• $100-6=94. You invest $50 and get back .53 x $94 = $49.82.• $40-6=34. You invest $20 and get back .57 x $34 = $19.38.• $10-2=8. You invest $5 and get back .6 x $8 = $4.80

Don’t Deny Reality.

Part I said most low-limit players don’t think seriously about costs for three reasons: First, some play for fun and don’t care about costs. Second, they don’t understand how important costs are. They think, ‘What’s another dollar or two?’ … That dollar or two comes out of every pot they win, which dramatically affects their edge, and edge, “is themost important concept in poker… small differences in edge add up dramatically over time… you must emphasize edge, including the small edges, in all your poker decisions.” (Roy Cooke, “Understanding Edge In Poker, Part II,” Card Player, 1/22/14)

You should now realize that those few dollars from every winning pot massively affect your results. If you still think costs are unimportant, you’re denying reality.

Denial is extremely common: Without denial, the entire gambling industry would collapse. Despite countless warnings that craps, roulette, and most other games are unbeatable, millions of people lose billions playing them. Unless they’re playing just for fun, they’re denying that painful reality.

As you walk past the craps and roulette games, you may look down at those “stupid gamblers” who play unbeatable games. But, if you deny reality about your games’ costs, you’re not much smarter than they are. You’re blaming idiots for your disappointing results because it’s intellectually and emotionally easier than accepting the responsibility to accept, analyze, and adjust to reality.

Even if you accept reality, the third factor is still a problem:It’s very hard work to analyze and adjust to your game’s high costs, and you can’t get much help from the books. That’s why my future articles will tell you how to do it. ♠

Why You Can’t Beat Low-limit Games — Part IIIby Alan Schoonmaker | Published: Sep 17, 2014

Alan Schoonmaker

Parts I and II showed that you need a huge edge to overcome the high costs of low-limit games. If you haven’t read them, do it at cardplayer.com. Unless you see and believe the evidence, you’ll probably continue to play the same old way, lose money, and make the same silly excuseslisted in Part I:

“There are too many idiots.”“They don’t respect my raises.”“They chase with weak draws.”“My good hands don’t hold up.”“I can’t push anybody off a hand.”

Accept That Frequent Bad Beats Are Inevitable.

This acceptance is absolutely essential. Bad beats can’t cause your long-term losses because you get them only when your opponents chase with weak hands. Since that mistake increases your expected value (EV) and profits, you should want them to call with weak hands, even thoughsomeone will frequently draw out on you. Frequent, painfulbad beats are an inescapable part of most low-limit games.

If you can’t accept – without whining (openly or silently) – that painful fact, don’t play in low-limit games.

If you can’t accept it, but play anyway, you’ll probably losemoney, and you’ll certainly get upset again and again. When you’re upset, you’ll probably make costly mistakes.

After accepting the game as it is, you can make intelligent adjustments. This column discusses game selection; future columns will discuss strategic adjustments. Game selection is always the most important poker decision, and, when the costs are high, it’s particularly important.

If you select the wrong games, nothing else matters much. To overcome the high costs, select games with:

• The best combination of rake, jackpot drop (R&JPD), andbonuses• Spread-limits• Many weak opponents• The right kinds of weak opponents

Since you’ll rarely find games with everything you want, you should evaluate the entire package. For example, if the game with the best combination of bonuses and R&JPD hasthe toughest players, go somewhere else.

Best Combination of Rake, Jackpot Drop, and Bonuses

In Las Vegas the maximum rake is $3-to-$5, and the JPD is$0-to-$2. We’ll defer evaluating bonuses until a future column. It’s obviously harder to win with a larger R&JPD and poorer bonuses, but many people foolishly try.

Spread-Limits

Some states don’t allow no-limit games, but do allow very wide spreads such as $5-$60. Since they are not low-limit games, we’ll consider only small games such as $2-$6 and $2-$10. Unfortunately, only a few rooms offer them.

Because spread-limits make games more complex, skill becomes more important, increasing your edge. They offer weak forms of some of no-limit’s advantages without the huge swings. You can use two more skills than in fixed limit games: (1) Varying your bets; (2) Reading your weak opponents’ cards from the size of their bets.

Varying your bets: Betting a much larger percentage of the pot helps you to bluff and to protect your good hands. Larger bets also help you to exploit low-limit players’ major weakness, calling too loosely.

For example, if a $4-$8 player limps, you can raise only $4,and he and (sometimes) the BB get satisfactory odds to call. In $2-$6, you can raise $6, three times the limper’s and BB’s investment. If they fold, their investment becomes dead money. If they call, their odds usually make calling –EV.

The flop offers the same advantage. If you’re BB in a $4-$8game and one player limps and the SB completes, the pot is$12. If you bet $4, your opponents risk $4 to win $16 (before the R&JPD which make the odds much worse). If

you’re BB in a $2-$6 game with the same preflop action, the pot is only $6, and you can make a pot-sized bet. Your first opponent gets only 2-to-1 (before the R&JPD).

Bluffs are obviously more effective when you bet a larger percentage of the pot.Paying off weak players usually costs less. They usually draw out on the turn and river. If you’re heads up, have aces, raised preflop, bet the flop and turn, and lose to a runner-runner flush, he pays the same amount to draw, but receives 25 percent less after drawing out. In $4-$8, he pays $20 ($8 preflop, $4 flop, and $8 turn) and wins $8 on the river. In $2-$6, he pays the same $20 ($8 preflop, $6 flop and turn), but wins only $6 on the river).

If he draws out on the turn, he pays more to draw, but wins less (pays $8 preflop, $6 flop, and wins $12 on the turn andriver versus $8 pre-flop, $4 flop, and wins $16 on turn and river). These differences may sound trivial, but – over time – they add up.

You can also make blocking bets when you’re out of position against weak opponents. For example, you can bet $2 with fairly weak hands. If you checked, someone might bet the maximum, and you shouldn’t call. Of course, you shouldn’t make such bets into strong players. They would quickly recognize and exploit your predictability.

Reading your weak opponents’ cards: It’s obviously easier to read their cards when they can vary their bets. You have much more information, and you’ll slowly learn that some

opponents make small bets with weak hands, while others have different patterns.Many Weak Opponents

You can’t get a large enough edge unless your opponents are much weaker than you are. Don’t complain about “too many idiots.” Choose games that are full of them. I’m not kidding. Ignore those excuses for your bad results, and pickgames with the weakest players. Most of your profits come from your opponents’ mistakes, and you want players who make one mistake after another.

Will they occasionally give you bad beats? Of course, they will, but you get bad beats only when you’ve been way ahead. Your edge is obviously bigger against the weakest players, and you must never forget that you need a huge edge to cover the high costs.

Since most players overestimate their own skills and underestimate their opponents, ask a coach or respected player to evaluate you and your opponents. Pick a critical, knowledgeable person who will tell you the truth you need to learn, not the lies you want to hear. (“You’re great, and they’re terrible.”)

The Right Kind Of Weak Opponent

Weak opponents aren’t enough. You need the right weaknesses. You probably can’t cover your costs unless most opponents are both loose and passive. In tight games the pots are so small that the R&JPD are an extremely high

percentage of the pot. You need a much bigger edge in small pots, and your cards will rarely have a large enough edge over the quality hands tight opponents play.

In loose-aggressive games the pots will be large, but — because the pots are large and these players are hard to read— you’ll be forced to call with marginal hands. With loose-passive players the pots are generally large, reducing the R&JPD’s impact. Your carefully selected hands have a large edge over theirs, and it’s easy to read their bets and raises. ♠

“Dr. Al” (alan_schoonmaker@yahoo.com) coaches only onpsychology issues. For information about seminars and webinars, go to propokerseminars.com. He is David Sklansky’s co-author of DUCY? and the sole author of fourpoker psychology books.