The Theory of Poker, David Sklansky Chapter 02: Expectation and Hourly Rate Mathematical expectation has nothing to do with results! 'Anytime you make a bet with the best of it, where the odds are.

Publisher’s Note: David Sklansky is working on a new book tentatively titled The Theory of Poker Applied to No-Limit. What follows is the first sample from this text. Also, this is not a complete chapter, but it should give you an idea of what is coming, probably in the summer of 2019.

Slowplaying

To be honest, the original chapter on slowplaying in The Theory of Poker could lead you astray in deepstack no-limit or pot-limit poker. This is especially true for players who religiously stuck to my guidelines without thinking too hard about possible adjustments. That chapter was pretty much solely concerned with limit play, and some specific guidelines had you both slowplaying in spots where it might not be right to bet in no-limit and avoiding slowplays where it is sometimes right in no-limit.

To slowplay means to play more meekly on an earlier round than your good hand might indicate, in order to disguise your hand for the sake of future bets and to prevent the hand from ending immediately on that round. Thus, you check hands that seem to be worth a bet or just call with them rather than raise.

Quoting directly, The Theory of Poker gives five criteria that it says must all be true in most cases for a slowplay to be correct. They are:

1. You must have a very good hand
2. The free or cheap card you are allowing other players to get must have good possibilities of making them a second best hand.
3. That same free card must have little chance of making someone a better hand than yours or even giving that person a draw to a better hand than yours on the next round with sufficient odds to justify a call.
4. You must be sure you will drive other players out by showing aggression, but you have a good chance of winning a big pot if you don’t.
5. The pot must not yet be large.

I think that most experienced poker players can pretty much see why these are accurate criteria for limit poker. If you have a monster, let you opponents partially catch up if there is too good a chance that early aggression will thin the field or win the pot immediately.

And this is also an argument for slowplaying in no-limit or pot-limit as well. It’s an excellent argument as long s the stacks are not deep.

But if the stacks are deep, there are at least two reasons to consider not slowplaying hands that you would slowplay in limit:

1. Bet sizes are related to the size of the pot. In limit, if you belatedly realize that you could have gotten called all the way through, your decision to miss an early bet is not that catastrophic. But in no-limit or pot-limit, it often is. If there’s $100 in the pot and I bet the pot all three rounds I win $1,400 rather than the $500 I would get if I skip the first bet. Of course, real life is more complicated than this, but the general point should be clear. As a result, early slowplays with great hands should be made less often in no-limit when the stacks are deep. (In TOP, I point out that even in limit games the pure nuts should be slowplayed less often than slightly worse hands just in case you’re up against a great hand being slowplayed. That remains true in big bet games.)
2. Catastrophic future cards are worse and good future cards are less plentiful. In no-limit, the next card is less likely to entice an opponent who has mildly improved to give you action than it would at limit. If the flop is the K52, followed by the T, two tens will lose more to your slowplayed three deuces in limit, but probably not no-limit. Meanwhile, if a four comes and gives you action, you could be in trouble. This concept is especially true in pot-limit Omaha. If the flop is the 833, and everyone checks to you, it’s usually wrong to slowplay eights full. Bet and hope to trap a trey that checked. If a card above an eight comes, you’re still probably okay, but not so much if you get action.

On the other hand, there are times to slowplay in no-limit with hands that would not be good enough to slowplay in limit. One reason is that your bets are giving your opponents lower pot odds. Another reason is that your opponent is more afraid of the next bet in no-limit than he is in limit. And third, is the fact that you are sometimes beat and your decision not to slowplay will thus usually cost you more money or, if you fold to a raise, the chance of drawing out.

A common example of the above occurs on fourth street in no-limit hold ’em when you have perhaps ace-king and the board is the K972. Your opponent called your flop bet and checks again. It’s often right to check it right back with the intention of calling a moderate river bet and perhaps making your own moderate bet if he checks again.

In limit hold ’em, this play is rarely right. But in no-limit, it should be obvious that it’s often right against many types of players. For instance, the opponent who will fold two jacks on the turn fearing the river bet, but who will call the one bet after you check. Or the opponent who has a holding of ten-eight but who will frequently bluff when he misses. Or the person with a nine-seven who check raises you out of eight wins.

David Sklansky Poker

The Theory Of Poker By David Sklansky