No lapis for neo

Now that it's over, I can talk about my latest streak, and the ratio I just missed achieving. You know about the golden ratio - twice as many winning sessions as losing ones. You know about the platinum ratio - three times as many winning sessions as losing ones. The ratio you don't know about, which I only recently dreamed up, is what I call the lapis ratio - four times as many winning sessions as losing ones. Lapis, of course, is shorthand for lapis lazuli. I picked lapis as the name for this ratio since for me it has the aura of something extraordinary, something magical, and something mystical.

Had I won last night's session, I would have achieved lapis in deuce. Needless to say, I didn't win. Not only didn't I win, I lost repeatedly. In fact, I set a personal record for the most times I've ever hit the felt in a single session - 7. If this had occurred at a $100/$200 table, I would have lost $280,000! Since it was only a $5/$10 table, though, I only lost $14,000 - a cheap lesson.

Ironically, one of the players I was an ATM for was "Aggresso", who'd been my ATM the previous session. This player is no fun to play with, and drags down the level of play of the whole table. I'll be on the lookout for him in the future and avoid joining tables where he's playing. One of the other players kept up a running criticism of "Aggresso's" idiotic playing style all night, but it had no effect. This critic eventually left in disgust. Would that I'd done the same at the same time! I would have saved myself about $8K.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 117 hands
Pots won if drawing - 21 of 63 (33%)
Pots won at showdown - 14 of 33 (42%)
Pots won without showdown - 8

delta: $-14,000
balance: $2,035,997

Personal ATMs

I'm not sure why this should be so, but I've found that when two players at a poker table go head to head often enough, one tends to dominate the other, using him like his own personal ATM. The second time I hit the felt five times in succession at a deuce table, I was somebody else's ATM; last night, someone else was mine. I knew from observing how this particular player played that he went all in way too often; all I had to do was wait for strong hands to come my way, then stick with them when "Aggresso" went all in. Luckily for me, no one else at the table really wanted any of his action, so I was able to go heads up against him for the most part.

The first bad news of the session was that I didn't have the discipline to quit when I got up over $7K. The next bit of bad news was that I hit the felt three times. The good news was that my personal ATM allowed me to recoup all my losses and end the night with a small profit.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 104 hands
Pots won if drawing - 25 of 80 (31%)
Pots won at showdown - 18 of 29 (62%)
Pots won without showdown - 8

delta: $430
balance: $2,049,997

Jumping

As you play deuce, the size of your stack jumps up and down. Of course, that's true in all poker variants, to a greater or lesser extent. I think the volatility of the jumping is much greater in deuce than in Hold'em, though. The reason is that deuce forces you to make many more "hopeful bets" than Hold'em does. You almost never know the real strength of your hand in deuce until after the third draw, whereas you can have a very good idea of the strength of your hand in Hold'em right when you see the flop. You have to undergo three betting rounds to know the strength of your hand in deuce, whereas you only have to undergo one betting round to acquire the same amount of information in Hold'em.

Once you get accustomed to the jumping around, you stop worrying about it. What you're doing is playing a timing game; you're waiting for the right moments to go all in. You're always trying to hear the rhythm of the cards, and step to that beat! You also need to be able to hear it when the cards tell you "Enough! Take your winnings and go home."

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 67 hands
Pots won if drawing - 16 of 52 (30%)
Pots won at showdown - 10 of 20 (50%)
Pots won without showdown - 6

delta: $2,278
balance: $2,049,567

Pat hand percentage

Looking over the hand histories from last Thursday night's session, I've come up with another deuce rule of thumb. It's simple to state: to be successful at deuce, you must try to win at least twice as many pat hands as you lose (where a pat hand is a hand in which you stand pat on at least one of the three draws). On Thursday, I achieved this goal; I won 4 pat hands and lost 2.

One good way to help pad your pat hand percentage is not to stand pat too often! It's amazing how often hands which utilize all three draws will beat pat hands.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 38 hands
Pots won if drawing - 8 of 29 (27%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 13 (30%)
Pots won without showdown - 4

delta: $5,413
balance: $2,047,289

Anatomy of a winning deuce session

Last night, I had a very successful deuce session. I think the way it played out is a good template for how to try to play. You need to start out with some luck, in order to build your stack early; building your stack early is the foundation for a successful session. The quickest (and luckiest) way to build your stack is to go all in on a strong hand, get some callers, and win. It's important to build your stack early for several reasons:

1. you can bully other players
2. you can't be bullied
3. you can suffer some losses and still have chips left
4. the best way to have a monster session is to win big early and keep winning until you quit

I went all in on hand 5 with a 7 6 5 3 2 which I hit after the first draw, and won a pot worth $5,025; $3,770 of this was o.p.m. (other people's money). After that, I mostly lost small amounts when I lost, and won large amounts when I won. Sometimes poker's just that easy!

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 43 hands
Pots won if drawing - 7 of 27 (25%)
Pots won at showdown - 5 of 10 (50%)
Pots won without showdown - 2

delta: $5,837
balance: $2,041,876

Platinum farewell?

Last night, I achieved the platinum ratio for the second time in my deuce career, improving to 15 winning sessions out of 20. I have a feeling that's the last time I'll ever achieve platinum in deuce. It's just not realistic to expect to win 3 out of every 4 sessions. I'm proud of the fact that I've achieved platinum in 3 of the 6 poker flavors I've tried so far - pot limit hold'em, no limit hold'em, and no limit deuce.

My stack took a wild ride last night; at the first table I joined I went up $6.5K at one point, but ended up hitting the felt. My very first hand after reupping, I won a pot worth almost $6.5K, and called it a night.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 35 hands
Pots won if drawing - 8 of 27 (29%)
Pots won at showdown - 8 of 13 (61%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $2,450
balance: $2,036,039

The paradox of conservatism

When I wrote in my last post that I wanted to keep playing in a conservative style, it felt a bit off. Inexact, or incorrect, or some combination of both. Thinking it over, I know why. It was off because it runs counter to the secret of winning at poker. Yes, friends and neighbors, it's that time again! I'm about to tell you, once more, this precious secret. Don't be alarmed that the secret constantly changes; the fact is, there's only one secret at any given time :-)

It's wrong to decide to play in a conservative style. Does that mean one should play aggressively? No; it's also wrong to decide to play in an aggressive style. What I'm trying to say is that it's wrong to decide to play in any particular style (this is the secret). When you do this, you limit yourself severely. Poker is all about fooling your opponents; you must constantly vary your style of play. Also, you must constantly adjust your style based on all the data you have at your disposal, which includes the playing style of your opponents.

So what, exactly, is the paradox of conservatism? Simply this: to accomplish the goal of conserving your chips, sometimes you must make plays that are very aggressive. It's a given that if you make conservative plays all the time, your opponents will recognize that, react accordingly, and end up winning all your chips. So you can't make conservative plays all the time, even though you want to play conservatively!

Last night, I doubled up on the very first hand. Here's how it went down:

Table 'Solstice II' 6-max (Play Money) Seat #2 is the button
Seat 1: neostreet (2000 in chips)
Seat 2: (4955 in chips)
Seat 6: (6320 in chips)
Seat 6: posts small blind 5
neostreet: posts big blind 10
*** DEALING HANDS ***
Dealt to neostreet [2c Ah 5c 6h Th]
Seat 2: folds
Seat 6: raises 6310 to 6320 and is all-in
neostreet: calls 1990 and is all-in
Uncalled bet (4320) returned to Seat 6
*** FIRST DRAW ***
Seat 6: discards 1 card
neostreet: discards 2 cards [Ah Th]
Dealt to neostreet [2c 5c 6h] [4s 6s]
*** SECOND DRAW ***
Seat 6: discards 1 card
neostreet: discards 1 card [6s]
Dealt to neostreet [2c 5c 6h 4s] [4d]
*** THIRD DRAW ***
Seat 6: discards 1 card
neostreet: discards 1 card [4d]
Dealt to neostreet [2c 5c 6h 4s] [7d]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Seat 6: shows [8c 5d 7h 4h 9h] (Lo: 9,8,7,5,4)
neostreet: shows [2c 4s 5c 6h 7d] (Lo: 7,6,5,4,2)
neostreet collected 4000 from pot

I decided to call the all in bet since I'd been dealt three excellent low cards out of five. Some might say that was insufficient, and that I only should have called with four excellent low cards out of five. What can I tell you? I had a hunch my hand would win. You have to go with your gut sometimes!

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 41 hands
Pots won if drawing - 11 of 28 (39%)
Pots won at showdown - 5 of 7 (71%)
Pots won without showdown - 6

delta: $3,613
balance: $2,033,589

Frisky-free

On Saturday night, I played a frisky-free session. I didn't go all in a single time. I went on an extended warm streak and the table ended up quitting on me. I didn't win enough chips for the streak to be considered truly a hot streak, but I did win 40% of the hands.

I'm going to stay with this conservative style for a while, and hope it'll enable me to re-achieve the golden ratio.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 55 hands
Pots won if drawing - 22 of 48 (45%)
Pots won at showdown - 9 of 20 (45%)
Pots won without showdown - 13

delta: $1,240
balance: $2,029,976

Frisky late

Last night, I equaled my record for futility. I hit the felt five times, then exited stage left. The thing is, I was having a great night up to the point I started playing like a donk. It was the appearance at the table of a super aggressive player that totally put me off my game. This player was going all in left and right, and I didn't have the discipline not to challenge him. We must have gone heads up six or seven times, and I only won once. I basically "shipped" all my chips straight to him, over and over again. Granted, I did get mighty unlucky three or four times, but still, I really had no right to be playing those hands to begin with.

So I was frisky late, and it really cost me. You only want to be frisky at the start of a session, as I've mentioned before. After 52 hands, I was up about $1,200. The super aggressive player joined the table on hand 49. From hands 53 to to 65, I hit the felt five times, each time losing my chips to the super aggressive player. Freefall. Ouch. I promise I'll play tighter tonight.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 65 hands
Pots won if drawing - 14 of 50 (28%)
Pots won at showdown - 6 of 17 (35%)
Pots won without showdown - 8

delta: $-10,000
balance: $2,028,736

Platinum deuce

Last night, I hit the the felt multiple times; four, to be precise. However, that didn't stop me from having a winning session. That brought me up to the platinum ratio (3 to 1, winning sessions to losing sessions) in deuce. That's an unsustainable height, but it sure feels nice to have achieved it!

I think I know why there are no high stakes no limit deuce tables; it's the same reason there are no high stakes pot limit Omaha tables. With both of these poker flavors, you don't need high initial stakes in order for the pots to grow very big very rapidly; inject high initial stakes into the mix, and you practically guarantee that some players will be forced to go all in on every hand. The more players are forced to go all in on a semi-regular basis, the more luck is a factor; if the luck factor of a game is too high, it's just no fun to play (at least for the poker purists like me).

On my penultimate hand last night, I won a pot worth $8,845 with a 9 7 5 4 2 low. The loser of the hand tried to goad me into playing some more when he noticed that I sat out after folding the next hand; he accused me of being scared, but I didn't rise to the bait.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 66 hands
Pots won if drawing - 15 of 51 (29%)
Pots won at showdown - 9 of 23 (39%)
Pots won without showdown - 6

delta: $1,071
balance: $2,038,736

Frisky early

Last night, I hit the felt twice in my first four hands. That's what you call getting frisky early! You need to be frisky if you want to get anywhere in poker. Not all the time, and certainly not late in a session; but some of the time, and for two good reasons. Reason 1 is to give yourself a chance to win a lot of chips. Reason 2 is to keep your opponents guessing about your playing style.

I got more cautious after the friskiness, and after a longish session managed to almost double my starting stack; that seems to be my most common outcome these days. I can't complain!

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 62 hands
Pots won if drawing - 9 of 45 (20%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 14 (28%)
Pots won without showdown - 6

delta: $1,840
balance: $2,037,665

Withdrawal symptoms

As much as I'm enjoying playing deuce right now, I'm really missing the big pots I could be winning playing no limit hold'em at a $100/$200 table with a maximum starting stack of $40,000. That could be a sign of a fragile poker ego; maybe I need to be winning large amounts of chips to validate my poker skills to myself. On the other hand, it could indicate that I'm bored with the chump change I'm playing for now, and need the excitement of greater risk to really get my poker juices flowing. I don't quite know the answer yet. I do know that if PokerStars hosted $100/$200 no limit deuce tables, I'd be all over them like white on rice :-) Maybe I'll send them a friendly email suggesting they do just that.

Last night, I got an early lift, went up over $3K halfway through the session, and finally settled for doubling my starting stack. It marked the second time in a row I made a profit without hitting the felt; maybe my "give to get" theory was premature.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 44 hands
Pots won if drawing - 13 of 37 (35%)
Pots won at showdown - 9 of 16 (56%)
Pots won without showdown - 4

delta: $2,120
balance: $2,035,825

A nagging question

I already know that I enjoy playing deuce, and that I have the potential to be very good at it. However, I have a question about deuce that's been bugging me for a while; I need to find out what the answer is. It's not just idle curiosity, either; the answer could very well change my playing strategy. The question is simply this: when all the 52 cards in the deck have been dealt out, but there are still draw requests remaining, where do the additional cards come from?

A little explanation is in order here. Even though there are only 6 seats at a deuce table, instead of the 9 at a hold'em table, if enough of the seats are filled, and enough players stay in the hand, and enough players keep drawing enough cards, the 52 cards in the deck will be exhausted before all the drawing rounds have been completed. As an example, suppose all six seats have active players. That means that 6 x 5, or 30 cards, must be dealt out before the first drawing round. Let's further suppose that each player draws 3 cards in the first drawing round, 2 in the second, and 1 in the third. That's an additional 6 * (3 + 2 + 1), or 36 cards to be dealt out. That means the total number of cards which must be dealt out in that particular scenario is 30 + 36, or 66 cards. But there are only 52 cards in a deck. Where are the extra 14 cards coming from?

I can only think of two ways to supply those extra cards, and neither one of them is entirely satisfactory.

1. start out with more than 52 cards. The best way to do this is to start out with 2 decks, shuffled together. The problem with this solution is that players can easily get hands containing 2 of the same card (both denomination and suit), and that makes the game both look and feel rigged and crooked.

2. supply the extra cards from previous discards. The problem with this solution is that the later you are in the drawing order, the more likely it is that you'll eventually receive some of this "backwash". Almost by definition, you don't want to be receiving previous discards, since it's highly likely they'll be high denomination cards which can't possibly improve your hand. In all other poker variants, having the dealer button is either a neutral proposition or a decided advantage; if the extra cards in deuce are supplied from previous discards, having the dealer button is a decided disadvantage, since you're dead last in the drawing order. That inconsistency, if indeed it exists, is offensive to a poker purist (and you must surely know I consider myself one of them :-).

I wrote a utility which reads the PokerStars hand history files of deuce hands and calculates the number of cards dealt out in each; I ran it on last night's hand histories, and found that fully 10 of the 22 hands I played went into what we can call "extra card territory". So it's actually very important to know the answer to this nagging question. For now, I'll assume that solution #2 is the one being used, and fold early and often whenever I have the dealer button at a full table :-)

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 22 hands
Pots won if drawing - 4 of 18 (22%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 8 (50%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $2,350
balance: $2,033,705

Give to get

Counting last Friday night, I've now played 12 sessions of deuce. I'm at the golden ratio, with 8 wins and 4 losses. As I mentioned before, deuce somehow felt familiar to me from the very beginning. To paraphrase a line from John Denver's classic song "Rocky Mountain High", I came home to a place I'd never been before! That also describes my feelings when I first visited Wales, the birthplace of my father's parents.

As I've said before, poker is all about pattern recognition. One pattern I'm recognizing in my winning deuce sessions is that of losing my starting stake multiple times at the start of the session, but then recouping all the losses and ending up with a profit. This pattern is much more common than gaining a profit without losing a single starting stake, which I've probably only achieved once or twice out of the eight winning sessions. Thus, at least for me, at least for now, to win at deuce I have to give to get.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 105 hands
Pots won if drawing - 14 of 75 (18%)
Pots won at showdown - 12 of 29 (41%)
Pots won without showdown - 2

delta: $720
balance: $2,031,355

Deep dive

Last night, I ventured into uncharted territory. After hitting the felt for the fifth time, I reupped for the fifth time instead of calling it a night. I really felt I could turn things around. I'd taken a deep dive, but still trusted in my ability to get back to the surface. I made it most of the way back on a single hand, and called it a night at that point. To be honest, at the time I quit the table I thought I'd made it all the way back; I'd lost track of the number of times I'd hit the felt and mistakenly thought I'd only hit it four times.

One of the times was due to the heinous user interface "gotcha" in the PokerStars client which I've mentioned before; I thought I was provisionally calling a $200 bet, but just before I clicked, another player went all in, which put me all in when I called. I make heavy use of the provisional buttons in the interface, since that frees up time to save the hand histories; it makes me vulnerable to the interface "gotcha", however.

Two of the other times were due to my inability to hold off from calling all in bets before the first draw when I had reasonably strong hands. That's something I know I still need to work on. All in all, I actually had a pretty decent session.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 63 hands
Pots won if drawing - 8 of 30 (26%)
Pots won at showdown - 7 of 13 (53%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $-1,815
balance: $2,030,635

Running hot

Play poker long enough, and you're going to experience times when you're "running hot". What a great feeling! You know it has little to do with skill, but that doesn't stop you from enjoying it to the fullest. For a brief moment in time, you feel like Superman; you're invincible!

Last night, I ran hot. In a short session, I won over half the hands. On the hands I lost, I invested almost nothing. I call the bar chart of my stack size over time "stairs to the right". I really wish there were $100/$200 play tables for deuce on PokerStars; I would really have made a killing!

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 15 hands
Pots won if drawing - 8 of 14 (57%)
Pots won at showdown - 6 of 6 (100%)
Pots won without showdown - 3

delta: $4,820
balance: $2,032,450

Fantastic finish

Last night, I had one of my best finishes ever. After 34 hands, I was $4,480 in the hole. Three hands later, I was $13,590 to the good. Here's how the hands went down:

hand 35: I hit a 7 6 4 3 2 low on the first draw, called an all in bet which put me all in, and won a side pot and the main pot for a combined $6,855 ($5,335 of it other people's money (o.p.m.))

hand 36: I hit a 7 6 5 4 2 low on the third draw, went all in, and won a pot worth $4,270 ($2,140 of it o.p.m.)

hand 37: I hit a #1 (7 5 4 3 2) on the second draw, went all in, and won a pot worth $19,590 ($10,595 of it o.p.m.)

My lastmin ratio was my second best ever - 50.88. On hand 37, I won a whopping 46% of all the available chips from the other players at the table. I'll have to check if that's a record; I have a sneaking suspicion it is.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 38 hands
Pots won if drawing - 4 of 19 (21%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 10 (40%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $13,590
balance: $2,027,630

Playing with an all-in-aholic

On Sunday night, I encountered an all-in-aholic - someone who's addicted to putting all his chips in the middle on the slightest pretext. It's tempting to try to take such players down right away, but it's much better to wait until you have a really strong hand. When you get one, you should go all in with it - the all-in-aholic won't be able to resist calling. I did just that when I was dealt a #1, and won a pot worth $7,585. Unfortunately, I gave it all back six hands later. Fortunately, I won a monster pot of $8,151 on the very next hand. Of course, I called it a night right after that.

This win put the sum of my deuce deltas modestly into the black; I'll do my best to keep it there.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 44 hands
Pots won if drawing - 6 of 21 (28%)
Pots won at showdown - 6 of 11 (54%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $4,141
balance: $2,014,040

Insufficient perfection

Deuce has its own lingo. The best possible hand, 7-5-4-3-2, is simply called "#1". The best possible hand where the high card is an eight, 8-5-4-3-2, is called "eight perfect"; another name for it is "#5", since it's the fifth best possible hand. Last night, on the first hand, I had an eight perfect after my third and final discard. I went all in with it and lost to a #1. The thing about any "perfect" hand is that its perfection is only in relation to its high card; an eight perfect will beat or tie any other eight high, but will lose to any seven high. I just didn't believe my opponent had a seven high, even though he reraised me enough to put me all in if I called. I fell in love with the "perfection" of my eight, but it was insufficient to win me the hand.

Last night marked the second session in a row where I hit the felt on my very first hand; I promise that won't happen tonight, even if I have to fold a #2! I hit the felt twice more last night, before having a strong rebound to bring my stack within shouting distance of its starting amount.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 117 hands
Pots won if drawing - 27 of 99 (27%)
Pots won at showdown - 11 of 29 (37%)
Pots won without showdown - 16

delta: $-835
balance: $2,009,899

Standing pat considered harmful

On my first hand last night, I had a rough 8 after the first draw and decided to stand pat for the other two draws; I ending up losing to an 8 6. I'd gone all in, so I hit the felt on the very first hand; clearly an inauspicious start. When I decided to stand pat, something about actually doing it (as opposed to deciding to do it) felt wrong. I know what it was - in deuce, it's a waste not to use all your draws unless you have a truly superior hand. A rough eight is a good hand, but not a hand to stand pat on when you've only had one draw. I'm adding to my deuce rules of thumb as I go along. Here's what they are currently:

- never pay additional chips to go to showdown when your high card is a 9 or higher
- never stand pat on the first draw unless you were dealt a #1
- never stand pat on the second draw unless you have at least a smooth 8
- never stand pat on the third draw unless you have at least a rough 8

I hit the felt again on my fifth hand of the night. When I reupped again, I turned things around, went on a bit of a hot streak, and ended the night with a nice gain. I need to stop "spotting" myself two feltings at the start of each session; it's risky having to climb out of a hole every night.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 33 hands
Pots won if drawing - 11 of 25 (44%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 9 (44%)
Pots won without showdown - 7

delta: $1,292
balance: $2,010,734

The secret to deuce success

As you know, every so often I get the urge to unleash my pearls of poker wisdom on the world. After playing only five sessions of no limit deuce to the seven triple draw lowball (deuce, for short), I believe I've discovered the secret to having success at it. Drumroll, please ...

In deuce, never go all in unless you're going to win.

I can already hear the howls of anguish from some of you and the hoots of derision from others. Anguish that I've given you nothing you can use. Derision that all I've provided is a tautology. I never claimed the secret was easy to implement! The secret could be rephrased as follows:

If you win when you go all in, you're going to be successful at deuce.

I've noticed time and time again that in my most successful sessions, I tend to win when I go all in. Last night, I hit the felt twice, but had a nice rebound; I went all in on the penultimate hand, doubled up, and got out of Dodge.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 70 hands
Pots won if drawing - 11 of 49 (22%)
Pots won at showdown - 8 of 16 (50%)
Pots won without showdown - 3

delta: $1,320
balance: $2,009,442

High heat

Last night, I had an up and down session. I hit the felt 3 times, then did much better on my final reup. The largest amount I lost on a single hand was $2,015, which was when I hit the felt for the first time. Looking back over that hand, I realize I never should have been in it. To use a baseball analogy, I couldn't lay off the high heat. In other words, I was offered a tempting fastball which was up out of the strike zone, and couldn't stop myself from swinging at it.

Deuce seems to have a lot more volatility than hold'em; you have to be prepared for your stack to take some pretty wild swings. You also have to be willing to fold early and often. I'm still getting the hang of deuce, but I'm already loving it.

During current 2-7 Triple Draw session you were dealt 137 hands
Pots won if drawing - 18 of 79 (22%)
Pots won at showdown - 10 of 26 (38%)
Pots won without showdown - 9

delta: $-2,025
balance: $2,008,122