It's like this with everything these days I suppose. Things get really popular, really fast. And then they're not.

Poker might be following this trend. There was a time, during the recent NHL hockey strike that took out an entire season, where televised poker drew a larger audience in the U.S. than any televised hockey game. And there was a time when poker was on every channel every hour of the day. Now televised poker is hard to find, YMMV.

"The light that shines twice as bright, burns half as long." -- Dr. Tyrell, in Blade Runner

Online casinos are still doing good business, but I don't think they are signing up new members as quickly. There are three reasons for this phenomenom:

1) Everyone who possibly would be interested in online poker already has an account

2) People who have casually tried online poker have lost all the money they deposited, and have come to the realization that losing money is bad. And so bad players have stopped playing.

3) There are a lot of people who jump from casino to casino just for the signup bonuses. Get $100 here, play 10 hours of break-even poker, withdraw and go to another site to get their bonus. For online casinos, the "abuse" (some say "efficient use") of their bonus system is a huge money loser.

Basically, there are some online players that are so good (raking in $100,000+ a year at online poker), and the poker sites themselves are making $$$ millions, that the money has to come from somewhere. It comes from the novice players, and the novice players are kind-of sick of losing money.

And so they go play with their kids, or spend their time in World of Warcraft which at least only costs them $10 a month maximum...

Who knows? Poker might have what Alan Greenspan used to call a "soft landing". Perhaps the popularity of poker is dropping, and will level off softly at some point. I don't know for sure. But poker sure isn't growing any more.

Betting... No matter where you are sitting, you only ever have three choices. Fold your cards, call the bet, or raise the bet. Those are the only three choices, ever.

There are only a small handful of situations before the flop:
1) You are not in the blinds and noone has raised before you: you can fold, call the big blind amount, or raise.
2) You are not in the blinds and someone has raised before you: you can fold, call the raise amount, or reraise.
3) You are in the small blind and noone has raised before you: you can fold, call the big blind amount, or raise.
4) You are in the small blind and someone has raised before you: you can fold, call the raise amount, or reraise.
5) You are in the big blind and noone has raised before you: you can check or raise.
6) You are in the big blind and someone has raised before you: you can fold, call the raise amount, or reraise.

Those are the only 6 situations a player can be in. After the flop, it gets very simple:
1) Noone has bet before you: you can check or raise.
2) Someone has bet before you: you can fold, call the bet, or raise.

Sometimes there will be some more complicated betting, like if you call the big blind, and the next person raises, and the next person raises again. But when it comes back to you, you still have the same three choices. Call the bet, raise, or fold. Just like the blinds, with betting everyone has to pay the same total amount to see the next card or cards. So if you've bet 100, and someone else bets 200, you have to at least match their 200 (ie: 100 more). And just like the blinds, if someone bets more, and you decide not to call the raise, you will lose whatever you have bet so far. That's poker.

Here are a few web sites if you want to read some more about the rules:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_hold_'em
http://www.pokertips.org/rules/betting.php

At the table, there is a white circle called the Dealer Button. The Dealer Button sits in front of the dealer. We randomly assign who the dealer is at the start of the game, and then after every hand it moves to person to the left. So if I am the dealer this hand, and you are sitting to my left, you are guaranteed to be the dealer next hand. Then after that the person to your left. It goes around in a circle again and again, hand after hand. etc.

So in a 6-person game, you can expect to be the dealer once every six hands. Being "on the button" (being the dealer) is the most powerful seat in poker - all else being equal, the dealer wins more often than any other player. That is because the dealer acts last every hand, and gets to see what everyone else bets first before he has to bet.

Every hand (before the flop), two of the players at the table are forced to bet. This is called "the blinds", and the players that are forced to bet are called the big blind and the small blind. The blinds exist primarily to keep the game interesting. Without them, everyone would fold every hand until they got A-A. The blinds force people to play. You have to win a few hands, or else you will get eliminated.

The person to the dealer's immediate left is always the small blind. This person has to bet a certain amount. Since the dealer button moves around the table after every hand, the small blind also moves. The person to the immediate left of the small blind is called the big blind. The big blind amount is twice as large as the small blind. So when we say the blinds are "25-50", the small blind has to bet 25 and the big blind has to bet 50 before they see their cards. Since everyone at the table has to pay the blinds at some point, this process is entirely fair.

The person to the left of the big blind always acts first pre-flop. So you have the dealer (indicated by the white circle), the small blind to their left, the big blind to their left, and then the person who plays first to their left. (Not to confuse things too much, but after the flop, the blinds don't matter and the person to the left of the dealer acts first.)

In tournament poker, the blinds play a key role. As people get eliminated from the table, the dealer button moves around the table faster and faster. So maybe at the start of the game you have to pay the blinds every 10-15 minutes, but near the end, you are paying every 2 or 3 minutes. And at the very end (final 2) you pay every hand.

Also in tournament poker, the blinds go up at regular intervals. It does not always double, but in some games it does. The purpose of raising the blinds is to eliminate players faster, otherwise a game could take all night.

In cash games, where you can enter or leave at any time, the blinds are typically fixed. They never increase.

So that's the blinds in a nutshell. If all you did was understand that there's the dealer, the small blind, the big blind, and the first-to-go person (in that order), and that the circle moves every hand, that's all you need to understand the blinds.

Here are a few web sites if you want to read some more about the rules:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_hold_'em
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_%28poker%29
http://www.pokertips.org/rules/blinds.php

When you sit down at a tournament or a sit-n-go, there are different strategies if you want to win, versus if you just want to get into the money.

It's not that you decide before the tournament starts that you do not want to win it. Everyone should sit down at the table, before the first hand is dealt, and believe they have a chance to win.

But as the game progresses, you may find yourself with an opportunity to either double up, or be out of the game. The path you choose is sometimes dependant on if you are willing to risk losing in order to have a better chance of winning.

Let me put it to you this way...
Let's say you have AK. Great starting hand. You raise moderately, and someone calls you. It's just you and this other person at the flop.
The flop comes up A78.
The person who you're playing against raises really big. It would cost you more than half your chips to call. So what do you do?

If you are playing to win, you will go over the top and reraise him again. If you are playing to cash out, playing it safe, you will fold. In order to win a big tournament, you have to take a bit more risks than if you just want to finish in the money.

So last time I reviewed the pros of Party Poker. There are a whole bunch of cons too, and they're pretty important to me.

Party Poker Cons:
More confusing interface
Less features
Doesn't support mini-view of tables
Higher fees
Hidden fees
Who needs side bets
More hassle to sign up
Inconsistent seating location
Frequent moves
You can't find out what place you are currently in in a tourney

I find the entire application more confusing than UB. From logging in, to trying to find a table, to the game itself. Somebody needs a lesson in simple UI design.

One of the more frustrating things is that I find there are less features. Looking at the tournament lobby, you can't see what the payout will be before the tournament begins. It takes a few minutes after the tourney starts before that is displayed. And looking at the poker table, you can't tell what "hand number" this is without multiple clicks. How many hands have I won (not just the %). There is no "bet pot" feature when it is your turn to bet. I could go on. The poker interface is just badly designed.

The Party Poker screen does not minimize well. Reducing it to its smallest size makes it hard to read as the fonts reduce as well. UB does a much better job with their mini-view, so you can play multiple tables at once.

I have notices Party Poker has slightly higher fees. When 1000 people play a $6 tournament, the total prize pool is $5000. That's $1000 in fees the "house" is skimming off the top. No wonder the Party Poker owner is a multi-billionaire. UB fees are half.

Speaking of fees, Party tends to hide their fees. So the entry fee is advertised as $6. Amd they take their fee from the pot. But on UB, the same tourney would say "$5+.50". See, the fee is right in the name of the game.

One of the first things I noticed when sitting at the PP table is "side bets". That is, you can bet that the flop will be all black, or all red. Does anybody use this? This seems kind of useless, and given that PP is missing a bunch of useful features, seems like it can be removed.

When I first deposited money at PP, I got an email saying "We tried to call you but couldn't reach you. Please call us back to confirm your identity." What? First of all, I was sitting right there - my phone did not ring, so they did not try to call me. Second of all, confirming my identity over the phone with some Indian call center was a hassle. I didn't like it. I felt like I was being interrogated. Way to start a relationship with me PP.

Another "con" is that PP always seats you in a different location at the table each time. UB is able to rotate the table so that I am always in the same spot. This makes PP a bit more confusing.

I don't know if UB does this as much, but PP tends to move me around a lot early in the game. So you play 1 or 2 hands at one table, 4 or 5 at another, and then you're moved again. It's very frustrating.

Finally, my final beef with PP, is that it is impossible to tell how you are doing in a tourney. There is no place to find out what your current ranking is. Are you in the top 10, or down near the bottom? You have to guess basically. That's stupid.

Anyways, there are things about PP to like, but they could do a much better job with it. I don't know why they don't.

I've been playing poker online using UltimateBet for a while, and during their recent technical difficulties decided to try the #1 site, Party Poker. Here are my first impressions.

Party Poker Pros:
They support other casino games, like BlackJack
Looser games, easier to win
Higher payouts at lower levels
Always a tournament starting soon
Sometimes moves you so you miss the blinds

So let's start with the things I like about Party Poker.

One of the first things I noticed was they do online BlackJack (and other casino games apparently). The odd thing about this from the Texas Holdem player's perspective is that you are playing against the house, and there are no other players at the table.

Now I find the games looser at Party. This is subjective, but I see people going all-in with Q-5 on an inside straight DRAW (not even a pair to back them up). So for a tight player, you have a good chance of winning by being patient. I have been cashing out on all the tournaments I have played there so far, I think.

Speaking of cashing out... I find Party pays more. I finished 60th the other day and made 4 times the buy-in. I think you have to finish top 20 on UB for that level.

Sometimes I am in the mood for a sit-n-go, but sometimes I want a multi-table tournament. There is always a tournament at my level starting within an hour at Party. UB often has no tournaments until tomorrow when I want to play late at night. Perhaps Party is more European focused.

And finally, a strange "pro". I find that Party moves me a lot (see below). But many times it will move me from a position of just BEFORE the blinds to the dealer button (just AFTER). Now that is totally unfair to the other players, but it gives me an advantage. So it's a pro.

My next post will deal with the cons of PP.

An earlier blog post talked about the time I saw someone fold with the nuts on the board.

The board contained AKQJT with no flush potential. Everyone in the pot was going to split it. Someone went all in, and although 4 people called, one folded. I was astounded.

So I decided to test out this new technique. I actually got a chance to bet big with the nuts on the board recently in a cash game. Same board. And I bet $5 after the river. One person called and one person folded.

So I turned a breakeven hand - I would get out what I put in plus a portion of the blinds who folded - into a 50% roi by scaring off one person who quite frankly either wasn't paying attention or didn't understand poker.

So this works. Brilliant!

If you're looking for a high-roller, I ain't one. The games I play online max-out at $10 sit-n-gos. It's a level I enjoy and am comfortable with, even though I could afford to play at a higher level.

So last week my company gave us a little unexpected bonus check, and the thought immediately came to me - I should play a higher sit-n-go. Just once, just for fun. When money falls in your lap, and you aren't expecting it, it's nice to be able to have fun with it.

Anyways, in talking with some friends from work, that idea is born that we should pool our money and play at a $100 table. That sounds like fun too, so we do.

And wouldn't you know it, we played and won. $420 first prize for winning a 6-seat $100 buy-in sit and go.

That was fun, no doubt. And I'll probably do it again some day.

But the thrill of winning that game was unlike any thrill I've had at a poker game in ages. I was so happy. 30 minutes later I was still smiling...

Put this one in the "stupidest moves in poker" category.

In a recent online tournament, I was playing at one table while watching another. At the other table, there were 4 players in the pot with the following flop:

Ace King Jack

Some small betting and everyone calls. On the turn:

Queen

Checks all around. The river:

Ten

So there is the top straight on the board. No flushes, since there is not more than 2 of any suit. So to an intelligent player, the nuts are on the board. And there is something like 2000 chips in the pot.

Someone goes all in. Now, I usually hate this type of move, cause it's a time waster. Of course, the next guy calls. And the next guy calls.

And the last guy folds.

Folding a hand you CANNOT possibly lose has to be one of the all-time worst moves in poker.

I might have to go all in the next time the nuts are on the board, in case I can convince a bad player to fold.

The poker hand "two pairs, Jacks and Fives" is commonly known as Motown. It's called Motown because "Jacks and Fives" sounds like "Jackson Five".

And if you don't know who The Jackson Five are, and their relationship to Motown...

Click here to learn more about the hand J5...

A brick is a card on the turn or the river that looks like it couldn't have helped anybody.

For example, in a Texas Hold'em game, let's say the flop is: Ace-King-Ten. Two of those cards are diamonds.

So chances are good someone has 1 pair, two pair, a straight draw or a flush draw.

After some betting, the turn comes 6 of Clubs. The turn card is said to be a "brick" or a "blank", because it most likely did not help anyone who is still in the hand after all the betting of the previous round.

Of course, if the turn was the 6 of Diamonds, it is not a brick because someone on a flush draw would have just made their flush.

Legend holds that Wild Bill Hickok was shot to death during a poker game in Deadwood, South Dakota, and that the hand he held was two pair, black aces and black eights.

This the hand Aces and Eights is now know as the Dead Man's Hand.

Let's pretend.

Pretend you are playing in the World Series of Poker. It's the first hand, and you're dealt Ten-Ten. Pocket Tens! Wow! Nice way to start.

With 10,000 in chips in front of you (representing the $10,000 you paid to get into the tournament), you bet modestly to see the flop (450 chips), and someone calls you.

The flop comes Ace-Ace-Ten. Wow, full house for you!

Check-check - let's see the turn. A Queen. That doesn't scare you with your full house.

Your opponet checks, and you bet 300. Your oppoent reraises to 1300. You call all-in. Your opponent calls!

Your opponent shows Ace-Ten. He has you beat with a bigger full house, and "drawing dead" - no way for you to win on the river. $10,000 down the drain on the first hand.

That really happened in the 2005 World Series of Poker. Sammy Farha beats Oliver Hudson (Kate Hudson's brother and the son of Goldie Hawn). Ouch - what a lousy way to go.

What were the mistakes? (1) Perhaps not betting more pre-flop. (2) Not realizing that, despite having a full house, there were at least four hands that could beat you after the turn. Ace-Ace, Ace-Ten, Queen-Queen, Ace-Queen. The flop would have guaranteed 2 or 3 more hands to beat you. So going all-in? Not a smart play. Fold. (3) Also, it's the FIRST hand. You have a long 60-70 hours more of poker to play before the final table. Going all in with less than the absolute nuts is, well, nuts.

I would have probably made the same mistake. It's a strong hand. No doubt about that. But with that flop, too many ways to lose.

In poker, the term "nuts" is defined as the best possible hand you could have. If the 5-card board shows Ace-Ace-Jack-Seven-Three, pocket Aces would be the nuts. That would give you four-of-a-kind which is unbeatable given that board.

Incidentally, Ace-Jack would also be the nuts, since if you are holding even one Ace, you know your opponent cannot have pocket Aces. So Ace-Ace and Ace-Jack are unbeatable.

Let's look at when you had the nuts.

When the flop came up Ace-Ace-Jack, did you have the nuts? Believe it or not, you are not 100% guaranteed to win - only 99.91%. With two more cards to come, a straight flush is still a possibility.

Let's say your opponent has King-Queen and one of the cards on the board is a club - either the Ace or the Jack.

Your opponent needs two running cards to catch a straight. Needing two specific cards as outs and with only two cards left to go, the odds are (2/46 x 1/45) = 0.09%. You are 99.91% odds to win. If your opponent beats you at this point, you must have the worst luck ever.

If the next card that comes up, the turn, is not one of the cards needed to catch a straight flush, then you got the nuts.

The theory of pot odds is simply one that compares the return you will get on your bet, vesus the odds of you winning the pot.

Let's say you are holding K-Q (that is to say, suited). Worth a call, right? The flop comes J-T-3. So you have an open-ended straight draw. You need an Ace or a Nine to catch a strait - and you are pretty sure a straight will win the hand.

The pot already contains 500 chips. Someone bets 150 chips. Should you call it, on a straight draw? Here's the pot odds calculation...

Chances of catching a straight on the turn or the river: 34% or 2.90 to 1
Pot odds: 150 to win 650 chips or 4.33 to 1

So you have a 2.9:1 chance of winning and will receive 4.33 times your bet. So it is definitely worth it.

But what if someone bets 300 chips? Now the pot odds are 2.66 to 1. Since you still have a 2.9:1 chance of winning, but will only receive 2.66:1 on your bet, pot odds says that it is not worth it. So fold.

There is a certain scenario that is almost always a good time to raise:
* You are not one of the blinds
* Before the flop, you simply "call"
* Everyone else folds
* The small blind either calls or folds
* The big blind checks

So it is just two or three of you in the pot - you and the blinds.

Once the flop is dealt, you have an unique opportunity. In this scenario, I almost always bet (especially with Ace or King showing on the flop). I make it a decent size bet (pot bet). And 90% of the time, both the blinds fold.

Being in the blinds is a disadvantage. You are forced to bet. As the big blind, even with the worst possible hand (7-2 offsuit) you get to see the flop for free. As the small blind, it is cheap to see the flop. Some people call in the small blind position no matter what cards they hold.

When your only remaining opponents are "the blinds", that is a good time to buy the pot. (Of course, if either of them call or raise you, get out of the hand unless you have something.)

In poker, being "in position" means being one of the last to bet in a given round. Being in position gives you a subtle advantage over the other players, in that they have to act before you, so you can see what they do before deciding what you should do.

For instance, before the flop, the players who have posted the small and big blind are generally said to be betting "in position".

Think of it like this, if you are the first to act this round, and you have an Ace-Three, you have no idea what any of the players are going to do. You could call the blind or even raise a little. Let's say you bet 100 chips.

Then, a player a few places over from you bets big - 1000 chips. From that point everyone folds until it comes back to you. Now what are you going to do? You can't call 1000 chips for an Ace-Three, but you've already "lost" 100 chips.

In this case, it would be better to be one of the last people to act, then you could see the player betting big before you and get out of the way. Alternately, you could call knowing that it would likely be only the two of you remaining in the hand to see the flop.

Being in position gives you more information on which to make a decision.

Every game, a poker player makes 100's of decisions - bet, check, or fold. These are the factors you should take into consideration before coming to any decision:

- Your mathematical odds of winning
- Your opponents playing style
- Your playing style
- The number of chips you have remaining
- The number of chips the opponents left in the hand have remaining versus yours
- The amount of chips in the pot
- The size of the blinds and/or antes
- Your betting position (first or last)
- Number of players in the hand
- If your opponents are in one of the blinds

Those are the big ones. You can also try to rely on these, although less often:
- Your opponents tells
- Are there reasons your opponent would fold a strong hand, just to stay in the tournment a little longer? (ie: very close to the end of the day of a multi-day tournament, very close to getting to the positions that pay out, very close to the final table)

I will try to deal with each of those, but not all at once.

I recently was dealt a King-Three and folded it before the flop. Some players get excited to see a King - and might call or even raise in that situation - but I have learned that having a weak kicker (the 3) makes the King weak. For instance, if a King came on the flop, I would have a pair of Kings (normally a strong hand) but another player with a King and a higher kicker would have beat me.

Well, to my dismay, the flop revealed two more Kings. I would have had three of a kind if I had called the relatively cheap 30 chips to see the flop. This is the poker equivalent of the old fisherman tale of "the one that got away".

But I do not regret my decision to fold, as the odds of winning with a K3 preflop are normally pretty low. It is in fact much, much more likely to see a single King or no King, leaving me in a serious underdog position.

Don't look back at the one that got away with remorse. It is much more fatal to call bad cards than to occassionally miss a lucky flop.

There are many styles of poker play:
* Loose - A player who bets or calls with marginal hands
* Tight - A player who only plays with excellent hands
* Aggressive - A player who frequently bets big or raises to attack other players
* Passive - A player who never bets or raises, simply calls

In general, in online poker, it is the aggressive player that usually wins. But being aggressive can get you into trouble, when you run into players with good hands. Aggressive players do well against tight players.

Given that an "out" is a card that will significantly improve your hand to go from a losing hand to a winning hand, determining the number of outs is simply a matter of adding up all the possible winning cards for you.

Let's say you are holding a pair of 2's (a.k.a. pocket 2's) and your opponent is holding a pair of Tens (pocket Tens).

The flop comes Ace, 3, 4.

In this case, you need another 2 to give you three of a kind, which will beat any other pair. Since you have two of the deck's four 2's, there are two remaining 2's in the deck and you have 2 outs.

But wait, the flop has also given you the possibility of a straight. A 5 on the turn or the river will give you a straight. There are four 5's in the deck, and none are known, so you have 4 more outs.

You need any one of 6 cards in the remaining deck to have any chance of winning this hand. Of course, your opponent could pull another Ten to beat your three 2's, and pull a 2-5 to make a tie your straight for a split pot.

Incidentally, since you have 6 outs to win the hand, and there are 45 unknown cards, your odds of pulling a 2 or a 5 on the next card is 13.3%. The river could also save you, which is a 13.6% chance to happen. So together, you have 26.9% chance of winning this hand. Not bad, but not great.

Outs (n): the number of cards remaining in the deck that could improve your hand to be the winning hand