So it’s about time that I got back into the habit of regularly updating my blog. After having done so much writing for the Around the World in 90 Days blog plus an enormous sum of live poker I was pretty worn out and didn’t feel up to writing anything for a while. Over the last few days I’ve felt my desire to write to grow again, so here we are.

Not only has my drive to write increased, so has my drive to do a lot of things. To put it bluntly, I’m pretty fucking bored with myself. Yesterday I had a golf lesson. The day before I had a boxing lesson. I’m playing a ton of tennis. I’m thinking about writing some material and going to perform it at an open mic night at a comedy club. I’ve been working out and dieting religiously.

Celina is currently away in Korea at the APPT Seoul. I didn’t go for a couple of reasons which I’ll talk about in a future entry, nothing major, just a business detail that meant I probably shouldn’t go to Korea. That and I’m really exhausted from all my recent travel, so another 14 hours in planes not to mention God knows how much time in airports seemed a bit too much for me. That and I’ve been killing online.

As most people reading this blog would know, last week was PokerStars WCOOP. The tournaments started at what’s 4:30am Melbourne time so I was up at 4:25am every morning and playing as many tables as possible for the next 12 hours. I didn’t have any major results in the WCOOP itself, but over the last 10 or so days (the last few I’ve gone back to my 8 hour schedule starting at 9am) my results have been:
1st on Titan for $15,000.
3rd on Stars for $12,000.
1st on Stars for $6000 New Zealand APPT package.
1st on Full Tilt for $9,900.
2nd on Stars for $16,500.
1st on UB for $7,500 Aruba package (I think that’s the value?)
1st on Stars for $5,800.
Not to mention a bunch of other random final table appearances for like $500-$2000 or something. It feels really good to be back grinding online and making money at a consistent rate. I’ve also continued my Midas touch of swapping, swapping with a friend at the final two tables of the 100r which he won and had to send me $1500, and swapping with Luckychewy with 10 left in the Tilt winners choice, which he won and had to send me $1200 for.

Today is Grand Final day in Melbourne so I’m going to take the day off and get outside. First going out to breakfast, then playing some tennis, then throwing some money on the game and watching the mayhem. If we go to the right spot for the game and get a couple beers in me (yea, I’m going to take a one day break from my strict diet) perhaps there’s potential for an epic day. We’ll see.

Hey people, it’s been a while since I’ve done any strategy writing but I assure you I was very busy rotating between grinding long days of live poker and considering suicide. Now that I’ve got some more free time I’m hoping to get back to productive writing and getting some articles done. Today I want to talk about a concept I’ve been mulling over in my head for a while now, manipulative vs deceptive play.
Alternating between manipulative and deceptive play is a concept I’ve struggled finding a balance with for some time. First let’s define what I mean by both manipulative and deceptive play.
Manipulative play: I alternate between calling ‘manipulative play’ manipulative and ‘obvious play’, or on the days a regular tries something obvious on me “Do you think I’d fall for that obvious fucking shit?!” Most manipulative plays are just that, rather obvious, at least to those of us who are thinking players. A good example of manipulative play is min raising or (tiny reraising) with AA/KK pre. You lower the cost for players in the blinds to see the flop (or the original raiser), hoping to manipulate them into getting married to their hand post flop against your over pair, or perhaps interpreting your pre flop min raise as weak and coming over the top. The problem is that many people don’t have anything besides AA/KK in their pre flop min raising/reraising range, so when you see it from them it becomes very obvious.
Deceptive play: Deceptive play is a way of describing a play that consists of making the same move with the majority or your entire range, making your hand very difficult to read. The major benefit of deceptive play is that it makes your hand much more difficult to read, but as a consequence it can sometimes discourage the action that you want. A good example of deceptive play is when it folds to you on the button with 13 BB’s and you shove your entire range of playable hands into the two blinds on your left. In order for this to be better than the manipulative play here though (which would be shoving hands that don’t want action and 2.5X’ing hands that want to get shoved on so you can snap call) you need the players on your left to be thinking or regular players. We’ll elaborate on that example a bit further in.

Basically, you want to use the manipulative play when appropriate to encourage the action you want against non thinking players, and use deceptive play against good/thinking ones who will see through your manipulative play. Manipulative play can be used both to encourage getting action on a hand and to discourage. Figuring out when to use which is a combination of hand reading, board reading, and being image and history conscious. Let’s look at some examples:

Example 1: Effective stacks 8,500. Blinds 100/200 with 25 ante 9 handed. You hold 8h8d on the button.
Preflop: Folds to MP2, MP2 raises to 550, folds to you on the button, you call on the button, both blinds fold.
Flop: Jc 8c 4d (Pot 1325)
MP2 bets 1000, you…

Many players would either flat here, or perhaps min raise. Some might raise 3X, some may even shove. Often though, people take the flat call or min raise option, hoping to keep the other player putting chips in the pot. Against a non thinking player you should take the route which you feel best manipulates that specific player to get a lot of chips in the pot, and whichever play that is depends on what kind of non thinking player you’re against. Many go with the min raise.

Against a thinking player you want to make the play that he expects you to make with the full range of hands that get a lot of chips in the middle, which is mostly draws and good jacks. If the thinking player perceives you as the type to shove your draws, then you should consider shoving your set. What you don’t want to do against a thinking player is alter your play solely based on the strength of your hand, since many have seen the same pattern before and know how to react to it.

Example 2: Your stack: 20,000. SB stack: 4800. BB stack: 5000. Blinds 200/400 with 50 ante. You hold QQ on the button.
Preflop: The action folds around to you…

Now, against non thinking players the optimal play here is to go with the manipulative play; make either a min raise or your standard open to like 2.5X (or whatever it may be.) This affords them the chance to resteal on you thinking they have fold equity, when in fact because you are aware of stack sizes that was never possible.

Against thinking players you need to just shove. This is because you would be shoving a huge range of hands on the button against these stacks, and they know that, and if you only make a nominal raise with you’re strongest hands they’re going to take note of that and you lose action from hands which would have called a shove but know to fold to your nominal raise.

Example 3: It may seem like every example of manipulative play needs to be done against a non thinking player, but there are in fact situations where using the manipulative play (especially if you are an unknown) can be better than the deceptive one.
Your stack: 10,000. HJ’s stack: 25,000. Blinds 300/600 with a 75 ante. You hold AdQc on the button. HJ is a good thinking regular.
Preflop: Folds to the HJ, HJ raises to 1600, CO folds, you…
Now, here’s a spot where against a good player the correct thing to do (particularly as an unknown) is to raise small, to something like 4000. This makes your hand look much bigger than it actually is and against some players will force folds from hands you’d really like to fold out (such as mid pairs and AQ, although AQ won’t fold that much.) It’s a useful play since against the hands that will never fold it’s effectively the same thing as shoving, but gives you one extra opportunity to take the chips in the pot without having to flip and be behind against some hands that will snap call a shove but occasionally fold to the scary looking raise.

As a rule, you should go with the deceptive play against anyone you consider to be a regular or good, and go with the manipulative play against players who seem bad or are totally unknown. If an unknown seems to be playing very well and thinking through his decisions, then opt for the deceptive play. However, be aware of situations where you can manipulate thinking players based on the tendencies they expect.

You should also give consideration to what site and stakes you’re playing on. On some sites way more players are ‘in the know’ and aware of the most obvious manipulative plays (such as Stars) whereas on sites with almost no regulars and are blocked to the US the manipulative plays work at a much higher frequency. Your choice in play should be different between a $50 freeze out and the $100 rebuys. Also, when it comes to playing unknowns in live poker you should pretty much always take the manipulative route, because well, unknown players in live tournaments rarely have a clue.

Hey guys,

My Around the World in 90 Days blog is nearly finished in it's writing so this one will get some more attention upcoming. As for the moment I did the 2+2 pokercast last week which can be heard here:

http://odeo.com/episodes/23243468-38-Pokercast-Episode-38-LIVE-from-the-APPT-in-Maccau-with-Tony-Dunst-aka-Bond-18

I come into the fray about 25 minutes into the fun. Had a great time and big thanks to Adam and Terrence for having me on.