The Value of Studying Poker part two

Conventional poker wisdom tells us that we should avoid confrontations with other big stacks because it is they that can bust us, even top pros swear by this. But the other big stack will also fear a confrontation as well. You do not have to fight to the death with them but just make them think that you are prepared to, it is the classic game of chicken but played out in poker games.

This game has been played for very high stakes in the past with events like the Cuban Missile Crisis (remember that game theory says that they are connected because everything in the universe is). Did the Soviet Premier baulk at the thought of going up against another big stack in the United States, no he didn’t and neither did Kennedy when he stood up to him.

But Kennedy was a better poker player than the Russians and they backed down because of the way that they perceived that the Americans would go all the way if they had to. The Russians tried to be cheeky and aggressive and were steal raising the Americans big blind thinking that they would be afraid to go up against another big stack.

Taking advice from the so called experts in poker, they would have advised Kennedy to back down because going up against another big stack was just too dangerous. But politics like poker is not played out in one instance but is a never ending process. If the Russians were to find out that the Americans would never go up against a big stack then this would just encourage them to attack and take little pieces from the Americans in future.

If another big poker stack has signaled their intention to attack you then it is in your own best interests to figure out an acceptable defence that will tell them that you mean business without it leading to world war 3 or in this case the total decimation of your stack. The only time that it may be in your interests to not go up against a big stack is if you are the one who will be starting the aggression. Just like in politics, other poker players will know when you are being out of line.

So should we avoid another big stack when it is merely poker chips and money that is at stake when players in a game like this have had a potential nuclear conflict as the stakes? Once we make the connection then we understand that the conventional thought of avoiding big stacks is blatantly wrong just like much of the perceived wisdom in poker books is wrong. It is wrong because much of it fails to make this game theory connection with other fields.

Let’s say that you have studied poker so well and worked so hard on your game that you are now the poker equivalent of Manchester United (keep with me here). Would Alex Ferguson send his team out into a third round FA Cup tie at home to Grimsby Town with a game plan of sitting back and hitting Grimsby on the counter attack?

Of course he wouldn’t and the reasons that he wouldn’t are obvious. Their overwhelming superiority over the opposition means that this is not the optimal strategy. Better to go at them and be 3-0 up with twenty minutes to go and then rest players for the next match. Despite the fact that Ferguson knows nothing about the Grimsby players he knows their relative ability because he is aware of what league they are in.

But change the opposition to a mid week Champions League clash against Barcelona and he is not going to play the same gung ho style because he knows that not only will it not succeed but it could seriously backfire on them against opposition that are their equals.

Carl “The Dean” Sampson
Come and see the bwin poker blog…. packed full of news and information on the world of poker.

Popularity: 1% [?]