There was a guy called Crash on another poker forum, who would only play for play money. A number of members would not take him seriously because they considered poker is played for real money not pretend money.

With play money, the site gives you some chips which have no value, then you play poker. The better players win more play chips, but nearly everyone ends up ahead because the play money is endless. If you lose you just get more play chips.

Some of the old time players have been making remarks about how sponsors’ money has changed the game pf poker. Devilfish said some young players would not be able to survive in the old days without sponsors’ money as they would soon go broke playing in that way, using their own money. Some of the “Late Night Poker” players have said they used to play with £2000 of their own cash, but now they are playing with sponsors putting up the cash.

With the amount of money being added to the game by sponsors, players don’t have to win at the table. Ever played in one of those play chip games? There are usually three or four all in straight away. If they lose they just enter another tourney, if they win they have a big stack. It’s all about the win. Similar in fact to the way a lot of kids play the game nowadays.

I have argued before that if you are not a good player then it pays to play the game like bingo. There is so much prize money around and so many players, the rewards for winning a big tourney are tremendous. It isn’t only the prize money for winning. If you win a big tourney there is the chance of receiving sponsors’ money too. You can be an overall loser at the poker table but still make a living at it. If you are a media friendly “character” too you will receive even more money. In fact the whole thing becomes a bit like a play money tournament. This is because of the high rewards for winning rather than just finishing in the money. Once you have a sponsor, they want you to finish in a high profile win. This means even more money. In the past, when players played with their own bankroll, there was the consideration of just finishing in the prize money. This still applies to the older less media friendly professionals I think. But sponsors’ money means a lot of over aggression and going for the win. If you are not playing with your own money there is no ROI to worry about. It’s different thinking altogether.

This isn’t the whole truth, it is merely an extra dimension that is now in the game. Sponsors’ money finds its way down to the less well known pros so everyone gains. But with a lot of people just going for the win, and some with nothing to lose, it almost turns the game and the type of play, into that of a play money tourney. This is maybe why long time pros now concentrate on cash games more seriously than tournaments. This has certainly been a tendency in the past, but is now perhaps becoming more true. The ones with more talent know they can earn a consistent living out of cash. The fame, title, and big money chasers go for the tournaments.

Size does matter – One of the most underrated skills is to size your bet correctly. It can seriously harm your chances if you get it wrong. Here’s an example. You are at a final table against some very good players. Blinds are 5000/10000 and you have an average stack of 250,000. You have JJ and raise to 30,000. You get called and the flop comes with an ace. If you follow up bet with 30,000 it is saying “I am weak,” and a good pro will pick up on this. It is better to check than do that.  This is an example from a situation I saw from 2 or 3 years ago in a televised tournament. You can bet small on the river which sometimes suggests strength, but if you are going to follow up bet on the flop you have to get it right. In the real life tournament, the pro sensed weakness and reraised even though he only had a pair of fives. He had position, he had skill, and he sensed weakness. The amateur passed. Betting pattern tells are, I believe, far more useful than body language tells.

Rules rules rules – Some of the rules really irritate me. They do vary to some extent depending on where you play, but these are the ones that make no sense to me. 

1. You cannot tell people what you’re hand is. Sure you can lie, but you cannot tell the truth. Totally ridiculous. Really you are not even supposed to discuss the hand you have at all. Why not let the players play their mind games? Sometimes the truth is a deadly weapon. Let the players use all the ability, deceit, and guile, at their disposal. Are they going to ban bluffing cos it’s not honest? Or maybe ban betting with a made hand because it’s honest? Mind games are a weapon. Let people use them. If other players can’t take it, they shouldn’t be sitting down at a poker table.

2. You cannot show your cards. Why not? This rule was brought in from, what I can remember, because one player who desperately wanted to get to a final table so bad, he turned over his aces, so another player wouldn’t suckout on him. They’re your cards and your chips. How can this be cheating? How can showing your cards be considered illegal and your hand is dead. It’s ridiculous. Rules made by chimps.

3. If blinds are 100/200 and you throw in a 500 or 1000 chip it’s considered a call. Why? If you throw in a 100 plus 500 chip it’s considered a raise. So if someone throws in a raise that is a raise, let it stand as a raise. This is not consistent with the rule that if you so much as put in one 50 chip when the call is 1,000,000 it is considered a call and the other 999,950 have to go in too. More rules made by chimps.

4. No Hollywood. This rule applies more in the UK than in the US where it is considered okay. This means getting up out of your chair to leave, before your opponent calls, or too much overracting (overracting was good enough to earn Laurence Olivier a big reputation, and plenty of honours). I hate this for the same reason as number 1. Players should be able to use any mind game at their disposal to fox their opponents. Rules have been relaxed a little over here with regards to this. Staff tend to use their discretion.   

5. You are not allowed to just call with the nuts. I saw this situation arise in a televised event where a player just called with the nuts so he could see what his opponent was playing. He got told off by “Mad” Marty Wilson who was in charge of the tournament. The caller correctly put his opponent on a total bluff who would not call the reraise, and therefore just flat called in order to both see the cards, and also to emabarrass his opponent. Fair enough, in my opinion. He has the best hand, he should have the right to see his opponent’s hand. He realised the hand would be mucked, so wanted the information, which could be valuable. He had earned that right to see his opponent’s hand.       

Sometimes players do the strangest of things – It’s great if you can put someone on a hand, but sometimes even the greatest struggle to do this, when other players just do not act in a normal way. It’s like the brain freezes and insanity or some sort of perverse behaviour takes over. Here’s an example. Blinds are 200/400 and the short stack is in the big blind with 2800. There’s a call in middle and the big blind checks. Flop comes A 4 6 rainbow. The big blind moves all in for the last 2400. Probably an ace, right? Although he should have been all in preflop. Or maybe one or two pair or straight draw. The middle position player calls and turns over A 6. Ouch. But the BB turns over…. TT! But he can’t possibly have a pair of tens. He can’t possibly flat call with his stack relative to those blinds then ship it with tens on that flop. But he did. For the record a ten came on 4th to make a house. Yeah I know, it was just like an internet hand. But his luck was short lived. A few minutes later he was all in with queens against AJ and two jacks hit. You cannot put someone on a hand if they do not play rationally. If players cannot work out what you are playing this could be considered a good thing. But if you play that irrationally, you will lose. I asked him why he did not move all in preflop with the tens. He really had no answer. Others at the table remarked how he quite often has a meltdown and gives it all away.