 Flop-Ology and Other Tales from Fifth Street
May 23
Chamblee, Georgia.
The thing that is the most vexxing about poker is that, without question, it is one of the few games that luck is the great equalizer. You can be the best players in the world and get beaten by a chump (Chris Moneymaker, Robert Vahrkoyni anyone??). In the words of Phil Hellmuth "If it wasn't for luck, I guess I'd win every time". Oh but Phil, my man, it's mostly luck isn't it?
That's why I am befuddled by all these books by great champions and better players that trick us into thinking there is a science or, to borrow from the most famous poker book of all, a system. In poker, as in life, it is truly, as my pappy says, better to be lucky than good.
To that end, I have been thinking about the randomness of cards and how certain cards and sequences occur more often than they should, not in a player's starting hand - as many books like to concentrate on- but on the flop. Through the course of play during a game, certain cards tend to appear on the flop more often than than the others.
In my weekly homegame, I like to call it "Flop-ology". It's a little tounge-in-cheek, but the more I thought about it, the more it seemed to make sense.
Since our games are low-limit, I can afford to toy around with the idea and play "creative" hands with little financial reprocussions. For instance, for 2 or three consecutive flops a J and a 2 have come up (it really does happen). So, if I get any of these rags in my hand I may be more apt to play these based on "flop-ology". One of the caveats is "flop-ology" cards can change through the course of a game.
I have had pretty good success trying this, but so much is dependent on how well you play against your opponents that there is no way it can be reliable.
I'm pretty sure there is a mathematical explanation for the trending of common cards in consectutive sampling that is far beyond my realm of understanding, and this whole "idea" may be an apparition in my mind. Truth be told, it could be a combination of me wanting to add another element to the game and the old "we only see what we want to see". Either way, its interesting to check out and its funny to see people move all in with a Q, 4 because the Queen has been a flop-ology card.
Hand of the night:
I am second in chips and get dealt Qc, 3c in the big blind, GC under the gun raises two times the big blind and there are three callers, essentially pricing me in (4-1 on my money). Flop hits Qh 10c, 5c. While alarms are going off in my head, I calmy check. GC bets the pot.
3 other players fold. I wait and then move all-in. I then proceed to do everything in my power to induce a call, figuring the worst two hands I could see is a better queen - like Ac, Qx - (in which case my flush draw is good), or a better flush draw (in which case my top pair was good). GC, who is third in chips, thinks long and hard -- I remark, "I probably only have J high" referring to a previous hand in which I outplayed someone to win a good-sized pot with J high -- and he finally makes the call. I turn over my Qc, 3c and he turns over.... wait for it... Ks, 9h.
What??????? 3h comes off on the turn and the brutal Kd on the river, crippling me. He sez: "I wanted to gamble". Somewhere in the back of my mind, I hear AG saying "He had a read".
I went on to double up with an A, 6 (flop-ology, catch the fever) and work my way back into near the chip leader.
Later I make two bad plays that doomed me: 1. I was messing around with an A high with junk on the board. I got re-raised and gave BC (a tight player and chip leader) credit for a big hand when he clearly didn't and then 2. on the very next hand NOT giving BC credit for a big hand (I flopped top pair with a J, 8 he had Q,Q) -- ending the tourney for me.
Exiting, I was rethinking the bad beat that essentially ended my tournament and tried to figure out how GC could put all his money in on a gutshot straight draw.
You know what Phil, your right. If it wasn't for luck, I guess I'd win every time.
 - farfel
|
- nutlow
