Vanessa Rousso Blog

The poker table is the most delicate and dangerous of double edged swords. It is both a battlefield that can rip you apart as well as a pedestal that can fulfill your wildest dreams and expectations. When you play this game-day in and day out-it is easy to get mired in the moment.

Sometimes we all just get caught up.in work, in a problem, in others, in a venture, and in our own lives. We forget to put it all into perspective. We forget to zoom out from the immediate and latch on to the perpetual.

I tried to do just that (zoom out) over the last few hours and all that came to mind was the following email I received about a week ago:

“Tomorrow (Thursday), Mitch, a teenager from Ohio will be at The Rio. His wish [through the make a wish foundation] is to play poker with world champions. If any of you are available it would be greatly appreciated if you would come by the suite and play with Mitch, or pop in to say hello if you are on a time constraint.If you plan to play in any of the events tomorrow, let us know which one and we will make sure there is food waiting for you on the dinner break. This way you can eat and still put a smile on Mitch’s face. If you aren’t playing and have time to spend it will really make him happy to play some tournament style poker.Mitch would also like to meet/play with Doyle, Chan and Ivey, if any of you are able to bring them along, or any other players, that would be great…”

Unfortunately I wasn’t able to go meet Mitch that night because I had to meet with someone who came from out of town to meet with me.but wow did that email ever put things into focus. I have so much to learn. I am going to try to keep things in perspective from here on out. The last few days have been emotional and stressful and I am glad I took a moment to reflect on what is important and to replace anger with forgiveness.

Bad beats and table conflicts are so very petty in the grand scheme of things. I am so thankful and blessed that those are my biggest problems.

Comment

Here is another article I wrote a while back about slowplaying aces:

Don’t Slow Play Aces!
FACT or FOLKLORE?
By: Vanessa Rousso

As children, we were all warned by some well-meaning individual that we shouldn’t scrunch our faces into eyes-rolled-back, tongue-out, noses-flared expressions or they might stay that way forever-and this was generally accepted, one child telling the next, and so on, until adage became truth for kids across playgrounds everywhere. I can’t help but feel like one of those children on the playground (who secretly suspects that her face won’t stick in the scary-monster expression, but who is too scared to test it out) every time some well-informed, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed young player at the table scoffs the now well-known phrase: “Well, he shouldn’t have slow played those aces!” Is it true? Is slow playing aces really so bad after all?

Before the recent surge in poker’s popularity (and the subsequent growth in poker expertise of the average player at a table), players generally played poker for the thrill and excitement of the game. Players wanted to see flops, turns, and rivers-they sought the rush of hitting that two-outer with one card to come, they wanted to gamble! On the other hand, professionals were in the game to make money over time. Thus, they encountered a problem when they looked down to see a pair of aces as their starting hand: How should pocket aces best be played against these casual thrill-seeking players? Eventually, one thing became clear: slow-playing (feigning weakness by not raising or otherwise representing strength pre-flop) could be disastrous.

Playing aces against opponents (especially the blinds) who are willing to risk chips for excitement by staying in a hand until the river in an attempt to get lucky, is scary for even the most seasoned of pros. This is rooted in their knowledge that (1) aces are difficult to fold with an unthreatening flop (say, for instance a flop of 2s, 5h, qc), (2) players playing any two cards and refusing to fold until the end would sometimes catch hands that “cracked” aces, and (3) it would be difficult to know when these players had successfully “cracked” the aces and when they had not, costing the professional player money over time.

Hence, the development of the “optimal” strategy for those playing aces: raise, and raise enough pre-flop to limit your opponents to those holding predictable hands (two face cards or a pair). This strategy is rooted in the idea that if you have information about the type or strength of the starting hand of your opponent, then it is easier to ascertain how best to play the flop (milk the player, take it down, or get away from the hand altogether). More information is always better than no information, so raising with aces in order to increase the likelihood that your opponents will have one of a predictable array of hands is what most successful pros developed as their strategy for playing pocket aces. And it was these players who then went on to win tournaments, write books, and spread the word about the proper way to play. Now, with the popularity of poker and the wide availability of poker how-to guides, the average player at the table is now well aware of the risks of slow playing aces (or even kings), especially in late position (due to the risk of playing the blinds who could be holding any random starting hand).

I have written about the changing nature of optimal play over time. To recall, I concluded that once you figure out ‘optimal play,’ it has already begun to change. In fact, it is precisely because you (and others) have caught on that what was once optimal no longer is. It is important to remember that not only are most players not slow-playing aces (or kings), but that almost everyone at the tables KNOWS THIS. This often-overlooked detail is very valuable to the enterprising player. Take the following:

In the big blind, faced with one or more “late position” (the last few players to act in a round of betting) “limpers,” (players who just call the big blind and do not raise), an “optimizing” player knows that these players are unlikely to be playing with very strong hands. This player then uses this knowledge to steal the pot pre-flop by putting in a big raise from the blinds.

Let us now take it even one step further. What if you knew that you faced one such enterprising player in the big blind, and you held aces in late position? I encountered exactly this scenario at the 2006 World Poker Tour Championships (the $25,000 buy-in tournament held at the Bellagio every April):

I held aces one off of the dealer button and it folded around to me. The big blind is a well-known pro notorious for raising in the blinds to profit by stealing the pot from weak late position players. This particular player has written about the importance of punishing late position weakness when you are in the blind, he has a reputation of doing so, and he had already put in several significant raises in that position while I was at his table. Therefore, I felt that if I limped there would be a strong likelihood that he would raise. There was also a chance that either the button or the small blind would raise. Even if no one put in a raise, I would prefer to play the flop with a willingness to get away form the hand if it appeared I was beaten rather than merely steal the blinds which were inconsequential at this point of the tournament. So, I limped. The button limped. The small blind called. The pro in the big blind automatically raised his standard ‘punish weakness raise’ of eight times the big blind. I call and the other two players fold. On the flop the well-known pro checked and folded to my bet.

The important point to this story is that by slow-playing aces I got an extra bet from the button’s call, a half bet from the small blind’s call, and an additional seven bets from the big blind’s raise. By smooth-calling the big blind’s raise, I also earn the potential that the big blind would lead out with a continuation bet on the flop. Thus, playing my aces in this way turned out to be much more profitable than a standard raise would have likely been (with everyone folding and me just taking down the blinds). Some important prerequisites to making a play such as that above are outlined as follows:

1. Only do so against experienced opponents
2. Prefer to do so against players who have an exhibited tendency to punish late position weakness
3. Only use this move as part of a diversified strategy, sparingly, and in order to change gears
4. Do not use this move if you have already done so at this table or against the opponents in the hand
5. Try to cultivate a loose passive image prior to slow-playing the aces. Limp a few times pre flop and draw attention to yourself when you fold to a raise-exhibiting a strong willingness to lay down a hand to a raise pre flop.

Ultimately, although it might be true that slow-playing aces is generally not a recommended strategy, slow-playing must not be blindly disregarded as unprofitable. In fact, under certain situations, slow-playing aces can be the most profitable of strategies. So, maybe it is time to go out on a limb and test out this and other poker-adages that have become widely accepted as truth in the playgrounds that are poker rooms across the world-and much like the rebellious child who holds that scary-monster, eyes-rolled-back, tongue-out, noses-flared expression for a minute or two, we might discover that it won’t stick after all.

Comment

So here is a recap of the last week:

WSOP Event #1 5K Mixed NL/Limit Holdem: As I posted earlier, I made day two of this event. Unfortunately, top 45 paid and I went out in the eighties somewhere with pocket tens against pocket kings all in pre flop (cold deck!!). I was really disappointed with that loss-especially because making day 2 of event #1 caused me to miss out on playing event #3 (a NL Holdem event). So, I spent the rest of that day catching up on rest and trying to get in the right mind-frame for playing the next day.

Event #4 1.5K PL Holdem: What a frustrating day!!! I was seated to Freddy Deeb’s left and was on my way to building a huge stack in the second level. I had aces in the big blind early and I slowplaed them when someone raised from early position, got one caller in mid position, and it folded to me in the big blind (where I just called to disguise my hand). The flop was perfect: j 6 5 rainbow. I check and the original raiser puts in a continuation bet of 75% of the pot. The original caller waits a long time and then pushes all in. I call expecting him to have AJ and the pre flop raiser folds his hand. The guy who pushed all in actually only had pocket tens.luckily my aces held up and I was on my way with a big stack jump early on. That is, until I got pocket fives all in with a set (three of a kind) on a flop of 2 5 10 against Freddy’s pocket eights. He needs one of the two remaining eights to win-making me a monstrous 92% favorite to be a huge chip leader in the tournament at that point. Unfortunately, the eight comes on the turn and I go out early on what was a very very frustrating bad beat.

I missed some WSOP events over the next days to go to the LA premiere of Ocean’s 13 (I posted about that earlier). I had a total blast!! Here are some pictures.

Me and Isabelle Mercier

Me and Isabelle on the Red Carpet

Isabelle and one the Pokerstars ticket winners

Brad, he’s right there!

George…sigh…

Oh yea, I also tried Bikram Yoga for the first time this week (yoga in 108 degree room!). It was surprisingly fun and quite a good workout.thanks to Bill Chen for dragging me along!

In the Ladies Event yesterday I was playing on the “Queen of Hearts” team for charity along with JJ, Isabelle, Clonie, Jennicide, Tilly, and several other female bigwigs and pros. We had a dinner party the night before at Bradley Ogden at Caesars-which has the best chicken of all time I might add-and I got to know some of the people from the PPA (Poker Players Alliance). For those who are interested in helping the cause of legalizing/regulating online poker, you should check out the PPA or their website. Anyhow, I was an early leader in the ladies event.only to then get hit with the worst string of bad beats in my poker tournament playing history. I have not been running well to say the least.but, alas, I will spare you all the bad beats.

Finally, the 5K limit event which started yesterday afternoon was yet another close call for me. I made it deep into day two (which was today)..bubbling just out of the money (in 40th place, 27 pay). Pocket queens got cracked TWICE in a ROW and I had to face yet another let down. I think (and hope) things will soon turn around-my game is on, the cards just have to cooperate a lil more. I keep reminding myself this is a long run game and everything will even out if I keep making correct decisions.

Wish me luck.if I get another set over set beat this week (I’ve had three so far) I might go nuts!!

Best, Vanessa

Comment

A few posts back I posted the first half of an article on the changing nature of optimal play in poker with a promise to post the remainder soon…so, here it is, enjoy!

I think any poker player who has spent time at the tables over the last few years will agree that most players are by and large playing far fewer hands than they used to:

Type of Player: THEN vs. NOW
1. “AVERAGE” PLAYER: THEN (LOOSE: Played Most Hole Cards) vs. NOW (TIGHTER: Waits For More Premium Hole Cards)
2. “OPTIMIZING” PLAYER: THEN (TIGHTER: Waited For More Premium Hole Cards) vs. NOW: (Exploits the Tight Players She Plays (and is, therefore, generally not so tight))

Over the last few years, the character of the ‘average’ player has changed dramatically from loose and willing to play “any two cards,” to tight and more selective about starting hand requirements. Thus, the ‘optimizing player’ who intends to keep herself ahead of the curve will anticipate this and other changes in the general field and adjust her play accordingly.

Once we accept the premise that the predominate view of ‘optimal play’ is not only outdated but ever-changing, we can test the commonly accepted principles of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ play that have emerged in the new poker era. Some of the latest trends, open to challenge by those intending to exploit the predictable nature of the general field they will encounter, include the following (among many others):

1. Rarely, if ever, “slow-play” monster hands (like pocket aces)-especially out of position
2. Less premium hands, like “suited connectors,” can be played in “late position”
3. Avoid making calls without “pot odds,” or at the very least, “implied odds”
4. Avoid allowing other players to draw for additional cards “for free”-especially when there is a draw to a better hand than yours on the board (such as a straight or a flush draw)

This is not to imply that these theories, and the others that have emerged along with them, are without merit. Much to the contrary, they teach several important lessons about how to play profitably. Nonetheless, to blindly follow these blanket recommendations-especially when this is what almost everyone else is doing-is not only unwise, but expensive. Rather, in the face of a remarkably uniform field of competition, players should hypothesize about what the ‘new optimal’ has become.

Poker is changing, and the good players will change along with it. Remember, once you figure out ‘optimal play,’ it has already begun to change. In fact, it is precisely because you (and others) have caught on that what was once optimal no longer is. Perhaps it is this elusive nature of perfect poker play that keeps all of us chasing what always remains just slightly out of reach.

Comment

What a day! As expected, thousands showed up over the past few days to sign for the various WSOP events beginning this week. What a mad house! People everywhere, three-hour lines for registration, and twenty minute lines for the men’s restroom (from what I hear, lol)! Not to mention the WSOP tried some new playing cards with very confusing (not to mention small) print-before long players were up in arms about the cards, with Mike “The Mouth” Matusow leading the raucous. Eventually, they switched out all of the decks and went back to plain old fashioned playing cards. It never ceases to amaze me how people persist on re-inventing the wheel.the wheel works folks, let it be!

Along the way I saw plenty of unusual sights-the most notable of which was Phil Hellmuth getting a massage ON THE FLOOR at the Rio. Here is a pic:

Alright, on to the tournament. Here is a pic of me at my first table:

I was pretty card dead for the first three hours or so-managing to plug along using position and by playing the other players (rather than my own cards). Eventually I began to get more playable hands and I gradually elevated m chip stack throughout the day-consistently managing to remain ahead of chip average. I was really excited late last night when it looked like Chad and I would finally make a day two together (we haven’t made a day two together since we met at the WPT Championships on day two in 2006). Unfortunately, he busted with only ten or so minutes to go in the day. I made it with 53,500 in chips, which puts me right at chip average. There are 95 players remaining and 45 will make the money (out of 451 initial entrants).

Every break I took notes about key hands that I will post when the tournament is over (which hopefully won’t be until after tomorrow’s final table for me!). So, in the meantime, keep up on bluff magazine’s tournament updates page. The action starts at 2pm pacific time and we will play down to the final table of nine players. Wish me luck!

Best, Vanessa

Comment

It is finally here! The WSOP begins today and I am totally psyched!

I was surprised at how long it took to register last night when I went…I hope they get that system in line so that those sort of delays don’t become regular. But, with that behind me, everything else looks good and I hope to tear it up today.

I am bringing my camera and voice recorder to the tournament and I will post a nightly recap with pictures, event descriptions, and hands from the day. Wish me luck!

Comment

I’m off in a few hours for a quick trip to the east coast before the WSOP begins on Friday. I will be meeting with some producers about a potential TV opportunity, some publishers about the book on game theory that I am putting together, as well as spending some time with my friend and manager Eric Brewstein (who is based out of Philly). Eric recently started No Limit Management and he is just now getting the site up www.nolimitmanagement.com (feel free to give him feedback on the site, I am sure he’d appreciate it…u can email him directly through the website). Also, looks like he just signed some new big name players, so look for updates about that soon. Finally, during my down time in New York, I’m excited about doing some damage to my wallet with some badly needed clothes shopping!

So, since I prolly won’t be able to write for a few days, I’ll leave you guys with some food for thought that I wrote a while back for a small publication (no longer available online) about the changing nature of optimal play in poker:

The Morphing Nature of “Optimal Play” in Poker

With the proliferation of poker strategy books and the popularization of poker-oriented television entertainment, the last few years have witnessed a dramatic shift in both quantity and caliber of poker players. Not only are more players playing, but more players are playing well. As a result, the general view is no longer that poker is solely a game of chance. Rather, the emerging consensus is that poker has definite strategic elements that reward skillful play.

As more and more players seek to become ‘in the know’ regarding poker strategy, they adopt the approaches of well-regarded gurus such as Sklansky, Harrington, and Caro. However, as progressively more players draw from this limited (and arguably similar) collection of guides, the range of tactics that a player can expect to encounter in her foes becomes increasingly predictable. Indeed, the average player seems to be gravitating towards what she perceives-and has been told in the literature and on television-to be ‘optimal play.’ However, optimal play does not come to be, nor does it persist, in a vacuum. To the contrary, tactics are only deemed optimal-or profit maximizing-on the basis of the opponent devices they are likely to meet in competition. Moreover, the strategies espoused by noted experts are those that they devised at a moment very different from the current state of poker affairs-notably, a time when players they encountered were, for the most part, ignorant to the tactical aspects of the game. Thus, as the nature and makeup of the general field of poker changes, so too does truly optimal play. Ultimately, as the opponents that a player is apt to come across in competition converge around the strategies propagated in the media, what was once ‘optimal,’ might now be out-of-date.

If you were competing in a rock-paper-scissors tournament, and you knew that a majority of the players would throw ‘rock’ every time, would you be better off with this knowledge? Certainly, if you were going to optimize your play, you would take this information and utilize it to develop your own best strategy. Ideally, you would come to the conclusion that you should throw ‘paper’ (since it beats ‘rock’) in order to maximize your likelihood of a victory. Given the choice, would you prefer to play in this hypothetical contest with the knowledge described above, or without any indication of what potential players might intend to do? A few years ago, poker was a lot like the latter situation: opponents’ likely strategies were essentially random. Yet poker has evolved significantly from this state of affairs. Now, players model their play after the ‘expert’ strategies available to them-and that players intend to act in accordance with these perceived ‘optimal’ plays is the equivalent of knowing that competitors in our hypothetical competition are likely to throw ‘rock.’

So, how has ‘optimal play’ evolved? I will post more along these lines next time.for now, I’m off to the Big Apple!

Comment

I just got great news from Pokerstars (my sponsor)…looks like they are sending me and some of their other pros to the Ocean’s 13 Premiere in Hollywood!

They are sending us to host the winners of a PokerStars tournament dedicated to raising money for a SaveDarfur.org charity.

The winners won their tickets to the premiere in a 10$ rebuy tournament this past Sunday. So, congrats to the qualifiers! And I will see you all on the red carpet on June 5th!

More info on the Pokerstars/Ocean’s 13 charity initiative here:http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/tournaments/oceans/

I play under the handle LadyMaverick on Pokerstars, so look for me online!

Comment

The ‘RL’ Ratio, Position, and Pre-Flop Play

I was talking strategy with a friend the other day when I stumbled on something that I think is relatively new as far as well-defined pre-flop poker strategies go.

A lot of attention is put on what cards to play before the flop in various positions, but not much discussion has been had regarding how to play those hands in various positions.

Optimal strategy in poker rarely consists of one uniform recommended move per defined situation. This is for obvious reasons-if I ALWAYS zig when you zag, I become predictable. And in a game of incomplete information such as poker, predictability is a severe downfall. When you become predictable, you allow your opponents to eliminate risk in devising their optimal plays when responding to your informational cues.

So, in poker and other games like it, optimal strategies are often mixed strategies described in terms of ratios. For instance, in reference to some hypothetical situation, you might hear a pro say, “you should bluff half the time and check half the time.” Well, in mixed strategy terms, the pro in our example is recommending a mixed strategy of 1 Bluff for every 1 Check over the long run. We express this as a ratio: Optimal Strategy=[1Bluff:1Check].

Now, when it comes to pre-flop play, a player who has decided that his hole cards meet the minimum standards to become playable, he rarely ever ALWAYS plays the hand the same way-or at least, he ought not to! Rather, if he will be the first player to enter the pot, he will alternate between ‘limping’ (just calling the big blind) into the pot and coming in for a raise.

You will find that most players favor one strategy or the other depending on their overall table image. Most loose/passive players will favor entering the pot with a limp (often as much as 80% of the time) to create action while tight/aggressive players will tend to err (a similar 80% of the time) on the side of entering with a raise. The particular percentages discussed in this example are not the point-rather, these merely serve as a foundation from which to begin to understand the concept of mixed pre-flop strategies.

In our example, the preferences for our two hypothetical players can be expressed in mixed strategy terms as follows: Loose/Passive Strategy=[1Raise:4Limps], Tight/Aggressive Strategy=[4Raises:1Limp]. How did we get these numbers? Well, if a player chooses one move 80% of the time and another move 20% of the time, then he has a 4:1 ratio in favor of the strategy he chooses more often.

At this point, I am sure most readers will be wondering how this can help them when they play. Once you understand the concept of mixed strategies, there is an abundance of discussion that can be had about when and how to change up your particular mix.

For now, I will conclude with one of the simplest ways in which a player should change their Raise:Limp pre-flop ratio (their ‘RL Ratio’) depending upon position.

A PLAYER’S RL RATIO SHOULD INCREASE WITH LATER POSITION!

That is, as a player finds himself deciding to enter a pot in later position before the flop, he should increasingly favor a Raise over a Limp as his favored method of play. This is for multiple reasons:
1. In later position, the probability of taking down the pot before the flop is increased as there are less players behind to worry about.
2. In later position, a player is likely to be last to act on future betting streets should he get called. Since most hands will miss most flops most of the time, the advantage of acting last is ENORMOUS. Oftentimes, players who raise pre-flop in late position and get called by the small or big blind will be able to take down the pot on the flop with just one continuation bet. So, since later position increases the likelihood of taking down the pot should you see the flop, why not make the other players invest more to play that flop before the flop? In doing this, you increase the size of the pots you play in position relative to the size of pots you will play out of position.
3. Conversely, it is more difficult to win a pot out of position. Therefore, if you decide to play a hand up front, you might as well do as much as you can to keep the pot small (decreasing the cost to you over time of playing hands out of position). As a result, a limp is favored more often from early position than from late position.

However, this is not to say that a limp should be favored more often than a raise in early position. Much to the contrary, I believe in an aggressive strategy which always favors showing strength before the flop most of the time. So, let me clarify: I like an RL Ratio of 5:1 in late position. That means that if it folds to me and I am in the cutoff or on the button with a playable hand, then I will Raise 5 times for every 1 time that I limp (in the interest of maintaining an unpredictable style). However, if I decide to play under the gun in early position, I prefer an RL Ratio of 3:2-raising three times for every two times I limp. Notice that I still raise more often than I limp, even in early position. However, I limp considerably more in early position for the reasons discussed above.

I hope you enjoyed this post.this is my first attempt to talk strategy in this blog, so any and all constructive feedback is welcome.

All the best,

Vanessa

Comment

Remember what it felt like in middle school on the last day when you broke for summer? Well, that’s me. At twenty-four. Sad, I know. I’m out for the summer and the WSOP is on the horizon! I am excited to be able to once again focus entirely on the game that I love.

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Okay, got that out of the way. First and foremost, thanks to all the people out there who sent me nice comments on MySpace (www.myspace.com/pokerness) after watching my spot on CNBC with Donnie Deutsch on the Big Idea. A lot of you wanted to know more about game theory and poker and where you could find out about the clinic I will be teaching on the subject this summer. So, here is a link to a news article about the clinic itself:

http://www.bluffmagazine.com/pokernews/newsArticle.asp?newsID=1101727

If this doesn’t answer all your questions, and you want to know more, feel free to email me on MySpace or comment here and I will respond ASAP. Also, I wrote a few articles for a British Magazine on Game Theory and Poker which have yet to be published.but, as soon as they are I will post links.

Also, I gotta comment on NBC After Dark. As many of you know, I was on this week’s series. If you watched all week, it might have appeared to you that I was a lil overly talkative-okay, I wouldn’t shut up-during the first episode. In my humble defense, I wanna let you all know that I was cooped up at home for two weeks before that segment filmed last December and I was in major need of some social mixin it up.but as you prolly noticed, I settled back into my normal self within the next few episodes. There’s really nothing like watching yourself be a total goofball with the knowledge that hundreds of thousands-if not millions-of others are there to soak it all in. Ahhh, lol, oh well.I always say that if you can’t laugh at yourself, you are takin things far too seriously. I’m not perfect, nobody is-and quite frankly that’s what makes life interesting. So, I guess what I am trying to say is: if you would all delete episode one from your TIVOs I really wouldn’t hold it against you. :p

Finally, I hope you all had a chance to watch Chad on NBC at the heads up championship vs. Paul Wasicka this Sunday. Chad wasn’t able to get the win, but I am really proud of his 2nd place finish over such a difficult field. I also would like to congratulate Paul-he is an outstanding player whose results speak for themselves, and he is also a great guy in general. Congrats Paul!

Talk to you all soon,
Vanessa

Comment