There can be little doubt that the biggest weapon in a poker player’s armoury is the ability to read hands. As David Sklansky puts it in his book, Theory of Poker, the gravest mistake in the game is to play differently from the way you would bet if you knew what the jackal on the other side of the table had: know your opponent’s hand and you can play perfectly. The theory also explains why commentators for TV poker are so smug – the under the table camera does their job for them.
The poker pundits have one of the easiest pay-days in television but it is not so easy for the player in the thick of the flop. The latter needs to employ scientific methods – logically eliminating likely hands – and, far more importantly, to be something of an artist and be able to dance around his opponent’s game.
This aspect of poker has inspired the creatives of film but they often make the final hand too dramatic. Take the 1965 film The Cincinnati Kid, starring Steve Mc Queen and boasting the deeply disturbing tag-line ‘He’d take on anyone, at anything, anytime……it was only a matter of who came first!’
The plot is simple – The Kid saunters into town attempting to take down ‘The Man’ in a high stakes game of Five-Card-Stud, but the upstart is handed a can of ass-whup and has to get out of dodge. No problem there.
However, he loses his money in a hand that would induce cardiac arrest – remember this is Five-Card Stud – he has a full house, Aces and tens; The Man has a straight flush. Poker writer Anthony Holden has calculated the odds of those cards occurring in the same hand as over 3 billion to 1; or, put another way, if you played for eight hours a day, five times a week, it would happen once every 443 years.
It was a wasted opportunity to represent the game in film and one that was repeated, although not to the same astronomical proportions, in 2006’s Casino Royale. Bond wins the final hand of the Hold ‘Em Tournament with a straight flush, beating not one, but two full houses.
It appears that film makers know that the appeal of poker is due to the player’s knowledge of their opponent but cannot resist the allure of a huge hand that has nothing to do with anyone’s ability at the game. In fact, those massive showdowns do poker a disservice as it simply comes down to a lottery.
Rounders, scripted by keen poker players David Levien and Brian Koppelman and starring Matt Damon, is one of the only movies to depict the importance of hand-reading. Damon’s opponent, Teddy KGB, dressed in a handy communist-era red tracksuit and played by John Malkovich, who appears to be suffering from excess catarrh, eats Oreo cookies at the table.
Occasionally, in between bets, he’ll break a biscuit: Damon spots that when the Russian has a winning hand, he proceeds to chomp away but when he is bluffing, his sugar levels don’t receive a bite-sized boost. This ‘read’ enables the plucky youngster to avoid the fate of The Cincinnati Kid and it ends with him following the yellow-cabbed road to the comforting safety and stability of Las Vegas.
Hats off to the script.
It is not perfect but it frequently shows the audience exactly why Damon is good at the game and even has the balls to not reveal Teddy’s KGB final hand: it is not relevant.
However, for the ultimate example of the skill of hand-reading, we need to turn to a real pro, the late Stuart Ungar.
In 1990, he challenged the year’s WSOP winner, Mansour Matloubi, to a $50k, NL freeze-out. After forty-five minutes’ play, the champ called Unger with 45 offsuit and the flop gave 3-3-7. Stu bet $6k and got a call. The turn saw K and both players checked. The river was a Q.
Mansour sensed weakness and bet $32k, all-in.
It was a good read.
Ungar looked right through his opponent and said ‘You have 4-5 or 5-6. I call with this.’
He flipped 10-9.
He couldn’t even beat jack-high but he called without hesitation because he knew he was right.
He won with ten-high.
He played the hand perfectly.
The poker pundits have one of the easiest pay-days in television but it is not so easy for the player in the thick of the flop. The latter needs to employ scientific methods – logically eliminating likely hands – and, far more importantly, to be something of an artist and be able to dance around his opponent’s game.
This aspect of poker has inspired the creatives of film but they often make the final hand too dramatic. Take the 1965 film The Cincinnati Kid, starring Steve Mc Queen and boasting the deeply disturbing tag-line ‘He’d take on anyone, at anything, anytime……it was only a matter of who came first!’
The plot is simple – The Kid saunters into town attempting to take down ‘The Man’ in a high stakes game of Five-Card-Stud, but the upstart is handed a can of ass-whup and has to get out of dodge. No problem there.
However, he loses his money in a hand that would induce cardiac arrest – remember this is Five-Card Stud – he has a full house, Aces and tens; The Man has a straight flush. Poker writer Anthony Holden has calculated the odds of those cards occurring in the same hand as over 3 billion to 1; or, put another way, if you played for eight hours a day, five times a week, it would happen once every 443 years.
It was a wasted opportunity to represent the game in film and one that was repeated, although not to the same astronomical proportions, in 2006’s Casino Royale. Bond wins the final hand of the Hold ‘Em Tournament with a straight flush, beating not one, but two full houses.
It appears that film makers know that the appeal of poker is due to the player’s knowledge of their opponent but cannot resist the allure of a huge hand that has nothing to do with anyone’s ability at the game. In fact, those massive showdowns do poker a disservice as it simply comes down to a lottery.
Rounders, scripted by keen poker players David Levien and Brian Koppelman and starring Matt Damon, is one of the only movies to depict the importance of hand-reading. Damon’s opponent, Teddy KGB, dressed in a handy communist-era red tracksuit and played by John Malkovich, who appears to be suffering from excess catarrh, eats Oreo cookies at the table.
Occasionally, in between bets, he’ll break a biscuit: Damon spots that when the Russian has a winning hand, he proceeds to chomp away but when he is bluffing, his sugar levels don’t receive a bite-sized boost. This ‘read’ enables the plucky youngster to avoid the fate of The Cincinnati Kid and it ends with him following the yellow-cabbed road to the comforting safety and stability of Las Vegas.
Hats off to the script.
It is not perfect but it frequently shows the audience exactly why Damon is good at the game and even has the balls to not reveal Teddy’s KGB final hand: it is not relevant.
However, for the ultimate example of the skill of hand-reading, we need to turn to a real pro, the late Stuart Ungar.
In 1990, he challenged the year’s WSOP winner, Mansour Matloubi, to a $50k, NL freeze-out. After forty-five minutes’ play, the champ called Unger with 45 offsuit and the flop gave 3-3-7. Stu bet $6k and got a call. The turn saw K and both players checked. The river was a Q.
Mansour sensed weakness and bet $32k, all-in.
It was a good read.
Ungar looked right through his opponent and said ‘You have 4-5 or 5-6. I call with this.’
He flipped 10-9.
He couldn’t even beat jack-high but he called without hesitation because he knew he was right.
He won with ten-high.
He played the hand perfectly.
No comments:
Post a Comment