For unknown reasons, the forum has a rash of of bogus new members lately. I assume their purpose is bad, since they are not just joining for fun, and they are not doing it for the poker discussion. I have deleted some of them, but I am concerned may delete a real new member. I am about to become more aggressive in deleting these New Members, who have what appears to be computer generated names and strange e-mails. Our admin has added a verify step to membership, he tells me, but these members pop up at a rate of 4-5 a day anyway.

So unless I recognize you, or you have a meaningful user name, I will be deleting the new users pretty aggressively (as is my nature). If you are a real user, the easiest thing is to post something, or drop me a line and tell me you are real. Otherwise, I may easily delete you, which is exactly what I do not want to do.

So if I delete a real person with an interest in my forum, I’m sorry. Write to me via the contact page, and I will have you reinstated right away.

For those of you looking for my column in the latest issue of CardPlayer, it is not there. It is the one with the Caribbean Poker Adventure on the cover (Volume 20, Issue 4). I was unable to submit a column due to illness. I have been submitting columns since then, so I will be in subsequent issues.

Yesterday’s session was interesting, and it brought up a point I thought worth mentioning. I went to Bellagio to play my normal $30-$60 game. I was seated eventually and playing for 45 minutes or so when a big guy in a suit sat down in the big blind, This was a wonderful game, and up to that point, fairly passive. I thought the game had excellent profit potential.

On this hand, his first, all fold to to a tight pro in the cutoff. She raised, the button folded and Suit four-bet. More action ensued and Suit eventually won the hand, showing down Q-4 offsuit. This was interesting, but he suddenly started racking up his chips. He did not seem the hit and run type, and when someone asked him where he was going, he told them they had just called him for his game.

I tossed the next hand and quietly inquired of the floor people where he was headed. When they told me $60-$120, I got myself on that list. When they called me to the game 20 or so minutes later, I went and looked at it. There was a killer main game with four of the cardroom’s toughest professionals, but the must move looked wonderful, with one tight pro, Mr. Suit, and some total strangers (generally a very good sign in high limit games). I took the game and it was wonderful, with lots of people disrespecting raises and 4-5 way action on most flops in a 9-handed game.

I have not played that much $60-$120 lately because I have stamina issues, there are many good players generally there, and the $30-$60 games have been so good. But it helps to have an open mind, especially when it was a sure thng that a guy willing to put four bets in on a Q-4out of position was going to be there.

I am not the first person to mention this, but keep an open mind when you get to a cardroom. Do not just sign up for your primary game and lump down into it. Look at the other gamer at your limit and other games that you can play at limit you can tolerate. It may be that playing a second-best game, or just playing tightly in a higher limit game to avoid swings may still be a more profitable opportunity for you.

My friend Roy Cooke wrote about a time when he passed by an Omaha/8 game that was extremely weak. Roy is not that good an Omaha player, but he was way better then the guys who were playing, so he jumped in and did well. It could easily be that a game at a higher limit, or even a lower limit, or a different game, may be the best spot for you on a given day. Look for it.

I am resuming lessons on a somewhat curtailed schedule (no more than one hour per lesson, right now only two per week), though I hope to ramp that up a bit. I am starting with people I had scheduled and cancelled previously, so I doubt if I will get to new students for about 3-4 weeks.

Let’s talk a bit about second best hands. Poker authors like to talk about best hands, but second best hands are of great interest to poker players. Here are some thoughts on the subject:

In No Limit, second best hands are absolutely critical. In fact, you can say that NL is a game of second best hands. If you accept the premise that the most important hands in NL are the ones in which all of the money of two players get into the center, then most of your time at the NL table will be spent a) waiting for a best hand in which someone will have a second best hand they wish to bet or call all of their chips on, b) developing your image such that people will be willing to believe their second best hand may be best, and c) avoiding being a victim of “a.”

In short-stack NL, this premise is incorrect, since you are simply waiting for a good hand and trying to shove your chips in because you rate to have the best of it. In deep stack NL, avoiding making second best hands is critical, and keeping the pot small with potential second best hands like top-pair-top-kicker and overpairs is so important. It is OK to lose money with these hands when you must, but not OK to lose your (deep) stack.

Even in limit, to make real money on a hand, you have to find someone who will pay you off. Obviously because of the pot odds, this is more likely than in NL. One of the reasons to raise preflop with a hand like A-K is when aces and kings flop, nobody has overcards and therefore will fold rather than chase. While it may feel good to flop A-2-2 when you have A-A, it is a tough sell to make much money in most games. 9-2-2 would be a much better flop, even though you will now lose to a deuce if someone has it. Players with hands like K-Q will chase drawing nearly dead, and have decent chances to make second best hands.

One of the reasons I bring this up was brief comment regarding pokerstove. Knowing how often your hand will be good is very important, but determining how much money you will makeif your hand is good compared to how much you will lose when it is second best is an even more important calculation that no porgram will do for you as far as I know.

I am fond of saying poker is a pendulum game. What this means is that any action out of balance is eventually noticed by opponents who then compensate by reacting, generally overreacting, in an opposite direction. this causes the out of balance player to either keep losing to completely change by pushing the pendulum to the other side, taking advantage of the overreaction. This work for a while until the opponents notice the change, in which case the see-saw bounces again.

You can pick your own example, but let’s just take a tight, straightforward player. He never bets draws, never bluffs, always has the goods. sooner or later, opponents realize that calling this guy is like making a deposit directly into his bank account, and he stops getting much action. If he is content, fine. But perhaps, noticing he he is rarely getting called, he tries a bluff. It works, of course. Now he feels he has found the keys to the kingdom, and tries another. That works too. With his new found boldness, he plays more hands and bluffs more often. Soon, opponents notice that his playing, betting and raising frequency has moved far higher than could be justified by just having hands, and they start calling and catching bluffs. He does not like losing money in unsuccessful bluff attempts, so tightens u again. But he still gets called until opponents notice he always has the goods and stop calling him. Round we go.

If you play frequently, you will notice that poker play in general also goes through phases and fads. There is sort of a mass action pendulum that operates on a wider scale, be it by cardroom or city or even world wide. These larger trends cause significant changes to the way the game is played. It is one of the major reasons I tell people that their game must continually evolve. If you were a winning player in 2001, and you decided you had mastered the game and would just -play that method for the rest of your life, it is unlikely you will win that much, if at all, in 2007.

For example, let’s look at the free card play. You are in late position on the flop, raise with a draw on the flop, and when everyone checks to you on the turn, you check right back unless you made your draw. This play was a staple of the pros between 20 and 10 years ago. After everyone had read Hold’em for Advanced Players which explained the play in detail, more and more people started using it. Combined with the number of players who waited until the turn to raise if they really had a hand, it seemed like almost every late flop raise was a free card play.

So players reacted. They three-bet the flop, or called and bet a non-scary turn rather than check to the raiser. These defenses against the free card play added volatility, but were effective. In many games, trying for a free card became very expensive.

But as the pendulum pushed, some players saw an opening. They stopped trying for free cards (I mostly stopped about six or so years ago) and began raising the flop with premium hands that they used to wait for the turn with. Now the defense against the free card play simply became an expensive way to pay off a good hand. Playing good hands fast on the flop taking advantage of free card defenses still seems to be working, but my radar says enough players are adopting this strategy that the old free card play may start working again in a year or so.

This is just one of many examples. Continuous awareness and adaptability, not just to specific opponents but also prevailing theories, will help keep you on top of this.