Technology always pushes the boundaries, especially ethical boundaries. The primary way to think about these boundaries, I think, is the way Andrew presented them: Does everyone have the same understanding of what is allowed, and the same opportunity to use technologies which are allowed? If so, no ethical problem.

I think the conditions that he identifies are spot-on, and I want to delve a bit deeper into them. This time around I’ve got more questions than answers, so I’ll be very curious to hear your opinions on the subject.

The Right To Know

My claim is that use of any technology allowed by the rules of a casino or poker site is ethical, and that using anything disallowed is unethical. This is because, by choosing to play at a particular venue, players agree to both their host and their fellow players that they will follow the posted rules.

As piefarmer points out, this presumes that everyone understands the rules, or at least has the opportunity to do so. Exactly what obligation does this impose on a casino or poker site? Certainly the rules need to be readily available, in writing, for any player or potential player to inspect. Assuming that they are, then I would argue that choosing to play at that venue constitutes agreement to follow those rules, even if the player never actually reads them or fails to understand them correctly.

I think that there must also be a way for players to receive clarification as to the meaning of rules. At live venues, this requires readily available floor staff and properly trained dealers who can explain things clearly and accurately. As many of us know, getting a consistent answer to a question about the rules is not always a trivial matter when playing live poker, and I believe that to be a serious failing of a casino’s obligation to its players.

Is there any obligation on the part of online poker sites to affirmatively warn their players that others may be using HUDs and other technology? I’m sure there are people every day who start playing online and have no idea that such software is available or that their opponents may be using it.

It seems to me as long technology is mentioned somewhere in the Terms & Conditions, the site meets this obligation. I’m interested to hear people’s opinions on this, though. Is there anyone who would argue that sites have an obligation to be more assertive on this point? Perhaps announce to all their players, via e-mail or pop-up, whenever they add a new program to the list of approved software?

Equal Access

This is a thornier question. Is equal access to technology essential to make it ethical? What if there were some piece of poker software that somehow violated the laws of the US but were legal in most other countries. Would it be ethical for a poker site to permit the use of this technology? Would it be ethical for players to use it? What if there were some amazing software whose creator refused to share it with anyone other than a select group of his friends?

Also, is the cost of the software relevant? If there were some amazing software that was readily available for purchase and use by anyone but that cost thousands of dollars, would we still be able to say players had equal access to it?

I’ll start by giving you the results, and then I’ll let you know how and why I made the decision that I did and what my thinking is on the most relevant HUD statistics.
UTG ($1570)
MP ($1124)
Button ($2200)
Hero (SB) ($1000)
BB ($1017)

Preflop: Hero is SB with 7, K
3 folds, Hero bets $40, BB calls $30

Flop: ($80) 6, 8, 6 (2 players)
Hero bets $55, BB calls $55

Turn: ($190) K (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets $150, Hero calls $150

River: ($490) 3 (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets $772 (All-In), Hero calls $755 (All-In)

Total pot: $2000 | Rake: $3

Results:
Hero had 7, K (two pair, Kings and sixes).
BB had A, 10 (one pair, sixes).
Outcome: Hero won $1997

When I checked the river, it was with the intention of calling a reasonably sized bet. If Villain bets something in the neighborhood of $300, he can conceivably be value betting as wide as A8, and my K7 is an easy call. As many of you pointed out, the overbet almost certainly polarizes him to air or hands that are better than mine. I suppose he could be shoving a worse K, in which case we’d chop, but that’s not going to be a major consideration.

I don’t know enough about this player to tell you just how wide he’s value betting the river or whether he’s capable of overbetting as a bluff- some people just don’t do it.

When someone is representing a narrow range, a key question for me is how wide his range is for getting to this point in the hand. Without knowing anything a player’s specific river tendencies, I’m comfortable assuming that the likelihood of his bluffing a particular street increases considerably when he can get to that point in the hand with a lot of air.

Good players are almost always capable of having relatively wide ranges for betting. In other words, I rarely take a bet as evidence that a guy has a hand. Likewise, most good players will recognize that they can call a raise in position blind vs. blind with a lot of hands, so regardless of what his pre-flop statistics look like, I’m going to assume his range isn’t all that narrow pre-flop. As Chris M. points out, his 3B% is potentially relevant for ruling out some of his thin value range such as KQ/KJ/KT. This is potentially a tough decision even we can rule out KT+, as many commenters did, and I also don’t know that a number would actually give us that information. I can tell you that my 3B% is generally pretty high in Villain’s shoes but that I often flat-call KT and KJ.

The decision point that is most likely to narrow Villain’s range is the flop. Moreso than betting or raising, calling is generally an indication that a player likes his hand at least a little bit.

I take it as a given that any good player with a wide flop calling range is going to be aggressive on the turn. Presumably if he calls the flop with a weak hand, it’s with the intention of bluffing the turn, so I rule out TAFq as a deciding factor.

RAFq is problematic for a few reasons. For one, the deeper we get into the hand, the less reliable our statistics become. Compounding the problem is the fact that this is a rather unique situation. Thus, I don’t expect to find much useful information in this statistic, nor did many of you.

When I posted this question, I intended for FCB to be the correct answer. However, several people made a compelling case for FAFq, enough so that if this were a test I’d give credit for either answer. I may have been biased because Villains FCB was actually extraordinarily low, such that it was even more of a determining factor for me than it otherwise would have been. Over nearly 400 hands, I’d seen him fold just 10% of the time to a continuation bet.

What this tells me is that he is fighting hand, probably too hard, for every pot in which he is involved. As soon as I saw that, I clicked “Call”. Not only does this very low number suggest that Villain can get to the river with a wide range, but it also tells me something about his approach to the game. He is clearly willing to put players to the test, and that seems to be exactly what was going on here.

I took it for granted that a low FCB would imply a lot of floating, but the people arguing for FAFq, primarily Shawn and Drew, raised a good point. It’s possible that he prefers attacking continuation bets by bluff-raising rather than by floating. Thus, it’s theoretically possible that even if he has a low FCB, he nevertheless does not get to the river this way with air because he would have raised rather than called his air on the flop. The FAFq statistic would help us figure out whether this was the case.

I think that would be more relevant if his FCB weren’t so absurdly low, which of course is information that you all did not have. Had his FCB been more like 40%, I would definitely want to look next to FAFq to figure out whether he was raising or calling his air on the flop.

As an aside, I find it odd that Villain chose to turn AT into a bluff on the turn. Perhaps he thought that my checking a good barreling card indicated that I could beat A-high. I’m sure he realized that he would have the best hand more often than not on the flop, and I’d expect a lot of people just to check it down.

Thanks again to everyone who participated.

PS If you’re interested in learning more about floating, I recommend Float On, a strategy article that I wrote on the subject.

In response to a recent post I made about using a HUD, commenter “Elmer Fudd” asked,

“I would like you to comment on the ethics of using a HUD in the first place. It most certainly gives you an edge over players that don’t use such software and provides you with stats that you couldn’t readily obtain during a live game. I guess I’m an old-fashioned poker purist, but anything that gives you a slight edge over other players is cheating. “

I would say anything that gives you an unfair edge is cheating. Sleeping and eating better than my opponents gives me an edge. Reading more books than they do gives me an edge. Using a second monitor gives me an edge over opponents attempting to multi-table on a single monitor. Yet none of these is unfair, because my opponents have equal opportunity to take advantage of them.

An edge becomes unfair when it violates the rules of the game as defined by the casino or site hosting the game. Even if you disagree with a particular rule or believe that other players are violating it, violating it yourself is unethical because it is essentially dishonest. By playing on a particular online poker site or at a particular casino, you are promising your fellow players that you will abide by a particular set of rules. This defines the parameters of the game, the ways in which players may and may not seek an edge.

When I sit down at a live game, I accept and agree that physical tells will be part of the game, and that signaling to a partner at the table will not. My opponents, in turn, agree to the same. They know that to keep up with me in this contest, they will need to practice their face-reading skills but not their sign language. If I were colluding with another player, this would gain me an unfair advantage, because it is one my opponents are not expecting me to have and one that they have themselves agreed not to pursue.

On sites that allow them, HUD’s are a legitimate part of the game. Insofar as they do not violate a site’s terms and conditions, then everyone playing on the site implicitly agrees that they are allowed. Some may use them more than others, and some may choose not to use them at all. Similarly, I might choose not to attempt to pick up physical tells during a live game, but this does not make it unethical for my opponents to do so. As long as I have the same opportunity, the playing field is level.

Using a HUD on a site that prohibits it, even if you were to find a way to make the HUD work and to evade detection, would not be ethical. Doing so would violate your agreement with the site and with your fellow players on that site. It would give you an edge that your honest opponents would not enjoy, and this would be unethical.

Online poker is not merely a derivative form of live poker. It bears many similarities, but also many differences. Just because something would not be allowed or possible in a live setting does not mean that it is unethical when done online, any more than a rule prohibiting cell phones at the table at the Rio would it make unethical to use a cell phone at the table at MGM. Different venues have the right to establish their own rules. Some players may prefer the rules generally found in a live setting to those found online, but they may not impose their preferred rules as an ethical obligation on their online competitors.

Happy New Year everyone! I hope you all enjoyed yourselves responsibly last night (and last year, for that matter), and that you are striding confidently forward into a new year.

Yesterday, I revisited my 2009 poker resolutions. Now, it’s time to make some new resolutions and set some new goals for 2010.

Resolution One: Play NLHE Cash Games

Particularly in the big games, virtually everyone is good and getting better. It’s not enough to be better than they are at the start of the year; if they keep improving and I stagnate, then they’ll be owning me by year’s end. So this year my focus will be on putting in hours at and away from the table.

Goal 1: Average 15 Hours/Week Playing My “Regular” Games

If I wanted a job, I’d get one. I want to have plenty of time for other things that are important to me: friends, family, travel, volunteer work. Then again, most of those things require (or at least benefit from) money, too.

I’ve found that 15 hours/week enables me to earn a pretty healthy income, far more than I could make at any real job I could get, without impeding too much on my lifestyle.

I consider my regular games to be anywhere from 2/4 NL to 50/100 NL as well as big tournaments like the Sunday Majors, the FTOPS, and the WCOOP; time spent playing any of these will count towards my goal.

Goal 2: Earn $X in NLHE Cash Games

It’s very tough to predict or control what I will earn playing tournaments. With cash games, though, it’s mostly a question of game selection and putting in hours. It’s not something I’m going to announce publicly, but I am going to set a target, and I am going to put in extra hours towards the end of year if I’m on pace to come up short.

Goal 3: Earn Supernova status on PokerStars

I gave up on this goal last year, largely because Stars doesn’t have deep stack or ante tables. I don’t want to sit in bad games just to get VPPs.Poker Stars is continuing to sweeten the deal, though. In addition to the cash bonuses that can be purchased with FPPs, they’re now offering up to $1000 in bonuses just for earning VPPs.

My plan for this is to table select as usual in the beginning of each month, and then assess my progress towards the end of each month. If I’m on pace to come up short, I’m going to put in extra hours above and beyond my weekly goal just grinding 9 tables of $1/2 NLHE (or smaller) until I hit my VPP target for the month. Hopefully this is something I can do relatively stress-free, just an hour or two at a time, when I’m not in the mood to put in a proper session in higher stakes games. To be honest, my hourly rate should still be quite good multi-tabling SSNL, so hopefully this will incentivize me to make a little money in what would otherwise be downtime.

Resolution Two: Diversify My Income Streams

This has been a long-term goal of mine, and I feel like it’s well underway now. Not only is it nice having some guarantee, variance-free income, but it’s a fun and rewarding break from grinding to coach aspiring MSNL players, write for Two Plus Two Magazine, or make videos for Poker Savvy Plus. It even helps me to cultivate and demonstrate other skills, like writing, teaching, and marketing, that would prove useful should I ever decide to seek proper employment.

Goal 4: Monetize This Blog

I know I keep saying it, but sooner or later I really am going to look into making money a little more directly from this blog. I feel like it’s right on the cusp of being pretty profitable. That doesn’t have to mean ads, though it might. Maybe I’ll…

Goal 5: Write a Book

I’ve talked about this before, but this is the first time it’s ever been an explicit goal. I’ve already got some downtime sketched out in the next few months to work on this and have been kicking around some ideas in my head. Rather than trying to write one big, expensive e-book as a lot of people have done, I’m thinking of doing a series of smaller, modular works that could be purchased separately or as a set. Those of you who read this blog regularly are going to be a big chunk of the target audience, so keep an eye out for posts in the next few weeks soliciting your input about what you’d like to see in a poker book authored by yours truly.

Goal 6: Average One Blog Post Per Day

I know it’s been a little quiet on here of late. Part of that is the holidays, and part of it is just laziness. I want to get back to posting once a day. There will probably be more non-poker content, and not all of the poker stuff will be equally in-depth, but overall you can expect to see more and better content here.

The other part of the problem is that fairly often during the week, I’m staying somewhere where I don’t have a reliable internet connection. I’m pretty sure it’s possible for me to write stuff in advance and schedule it to post on a particular day, though, so that’s really not an excuse.

Goal 7: Average Five Hours of Coaching Per Week

Coaching was extremely fun and rewarding for me last year. So far, except for my group seminars, I haven’t done much to market myself as a coach or actively solicit students. I’ve mostly just worked with students as they’ve come to me, and so so far that’s kept me just about as busy as I’d like to be with coaching. I want to ramp it up a bit this year by setting a monthly goal and actively soliciting students if necessary to ensure that I’ve got a regular stream of students.

By the way, if you’re interested, check out my poker coaching information.

Resolution Three: Improve My NLHE Skills

There are so many good reasons to make an active effort to improve my NLHE. In addition to the obvious benefit of getting better and winning more money, studying can give me new material for blog posts and book reviews, introduce me to new coaching and video producing techniques, help me to monetize what would otherwise be downtime, restore my focus and confidence during a downswing, and help me keep up with what my opponents may be learning and trying at the tables.

Goal 7: Average an Hour a Day of Dedicated Studying and Improvement

I’m going to be very broad about what this can include: reading books, watching videos, reviewing hands in Hold ‘Em Manager, talking poker with a friend, and even blogging (when it’s related to reviewing my play).

I may even hire a coach. It’s funny: many of my students expressed some concern about the cost of coaching when we first discussed working together. After a few hours with me, though, these same students have always told me that coaching was far more valuable than they expected and that in retrospect they considered it a very good investment.

Yet, cheapstake that I am, I still balk at paying hundreds of dollars an hour for a high-stakes coach. I probably ought to just suck it up and purchase a few hours. To be fair, though, I do charge less than most comparable coaches. Plus, I don’t have the option of hiring someone who coaches as well as I do .

Goal 8: Use Hold ‘Em Manager

I switched from Poker Tracker to Hold ‘Em Manager last year. PT2 is great, but HEM is just better. For the last part of the year, I was playing without it on my laptop. It does get in my way sometimes, but I’d rather learn how to work with it than insist on playing without it.

Goal 9: Finish the Year with a 4BB/100 Win-Rate at 5/10 NL and/or Higher

Same goal as last year, since I didn’t achieve it but still think it’s very viable. It might be cheating a little, but I’m going to allow myself to count my results from bigger games towards this goal or not depending on whether I do better in them than I do in 5/10 (this was the cast last year). Basically, if I am at 4 BB/100 over a big sample at 5/10, then I don’t care how I’m doing in bigger games. If I’m not doing quite that well at 5/10 but am at 4 BB/100 if I also count bigger games, then that’s certainly a fine result as well.

Goal 10: Play 50,000 Hands of Heads Up NLHE at 5/10 and Higher

Last year, my win rate at heads up was twice what it was at ring games. Plus, it’s a great way to improve poker skills in general, and at stakes above 10/20, it’s often the only way to get action.

The only problem is that I can’t play as many tables at once, so my hourly rate isn’t necessarily better, plus it’s tough to get action from people I actually want to play. Unlike with my other goals, I don’t want to resort to playing smaller stakes just to hit this goal. I will try to be more diligent about starting tables and maybe even playing some people against whom I don’t necessarily have an edge, since part of the point here is to get better.

What About You?

How did 2009 treat you? What are your goals, poker or otherwise, for 2010?