What to Listen For When Listening to Poker Hand Histories
Poker is a nonstop story generator. It's one of my favorite aspects of the game.
When we play a poker hand, we are (in a way) constantly telling "stories" to each other via our actions, as well as with whatever table talk we engage in to supplement those actions. Then after the hand is done, we tell stories about what just happened. Again and again and again.
The "hand history" is no doubt the most common genre of storytelling in poker. You've recounted them. You've heard others tell them. We're frequently (and logically) sharing "HH" stories authored by a variety of players here in the Strategy section on PokerNews.
If you think about it, the structure of a poker hand readily provides all the needed elements of plot and character from which to build a story, complete with a "Hero" and "Villain," rising action and a climax, and a happy or sad ending.
Players often can't help themselves when it comes to sharing these hand histories. Who can blame them? Having played an exciting and memorable hand, they cannot resist telling someone about it. Sometimes they desire a response, including a critique of the decisions they made in the hand. Other times they don't, simply wanting to relate a moment of excitement they've experienced.
What some players don't realize is that whenever we tell a story about a hand we played, we are also telling a story about what kind of player we are. We're "tipping our hand" in more ways than one. And if those listening to our story are attentive, they'll know more about how to play against us than they did before they heard it.
Every Story Gives a Picture
You've heard the phrase "every picture tells a story." When it comes to hand histories, we might say every story potentially provides a kind of picture or portrait of the teller as a poker player. When you hear someone describe a hand he or she played, the description often also provides a kind of profile or sketch that includes at least something about the tale-teller's playing style and/or skill level.
In fact, every now and then, a hand history might give away something glaring — the kind of thing that could prove useful the next time you're sitting at a table with the player.
Even if you aren't seeking out information from a player's story about his or her tendencies or style of play, I think it's worthwhile to train yourself to think critically when listening to hand histories. Just as you gain knowledge about how people approach the game when you remain attentive at the poker table after folding your hand, so, too, can you improve your game by paying close attention to the way poker players — both good and bad ones — talk about the hands they've played.
Below are three areas worth focusing on when listening to someone relate a hand history.
1. Specificity Regarding the Action
Pay attention to the details a hand historian chooses to include when relating a hand. And to what gets left out.
You can't always know the accuracy of such details — after all, most of the time we can't really "fact-check" these stories. Even so, vagueness in the story about (say) board cards, positions, bet sizes, stack sizes and the like might sometimes give away the tale-teller's failure to appreciate the significance of such elements.
We probably shouldn't judge too harshly in this regard. We're all human, and for most of us our memories can fail us from time to time. Most of us aren't going to remember every detail in a hand we've played.
Even so, it's often notable when halfway through a hand the player suddenly remembers he was the cutoff and his opponent was the button, not vice-versa. Or that the opponent she was trying to squeeze out of a hand with a three-bet bluff from the blinds had most of his stack in the middle already. Or when the player isn't clear about whether or not a flush was possible on the river.
2. Awareness of Fundamentals and Concepts
Sometimes the way a player tells the story of a hand gives away a lack of knowledge about certain poker fundamentals — things like starting hand selection, position, absolute versus relative hand strength, pot odds and implied odds, stack-to-pot ratio, and other important elements that should matter when it comes to decisions the player made.
Sometimes even the story's very first line can immediately send such a signal.
Player: "Wow, I just took the sickest beat. So I opened with king-ten from under the gun..."
— Alee Yah (@ElleSriracha)
Occasionally a player relating a hand from a tournament might betray a lack of appreciation for how strategies change when the bubble is near, or after the tournament has reached the cash. Or how ICM considerations can come into play, say, at a final table when players' decisions are greatly influenced by impending pay jumps.
One frequent mistake novice tourney players make is to allow themselves to get blinded down to the point that when they finally pick up a pocket pair or big ace and jam all in, they are doing so with just a couple of big blinds, thereby all but guaranteeing they have no "fold equity" (a concept with which they may not be familiar) and will be called.
The stories of such hands often begin the same way ("I was card dead all day") and end similarly, too (with a so-called "bad beat" of the A8 > TT variety).
3. Emphasis on Results
Speaking of "bad beat" stories, for some players that is practically the only hand history subgenre they ever tell. Meanwhile many players — even skilled ones — often make the result of the hand the entire "point" of their story, be it positive or negative.
That emphasis on results actually makes a lot of sense. After all, how the hand ended provides the kind of dramatic resolution we naturally yearn for in a story. Leaving out the end would be anticlimactic, not to mention irritating.
That said, some players place more emphasis on the result than anything else in a hand history, letting the ending overwhelm all other details.
You'll often hear pros discuss hands in ways that remove emphasis from the result and instead place it on a key decision made prior to the hand's conclusion. Those who relate hands in this way tend to be more interested in analyzing decisions made in the hand than in entertaining or making an emotional connection with an audience.
As an example, take a look at Dominik Nitsche below discussing a hand he played against Alexander Kostritsyn. Note all the details he includes in his hand history, as well as his keen awareness of various concepts and how they applied to the hand he's describing.
In this hand, we know from the start that Nitsche doubled up through Kostritsyn, but notice how that result isn't the "point" of his story. Rather Nitsche's turn decision — namely, how much to bet when Kostritsyn checks (and whether or not to go all in) — is the main focus of his hand history. And after that, Kostritsyn's turn decision in response (whether or not to call Nitsche's shove) becomes another topic of inquiry.
Notice one other thing — Nitsche could have described this hand in exactly the same way if he had lost it.
Conclusion
I'm not here to tell you how to tell your hand histories. Tell your stories however you like! Like I say, that's one of my favorite things about poker — the endless stories the game inspires.
Remember, though, that when you do tell others about hands you've played, you're potentially telling them a lot else about yourself as a poker player as well. Also try to be an attentive and critical listener to others' hand histories. If they are well told, you can learn from them and improve your game. And if they're lacking, you can still learn something worthwhile.
