Patrik Antonius, the Finnish master, answers your questions on short-handed play
Like most pros, Patrik Antonius makes the game seem easy. ‘You don’t need to be Einstein, you just need passion for it,’ he says.
But the ice-cold Finn is not immune to the downswings that affect us all. In the recent Million Dollar Cash Game in London, he lost a $700,000 pot to Phil Ivey and he’s been having an even more torrid time in the Big Game.
‘I’ve lost over a million this year,’ he says. Still, even in a bad year Antonius does better than most, and that’s because he’s constantly refining his game.
In tournaments he is way past the $600,000-mark and rather ominously for everyone else, he’s barely out of first gear. ‘I could play so much trickier, but I’m doing fine and I don’t think I should change anything. I’m playing very straightforward – I still have one or two levels I can raise my game to.’
Few players have more levels than Antonius. He’s won millions online by playing short-handed no-limit hold’em and pot-limit Omaha, where you have to mix up your game and only the strongest survive. Who better then to answer your questions on this notoriously tough format of the game?
I’ve just started playing poker and am still trying all the different variations. Would you recommend short-handed to a beginner? Eddie, Newhaven
For beginners, short-handed is very hard. The way I learnt was heads-up and short-handed, but people were so bad that on almost every hand I bet the pot on the flop and the turn. If people raised me, I’d just fold if I didn’t have anything. It was such a good way to learn and it taught me to avoid situations where I just can’t bluff.
I needed to just make my game tighter. Going from tight to looser is more difficult because suddenly you need to learn how to play all these weird hands. It’s a hard way to approach the game. For beginners, I think full ring games are better; you get a better idea about the game.
Tournaments are a cheap way to start playing. You could become a heads-up player first. That’s maybe a better way because you have to play every hand.
What in your view is the most important factor in being a good short-handed player? Julia, Dartford
In short-handed games, if I had a single piece of advice to give it would be aggression. It’s not always the key, but it’s about 90%; you have to be able to adjust your game and be good at reading. It’s very difficult to put people on hands because there are so many different hands they could have. The average hand is going to be so bad in every situation.
How do you go about choosing a short-handed game online? Mark, Rochester
I usually look at how much money players have on the table. If almost everybody is in for a short buy-in, you know you can only win a little bit but still lose a lot. A lot of people who do short buy-ins just want to double up and leave. I’m looking for an opponent who isn’t going to take off in 20 minutes; I like to play for a long time. I don’t sit with the maximum if I don’t have a positional edge in pot-limit and no-limit games.
Let’s say everybody is short and there’s just one guy who has a lot of money. If I still want to play that game I might just take an average buy-in. Usually I just choose not to play that game.
I keep reading about the importance of cultivating an image from books and websites. Is image as much of an issue in short-handed games? David, London
Image is very important, but all you need to know is what other people think about your game. A perfect situation is where you have a very tight image and you make the sickest of bluffs. It makes a difference who can buy a lot of pots when no one has anything – you get a lot of money that way.
When two players have big hands, big flops, you can’t help those – hands that no one in the world can fold. In any game, short-handed, heads-up or full ring, image is important.
If I asked players who have played you online what kind of short-handed player you were, what would they say? Brian, East Anglia
People usually say I’m very loose-aggressive and I like to call a lot, that I like to bluff more than anyone. I don’t mind what people say because I can always adjust it. If people think that I bluff more than anyone in the world, then I don’t bluff and I get calls with my hands every time. If they think I’m tight, I just start bluffing.
Do you approach short-handed limit and no-limit in the same way? Tony, Llanelli
You have to be aggressive in both. They’re totally different types of games – the key is to be the one who’s taking the lead in a lot of pots. In no-limit there’s more trapping. In limit you have to play with a certain pattern and strategy; slow-playing is usually not profitable.
In no-limit there’s no such thing as playing a hand a certain way because there are loads of different ways. Sometimes you flop top set and you never want to raise the guy, you just call.
Say you have Queens pre-flop and the flop comes Queen-high and you just check-call all the way. Or you can raise on any street. In no-limit, you need to mix it up more. If you’re always betting, people start trapping.
If you had to play yourself in a big tournament, how would you alter your play and what strategies would you adopt? Karl, Durham
In tournaments, I would force me to play big pots, overbetting. It’s very hard to handle because in tournaments you don’t want to take risks, you want to play small pots. I don’t know if I want to say any more!
I’m very good at folding hands when people make big check-raises on the river. I give them a lot of respect. So if you want to bluff me, just check-raise me on the river with a big amount. It’s very hard for me to call on the river if I don’t have a huge hand.
There are a lot of situations where I know I should bluff more, but I don’t do it because I don’t need to do it. I’m doing fine now, just taking reads from people and making decisions based on those reads.
My friend and I were arguing about that tennis bet between you and Gus Hansen. He reckons it’s already happened. I’m sure it hasn’t. Please tell me I’m right! Chris, Cambridge
You’re right, it hasn’t happened yet. It all depends on media and timing. We’re both very busy this fall. We both want to practise – at least two weeks before the match where we don’t have to play any tournaments.
It’s going to happen. There’s a chance that we’re going to kick up the bet as well. It would be nice to make a $1 million tennis match, but $200k is still a lot to put down. It’s the best of three sets. He would beat me if we played next week, but if I have time to practise and get myself in better shape, I have a good chance.
Anyway, it’s going to be tight. It’s just a fun bet. It’s nice to do something different.
You’re reported to have told David Benyamine at this year’s WSOP that you have three holes in your wall from where you’ve thrown a mouse at it in frustration. Andre, Southampton
Yes, that’s true. In fact now there are more holes because I punched the wall or kicked or something. My walls aren’t made from stone, they’re not brick walls. Poker hasn’t been too good recently! It’s not usually just one bad beat, it’s usually that I’ve been playing a bad session, losing a couple of hundred thousand and getting a lot of bad beats.
It’s everything put together. Usually it’s just the frustration of playing and losing. I don’t mind if people play bad and get lucky. I haven’t been too lucky lately and you can see it from the walls! One day I’ll fix them – but I’ll do it again. I even broke my keyboard.
Patrik was speaking with PokerPlayer magazine which is published monthly HERE
