There’s a lot going on when you sit down to a cash game, and obviously you’ve got to be aware of all of it if you have any intention of being successful. 

When you’re going to play – before you even sit down – you’ve got to decide how much you’re going to buy in for. It might seem like it goes without saying, but you’ve got to be aware of everyone’s chip stack when you decide where to start. For me, I generally like to start out at least equal with – or buy in for more – than the biggest stack at the table.

Another part of this is recognizing who’s properly bankrolled at the table. If there’s somebody that’s playing on case money, then he’s generally a good opponent to pick on: they’re the one’s taking a shot at the game. If they don’t succeed, they’re going to drop down or they’re done for a while. Recognizing this lets you manipulate certain situations and take full advantage of them.

As far as recognizing opponents goes, one of the most important things that you have to do whenever you sit down is develop an accurate profile of each person at the table. Profiling is a matter of getting exactly who all of the other players at the table are and how they’re playing. This is critical and you need to learn to do it quickly.

For example, if you sit down with an older guy that’s retired and just there to have fun, you know that you can probably get away (with) a lot. Of course, you could be sitting with a guy who looks exactly the same, but has been around the block more than a few times and has been playing poker for years. You need to be able to figure out the difference between the two real fast. A lot of this is intuitive, but it’s all about recognizing experience in a player; figuring out who’s strong and who’s weak. Also keep in mind that just because someone is an unknown doesn’t mean that they aren’t good – you’ve always got to watch how they act, what they do at the table and listen to what they say.

This is a little different with players coming from an online background. If you’ve got an opponent with a reputation as a really strong online player, it’s probably a good idea to sit back and take a more passive approach until you figure out how they play live. I think that this is definitely a case where live players have an edge over online players. For myself, I’m accurate about 90% of the time when I put someone on being a particular type of player: solid, an amateur, a seasoned pro.

Of course, the flip-side of this is how they perceive you as a player. For me, if I’ve got any notoriety at a game, people recognize or greet me by name, maybe even comment on my play, I can use it to establish an image as an aggressive player that might check/raise with nothing. If I pick up on that, I can make moves like betting 4K into a 2K pot and get paid off with middle pair because this person thinks that I’m playing with nothing. On the other hand, if someone doesn’t think that about me or doesn’t know how I play, I have to adjust accordingly – it all depends on how I see their read on me.

Once you know how people view you, then it’s just a reverse psychology game. You can adapt to that in so many ways – this is one of the strongest parts of my game. It really lets me manipulate the table to my advantage.

If you can keep all of this in mind, you should be able to figure out what and who you’re dealing with right off the bat. Take full advantage of it, and you’ll be the one getting paid off.

To start with, I hope that I don’t pick up a hand right away when I sit down at a table – I like to watch my opponents before I play against them so I can make better decisions. Some things that I’m watching for are really easy, like the way they’re dressed and the way they’re sitting at the table. It says a lot about how they play. That’s basically the first thing that I do – look to see how my opponents are dressed, how they’re sitting at the table, and maybe how they stack their chips. They’re already giving me information on how they’re going to play.

Let me get into how an opponent’s dressed a little more: people tend to dress how they play. A lot of times, when they’re sloppily dressed, they play kind of sloppy, and when they’re conservatively dressed, they play more conservatively.

Let’s say a guy sits down in a suit and tie: I’m generally going to view him as being more conservative. While it’s likely that I’m going to be able to steal more pots from this guy, I’ll stay away from him when he’s raising in earlier positions because I feel that he’s most likely going to have a hand there. As a rule, they’re going to play tighter than the person who’s dressed pretty sloppy.

When I’m talking about sloppy, I’m talking about the player with a collared shirt that’s unbuttoned and one collar is up. They’re wearing a baseball cap, kind of unshaven, and maybe the baseball cap’s not on straight – maybe even a big belly. (Sorry – I hate to stereotype.) There’s always one button that’s not buttoned, things like that. They usually play sloppy and are into more pots. I find that they’re more recreational and there to have fun – not to try hard and win money. They’re not taking it as seriously as, let’s say, a guy in his jeans and t-shirt. I think the guy in his jeans and t-shirt takes it more seriously. I think that maybe the guy in his suit is there for entertainment too, but he doesn’t want to lose his money.

That’s another view that I have – a different take on dress – the player in a t-shirt and a pair of jeans: a pair of jeans and a t-shirt means a solid player. They’re usually kids that are coming from the Internet. When they’re playing in a tournament or a side game, they’re going to try. They tend to take things seriously.

Keeping all of this in mind, I try not to ever let myself fall into a trap. You always have to be objective about how somebody might play. A guy might look sloppy or like he’s completely ruffled – with his shirt hanging out of his pants or something – but he might actually play conservatively. You just can’t let yourself fall into that trap. Even though someone looks or dresses a certain way, you have to stay objective. Keeping this in mind and staying on guard, looking at how someone is dressed can give you valuable information about how they play.

Instead I found an entertaining narrative of Gus’ experience from start to victory at the 2007 Aussie Millions. Taken directly from recordings that he consistently made throughout the tournament, Gus methodically walks through what was happening at the table and in his head every step of the way. Rather than the diary of a madman at the table, Revealed gives the reader clear and direct insight to Gus’ critical thought process from start to finish.

Gus explains his decisions employing the type and depth of theory that you’d expect from a player of his caliber, but his delivery is more practical application than treatise on game theory. More to the point, its how it was – in fact is – for one player rather than a “how to play” instructional. Supported by liberal commentary and subtle humor, it’s a good read if you’ve ever wondered how Gus makes some of the plays that he does.

Examples of this abound, but his philosophy on avoiding certain “ugly scenarios” illustrates the tone of his book. As Gus details the hand where he busted Patrick Antonius, his “toughest opponent” who “easily made his top-ten list of pretty, Finnish poker-players,” he methodically examines his options following the turn:

“…and No. 3: The all-in bet: 1.7 million! Pulling the trigger is often my favorite play. No more nonsense, no more worrying about disgusting river bets, just the plain and simple ‘Do you wanna dance?’ puts on the ultimate pressure.”

Reckless out of context, his discussion identifies exactly how he arrived at this decision and how it played out – and sent Patrick to the rail. Later, Gus offers a final opinion on “the all-in play,” stating that even if it’s a mistake, “at least it’s gonna be the last one you make.”

As books go, Every Hand Revealed is a poker book written by a professional poker player specifically for poker players. Gus gives us his experience Down Under one hand at a time to illustrate exactly how he operates. In his own words, it’s a visit to his world.

In fact, the most unpleasant poker experience of my life was playing the Ladies Event at the 2006 WSOP. I was mid-way through a nine-week stay in Vegas and the combination of being forced to answer stupid questions like, “Do you know where Daniel Negreanu is?” while manning a booth squashed in between the Milwaukee’s Best Light girls and the hookers from Sapphire (who to their credit had gotten organized that year) had put me on serious monkey tilt.

I’m not a good poker player, not even close, but in spite of my record of zero cashes in live tournaments (a streak that continues to this day), I somehow managed to sell 55% of myself and decided to front the rest for the buy-in. I rock up to the tournament late, and as I sit down it suddenly dawns on me why the majority of my friends are boys.

Some tournament reporter wanders over and asks the woman in seat 1 for her chip count. After she turns back to the table, the conversation goes something like this:

Collective table sheep minus Cyndy Violette and myself: “We love your magazine! You’re such a good poker player..blah blah blah”

It was almost the poker equivalent of the “I’ll-insult-myself-so-everyone-around-me-will-pump-me-up” bullshit that irritates me about being a girl. When another girl comes up to me and goes “Why don’t you like me?/I’m so fat” I usually comply and reply with the expected “Of course I like you, you’re a really nice person/No you’re not, you’re totally skinny” when what I really want to say is, “For the love of God stop putting your fucking neuroses on me!” Manipulating other people to spout adulation about you is false humility and I’m calling you out on it.

Of course this now leaves me in a bit of a quandary as I’m now equally tilted by both sexes. I wasn’t really contemplating going to the Ellen Degeneres side beyond maintaining my “List of Women I Would Turn For” (Tea Leoni, if you ever leave David Duchovy give me a call – I’ll dress you up like Bad Boys I and we’ll live happily forever after), but given my non-existent track record with the lads I was simply trying to increase my outs.

I think the only logical option now left is to go asexual – if you know any single-celled amoebas who like to have a good time, please let me know.