It is easier to get value in position

When you flop a big hand, your ability to build a sizable pot largely depends on whether or not you

are in position. As we have already discussed, being last to act allows you to control the size of the pot and ultimately decide how much money goes in. This is why calling in the blinds to try to hit a hand is so terrible. Because, not only do you not make a strong hand often enough to justify the call, you also have difficulty building a big pot even when you do hit.

Initiative

There seems to be a lack of literature on the subject of initiative. This is unfortunate since, after position, playing with initiative is the most important strategic thing we can do as a poker player. It comes down to a matter of control. Once you give up initiative, you are at the mercy of your

opponents.

Having initiative means that you were the pre-flop aggressor on the prior street or that someone has checked to you after the flop. If you raised pre-flop or post-flop and were called, you have

initiative. The only way you can get initiative after not seizing it pre-flop is to raise post-flop or have someone give up their initiative by checking to you.

You want to be the aggressor and have initiative throughout almost every hand you play. There are very specific situations where this is not the case, but they are few and far between. The vast majority of your hands should be played in position with you as the pre-flop aggressor.

The reason having initiative is so powerful is that it always keeps fold equity on your side and gives you a way to win hands even if your holding is not strong. And if you get raised at any point during the hand, you almost always have the final decision on whether that last bet goes in. If you were just calling bets all along, the only way you could win is by making the best hand at showdown. When you have initiative, you always get the last word.

Playing without initiative also lowers the relative hand strength of any holding. This is mostly due to c-bet bluff earnings, which are non-existent without initiative. By opening a hand pre-flop, you are giving yourself multiple chances to win the pot. First, everyone can fold, and you take down the blinds uncontested. Second, you can usually make a profitable c-bet on the flop and take down the pot often enough that you never need to actually make a hand.

If you call a raise, this can never happen, and you must play a flop. Furthermore, as a short stack, you will usually not have the implied odds to try to make a hand and extract enough money to compensate for the times you whiff. On the flip side of the coin, when your opponents call your pre-flop raises, they are making an error as well. And trust me, your opponents will make this error quite frequently.

The reason going to the flop without control of the pot is generally bad, especially for a short stack, is because it forces you to play fit or fold poker. You simply will not make enough hands to overcome the times you miss the flop and are compelled to fold. But perhaps the worst part of playing without initiative is you will be forced to give up the best hand very often when you check and fold a marginal holding.

Except for a few specific situations, it is always more profitable to be the one controlling the hand.

Most of the time, if you cannot maintain the initiative because you get raised or the board texture is not conducive to continuing, your best play is to give up and check and/or fold.

My strategy will have you going to the flop without initiative only in specific situations. Most

commonly, this will happen when you complete the small blind. Less frequently, you will call a pre-flop raise with significant implied odds, but generally this is only after there has been a raise and at

least one other caller. Except for limping, my charts do not define when you should or should not make pre-flop calls. Because a number of factors weigh in when making such a decision, I will cover these instances separately in Chapter 10.

Ultimately, poker without initiative is poker without aggression, and passive play is highly

unprofitable in No’Limit Hold-em. A game based upon position and initiative gives you the ability to apply constant pressure to your opponents.

Pressure

The benefits of persistent aggression are numerous and inherently exploitative. You apply pressure to constrict your opponent’s play, modify your image, pick up dead money, and instill fear in other

players, ultimately causing them to make mistakes against you.

Examples of strategically applying pressure include stealing, 3-betting, and c-betting. An aggressive stealing game pressures the blinds, an aggressive 3-betting game pressures raisers, and an aggressive c-betting game pressures pre-flop callers. Additionally, the player who controls the action tends to pick up the pots where no one has a showdown worthy hand.

Consistently applying pressure also establishes an aggressive image among observant opponents.

Many players will become frustrated by your attacking style and will begin actively avoiding you.

Others will try to get into wars with you in order to “shut you down” and will generally spew money your way when they run into the top of your range.

If you play passively, then you are letting your opponents dictate the action, which forces you to make hands to win pots. By consistently leaning on your opponents, you are always keeping fold equity on your side. Therefore, when employing an aggressive poker game, you have access to income from two sources, showdown and non-showdown earnings. A potential by-product of a sound strategy based on initiative and pressure is a positive red line.