The squeeze play. Perhaps the most impressive and scintillating move in poker. It can only be attempted at rare moments when a series of circumstances combine to perfection and it can only be executed successfully with the mental fortitude to risk everything with very little. For every gem there will be half a dozen disastrous squeeze efforts that leave the perpetrator looking foolish. It is to Texas Holdem what the overhead kick is to football. Spectacular, high-risk and not to be attempted by the uninitiated.
The idea is that a player regarded as tight and conservative, identifies a loose aggressive player raising the pot in front of him and a similarly loose second player calling that raise before the action reaches our hero. At this point the ‘tight conservative’ player in late position puts in a massive re-raise with a mediocre hand to force everybody to fold and take down a decent pot without even seeing the flop. This is a standard squeeze scenario although it can also be attempted with multiple callers in front or from various seat positions, including the blinds. The move sounds simple in its description and yet the margin for error is miniscule. If any one of the factors is misjudged then the consequences are likely to be dire.
First of all ‘the squeezer’ must know that Player A, the initial raiser, is opening up pots with a wide range of start cards. Over a long period of play this should become apparent from either the sheer quantity of raises or from seeing the cards he shows down having played to a raise pre-flop. However, it is dangerous and far too easy to tag a player as loose aggressive just because he raises a few hands in a row. It’s vital to spot the difference between a card rush and generally more expansive play. A similar criteria must be used to assess the strength of Player B, the pre-flop caller in front. The additional information one has to work on here is that Player B opted to call, rather than re-raise Player A. This also implies weakness, particularly if we assume that Player B has also noticed the attacking intentions of Player A and has decided to see a few flops against him with marginal hands. The complexity of assessing what Player B thinks of Player A and assessing his tactics with this in mind is high-risk but essential for this move.
Having surmised that neither active player in the hand is strong, ‘the squeezer’ is now poised to make his play, but there are still more factors to consider. It’s far too simplistic to think ‘they’ve got nothing so they can’t call me.’ This is where table image comes in. It amazes me how often the player most likely to bluff at the table is the same player who most recently bluffed. A reputation as a bluffer will get good hands paid off but it won’t help future bluffs to succeed. For this reason the squeeze is suited to a player regarded as a rock, waiting for a big hand to make his move. If people don’t think you have the squeeze move in your playbook that’s ideal!
Infuriatingly, being a decent tight player with a good table image and the capability of making a great read still may not be enough though. Let’s say for instance that ‘the squeezer’ puts Players A and B on hands like Ace-rag suited and average high cards like Q-J. Let’s then say that his read is correct and that his opponents do indeed hold moderate start cards that have potential but can’t be played to a huge re-raise. The problem is that final assessment that they can’t be played. This would be the view of 95% of solid, experienced poker players but it may not mean that Player A or B will actually fold. Some players just can’t lay down a hand and this will certainly be the case if they suspect foul play. If the big intimidating raise looks like it doesn’t want a call then it is more than likely to get one from one of these ‘instinctive’ players, even with Q-J or A3s.
The temptation to call the squeeze will also be affected by stack size. A wild aggressive player with a monstrous pile of chips may feel that a loose call won’t really matter, so curiosity gets the better of them. A loose player who feels like he is on a roll is a dangerous commodity and virtually unbluffable. Similarly, a short stack is often inclined to think that there’s nothing left to lose so why not take a gamble. The squeeze must therefore be directed against players who do value their remaining chips and can lay down marginal cards.
The great thing about this manoeuvre is that it plays the opponents and the situation and is less card focused. It is based on an approximation of the cards that you think your opponents have and gives very little thought to what you hold yourself. Unfortunately, even a perfectly timed move can still be rumbled by a player left to act waking up with a beauty. But it really should have to be an exceptional hand to rumble you, given the play pattern up to this point. A wonderful illustration of this was a squeeze carried out by Dan Harrington at the 2004 WSOP. Renowned professional Harrington, carries the ironic nickname of ‘Action Dan’ due to his tight conservative reputation. He was therefore the perfect man to push the button with 6-2o against the loose aggressive players in front who had entered the play with K-9o and A-2s. This not only worked on them but the icing on the cake was that another player, still to act behind Harrington in the blinds, could not wait to throw away his AQ against such apparent strength. This illustrates how poker can be elevated from the solid and dependable to the stylish and great.
Simon Ballou writes for Oddschecker Poker