Friends on the Table Part 2

Joe Sebok and Amanda Leatherman

In this, the second part of this article, we'll look at an example of a sticky situation that can arise from playing with a friend, as well as at the two hands-versus-one concept.

As I explained at the end of my

"Amarillo Slim" Preston: One of Doyle's friends.

Put fear and doubt into your opponents and you will walk over them. This is one of the reasons Doyle Brunson was able to bluff so effectively and win so many big pots with less-than-premium hands.

Combined equity brings a whole new set of options and lines into the game. If you have one or two friends on the table, you will practically always have the majority share of equity in a two- or three-hands-versus-one scenario. Although this isn't exactly on the level with how the game was meant to be played, it's not exactly against the rules either.

You always had the ability to play that exact hand in that exact manner regardless of who was playing the other hands. The only question is if you would have played it in the first place. Because it is impossible to make a ruling on a player's possible intention, it's not a breach of etiquette.

Just remember the rule of thumb: If you wouldn't feel comfortable telling the whole table exactly what's going down, then you shouldn't be doing it.

If you ever have to wonder if you might be breaking rules, you probably are. Play with friends all you like; just try to keep your game as close to "regular" as you can at all times, while avoiding clever plays and techniques to give yourselves an edge.

More beginner strategy articles:

Best Poker Sites - Editor`s Pick

Latest Blogs »