Here are chapters 31–35 of our Easy Game summary:
Chapter 31: Balancing and Equity
In chapter 31, Andrew Seidman explains why raising with a hand like A♥5♥ on an 8♥6♥4♣ flop can be correct even with only ~40–45% equity when stacks go in. Two forces justify the aggression:
-
Dead money: fold equity plus the existing pot can make a slightly equity-disadvantaged shove/stack-off profitable.
-
Balancing and depolarization: widening the set of hands you raise strengthens your overall range and enables more profitable bluffs.
He contrasts polarized flop-raising ranges (monsters + pure bluffs) with depolarized ranges that include medium-equity hands like strong draws, pair+draw, and sometimes top pair. Adding these “in-between” hands makes raises harder to classify as nuts-or-air, so opponents can’t comfortably fold hands like overpairs.
Good players sometimes raise top pair not because it’s “thick value,” but to keep their raising range dense enough that bluffs remain credible. On coordinated boards, a balanced raising range can include many strong made hands, powerful draws, and selective bluffs—creating strategic ambiguity and forcing opponents into tough guesses.
The core lesson: equity, fold equity, and range construction interact. Aggression with non-favorites can be strategically powerful when it builds a robust, believable raising range.
Chapter 32: Leverage
In chapter 32, Andrew Seidman defines leverage as risking as little as possible to force your opponent to risk as much as possible. The key is finding the leverage point: the smallest bet size that creates the intended difficult decision (often shove-or-fold), based on effective stacks.
A common mistake is overshooting—betting larger than necessary to create the same decision. Extra chips that don’t increase fold equity or change the opponent’s options are wasted: they create unnecessary dead money and reduce how often you can bluff profitably.
Leverage sits on a spectrum:
-
Too small → gives profitable calls.
-
Too big → burns money without added pressure.
-
Optimal → minimal risk for maximal decision pressure.
As pots grow and SPR shrinks, leverage points require less money on later streets. Seidman notes that early in his career he used oversized 4-bet bluffs and flop raises; improving sizing efficiency made his aggression profitable.
Leverage also supports balanced play: if you’re mixing bluffs and value, your sizing must work for both, or you become exploitable. Larger bets can be justified when opponents call too much and future streets allow you to reclaim that added money through continued pressure.
The takeaway: leverage is efficient pressure, not expensive pressure.
Chapter 33: Dual Mentalities
In chapter 33, Andrew Seidman introduces dual mentalities: the same hand can be profitable against different opponents, but only if your intention changes.
He describes two opponent archetypes:
-
Strong, narrow ranges that won’t fold much postflop.
-
Wide ranges that miss often and fold to pressure.
This creates two mindsets:
Nuts Mentality
Used against tight/sticky players who show up with strong hands and don’t fold well once they connect. You enter intending to make a big hand, invest little without strength, and aim to stack them when you hit hard. Bluffing is inefficient; value when you connect is the plan.
Air Mentality
Used against wide, fold-prone opponents. You expect to win many pots without strong hands by raising, floating, and applying pressure. Big hands are bonuses, not requirements.
Seidman reframes “fit-or-fold” as sometimes correct: against players who won’t fold strong hands, speculative hands profit from implied odds and disciplined folding when you miss. In multiway pots, you may adopt different mentalities toward different opponents in the same hand.
Core lesson: pick the right mindset before acting, and switch when the situation changes.
Chapter 34: Dead Money
In chapter 34, Andrew Seidman deepens the dead money concept by splitting it into two types:
Aggressive Dead Money
Chips put in through aggression that are later surrendered when the aggressor folds to resistance. Example: a player barrels multiple streets then folds to a shove—those invested chips become recoverable by a well-timed counter-attack. Strong aggressive players often create this.
Passive Dead Money
Chips put in through calling with a tendency to fold later (call preflop, fold to c-bet; call flop, fold turn). This money is easier to collect and is a major reward for sustained aggression.
Aggression is powerful because passive dead money accumulates steadily, but it can be punished if it creates aggressive dead money that opponents can capture with counter-raises. Beating aggressive players means recognizing when their pressure commits them and applying force at the right inflection point.
The takeaway: dead money is the fuel—passive dead money rewards pressure, aggressive dead money rewards well-timed counter-pressure.
Chapter 35: Deepstacked Play
In chapter 35, Andrew Seidman explains that deep stacks radically change hand values. As stacks grow, implied odds and especially reverse implied odds increase, making non-nut “strong hands” more fragile. Hands that stack off easily at 100bb can become liabilities at 300bb+.
Deep, the nuts matter more:
-
Higher pairs gain relative value because being overset is extremely costly and occurs less often with higher pairs.
-
Suited aces gain value because nut flushes and over-flush situations become far more profitable.
-
Connected hands improve because disguised nut straights and hidden strength extract more when opponents commit large stacks.
Seidman argues that cooler dynamics are not purely random—you influence them by choosing which hands you stack off with. Deep, it becomes more important to be the player doing the coolering rather than the one being dominated.
He notes that deeper stacks should, in theory, increase fold equity, but many players fail to adjust and still stack off too lightly. The implication is to bluff somewhat more—but not to assume opponents will fold “correctly.”
Core takeaway: deepstacked poker rewards nut potential, patience, and disciplined avoidance of costly second-best stack-offs.