Gigabet article - labels - winners, losers, good bad
We call bad players fish, bad, awful, loose, tight, nit, weak-tight, etc. It's a bad way of thinking. Most logical thinking is free of judgement.
Change your perspective. Step out of your shoes and into theirs. Don't think "they play loose," think "why do they play loose? How must they think about the game in order to play the way they do?"
Saying that a player does not think beyond his own cards is wrong. If there are four cards to a straight on board, you raise, and he doesn't have the straight, you better believe he's thinking about your hand. The difference is that we think deeper. But too many times we do the same things that we tend to use to judge bad players when we judge them in some way. We say they are "loose" but go no deeper. We label them a "nit" and leave it at that. We call them "weak-tight" and adjust our play from that simple label. We rarely think deeper. We think about what he is thinking about the hand, but we don't stop to think about what he is thinking about the game. How does he think the game is best played? How must he think about poker in order to play the way he does? "Loose" is just a label that does a poor job of describing the perspective a player has in how to play poker. There are so many other intricate details about a player's perspective that go unnoticed when applying a label to him, and it leads to mistakes or sub-optimal play against them.
We all look at reality through rose-colored lenses. Our thoughts and opinions are all biased based on our lives up to this point. Poker is not a game of cards, but a game of players - of perspectives. Sitting at a full-ring table is nine different perspectives of how to play poker. Some may be more similar than others, but they are all different from our own. We are too quick to judge a player looking through our own rose-colored lenses. If we see something differently than they see it, we think they are seeing it wrong. "THIS is how you should see it" we might think. "You should never have called that bet with such a weak hand!" This is what leads us to label people as "good" players or "bad" players, "loose" players or "tight" players. The truth is, they may not play the game as optimally as you do if you both have the same goals. But that line of thought does not help us to find the way to adjust most optimally to them. It stops us from thinking more deeply about how they see the game. We label them "loose-bad" and move on, using that information to make generalizations to adjust to them.
We could adjust far better and precisely by simply asking "Why does he play loose?", "Why does he call PSB's with all draws?", "Why did he call my raise with A3o?" Normally, we see something like this happen and happily note "loose - calls with weak hands - valuetown" etc. These notes and thoughts about a player help, but they help as much as doing shallow 2nd level thinking about a player's hand. We could derive so much more information just by taking a moment not to judge them, not to look at them through our own rose-colored glasses - our own perspective on the correct way to play - but instead see the game through their lenses, their perspective, and forget our own for a moment. We can figure out how a player must think about the game in order to play the way he does. From that we can infer how he will react to things we might do even though we haven't see it yet. We can adjust our play, our lines, our bet sizes, everything optimally from just not labeling a player and instead taking a moment to sit behind his colored lenses.
The first time I really understood this (not just read it, said "that's true", but REALLY understood it) was at a small home game that has went on every week for the last few years. I had started back playing in it for fun, having taken about a year off. In that span, I'd learned a lot of things about poker, corrected a lot of mistakes, knew the online poker lingo, knew what the labels were, knew what to do when I identified a nit/station/maniac, etc. I felt that I was a "good" player and my perspective was correct. I knew I had a plethora of mistakes and leaks to continue to fix, but I knew certain things to be correct or incorrect, and could quickly identify a "bad" player and adjust appropriately. I thought of all the other player's as 1st level thinkers. "They mostly only think about their own hands. They do little thinking about other player's hands and only shallow thinking at best." What I didn't realize was that I was doing the same thing, only about players and not hands. My thinking about them was as shallow as a lable and a handful of details. I was thinking about what hands they could have to make the plays that they made, but I was not thinking about what kind of perspective they could have to approach the game they way they played. This is a fundamental mistake.
My thinking about the game at the time was that all the players were very "loose." They saw the flop 80% of the time, called raises with very weak hands, and generally did not think about anything but their own hand. Easy game. They way I could adjust preflop with strong hands is to raise bigger and bigger as long as I was getting calls. I thought I was adjusting optimally, getting max value.
But some things always confused me a little. I was by far the tightest player in the game and everyone was aware of that. Even so, I would raise to 15x the bb and there would be commentary around the table as to what hand I had.
"He must have Aces or Kings." ...and then he'd call with Q7.
"Nah, he's got AK." ...and then he'd call with AT
"I think he as Queens." ...and then he'd call with QJs
I'd get 5 or 6 callers and tons of value! I would explain this with "they are just thinking about their own hand." Except it was completely obvious that they were thinking about my hand from the table talk.
I'd explain it with "They are calling because of implied odds, since they know I have a big hand" except they not only didn't know what implied odds were, they just didn't think that way. I would frequently get questioned about how on earth I could call one of their 15x raises with 44 if it was clear the guy had AA/KK. I just never saw or heard any evidence to support that most of the regular players thought this way.
I'd explain it as "They are just gambling and having fun." Certainly that is partly true. But occasionally I didn't get 6 callers. I'd only get 1 or 0 callers. I'd seen some of the junk they called with before, they're standards were pretty low for calling that size of a raise.
So what was it? What factor am I missing? Is it some combination of these? "They are loose players, that explains why they call. But it doesn't explain why they sometimes fold hands better than ones they had called with before." Why aren't loose players consistently doing what loose players do?
The answer came to me one night during the game. I opened to my standard 15xbb. The table talk immediately started as always. One young player sitting 2 to my left, who never failed to bring his sunglasses to the nightly game, stood up and said:
"WHY WOULD YOU EVER RAISE THAT MUCH?!?! You will never get called!!!!"
I replied, "Watch."
The older gentleman to my direct left called. Then something funny happened. The guy who had just stood up and made all that noise, the one who proclaimed that I would never get called.......called!
"WHAT!" , I said. "You just said thatI would never get called. And then YOU called! That doesn't even make sense."
The whole table started laughing, including the guy we are talking about. He then said with a big smile "I know, but now I have pot odds." He latter showed down A6 offsuit.
We had a good time from that, but I didn't forget it and later spent some time really thinking about what had happened. I realized that I had found my answer to why sometimes they all call and other times they will fold the same or better hands. Pot odds! Here I could have simply thought "They are bad players, they don't understand pot odds, pretty obvious, nothing I didn't already know," and left it at that. That would have been a costly mistake. Instead, because the funny situation that had come up, I was curious enough to actually thinking about the "why" and not just the "what". I realized that their understanding of the concept of pot odds only went as far as meaning "the pot is big." I realized that they liked to see flops and wanted reasons to call. "Pot odds" was a good excuse. I saw the pain they expressed when they would have flopped the nuts with 52o in a large pot and showed their mucked cards to the table afterwards, thinking "If only I had called." Crying pot odds and calling was a way for them to avoid this and to justify a call.
The sunglasses wearing player had given me great insight into how he thinks about the game. He allowed me to look through his perspective on the right way to play poker. Whether it was good thinking or bad thinking was not important. What was important was knowing how he thought about the game, which would allow me to make far more optimal plays against him and the rest of the players who thought in similar ways. The very first adjustment I made from then on out in that weekly game was re-adjusting my bet sizes. Rather than raise to 15x just because they were "loose" players, I also factored in who was on my left. If the loosest players in the game were on my side of the table (and there are some that would call 15x cold with 40-50% of hands), then I would raise even more than before. I knew that if at least one called, and there was a good chance of that, then it would start a cascade. If another player called, it was even more likely for the next to call. Even if I open-raised to 20xbb, the last few players would call with almost any hand they had if there were callers before them. I was opening AA to 20xbb and getting calls from J5s.
I had been stuck judging players behind my own rose-colored lenses. Having the opportunity to see what they see gave me a far better idea of how to adjust to them than any lable could have. The result is that I got far more value from my starting hands. I could make more precise adjustments to my opening raise size rather than just opening big because they were "loose" and moving up or down based on the average number of callers. The old way was an easy way to think, a convenience, a shortcut, a mental hotkey, a word to associate with a strategy. But it was lazy. It was imprecise. It was costing me money.
Now I work everyday to avoid being lazy by just using labels. It's habit that is deep-rooted. It's a habit that we should all try to avoid or at least minimize. It makes us lazy. We label based on our perspective; by what we think the correct way to play is, and then we use that lable to adjust. But we only scratch the surface of layers upon layers of a player's game and his psychology. We should stop to think away from the game about how our opponents are thinking about poker. Not just that they "go too far with TP", "slowplay too much", "bluffs often", "is aggressive", not just on what we think they are doing right or doing wrong, but how the game must look through their eyes in order to play the way that they do. If we can understand them on that level, if we can know what they must be seeing and thinking through their own perspective and not just through our own rose-colored lenses, then we can adapt and adjust on a whole new level.
What's been happening:
More research on Sleep/Diet/Exercise to improve mental clarity and play at peak more often and for longer. Mainly sleep this week. I have a stack of papers to sort through, understand, and pick out the pieces that will help. I already know there is a LOT of improvement that can be made in this area.
Those 3 things look to be the 3 pillars of good physical and mental health and something I'm very interested in for the high stress, long hours, thought/memory intesive profession that I'm in. I'll try to blog more on findings, things to change, ways to implement etc. when I can. One thing that I think will be very helpful is synching my sessions with circadian rhythm peaks. It would be nice if that aligned with high traffic times. So far, online reports say online traffic peaks at either 2 or 4p.m. ET. Unfortanately, 2p.m. is typically a circadian rhythm dip. Well, I'll figure it out. I also want to start incorporating power naps between sessions to improve awareness. More on all this later.
Didn't get to read more on economic theory applications to poker, but it's on the agenda.
Tonight is Alan's game. Robin is coming to it tonight. No specific plans which is my fault. I definitely could have spent a couple hours thinking about it rather than watching Sopranos episodes. I definitely want to incorporate some preflop 3betting/squeezing at some point, not so much to balance my range (doesn't matter vs them), but to pick up a TON of preflop dead money. They will also think that because I am so aggressive pre-flop with some bluffs, that'll I'll be bluffing just as much post-flop, which will not be the case at all. Not tonight though. Just going to play, try to focus on each hand, play well, and enjoy the evening.
Tomarrow, I will be definitely getting in some hands and starting rakeback. It's nose to the grindstone time.
More research on Sleep/Diet/Exercise to improve mental clarity and play at peak more often and for longer. Mainly sleep this week. I have a stack of papers to sort through, understand, and pick out the pieces that will help. I already know there is a LOT of improvement that can be made in this area.
Those 3 things look to be the 3 pillars of good physical and mental health and something I'm very interested in for the high stress, long hours, thought/memory intesive profession that I'm in. I'll try to blog more on findings, things to change, ways to implement etc. when I can. One thing that I think will be very helpful is synching my sessions with circadian rhythm peaks. It would be nice if that aligned with high traffic times. So far, online reports say online traffic peaks at either 2 or 4p.m. ET. Unfortanately, 2p.m. is typically a circadian rhythm dip. Well, I'll figure it out. I also want to start incorporating power naps between sessions to improve awareness. More on all this later.
Didn't get to read more on economic theory applications to poker, but it's on the agenda.
Tonight is Alan's game. Robin is coming to it tonight. No specific plans which is my fault. I definitely could have spent a couple hours thinking about it rather than watching Sopranos episodes. I definitely want to incorporate some preflop 3betting/squeezing at some point, not so much to balance my range (doesn't matter vs them), but to pick up a TON of preflop dead money. They will also think that because I am so aggressive pre-flop with some bluffs, that'll I'll be bluffing just as much post-flop, which will not be the case at all. Not tonight though. Just going to play, try to focus on each hand, play well, and enjoy the evening.
Tomarrow, I will be definitely getting in some hands and starting rakeback. It's nose to the grindstone time.
Researching ways for a better diet, one that keeps energy levels high and even throughout the day (and balancing blood-sugar levels) as well as fighting mental decline through age. Also wandered from that into sleep, ways to get the best sleep, best amount of sleep, power naps for renewed focus and clarity, sleep cycles, circadian rhythm, etc. Found out some interesting things that promote sleep such as core body temperature and more on the obvious importance of sleep for mental clarity, focus, and energy levels throughout the day. Some on exercise, especially pertaining to energy levels, stress reduction, and better sleep. Diet, exercise, sleep look to be my initial core elements to maintaining strong mental health, reduced stress, and operating a peak performance for larger amounts of time.
Quote of the Day
"Being wrong is erroneously associated with failure, when in fact, being proven wrong should be celebrated, for it is elevating someone to a new level of understanding, elevating awareness."
Zeitgeist Addendum
Zeitgeist Addendum
State of the Game
So much going on right now. I'm hitting the "books" again - watching videos, reviewing notes, etc. I've set up a daily study routine that consists of:
I've set up a file system a la GTD for poker for "projects" and I think that will help me keep things just as organized as it has my life over the last year. The best thing of all is that having everything so well organized allows me to stop thinking about it, knowing it will be taken care of and not lost or forgotten, and focus on what I'm working on.
Currently, the projects are Diet, Exercise, and Sleep. Each week I will contribute something to each of these as long as they are still projects. As my study continues, I can add deliberate practice projects such as Math, 3betting, playing deep, playing live, etc.
I've also been reading the things on neuroeconomics. It's so fascinating how poker is connected to everything. It's just a game played with cards. No, it's a game of people, politics, and psychology. The psychology part alone is universal. At first you just think it's a game played with cards and chips. Then you realize there's some strategy behind it; it's not all luck. Then you realize there's actually math behind it. You can actually prove plays are correct mathematically and infer the amount you will win long-term, regardless of short-term results. For many, it stops here. Oh no, this rabbit hole goes much deeper.
Neuroeconomics, and the prospect theory in particular, explains a naturally occurring lapse in logic people experience when facing loss or gain. It isn't specifically meant for poker, but all the basics are there. And that is why poker is universal. The chips and cards are just tools, just objects, not really all that relevant. The core is the person, and that is why these studies that may have originally come from stock market studies, or sports psychology, or evolutionary tendencies-they can be applied to poker. It's a game about people.
Anyways, doing just some initial reading has given me insight on why I'm sometimes to careful or nervous before playing or getting involved in a hand. Why I sometimes lack confidence even though my results and all my logic tell me different. It's not and instant-fix, but the first step is understanding the problem. The last few days I felt a bit of a weight lifted just from the act of making the unknown, known. Now that my enemy is revealed, he can be defeated.
- Reviewing notes
- Doing a session review and post hands/reply to forums
- Watching a video
- Deliberate Practice planning
- and finally recording a 1 or 2 hr deliberate practice session (to be reviewed at some point, still have to work on that)
I've set up a file system a la GTD for poker for "projects" and I think that will help me keep things just as organized as it has my life over the last year. The best thing of all is that having everything so well organized allows me to stop thinking about it, knowing it will be taken care of and not lost or forgotten, and focus on what I'm working on.
Currently, the projects are Diet, Exercise, and Sleep. Each week I will contribute something to each of these as long as they are still projects. As my study continues, I can add deliberate practice projects such as Math, 3betting, playing deep, playing live, etc.
I've also been reading the things on neuroeconomics. It's so fascinating how poker is connected to everything. It's just a game played with cards. No, it's a game of people, politics, and psychology. The psychology part alone is universal. At first you just think it's a game played with cards and chips. Then you realize there's some strategy behind it; it's not all luck. Then you realize there's actually math behind it. You can actually prove plays are correct mathematically and infer the amount you will win long-term, regardless of short-term results. For many, it stops here. Oh no, this rabbit hole goes much deeper.
Neuroeconomics, and the prospect theory in particular, explains a naturally occurring lapse in logic people experience when facing loss or gain. It isn't specifically meant for poker, but all the basics are there. And that is why poker is universal. The chips and cards are just tools, just objects, not really all that relevant. The core is the person, and that is why these studies that may have originally come from stock market studies, or sports psychology, or evolutionary tendencies-they can be applied to poker. It's a game about people.
Anyways, doing just some initial reading has given me insight on why I'm sometimes to careful or nervous before playing or getting involved in a hand. Why I sometimes lack confidence even though my results and all my logic tell me different. It's not and instant-fix, but the first step is understanding the problem. The last few days I felt a bit of a weight lifted just from the act of making the unknown, known. Now that my enemy is revealed, he can be defeated.
"Is Tiger Woods Loss Averse" and its relation to poker
Currently reading a research paper released in June (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1419027). The paper uses golf as the subject, but the underlying principle applies to almost to many other areas, including poker.. It's provides evidence from over a million putts on the PGA, to suggest that even seasoned, experienced experts are loss averse. In other words, they focus and perform better when facing a possible poor result or "loss" (in this case, when putting for par), than they do when facing a very good or "winning" result (in this case, a birdie putt). Also, they are more willing to take higher risks when behind than when ahead. This can be immediately thought of in poker regarding typical player's decision-making behavior when way down vs. way up. People typically gamble more (i.e. take more risks) when trying to break-even than they will when they are way up during a session. Often a player that is way up will pass on high risk situations even though that situation may be very +EV, whereas the same player would get involved if way down. He is loss averse, and just as the paper suggests for golf, this mistake is very costly.
This paper isn't the first to suggest this when referencing economic models and how an agent's decisions are affected when faced with different levels of risk. The first was called the Prospect Theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prospect_theory). However, this paper suggested that these affects were diminished in agents of great experience. In other words, pros on the PGA Tour would not be susceptible to being loss-averse and their decisions would be consistent. The current paper uses all the evidence of putts to try to prove this wrong; that even highly experienced agents were still loss-averse and it is costing them wins and money.
On last thing to mention in this post that was pointed out in my limited reading so far is that the researchers believe people put a lot of value and focus in something that is really irrelevant: Par. It's just a reference point that people judge their success by, that really has little meaning in how they are and should be playing. This is why they suggest people focus more on the par putt than the birdie putt. It's the fear/pressure/etc of going over par and taking, what they would consider, a loss. They aren't faced with this during a birdie putt. This same imaginary, irrelevant reference point that everyone looks at to judge their level of success/failure exists in poker. It's the break-even point.
A session is far too small a sample for a win or loss to be evidence of performance for the most part. The volatility has not had time to even out and can deviate greatly from the mean. However, it is very hard for experienced players and especially novice players to separate their results from their performance in the short term. Win a lot and you feel like you are playing great. Lose a lot and you will feel like you are playing terrible. The truth may be the complete opposite.
Even though this reference point is irrelevant, we falsely give it value and it, in turn, affects our decisions. Something that has no value in decision-making but still affects our decisions is not optimal and leads to inconsistencies and mistakes. An easy example of this is passing on a +EV spot when we are way up because a loss would leave us break-even or down (i.e. high risk and we are now risk averse), even though we would take that spot at other times just because we are in a different position with regards to the irrelevant reference point (like when we are down or even) . We cost ourselves money and make poor decisions just because we are loss averse.
I know I suffer from this loss aversion. It's not something this just applies to a person in one realm, but follows through to other challenges. Often in other games, when way ahead, I freeze up. Since I'm watching the SF4 Evo championships right now, I'll use Street Fighter as an example. Some rounds I'll be far ahead of my opponent, crushing him the entire time. But if I'm about to get a perfect or sometimes just win by a lot, my game will change and I'll start to get destroyed. It doesn't happen a lot, but when it does, it definitely makes me sit up and think "WTF IS HAPPENING?!" I instantly go from playing well and aggressive to playing too safe, too careful, and end up playing much worse than I should. Similar things have happened in MTG with an X-0 record. It seems like when it does happen, as soon as I lose, the pressure is off and I'm back to feeling comfortable and playing more aggressively for the win. This fits right in with the Prospect Theory and a person's risk aversion when "gaining", versus their risk tolerant nature when "losing."
Lately, I've been reading a lot about clutch players and competitors. These are the guys that perform the best under pressure. It's a characteristic I want to develop and it is definitely, in some way, related to this study.
I'm going to continue to read the article and try to post up a summary of each section as I go.
P.S. I keep coming up with other ways this sort of thing affects me. Another way is, on a smaller level, when I start with a premium starting hand. Often, even with AA, I'm nervous when called of losing to a set or two pair. I feel the anxiety, especially when called on the flop, but have to fight back the want to check on the Turn. This is even more true with something like AQ with TP on the flop. It's true in Alan's game as well when called by many people. Instead of focusing 100% on the most EV plays, part of my focusing is almost dividing with the fear of losing with a strong hand. I don't have the same feeling if I have 33 or 57s. I start with a premium hand, I'm ahead, and therefore loss averse, even though I haven't actually won anything yet. It is almost like the though is "I have a good hand, I SHOULD win." I know it's bad thinking and don't consciously do it, but it might be very deep rooted and still having an very real effect. It's definitely a psychological barrier I have to get over. Fortunately, being aware of it is the first step to getting rid of it.
This paper isn't the first to suggest this when referencing economic models and how an agent's decisions are affected when faced with different levels of risk. The first was called the Prospect Theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prospect_theory). However, this paper suggested that these affects were diminished in agents of great experience. In other words, pros on the PGA Tour would not be susceptible to being loss-averse and their decisions would be consistent. The current paper uses all the evidence of putts to try to prove this wrong; that even highly experienced agents were still loss-averse and it is costing them wins and money.
On last thing to mention in this post that was pointed out in my limited reading so far is that the researchers believe people put a lot of value and focus in something that is really irrelevant: Par. It's just a reference point that people judge their success by, that really has little meaning in how they are and should be playing. This is why they suggest people focus more on the par putt than the birdie putt. It's the fear/pressure/etc of going over par and taking, what they would consider, a loss. They aren't faced with this during a birdie putt. This same imaginary, irrelevant reference point that everyone looks at to judge their level of success/failure exists in poker. It's the break-even point.
A session is far too small a sample for a win or loss to be evidence of performance for the most part. The volatility has not had time to even out and can deviate greatly from the mean. However, it is very hard for experienced players and especially novice players to separate their results from their performance in the short term. Win a lot and you feel like you are playing great. Lose a lot and you will feel like you are playing terrible. The truth may be the complete opposite.
Even though this reference point is irrelevant, we falsely give it value and it, in turn, affects our decisions. Something that has no value in decision-making but still affects our decisions is not optimal and leads to inconsistencies and mistakes. An easy example of this is passing on a +EV spot when we are way up because a loss would leave us break-even or down (i.e. high risk and we are now risk averse), even though we would take that spot at other times just because we are in a different position with regards to the irrelevant reference point (like when we are down or even) . We cost ourselves money and make poor decisions just because we are loss averse.
I know I suffer from this loss aversion. It's not something this just applies to a person in one realm, but follows through to other challenges. Often in other games, when way ahead, I freeze up. Since I'm watching the SF4 Evo championships right now, I'll use Street Fighter as an example. Some rounds I'll be far ahead of my opponent, crushing him the entire time. But if I'm about to get a perfect or sometimes just win by a lot, my game will change and I'll start to get destroyed. It doesn't happen a lot, but when it does, it definitely makes me sit up and think "WTF IS HAPPENING?!" I instantly go from playing well and aggressive to playing too safe, too careful, and end up playing much worse than I should. Similar things have happened in MTG with an X-0 record. It seems like when it does happen, as soon as I lose, the pressure is off and I'm back to feeling comfortable and playing more aggressively for the win. This fits right in with the Prospect Theory and a person's risk aversion when "gaining", versus their risk tolerant nature when "losing."
Lately, I've been reading a lot about clutch players and competitors. These are the guys that perform the best under pressure. It's a characteristic I want to develop and it is definitely, in some way, related to this study.
I'm going to continue to read the article and try to post up a summary of each section as I go.
P.S. I keep coming up with other ways this sort of thing affects me. Another way is, on a smaller level, when I start with a premium starting hand. Often, even with AA, I'm nervous when called of losing to a set or two pair. I feel the anxiety, especially when called on the flop, but have to fight back the want to check on the Turn. This is even more true with something like AQ with TP on the flop. It's true in Alan's game as well when called by many people. Instead of focusing 100% on the most EV plays, part of my focusing is almost dividing with the fear of losing with a strong hand. I don't have the same feeling if I have 33 or 57s. I start with a premium hand, I'm ahead, and therefore loss averse, even though I haven't actually won anything yet. It is almost like the though is "I have a good hand, I SHOULD win." I know it's bad thinking and don't consciously do it, but it might be very deep rooted and still having an very real effect. It's definitely a psychological barrier I have to get over. Fortunately, being aware of it is the first step to getting rid of it.
Becoming a Better Professional Part 2
1. Deliberate practice
Musicians use deliberate practice. Golfers use deliberate practice. It is simply the most efficient way to practice that I know of right now. It's just identifying something to improve on, and then doing it over and over again, hour after hour, until the hole is patched. It's easy to just sit down and play poker and work on many things at once as they come up, but I should look to working on something specific each and every day. I should either look for a special session to do it, or just focus on it during the whole time I am playing that day. I should also re-read "Talent is Overrated" and take notes to use. The second thing on this list works hand-in-hand with deliberate practice of a leak.
2. Review play daily, weekly, and monthly
I need to be actively looking for leaks and thinking about my game and strategy as a whole. That's the way to build a stronger technical game. Daily reviews will allow me to look at individual hands and how I could have played them better, do the math, and get advice. I should be reviewing both HEM and videos. Weekly Reviews give me a higher perspective and make the stats more accurate. I can use this information to know what to work on and study the following week. Finally, the Monthly Review gives me a bird's eye view of my game and strategy as a whole. I can use this to look at stats and groups of hands (cbets, 3bets, etc) and find leaks as well as think of ways to improve my entire strategy and know what to work on over the next month. I need to set up a process or checklist for each to make things run more quickly and smoothly. I also will file the weekly/monthly reports to have a record to changes I've made or planned to make.
3. Be accountable
This is incredibly important. Being accountable is another trait I admire in GSP. He admits fault even in things that are not really his fault. For example, in the Alves fight, he said something snapped and hindered his performance. It was because their fight happened sooner than expected and he didn't have enough time to warm up. Most leave it at that; nothing they could do about it. But then hesitates, realizes he should never be making excuses, and then he says that it was his fault. He is a professional and the champion, and as such, should have planned for things like this and began warming up earlier. He accepts responsibility and is accountable even when it wasn't really under his control.
The reason being accountable at all times is so important is because it forces you to look for something you could be doing better, regardless of whether or not you actually can. Maybe you could have done something about it, but it is easy to miss and would never immediately realize it if you weren't diligently looking for it. If you are accountable, you will search for that hidden problem. Maybe you don't see a way to avoid what happened, but you discover something else related you could improve on. It may even lead you to thinking outside of the box.
If we are not accountable, we don't look for ways to improve. We don't think we are at fault, and then there is nothing to change. But we must always strive to improve and we always can. Being 100% accountable gives us the opportunity to improve; to find some area somewhere that is not perfect. It is a habit that will keep us busy looking for ways to reach our full potential. So when things go wrong, I must swallow that pride, admit that I could have done something better even if it's true or not, I can see it or can't see it, and create a habit that will always keep me searching and striving to be a better player the next time.
4. Coaching
Everyone needs a coach; an outside perspective. They will teach you things, make you question things, and give you a new view to a problem that you would not have seen on your own. It will also help to create a network of players that could be very beneficial in the future.
Also, I should look into coaching others when the time is right. That's one of the best ways to understand concepts and reinforce my foundation. It will also provide an outside source of income and provide some name recognition which could be helpful for future networking.
5. Consistent schedule with time off to relax
The body adapts to a schedule and to operate at peak performance, I need a routine schedule to follow. It will build daily habits and take more burden off of my mind about what I need to be doing and allow more focus to be on what I am doing right now. It will be less stressful and provide a healthier lifestyle. I also need to plan time off just to clear my head and relax or have fun. That will insure my performance can stay at it's peak without getting worn down over time.
6. Optimal sleep (amount and time)
Obviously, sleep is incredibly important too. Everyone needs different amounts of sleep to operate at their best. I need to research sleep, how to get the best sleep, what the optimal amount of sleep is for me, and implement that so that I can perform at my peak the next day with a clear head, lots of energy, and less stress.
7. Exercise
Exercise gives us energy and a healthy mind and body makes us feel better during the day. Sitting in front of a computer screen all day is not very healthy so I need a good routine that will keep me clear headed and relieve the most stress, as well as increase my heart rate to burn the most calories during the day while I'm working. It sounds like it will be mainly cardio. I need to research and experiment with routines that give me the most energy, focus, and mental clarity. It will also relieve stress and allow me to sleep better during the night.
8. Specialized Diet including supplements
Right along with exercise, diet is very important to keep me clear headed, healthy, focused, and energetic. Sugary drinks, junk food, large meals early in the day, too much caffeine at night, etc. are all things I must avoid to stay at my peak during the day. I should look at any supplements to improve focus if there are any. I also need a diet that can provide the energy for a cardio workout without making me too tired for the rest of the day. I will obviously do a low fat diet, and look into a low carb diet or some other "mental" diets that may be out there.
9. Meditation/Vizualization
Meditation is a great form of stress relief as well as a way to clear the mind. Just like we need to allow the body to recover after strenuous activity, we need to let the mind do the same. Clearing out my thoughts will allow me to focus more on what is at hand right now. Visualization is an important technique for establishing a stronger comfort zone with new things, syncing the mind with the body during performance, and gaining mental experience before the work.
10. Keep great records of monthly results
This will allow me to make better plans for future goals and projects, reduce stress from financial uncertainty, and allow me to keep better records for taxes. It can also come in handy as a reference tool for possibly future coaching.
Each one of these should be individual projects to work on implementing and then becoming habit or routine and allow me to be come the best player I can be and become a true professonal. Most of them qualify as individual folders for the GTD system and I will create that by Friday.
Musicians use deliberate practice. Golfers use deliberate practice. It is simply the most efficient way to practice that I know of right now. It's just identifying something to improve on, and then doing it over and over again, hour after hour, until the hole is patched. It's easy to just sit down and play poker and work on many things at once as they come up, but I should look to working on something specific each and every day. I should either look for a special session to do it, or just focus on it during the whole time I am playing that day. I should also re-read "Talent is Overrated" and take notes to use. The second thing on this list works hand-in-hand with deliberate practice of a leak.
2. Review play daily, weekly, and monthly
I need to be actively looking for leaks and thinking about my game and strategy as a whole. That's the way to build a stronger technical game. Daily reviews will allow me to look at individual hands and how I could have played them better, do the math, and get advice. I should be reviewing both HEM and videos. Weekly Reviews give me a higher perspective and make the stats more accurate. I can use this information to know what to work on and study the following week. Finally, the Monthly Review gives me a bird's eye view of my game and strategy as a whole. I can use this to look at stats and groups of hands (cbets, 3bets, etc) and find leaks as well as think of ways to improve my entire strategy and know what to work on over the next month. I need to set up a process or checklist for each to make things run more quickly and smoothly. I also will file the weekly/monthly reports to have a record to changes I've made or planned to make.
3. Be accountable
This is incredibly important. Being accountable is another trait I admire in GSP. He admits fault even in things that are not really his fault. For example, in the Alves fight, he said something snapped and hindered his performance. It was because their fight happened sooner than expected and he didn't have enough time to warm up. Most leave it at that; nothing they could do about it. But then hesitates, realizes he should never be making excuses, and then he says that it was his fault. He is a professional and the champion, and as such, should have planned for things like this and began warming up earlier. He accepts responsibility and is accountable even when it wasn't really under his control.
The reason being accountable at all times is so important is because it forces you to look for something you could be doing better, regardless of whether or not you actually can. Maybe you could have done something about it, but it is easy to miss and would never immediately realize it if you weren't diligently looking for it. If you are accountable, you will search for that hidden problem. Maybe you don't see a way to avoid what happened, but you discover something else related you could improve on. It may even lead you to thinking outside of the box.
If we are not accountable, we don't look for ways to improve. We don't think we are at fault, and then there is nothing to change. But we must always strive to improve and we always can. Being 100% accountable gives us the opportunity to improve; to find some area somewhere that is not perfect. It is a habit that will keep us busy looking for ways to reach our full potential. So when things go wrong, I must swallow that pride, admit that I could have done something better even if it's true or not, I can see it or can't see it, and create a habit that will always keep me searching and striving to be a better player the next time.
4. Coaching
Everyone needs a coach; an outside perspective. They will teach you things, make you question things, and give you a new view to a problem that you would not have seen on your own. It will also help to create a network of players that could be very beneficial in the future.
Also, I should look into coaching others when the time is right. That's one of the best ways to understand concepts and reinforce my foundation. It will also provide an outside source of income and provide some name recognition which could be helpful for future networking.
5. Consistent schedule with time off to relax
The body adapts to a schedule and to operate at peak performance, I need a routine schedule to follow. It will build daily habits and take more burden off of my mind about what I need to be doing and allow more focus to be on what I am doing right now. It will be less stressful and provide a healthier lifestyle. I also need to plan time off just to clear my head and relax or have fun. That will insure my performance can stay at it's peak without getting worn down over time.
6. Optimal sleep (amount and time)
Obviously, sleep is incredibly important too. Everyone needs different amounts of sleep to operate at their best. I need to research sleep, how to get the best sleep, what the optimal amount of sleep is for me, and implement that so that I can perform at my peak the next day with a clear head, lots of energy, and less stress.
7. Exercise
Exercise gives us energy and a healthy mind and body makes us feel better during the day. Sitting in front of a computer screen all day is not very healthy so I need a good routine that will keep me clear headed and relieve the most stress, as well as increase my heart rate to burn the most calories during the day while I'm working. It sounds like it will be mainly cardio. I need to research and experiment with routines that give me the most energy, focus, and mental clarity. It will also relieve stress and allow me to sleep better during the night.
8. Specialized Diet including supplements
Right along with exercise, diet is very important to keep me clear headed, healthy, focused, and energetic. Sugary drinks, junk food, large meals early in the day, too much caffeine at night, etc. are all things I must avoid to stay at my peak during the day. I should look at any supplements to improve focus if there are any. I also need a diet that can provide the energy for a cardio workout without making me too tired for the rest of the day. I will obviously do a low fat diet, and look into a low carb diet or some other "mental" diets that may be out there.
9. Meditation/Vizualization
Meditation is a great form of stress relief as well as a way to clear the mind. Just like we need to allow the body to recover after strenuous activity, we need to let the mind do the same. Clearing out my thoughts will allow me to focus more on what is at hand right now. Visualization is an important technique for establishing a stronger comfort zone with new things, syncing the mind with the body during performance, and gaining mental experience before the work.
10. Keep great records of monthly results
This will allow me to make better plans for future goals and projects, reduce stress from financial uncertainty, and allow me to keep better records for taxes. It can also come in handy as a reference tool for possibly future coaching.
Each one of these should be individual projects to work on implementing and then becoming habit or routine and allow me to be come the best player I can be and become a true professonal. Most of them qualify as individual folders for the GTD system and I will create that by Friday.
Becoming a Better Professional
GSP has been one of the fighters I respect greatly for a long time now. It's not just because of his ability, but one of his biggest strength's that allowed him to get where he is today: his attitude.
He's achieved what he has through another level of professionalism. In pre- and post-fight press conferences, he's the only guy in a suit and tie. He and Greg Jackson take their work very seriously and implement techniques of training, physical and mental, from various unrelated sources and apply them to MMA. Some of it is incredibly innovative. Things people may see as odd today, which will be common practice tomorrow. It reminds me of Bruce Lee, a philosopher and pioneer, who expressed himself through martial arts.
Many poker players lack that professionalism. It's a competition of old gamblers and college kid slackers and everybody in between. That next step for players becoming true professionals, the step GSP has recently taken in the fight game, the outside-the-box thinking of Greg Jackson, hasn't really been taken on a large scale. The truth is that seeing GSP as well as all of the other things I've picked up through the years from extraordinary people has inspired me to take that step of becoming a real professional.
Here's a list of 10 things I will start implementing to become a better professional:
He's achieved what he has through another level of professionalism. In pre- and post-fight press conferences, he's the only guy in a suit and tie. He and Greg Jackson take their work very seriously and implement techniques of training, physical and mental, from various unrelated sources and apply them to MMA. Some of it is incredibly innovative. Things people may see as odd today, which will be common practice tomorrow. It reminds me of Bruce Lee, a philosopher and pioneer, who expressed himself through martial arts.Many poker players lack that professionalism. It's a competition of old gamblers and college kid slackers and everybody in between. That next step for players becoming true professionals, the step GSP has recently taken in the fight game, the outside-the-box thinking of Greg Jackson, hasn't really been taken on a large scale. The truth is that seeing GSP as well as all of the other things I've picked up through the years from extraordinary people has inspired me to take that step of becoming a real professional.
Here's a list of 10 things I will start implementing to become a better professional:
- Deliberate practice
- Review play daily, weekly, and monthly
- Be accountable
- Coaching
- Consistent schedule with time off to relax
- Optimal sleep (amount and time)
- Exercise
- Specialized Diet including supplements
- Meditation/Vizualization
- Keep great records of monthly results
Live Players Love Their "Pot Odds"
Last night I had a small breakthrough, something that's been on the surface and I've known, but it really hit home.
My standard raise in Alan's game is 10-12xbb. This frequently gets comments like "10 into a 4 pot?!?!", "He must have AA", and other nonsense. But then they all call as they always do wherever I play. It's exactly the reason you can flex your bet sizes vs weak players and play very exploitably: They just aren't going to exploit you well. I frequently build the biggest pots in that game because even though I "must have AA", I'll get 6-8 callers, making it a 60-80 pot on the flop.
Well, last night my pre-flop raise size grew from 10 to 14bbs. The first time I did it, Snoop (who's max raise is usually 7 even with AA) says "WHY would you ever bet that much, no ones going to call!!!" The calling station on my left quickly calls and then something interesting happens, Snoop calls.
Me: Wait. What? Now that doesn't make sense. You said no one is going to call, AND THEN YOU CALL!
Snoop: Yeah, but then I got "pot odds" now.
Four more players proceeded to call this raise that "no one was going to call."
The truth is that live/weak players don't understand pot odds at all. That's easy to realize and I've always known it, but never really thought about exactly what their thought process is regarding pot odds and how to exploit that. Pot odds has two elements: Pot size AND bet size. Using the two, you can get a ratio like 2:1 and with that you can compare it to the odds of your hand improving to the best and see if you are getting the correct immediate price to continue.
The important thing I learned is that they only factor in the first, pot size. "Pot odds" for these players is simply synonymous and interchangeable with "the pot is big."
This works for them because it helps them to justify calling, especially preflop, which is what they love to do: call too much. It's almost as if they tell themselves "Remember, as long as you say pot odds first, you can make the call." It reminds me of Jimbo and his method to bypass hunting regulations:
Jimbo: Just remember kid, always yell "It's coming right for us!" before you start shooting.
This seems consistent among many, many live players. It's like one guy read a book and it spread like rumors spread, the result is always horribly twisted from its original form as each person adds or takes away a little. Or maybe they just watch WSOP reruns, heard it there, heard it at the table, and inferred that the meaning was that the pot is big and they can call. Or may it's just two words that make them feel ok about not folding when they know they should.
Regardless, this a VERY good thing. Immediately, I can think of a couple ways to exploit this:
I need a special name for it as to not get it confused with real pot odds. I'll be thinking about further ways to exploit this such as 3betting preflop, adjusting bet sizes depending on positions of these players, etc during the week.
P.S. Later I raised to 14 again with AA after getting called 6-ways previously and Snoop called me "Donkey Kong" talking to Dave. I don't know who's the teacher and who's the student, but somebody's shoveling bullshit and the other is eating it up. Those guys are completely oblivious to how much they misunderstand poker. It's odd that he will see me get called in 6 spots raising to 14 and yet he'll still not learn from it and say "Hey, he got a lot of money in the pot that way, I can copy that and do the same" but he still only raises to 7 or 8. Oh well, Snoop doesn't play bad, he just runs bad all the time as he says... Ignorance is bliss.
My standard raise in Alan's game is 10-12xbb. This frequently gets comments like "10 into a 4 pot?!?!", "He must have AA", and other nonsense. But then they all call as they always do wherever I play. It's exactly the reason you can flex your bet sizes vs weak players and play very exploitably: They just aren't going to exploit you well. I frequently build the biggest pots in that game because even though I "must have AA", I'll get 6-8 callers, making it a 60-80 pot on the flop.
Well, last night my pre-flop raise size grew from 10 to 14bbs. The first time I did it, Snoop (who's max raise is usually 7 even with AA) says "WHY would you ever bet that much, no ones going to call!!!" The calling station on my left quickly calls and then something interesting happens, Snoop calls.
Me: Wait. What? Now that doesn't make sense. You said no one is going to call, AND THEN YOU CALL!
Snoop: Yeah, but then I got "pot odds" now.
Four more players proceeded to call this raise that "no one was going to call."
The truth is that live/weak players don't understand pot odds at all. That's easy to realize and I've always known it, but never really thought about exactly what their thought process is regarding pot odds and how to exploit that. Pot odds has two elements: Pot size AND bet size. Using the two, you can get a ratio like 2:1 and with that you can compare it to the odds of your hand improving to the best and see if you are getting the correct immediate price to continue.
The important thing I learned is that they only factor in the first, pot size. "Pot odds" for these players is simply synonymous and interchangeable with "the pot is big."
This works for them because it helps them to justify calling, especially preflop, which is what they love to do: call too much. It's almost as if they tell themselves "Remember, as long as you say pot odds first, you can make the call." It reminds me of Jimbo and his method to bypass hunting regulations:
Jimbo: Just remember kid, always yell "It's coming right for us!" before you start shooting.
This seems consistent among many, many live players. It's like one guy read a book and it spread like rumors spread, the result is always horribly twisted from its original form as each person adds or takes away a little. Or maybe they just watch WSOP reruns, heard it there, heard it at the table, and inferred that the meaning was that the pot is big and they can call. Or may it's just two words that make them feel ok about not folding when they know they should.
Regardless, this a VERY good thing. Immediately, I can think of a couple ways to exploit this:
- Continue raising large. If I get one caller, my chances drastically increase for getting two or more, especially if players who like to call for "pot odds" have yet to act. It looks like it can take as few as one caller for this to happen. Then a cascade effect occurs where more and more people call until the logic is "6 people called, now I HAVE to call with my A5o"
- Raise especially large if there is a calling station or two next to my left and "pot odds" players are left to act afterward. If the a station calls, it's almost certainly going to be at least 3-way. If a couple call, it could be 4 or 5-way. I can use this to get ridiculous value on big hands preflop.
I need a special name for it as to not get it confused with real pot odds. I'll be thinking about further ways to exploit this such as 3betting preflop, adjusting bet sizes depending on positions of these players, etc during the week.
P.S. Later I raised to 14 again with AA after getting called 6-ways previously and Snoop called me "Donkey Kong" talking to Dave. I don't know who's the teacher and who's the student, but somebody's shoveling bullshit and the other is eating it up. Those guys are completely oblivious to how much they misunderstand poker. It's odd that he will see me get called in 6 spots raising to 14 and yet he'll still not learn from it and say "Hey, he got a lot of money in the pot that way, I can copy that and do the same" but he still only raises to 7 or 8. Oh well, Snoop doesn't play bad, he just runs bad all the time as he says... Ignorance is bliss.
A-Game Live: July 7 Player Notes
Dave the dealer:
- With a monster vs me, said "I just don't believe you, that bets not very convincing" and just called a 30bb cbet.
- Bet size post-flop is strong indicator of hand strength. Bet small with small hands/draws and big with larger. Check-raising seem effective in both stealing vs loose callers and frustrating him. He said "That's the 3rd time you've check/raised. I'm getting sick up it, just bet if you have a good hand." Now wouldn't that be nice of me.
- He bets frequently post flop, and often small, so I can use a very strong relative position on him to see what everyone else does and make some very good plays. I should use him to check/raise as a steal and to help build pots with big hands. If I have a strong hand that isn't easily drawn out on with a free card, checking to let him bet will ensure another 20-30bbs enters the pot before the raise. Then people will call because of "pot odds." Also, all the calls are weak, and I can pick up some large pots with raises. This will also help balance my check/raising range a bit in this situation so I don't get called too often on a steal or folded to often with a monster. Definitely can use this tendency to my advantage.
- Will call very big bets/raises with draws if the pot is big enough. Strong believer in "pot odds." I should get max value on drawy boards with big hands by betting very big.
- Led 2bbs with a SD on the flop and turn
- Bet size clear indicator of hand strength. If he bets 3bbs, gets raised, and calls, that very often should be a draw.
- Will crying call down when clearly behind and say he's just "running bad". Haven't really seen him make big laydowns. Definitely can get it in with big hands if he has something.
- Seems oblivious to live tells and hand reading in general
- wears shades in Alan's home game...
- Bets 5 or 10bbs with everything from top 2pair to the stone cold nuts regardless of how big the pot is. Will bet all 3 streets. Will get very passive vs a raise however and check down very, very strong hands like flushes, straights, boats OOP.
A-Game Live: July 7 Results
7:30-3:30 - 8hrs
W/L = -53
Expenses = -20
Total = -73
Another disappointing night where I was way up at times and way down at times. I flopped 4 sets and all failed to hold up in NL, missed all my combo draws/nut draws in Omaha in big pots except when I opened AAK4 double suited, flopped top set, and backdoored a flush draw.
Even though 4 sets failed, I did make 2 bad calls with them. Early when it was clear I was up against two flopped flushes, I peeled the flop to draw to a boat which was right, but peeled the Turn too not quite getting the correct price or perhaps breakeven with implied odds. Later I had a boat, bet the River, got reraised, it was called in another spot. I was clearly behind, but called the 50bb raise in a large pot mainly due because just a couple hands prior, the guy who had reraised me was obviously very frustrated at me check/raising him multiple times. I didn't think I had, but trusted his sincere feelings. I thought he could be making a play, but I don't think I could really give him credit for it in hindsight. I should have folded but instead called and lost to two higher boats.
Those are my 2 big mistakes for the night. I made some smaller mistakes by not raising hands like KQs in the blind. I should be raising this, but justified a call due to how much it would be worth if I made a big flush or straight multi-way. I don't think this is bad logic, except that it is not to the nuts, I am OOP, and people are somewhat afraid of my bets. That doesn't mean they ever fold a smaller flush, but they might fold TP or 2 pair because they are deathly afraid of bets when the flush card hits. I should be flatting hands like A4s, but still raising hands like KQs and AJs and not justifying it with how much I'll make with more people in if I hit a big hand. That doesn't happen often, I play much better HU or 3-way than 10-way (far more exp in 6max than FR), and it helps my image to raise more hands. I think part of it is due just to the fear of being called 6-ways and facing just TP on the flop in a 60bb pot, not wanting to deal with having to cbet 30-40bbs, and being lost of the Turn when called. On thing I have to get over live is the feeling of embarrassment of losing. Online you are anonymous and can instantly rebuy. Your results are connected to you more personally, and it is a little embarrassing to lose live as you push your chips away. But that is something I have to get over.
Playing scared is losing play, whether it's because of the amount of money or the embarrassment of losing. I should never be playing scared and this is something I need to work on to play my A-game live.
Aside for a couple big mistakes, likely several very small mistakes, and whiffing nut draws in big pots getting the right price with pot odds/implied, the rest of losses came from some coolers. I flop the nut flush vs a super-calling stating that was up like 800bbs on the night. He called me to the River and would do so any FD, TP, or better. He checked the River, the board paired on the end, and the pot was huge. I almost bet, but it was Omaha, and so I checked it back and he showed the rivered boat and raked in a well over 100 bb pot. By the end of the night, I had folded several big hands like sets, straights, and flushes. I was correct every time as I got to see each showdown and accurately read the playe
rs for what they had. That's good because I was right, and bad because so many hands did not hold up.
One highlight of the night was a big bluff using my image and trusting my instinct. I had the nut flush draw on the Turn and checked from EP. Dave the dealer bet 4bb in a 30bb pot like he did frequently. It was called all the way around the table. I was pretty sure everyone was weak, my image was that a big check/raise would look very strong, and there was a possibly straight on the board. So I check/raised to 40. It folded to Ron to took forever. Almost folded once, then decided to call. That's a pretty big bet for him to call and I did not like it, but he did take forever so I thought he may have had two pair. Effective stacks were about 250bbs to start the hand. The right brought a K, and overcard, and a card I didn't think would help him. I started to check and give up, but then realized the only way I can win is to bet, the pot is large so if I bet 2/3 pot, I only need it to actually work 40% or better to profit, and he almost folded on the Turn already. I would also be great advertisement if it worked, so I bet 60bbs into about a 100bb pot, expecting that to be enough as 40 to standard for huge bets in their eyes, regardless of the size of the pot. He insta-folded a weaker flush draw and I table it. I do think it was good to show as people began to say things like "he's buyin' it again" and so on, although it probably cost me 50bbs a few hands later when I should have folded that boat, but called partly because of how I thought that hand my have affected my image.
The last cooler came late into the night in a game of Crazy Pineapple. I had AK3ss in the hole and raised PF 6-way. Got called in 4 spots. The flop was AK3, leaving me behind to only the case AA, KK, and 33, and way ahead of all Aces. I got called in one spot. A tell I may have on Dave, who talks to much during play, is that he said "30? I just don't believe you" and called with a monster.
I bet the 9 Turn and he called again. I thought I could be up against a set, but with only 3 combos of sets, 4 combos of AK and A3, 6 combos of A9, and numerous combos of other Aces like AQ he will have some of the time, I thought there was no way valuebetting could be wrong. The River was a J and I pushed. He called and flipped over KK, which he had slowplayed preflop - river. I lost about 120bbs in that pot.
So at the end of the night, super calling station (who always bets 5 or 10 max on his huge hands all 3 streets in 60+bb pots) cashes out for 800bbs, Dave the dealer cashes out for probably 1000bbs, Marshall cashes out for about 700bbs, and I cash out down 200bbs. I'm 0-3 now, what the hell is going on?
W/L = -53
Expenses = -20
Total = -73
Another disappointing night where I was way up at times and way down at times. I flopped 4 sets and all failed to hold up in NL, missed all my combo draws/nut draws in Omaha in big pots except when I opened AAK4 double suited, flopped top set, and backdoored a flush draw.
Even though 4 sets failed, I did make 2 bad calls with them. Early when it was clear I was up against two flopped flushes, I peeled the flop to draw to a boat which was right, but peeled the Turn too not quite getting the correct price or perhaps breakeven with implied odds. Later I had a boat, bet the River, got reraised, it was called in another spot. I was clearly behind, but called the 50bb raise in a large pot mainly due because just a couple hands prior, the guy who had reraised me was obviously very frustrated at me check/raising him multiple times. I didn't think I had, but trusted his sincere feelings. I thought he could be making a play, but I don't think I could really give him credit for it in hindsight. I should have folded but instead called and lost to two higher boats.
Those are my 2 big mistakes for the night. I made some smaller mistakes by not raising hands like KQs in the blind. I should be raising this, but justified a call due to how much it would be worth if I made a big flush or straight multi-way. I don't think this is bad logic, except that it is not to the nuts, I am OOP, and people are somewhat afraid of my bets. That doesn't mean they ever fold a smaller flush, but they might fold TP or 2 pair because they are deathly afraid of bets when the flush card hits. I should be flatting hands like A4s, but still raising hands like KQs and AJs and not justifying it with how much I'll make with more people in if I hit a big hand. That doesn't happen often, I play much better HU or 3-way than 10-way (far more exp in 6max than FR), and it helps my image to raise more hands. I think part of it is due just to the fear of being called 6-ways and facing just TP on the flop in a 60bb pot, not wanting to deal with having to cbet 30-40bbs, and being lost of the Turn when called. On thing I have to get over live is the feeling of embarrassment of losing. Online you are anonymous and can instantly rebuy. Your results are connected to you more personally, and it is a little embarrassing to lose live as you push your chips away. But that is something I have to get over.
Playing scared is losing play, whether it's because of the amount of money or the embarrassment of losing. I should never be playing scared and this is something I need to work on to play my A-game live.
Aside for a couple big mistakes, likely several very small mistakes, and whiffing nut draws in big pots getting the right price with pot odds/implied, the rest of losses came from some coolers. I flop the nut flush vs a super-calling stating that was up like 800bbs on the night. He called me to the River and would do so any FD, TP, or better. He checked the River, the board paired on the end, and the pot was huge. I almost bet, but it was Omaha, and so I checked it back and he showed the rivered boat and raked in a well over 100 bb pot. By the end of the night, I had folded several big hands like sets, straights, and flushes. I was correct every time as I got to see each showdown and accurately read the playe
rs for what they had. That's good because I was right, and bad because so many hands did not hold up.One highlight of the night was a big bluff using my image and trusting my instinct. I had the nut flush draw on the Turn and checked from EP. Dave the dealer bet 4bb in a 30bb pot like he did frequently. It was called all the way around the table. I was pretty sure everyone was weak, my image was that a big check/raise would look very strong, and there was a possibly straight on the board. So I check/raised to 40. It folded to Ron to took forever. Almost folded once, then decided to call. That's a pretty big bet for him to call and I did not like it, but he did take forever so I thought he may have had two pair. Effective stacks were about 250bbs to start the hand. The right brought a K, and overcard, and a card I didn't think would help him. I started to check and give up, but then realized the only way I can win is to bet, the pot is large so if I bet 2/3 pot, I only need it to actually work 40% or better to profit, and he almost folded on the Turn already. I would also be great advertisement if it worked, so I bet 60bbs into about a 100bb pot, expecting that to be enough as 40 to standard for huge bets in their eyes, regardless of the size of the pot. He insta-folded a weaker flush draw and I table it. I do think it was good to show as people began to say things like "he's buyin' it again" and so on, although it probably cost me 50bbs a few hands later when I should have folded that boat, but called partly because of how I thought that hand my have affected my image.
The last cooler came late into the night in a game of Crazy Pineapple. I had AK3ss in the hole and raised PF 6-way. Got called in 4 spots. The flop was AK3, leaving me behind to only the case AA, KK, and 33, and way ahead of all Aces. I got called in one spot. A tell I may have on Dave, who talks to much during play, is that he said "30? I just don't believe you" and called with a monster.
I bet the 9 Turn and he called again. I thought I could be up against a set, but with only 3 combos of sets, 4 combos of AK and A3, 6 combos of A9, and numerous combos of other Aces like AQ he will have some of the time, I thought there was no way valuebetting could be wrong. The River was a J and I pushed. He called and flipped over KK, which he had slowplayed preflop - river. I lost about 120bbs in that pot.
So at the end of the night, super calling station (who always bets 5 or 10 max on his huge hands all 3 streets in 60+bb pots) cashes out for 800bbs, Dave the dealer cashes out for probably 1000bbs, Marshall cashes out for about 700bbs, and I cash out down 200bbs. I'm 0-3 now, what the hell is going on?
A-Game Live: Player Notes July 1
Dave
- played better with a large stack than he normally does a small one
- mentioned often that he'll call a flop bet and fold on the Turn if he doesn't hit, so 2nd barrelling him is a good way to exploit.
- his preflop raise sizes are highly indicatative of his hand strength, will follow up premium pairs with big flop cbets so that is pretty easily exploitable
- frequently tried to bluff in bad spots/bad cards, even vs the biggest calling station, did so with medium sized amounts and across multiple streets
- made several clearly bad calls on the River with TP/2 Pair, justified as just "running bad", definitely valuetown with strong hands when he's likely to have TP
- Preflop raise means a premium hand, size is very indicative of strength
- will sometimes cbet, although usually not nearly as big as with a real hand
- cbet extra small with top set on a dd flop to not lose action
- donk bet was just a bluff and is probably usually a very weak hand, he checked Turn, check/folded River to a small bet, can exploit donk bet with a float or raise
In these loose, live games, I've been playing my draws really passively. I think that is generally the right strategy because a player typically has little fold equity and will often get paid off when he hits. Maybe this is just me not hitting draws and it affecting my game, but I'm considering playing FD's in particular more aggressively. A common situation is that either someone will raise to 3 or 4bbs preflop and 8-9 players will call, or everyone will limp. Then someone bets somewhere in the neighborhood of 10bbs on the flop, which will get called by several players.
Previously I've just called in these situations. But there may be some benefits to making a big raise here and either taking down the dead money or getting called and having my draw essentially subsidized by the very large pot. It's pretty common to see 40-60bbs in the pot so a shove really needs little FE to be profitable, and when called loses only a small amount in EV and even two pair.
This might be a play to make sometimes in the right situations because:
Previously I've just called in these situations. But there may be some benefits to making a big raise here and either taking down the dead money or getting called and having my draw essentially subsidized by the very large pot. It's pretty common to see 40-60bbs in the pot so a shove really needs little FE to be profitable, and when called loses only a small amount in EV and even two pair.
This might be a play to make sometimes in the right situations because:
- With a tight image, I might have decent FE (or not in this game!)
- It will help me to get paid off on good hands, good advertisement (isn't that important in this game, though)
- I might be able to get larger FD's to fold (it is FR where people play any two)
A - Game Live 2: Post Game
God. Damn.
Sigh...
Expenses -15
Win/Loss -49
Total = -64
That's just gross. I'm really at a point that I just don't know the right way to explain it. Am I really running THAT bad? Am I really playing THAT bad? There's no way I'm making greater and more frequent mistakes than the rest of the players, yet lately live I see to be one of the bottom two people at the table. I might have lost the most tonight...
I won a total of three pots all night. Two were very small; definitely in the top five smallest pots of the evening. The other was a medium sized pot. I lost every big pot. I think I bet/raised and then had to fold what was the best hand on the previous street four times tonight, being correct every time. I did make a somewhat thin call on a fifth hand and lost.
In one hand I had top two which I gave up on the worst river card in the deck and was shown two flushes. I flopped the nut straight and easily folded without putting any more money in to what was obvious a boat. I folded Aces up on the River to a guy who lead out on the flush card and was called. Finally, one guy goes all in for just 4bbs, gets 3 callers, I pick up AQs and decided to squeeze and run it heads up for the dead money. I raise to 20bbs. Now, compared to everyone else who plays 80% of hands, I am by far the tightest player at the table, and I hear that plenty. And yet in some universe 2 gappers and A-rag are good enough to call against a hand I would re-raise with in that game. Don't get me wrong. I love the terrible calls. Love them. What I despise is how often they get rewarded for it. Guy calls me with Q9. Awful call for him. I have AQ, that's great for me. But of course he gets rewarded for it. We both turn a Q, he bets, I call. He was not only dominated, now he's dead to three outs. Of course the nine rolls off on the River and I make a call for about a third the pot which was very big now from the 4-way preflop action.
It's not that it happened; it's that this sort of thing has been happening CONSTANTLY lately. It was only a drop in the bucket, but that buckets starting to get full. I don't remember the last time I won in a situation where I dominated the other player. Guys are calling me with A9 or A4 when I have AK, and lately have always had two pair if I paired the Ace. If not for being behind to dominated hands, I'd just miss completely. Why is it so hard to punish someone for calling big bets with crushed hands? It's like they defy the laws of poker physics. I forget why calling a preflop raise is bad with A7o after watching these guys rake in chips.
If you can't tell, I'm pretty frustrated with it. I'm really tired of seeing these things and guys raking in chips after playing hands so horrendously, making bonehead mistakes and calls that can never be good, drawing to three outs, and getting rewarded for their play while my stack is withering away.
I don't know. I don't know if I am running bad or playing that bad. I miss so many flops, miss every draw, and lose every hand I raise. I can't think of any major mistakes I'm making. I'm not calling with bad TPs, gutshots, FD's on paired boards, dominated or just super junky preflop hands. Mistakes I'm making have to be post-flop and can't be that huge.
Poker really fucks with your mind sometimes. I just wish I could live in their universe.
Sigh...
Expenses -15
Win/Loss -49
Total = -64
That's just gross. I'm really at a point that I just don't know the right way to explain it. Am I really running THAT bad? Am I really playing THAT bad? There's no way I'm making greater and more frequent mistakes than the rest of the players, yet lately live I see to be one of the bottom two people at the table. I might have lost the most tonight...
I won a total of three pots all night. Two were very small; definitely in the top five smallest pots of the evening. The other was a medium sized pot. I lost every big pot. I think I bet/raised and then had to fold what was the best hand on the previous street four times tonight, being correct every time. I did make a somewhat thin call on a fifth hand and lost.
In one hand I had top two which I gave up on the worst river card in the deck and was shown two flushes. I flopped the nut straight and easily folded without putting any more money in to what was obvious a boat. I folded Aces up on the River to a guy who lead out on the flush card and was called. Finally, one guy goes all in for just 4bbs, gets 3 callers, I pick up AQs and decided to squeeze and run it heads up for the dead money. I raise to 20bbs. Now, compared to everyone else who plays 80% of hands, I am by far the tightest player at the table, and I hear that plenty. And yet in some universe 2 gappers and A-rag are good enough to call against a hand I would re-raise with in that game. Don't get me wrong. I love the terrible calls. Love them. What I despise is how often they get rewarded for it. Guy calls me with Q9. Awful call for him. I have AQ, that's great for me. But of course he gets rewarded for it. We both turn a Q, he bets, I call. He was not only dominated, now he's dead to three outs. Of course the nine rolls off on the River and I make a call for about a third the pot which was very big now from the 4-way preflop action.
It's not that it happened; it's that this sort of thing has been happening CONSTANTLY lately. It was only a drop in the bucket, but that buckets starting to get full. I don't remember the last time I won in a situation where I dominated the other player. Guys are calling me with A9 or A4 when I have AK, and lately have always had two pair if I paired the Ace. If not for being behind to dominated hands, I'd just miss completely. Why is it so hard to punish someone for calling big bets with crushed hands? It's like they defy the laws of poker physics. I forget why calling a preflop raise is bad with A7o after watching these guys rake in chips.
If you can't tell, I'm pretty frustrated with it. I'm really tired of seeing these things and guys raking in chips after playing hands so horrendously, making bonehead mistakes and calls that can never be good, drawing to three outs, and getting rewarded for their play while my stack is withering away.
I don't know. I don't know if I am running bad or playing that bad. I miss so many flops, miss every draw, and lose every hand I raise. I can't think of any major mistakes I'm making. I'm not calling with bad TPs, gutshots, FD's on paired boards, dominated or just super junky preflop hands. Mistakes I'm making have to be post-flop and can't be that huge.
Poker really fucks with your mind sometimes. I just wish I could live in their universe.
Daily Schedule
My new schedule is pretty simple and that's on purpose. It's easier to stick to. So loosely:
11-2 Study/Review
Time for reviewing previous sessions, look at hands, post up hands, answer forum threads, watch DC vids, type/review notes and questions, and anything else that needs to be done.
2-6 Session
6-7 Exercise
7-10 Free Time/Misc.
Open hours to do anything else that needs to be done during the day or just relax
10-2 Session
Everything is loose and just a basic framework for how the typical work day should go.
11-2 Study/Review
Time for reviewing previous sessions, look at hands, post up hands, answer forum threads, watch DC vids, type/review notes and questions, and anything else that needs to be done.
2-6 Session
6-7 Exercise
7-10 Free Time/Misc.
Open hours to do anything else that needs to be done during the day or just relax
10-2 Session
Everything is loose and just a basic framework for how the typical work day should go.
Fresh Start
Today's officially the new start. I ended the last run with the trip to Vegas and thought after the vacation it was a good time to renew my dedication to improving. I'm starting out much better than I was this time last year, even though my bankroll is much smaller. I'm going to get my sleep schedule back on track, start back exercising and eating healthy, and set up some new goals to work towards over the next several months.
I wrote down a simple schedule to go by. I've learned that trying to build a strict schedule is just going to fail, so I've left several extra hours in the day in case things come up or I'm running behind. One thing I must do is to stop wasting time. While I'm doing those things, my opponents are getting better. I need to always ask myself "What are you doing now that will matter tomorrow?"
I also looking into some things about getting into the "zone." One thing I'm going to try is conditioning myself and priming my concentration with music. I have never listened to much music, but it may be able to help me out. If I create a comfort zone with music, it may be perfect for situations that come up such as the WSOP next year where I'm a bit uncomfortable around so many strangers so far from home, playing against some very good opponents. The music may have a calming effect and allow me to focus. I dunno, we'll see.
I also heard something that was really interesting and possibly helpful. One of my biggest problems is that I get nervous in clutch situations. I have a fear of failure or success or something, because whenever I'm about to do something exceptional, I can't help be think about failing. And of course, often I do. Then I feel the pressure immediately leave as I feel I have nothing to lose anymore, and I get back to normal. This happens in all kinds of situations, including poker. A lot of times when I'm in Jasper, I feel I'm so much better than the players at the table, I should win. But that sets much up to constantly think about "what if I lose?" I'm so focused on the results in the end, that it takes focus away from more important things in the "now." But once I get stacked, even by a cooler, I feel the pressure taken away.
What I heard was something that (I'm almost ashamed to say) I heard Phil Helmuth say. He said that when he's in high pressure situations where something really good can happen, he's not thinking about missing that chance or being nervous that he is in that situation; he's thinking that here he is, in a position to do something great. That's where he wants to be as often as possible. To have a chance to do something great...That almost makes it sound like a freeroll to me now. Before it was more like a situation where it was mine to lose. I should achieve it. To miss is to fail. But looking at it in that light makes it sound more like the success has already been achieved: to reach that postion. Now, it's just a shot at something awesome. I haven't had a situation to use it in yet, but I'll be sure to try this new way of thinking out and hopefully I can get over that fear of failure.
Well, the grind starts tomorrow. I'll be eating and breathing poker. I've learned a lot of the fundamentals over the last year. This next year I need to focus on execution. Getting in hands, developing reads, and executing the things I've spend the last year learning. I just hope NL doesn't completely dry up; everyone is so good these days. Maybe Florida will open up and my live game will be better as well as my overall game, and I can leverage that against all the incredibly weak players that live there.
Finally, I need to make some money and make a move this next year. There are no players here really. To be the best player I can be, I need to be in the scene with other good players. I need to be talking with them and playing against them. I have to be that seasoned veteran. Living here will just leave me too green when it comes time to jump into shark infested waters in Vegas. I can't get that experince here, so I know the move is something I'm going to have to do.
I wrote down a simple schedule to go by. I've learned that trying to build a strict schedule is just going to fail, so I've left several extra hours in the day in case things come up or I'm running behind. One thing I must do is to stop wasting time. While I'm doing those things, my opponents are getting better. I need to always ask myself "What are you doing now that will matter tomorrow?"
I also looking into some things about getting into the "zone." One thing I'm going to try is conditioning myself and priming my concentration with music. I have never listened to much music, but it may be able to help me out. If I create a comfort zone with music, it may be perfect for situations that come up such as the WSOP next year where I'm a bit uncomfortable around so many strangers so far from home, playing against some very good opponents. The music may have a calming effect and allow me to focus. I dunno, we'll see.
I also heard something that was really interesting and possibly helpful. One of my biggest problems is that I get nervous in clutch situations. I have a fear of failure or success or something, because whenever I'm about to do something exceptional, I can't help be think about failing. And of course, often I do. Then I feel the pressure immediately leave as I feel I have nothing to lose anymore, and I get back to normal. This happens in all kinds of situations, including poker. A lot of times when I'm in Jasper, I feel I'm so much better than the players at the table, I should win. But that sets much up to constantly think about "what if I lose?" I'm so focused on the results in the end, that it takes focus away from more important things in the "now." But once I get stacked, even by a cooler, I feel the pressure taken away.
What I heard was something that (I'm almost ashamed to say) I heard Phil Helmuth say. He said that when he's in high pressure situations where something really good can happen, he's not thinking about missing that chance or being nervous that he is in that situation; he's thinking that here he is, in a position to do something great. That's where he wants to be as often as possible. To have a chance to do something great...That almost makes it sound like a freeroll to me now. Before it was more like a situation where it was mine to lose. I should achieve it. To miss is to fail. But looking at it in that light makes it sound more like the success has already been achieved: to reach that postion. Now, it's just a shot at something awesome. I haven't had a situation to use it in yet, but I'll be sure to try this new way of thinking out and hopefully I can get over that fear of failure.
Well, the grind starts tomorrow. I'll be eating and breathing poker. I've learned a lot of the fundamentals over the last year. This next year I need to focus on execution. Getting in hands, developing reads, and executing the things I've spend the last year learning. I just hope NL doesn't completely dry up; everyone is so good these days. Maybe Florida will open up and my live game will be better as well as my overall game, and I can leverage that against all the incredibly weak players that live there.
Finally, I need to make some money and make a move this next year. There are no players here really. To be the best player I can be, I need to be in the scene with other good players. I need to be talking with them and playing against them. I have to be that seasoned veteran. Living here will just leave me too green when it comes time to jump into shark infested waters in Vegas. I can't get that experince here, so I know the move is something I'm going to have to do.
Home Game Tournament Structure
I spent some time today working on a better tournament structure for Alan's game. I looked at the Stars turbo format first:
Turbo Structure
1st 50%
2nd 30%
3rd 20%
1500 Starting Chips
1 10/20
2 15/30
3 25/50
4 50/100
5 75/150
6 100/200
7 100/200 Ante 25
8 200/400 Ante 25
9 300/600 Ante 50
10 400/800 Ante 50
11 600/1200 Ante 75
12 800/1600 Ante 75
13 1000/2000 Ante 100
14 1500/3000 Ante 150
15 2000/4000 Ante 200
Then I found this tournament software at www.thetournamentdirector.net that was pretty sweet. It lets you customize everything and displays a very professional looking screen once the tournament starts with the timer, blinds, next blinds, and anything else you want it to. You can even track things like season points and rankings. Pretty neat.
I'm looking forward to the game tomarrow night. I really need to find someone regular to ride with though, both to cut down on gas and to have someone to talk poker with on the trip. Damn, why don't I know more players around here that want to be good! There must be some somewhere!
Turbo Structure
1st 50%
2nd 30%
3rd 20%
1500 Starting Chips
1 10/20
2 15/30
3 25/50
4 50/100
5 75/150
6 100/200
7 100/200 Ante 25
8 200/400 Ante 25
9 300/600 Ante 50
10 400/800 Ante 50
11 600/1200 Ante 75
12 800/1600 Ante 75
13 1000/2000 Ante 100
14 1500/3000 Ante 150
15 2000/4000 Ante 200
Then I found this tournament software at www.thetournamentdirector.net that was pretty sweet. It lets you customize everything and displays a very professional looking screen once the tournament starts with the timer, blinds, next blinds, and anything else you want it to. You can even track things like season points and rankings. Pretty neat.
I'm looking forward to the game tomarrow night. I really need to find someone regular to ride with though, both to cut down on gas and to have someone to talk poker with on the trip. Damn, why don't I know more players around here that want to be good! There must be some somewhere!
A-Game Live 2: The Other Games
Pineapple
This is just like NLHE, except people will start with better hands on average and almost everyone will want to see the flop, even for a raise. People will probably keep more high cards than low, so more people will hit high flops than low flops. I think I can use the same plan I have for NLHE, and it may be even more effective for this game because I will have "nut-makers" more often and seeing more flops can only be a very good thing, especially if there is an A on the flop. So if I start with Ah2hJc, I should probably keep the A2hh rather than the AJo because the A2s plays so much better multi-way and dominated TP hands should be even more RIO in this game. I'm sure almost everyone else in the game would keep the AJo, so I should have a solid edge here preflop. This game should be very favorable for me if these things are true. Anything that lets me see a flop more often should be very, very good.
Plan: Stick with many connectors over TP hands. Try to make a set, straight, flush, or better and get huge value from all the TP-type hands people will keep. Low flops should be safer than high flops.
Crazy Pineapple
Now people will have better hands post-flop on average than NL. I should be even choosier PF because I will absolutely have to make a monster to win a big pot. TP will probably never be good by the River. Bottom 2 pair will often not. I need to focus on making sets or better, and choose my preflop hands accordingly. Higher PP's should have way more set value than low PP's because sets should be more common and I want to be the one coolering the other player. Hands like JJThh are perfect. My edge will come from better PF hand selection, folding anything marginal, and staying and betting BIG (because they will call more often since they will more often have TP/2 Pairs) with my big hands. This game should be very favorable for me.
Plan: Only start with hands that can make monsters because people will make more hands than usual on the flop. Especially go for cooler-type hands rather than hands that can get coolered in order to stack people who make smaller sets, straights, and flushes and will never fold them. Be careful without the nuts.
NL Omaha
I should probably watch a couple videos on PLO to pick up a few things. Very much like Crazy Pineapple, I should start with hands that have lots of connecting potential (wraps?), and often only stay vs bets/raises with draws to the nuts. People should be getting coolered left and right with flushes/straights/sets because they will never fold a flush, so I certainly can take advantage of that by nut peddling.
Plan: Watch PLO vids. Keep same type of hands as Crazy Pineapple. Nut-peddle post-flop.
NL Stud with wild cards
This game is just ridiculous. I don't understand it, nor care to. I'm just going to ante and fold anything but the nuts.
Plan: Ante and fold.
This is just like NLHE, except people will start with better hands on average and almost everyone will want to see the flop, even for a raise. People will probably keep more high cards than low, so more people will hit high flops than low flops. I think I can use the same plan I have for NLHE, and it may be even more effective for this game because I will have "nut-makers" more often and seeing more flops can only be a very good thing, especially if there is an A on the flop. So if I start with Ah2hJc, I should probably keep the A2hh rather than the AJo because the A2s plays so much better multi-way and dominated TP hands should be even more RIO in this game. I'm sure almost everyone else in the game would keep the AJo, so I should have a solid edge here preflop. This game should be very favorable for me if these things are true. Anything that lets me see a flop more often should be very, very good.
Plan: Stick with many connectors over TP hands. Try to make a set, straight, flush, or better and get huge value from all the TP-type hands people will keep. Low flops should be safer than high flops.
Crazy Pineapple
Now people will have better hands post-flop on average than NL. I should be even choosier PF because I will absolutely have to make a monster to win a big pot. TP will probably never be good by the River. Bottom 2 pair will often not. I need to focus on making sets or better, and choose my preflop hands accordingly. Higher PP's should have way more set value than low PP's because sets should be more common and I want to be the one coolering the other player. Hands like JJThh are perfect. My edge will come from better PF hand selection, folding anything marginal, and staying and betting BIG (because they will call more often since they will more often have TP/2 Pairs) with my big hands. This game should be very favorable for me.
Plan: Only start with hands that can make monsters because people will make more hands than usual on the flop. Especially go for cooler-type hands rather than hands that can get coolered in order to stack people who make smaller sets, straights, and flushes and will never fold them. Be careful without the nuts.
NL Omaha
I should probably watch a couple videos on PLO to pick up a few things. Very much like Crazy Pineapple, I should start with hands that have lots of connecting potential (wraps?), and often only stay vs bets/raises with draws to the nuts. People should be getting coolered left and right with flushes/straights/sets because they will never fold a flush, so I certainly can take advantage of that by nut peddling.
Plan: Watch PLO vids. Keep same type of hands as Crazy Pineapple. Nut-peddle post-flop.
NL Stud with wild cards
This game is just ridiculous. I don't understand it, nor care to. I'm just going to ante and fold anything but the nuts.
Plan: Ante and fold.
Alan's Game 2: Pregame Plans
I really need to focus on reads and getting back to a very solid, simple ABC game for these live games and build from there. My two goals next time are just to:
I also need to see more flops cheaply. I should limp more hands that can make any sort of monster. Definitely more connecting-type hands (34o, Q5s) than weak TP-type (A9o) hands because the pots are so multi-way and get so big from bets being called. I definitely want to have a straight rather than TP in those big, multi-way pots. Also, people underbet pots constantly, so I will often get the right price to draw. On the other hand, if I have a TP-type hand, I will have to bet very large to protect my hand, which can get me in a lot of trouble since everyone's range is almost any 2 cards and they play 2 pairs and better TP's so passively. I just will have no idea if I'm ahead or not. However, if I have the nut straight, I KNOW I'm ahead, and if I have a weaker flush, they'll certainly raise and I'll know that I am beat.
Because so many pots can get so big and people will call so lightly, it should certainly be profitable to play these connecting hands. SC's should look like the nuts. As we get deeper stacked, I should open that range up a little, but not much. I'll already be playing many suited hands and connectors, but at some point I can go for trips/2 pair value vs a raise from another monster stack.
Against raises, I need to look at how many callers are already in the pot and how many are likely to call. Then I need to look at position and stack size. I should tighten up some, but certainly play hands that can make the nuts if there are many people in the pot. They really don't like to fold in big pots, so making the nuts can result in a serious gain in chips.
So to recap:
See lots of cheap flops with hands that can make the nuts like suited cards and connectors (even unsuited, especially when stacks are deep). Develop reads and play a very solid ABC game. No bluffs, just make hands and valuebet big.
Hopefully, I can get this down and get back to some of the more risky experiments. I'm basically starting back at a solid foundation building a new game just for low limit live play.
Note: From now on Alan's Game and this project to be a better live player will be known as just "A-Game Live" in the post titles.
- Develop reads
- Play a basic ABC game. Next to no bluffs, just make hands and valuebet them to death.
- Seeing more flops cheaply to hit monster
- (If 6max, thin valuebetting, too)
I also need to see more flops cheaply. I should limp more hands that can make any sort of monster. Definitely more connecting-type hands (34o, Q5s) than weak TP-type (A9o) hands because the pots are so multi-way and get so big from bets being called. I definitely want to have a straight rather than TP in those big, multi-way pots. Also, people underbet pots constantly, so I will often get the right price to draw. On the other hand, if I have a TP-type hand, I will have to bet very large to protect my hand, which can get me in a lot of trouble since everyone's range is almost any 2 cards and they play 2 pairs and better TP's so passively. I just will have no idea if I'm ahead or not. However, if I have the nut straight, I KNOW I'm ahead, and if I have a weaker flush, they'll certainly raise and I'll know that I am beat.
Because so many pots can get so big and people will call so lightly, it should certainly be profitable to play these connecting hands. SC's should look like the nuts. As we get deeper stacked, I should open that range up a little, but not much. I'll already be playing many suited hands and connectors, but at some point I can go for trips/2 pair value vs a raise from another monster stack.
Against raises, I need to look at how many callers are already in the pot and how many are likely to call. Then I need to look at position and stack size. I should tighten up some, but certainly play hands that can make the nuts if there are many people in the pot. They really don't like to fold in big pots, so making the nuts can result in a serious gain in chips.
So to recap:
See lots of cheap flops with hands that can make the nuts like suited cards and connectors (even unsuited, especially when stacks are deep). Develop reads and play a very solid ABC game. No bluffs, just make hands and valuebet big.
Hopefully, I can get this down and get back to some of the more risky experiments. I'm basically starting back at a solid foundation building a new game just for low limit live play.
Note: From now on Alan's Game and this project to be a better live player will be known as just "A-Game Live" in the post titles.
Online Rakeback
I finally got signed up for rakeback. People seem to think it's a big deal. I get the impression I was insane for not playing with it before. I remember one week I had paid in about $800 in rake. Paying Stars $800 a week to play means I have to grind out some serious winnings to profit. I'm switching to Full Tilt to get the rakeback. I heard there were a lot of regulars grinding it out, even at the low stakes (for rakeback obv), and I really don't like that you can't filter as well as Stars for better table selection, but we'll see what happens.
I got a pretty good figure on the rakeback calculators, but I think those are probably very exaggerated. We'll see how much in about a week or two. I know that I'm a winner at 100NL and below on Stars, and feel that I would be a winner at 200NL as well, even though my bankroll was not big enough to try it. Unless FT is far harder, the winnings + rakeback should give me a healthy boost. I really can't wait to get started and see.
I'll be getting 27% rakeback plus a $600 deposit bonus. I plan on playing about 8 hours a day, 5-6 days a week. I'll probably be playing 4-6 tables, but between open, closing, and switching tables, I'll probably only average about 3.5-5. The goal is about 15,000 hands/week. At 2000/day average over the entire month at 25NL 6max, thisisthenuts.com rakeback calculator says I'll recieve about 986 in rakeback. I think this is far too high, but I hope not too much. I may actually start with more full right just to clear the deposit bonus since Full Tilt uses the dealt method for rake and I read you could clear the bonus faster at FR due to that.
I got a pretty good figure on the rakeback calculators, but I think those are probably very exaggerated. We'll see how much in about a week or two. I know that I'm a winner at 100NL and below on Stars, and feel that I would be a winner at 200NL as well, even though my bankroll was not big enough to try it. Unless FT is far harder, the winnings + rakeback should give me a healthy boost. I really can't wait to get started and see.
I'll be getting 27% rakeback plus a $600 deposit bonus. I plan on playing about 8 hours a day, 5-6 days a week. I'll probably be playing 4-6 tables, but between open, closing, and switching tables, I'll probably only average about 3.5-5. The goal is about 15,000 hands/week. At 2000/day average over the entire month at 25NL 6max, thisisthenuts.com rakeback calculator says I'll recieve about 986 in rakeback. I think this is far too high, but I hope not too much. I may actually start with more full right just to clear the deposit bonus since Full Tilt uses the dealt method for rake and I read you could clear the bonus faster at FR due to that.
Loose/Passive Live Full Ring: Review of Last Adjustments/Experiments
My simple goals were:
Experiments:
- Don't look at hand until action is to me - Success
- Pay attention to live read - Marginal to bad
- Keep track of the pot size - Marginal
- Count out bet sizes better - Marginal to ok
Experiments:
- Isolating - This didn't turn out well this time. It's very hard to isolate a single player in these games because people are SO loose preflop. I had to raise extra big to even try to isolate and the times I did, I either got no calls or I got several.
- 3betting a wider value range - I did this 0 times. People raise so seldom in these games that when they do AND you have a good hand, it's luck. There was one guy somewhat aggressive, as well as Dave the dealer who would right light, so I could look to just value 3bet them more often next time. I may be able to isolate very well this way. But overall, it's live, we play few hands, and the game was hold'em only about half or less of the time, so I didn't get any opportunities over such a small sample. I should try again in future sessions.
- Fight for orphaned pots/2nd, 3rd barrel bluff - This was not good in the game I was in because of the short-stacked drooler. I tried a few times, picked up the pot maybe once, got called 3way or more the rest of the time. Player's just aren't folding often and this will probably require some 2nd/3rd barreling to be profitable. It's not something I'm comfortable with until I get better at live reads.
Alan's Game 1: Recap and Review
The GameLast night was apparently dealer's choice. I don't know if that is the regular game now or not, but I'm ok with it even though Hold'em is my regular and only game. I probably know a little more about Omaha than them, but not enough to be good. But they played some gambler games, all of which I'd never played before:
- low in the hole: Stud played where the lowest card in the hole is your wild card. Everyone has at least 1 wild card. If they pair it, they have two. Stud with wild cards and you don't know what everyone's wild card is. Oh, the best part is, they play all games NL. NL Stud with hidden wild cards, played 8 handed.
- follow the queen: Stud where queens are wild and the next up card after a queen is wild. If another queen is dealt, the wild card changes to whatever the next up card is. Still a gambling game, but a little easier to figure out where you are than low.
- Pineapple/Crazy Pineapple: These were a lot better. Pineapple seemed pretty much just like Hold'em, except everyone starts with a stronger starting hand on average since you get to pick 2 of 3 hold cards to keep pre-flop. Crazy Pineapple seems like a good mixture between Hold'em and Omaha. People will have better hands on average post-flop, and much like in Omaha, starting hands that are connecting like JhQhQs seem like the premium hands.
- NL Omaha: I felt pretty comfortable in this game even though I don't know much about it. I do know more than them, have an idea of what starting hands I want to keep and want to fold, and what NOT to get into trouble with. Others, however, had no problem sticking a lot of money into the pot with TP, 2 Pair, Trips, Straights on flush boards. I think I correctly folded the nut straight once on my gin card and the nut flush once. It seems like a really good game to make money in. People bet too small, 1/3 pot, 1/4 pot, etc, so drawing is pretty easy.
- Tournament: $10BI. We start with 45bbs. Not sure why such and odd number. Stacks are 45,000 with starting blinds at 500/1000. Not sure why such big numbers. Blinds go up every 20 mins. No antes. Payouts to 1st, 2nd, 3rd, although most of the time it goes so long that they split before then.
We had about 12 players so the tables were split up with 6 each. I'm great with that since I play so much 6max online. The ones I played with were the younger ones in the game:
- Dave, a dealer: He's a really weak player. Too loose preflop, will make wierd raises UTG to 3xbb with hands like J9s (consider how loose the game is), calls too lightly post-flop, his bet sizes are really awful, and sometimes he bets with little reason to. These are actually common among just about every player there.
- Snoop: I can't remember what his name is right now. He's a pretty weak player as well, but at least he is aggressive. Bad aggressive, but that is better than being passive at least. He ultra loose preflop and postflop. Will call 8xbb opening raise with offsuit junk. Will call on the flop with 2nd or bottom pair, any TP. He likes to bet a lot. His bet sizes are usually pretty weak, and also indicative of the type of hands he has. It's hard to tell how often he was bluffing because he was hitting a lot of hands last night, winning some pots uncontested, and often showing up with at least a weak TP when called down.
- Country guy: Not a bad player. Still too loose preflop, but played better when it counted. He was very much on the passive side, but he wasn't a calling station and had a decent idea what was going on. He wasn't involved in many big pots without the best hand. He did check or call with monster hands on the River when he certainly should have been betting or raising.
- Lee: He's too loose, but seems like he has some real potential to be a good player. He's capable of making some good folds, and will definitely fold to raises preflop with bad hands. He is too passive. He will often check or call when he should be betting or raising. When he does bet, it's usually not as horrendous of a size as everyone else, but it is always a very big hand. For some reason, he tends to sometimes play well, and other times just call off his chips in a spot that an hour ago he would never call in. Maybe impatience, maybe he gets tired, not sure. It seems like he has an A-Game and an F-Game and he moves up and down the whole spectrum during the night. Good guy though and definitely could be a strong player with some structure and fundamentals in his game.
- Some drooler: Super calling station, rarely won a hand unless he got lucky. When he bet, it was always 2 or 3bbs on any street. Really, really bad player, and I could never bluff because he was in every hand.
- Alan: The host. Great guy, great cardroom, not a great player. He plays for fun and the money doesn't matter. Calls very loose and doesn't like to fold preflop. One thing interesting is that whenever he has a monster, he always starts talking. He loves to talk people into calls, it's very consistent, and always means the same thing. Weak means strong.
"I don't think you have anything, I raise" = Monster
Flush hits "I don't think you have the flush, I raise" = Nut flush or better
"You don't have the balls to call that" = Monster"
Bets "Hope you don't raise" Player doesn't raise. "Phew" = Monster
I don't see how literally everyone doesn't insta-fold when they hear this, especially after playing with him for a bit, but they keep on calling anyways. What's really scary is when you have a monster too that's not the nuts and he does this. Now it's just a guessing game as to who has the better end of the cooler.
- Ron/Marshall: I grouped these two together because they play so much alike. Too loose by good standards, but definitely the tightest players in the game by comparison. They would still qualify as "loose" though. They are capable of folding before the flop and not calling with longshot draws. If they bet, they have a good hand. At least TP. If they raise, they have a huge hand. Overall, pretty standard loose/passive players, just not nearly as loose as everyone else.
- Ralph: Calling station, plays any two, calls with air drawing to a pair... It's pretty amazing when he folds. If he makes a big hand according to the chart (pair, 2 pair, set, straight, etc), he'll stick ALOT of money in the pot, regardless of what you might have. He'll do it with 2 pair on a board where there's a straight and a flush
To start the night, most were short or had 100bbs. By the end of the night, most of the table was at least 200bbs deep. 3 people were 3-400bbs deep (including me since I added on to cover - this got some crazy looks by people who just didn't understand why, including the dealer who said he'd never seen that done before. I don't doubt that at all). I just explained it using what I'd heard several people say during the night, "He's big stack, he can bully the table." We know how wrong that is at table stakes, but they seem to believe it so I just said "I don't want to get bullied by the big stacks."
Overall, it was super loose pre-flop. A raise built huge pots since it got several calls. Often 2-4 people may continue on the flop. People didn't raise as a bluff, always big hands. Bet sizes were terrible and always too small to accomplish anything as best as it could be.
The Results
-10 Tourney
+13 Cash
= $3 (doesn't include expenses - $5 food, gas)
Alan's Game 1...again.
I'm going to reread through what I wrote last week for the game tomarrow and spend sometime visualizing it. A few other simple things that I need to work on in live games:
...rereading my notes on players and thinking about how to exploit them
...having more fun in the game
...maybe setting some sort of reward for myself
Hmm, I really need to work on things I can do to make this easier.
Pretty simple habits I need to start working on.
- paying attention to live reads
...rereading my notes on players and thinking about how to exploit them
...having more fun in the game
...maybe setting some sort of reward for myself
Hmm, I really need to work on things I can do to make this easier.
- keeping track of the size of the pot with chips
- not looking at my hand until the action is around to me
- counting out bet sizes more quickly and steadily
Pretty simple habits I need to start working on.
Simplicity
Whenever you watch a master do something that you have been working your ass off trying to do well, they always make it look so simple. And every time I watch this, I always feel like I leave with a new perspective that I can't quite put my finger on.
From experiences and sources, without proof, only speculation, I feel like the path to mastering something begins by making it very complicated. You start off learning and applying the most basic concepts. As you better grasp, understand, and apply those, you add more to it. As you add things into the mix to improve and grow, things begin to get more and more complicated. You know that you are at this point when you cannot explain anything well and completely within one sentence. Often you are familiar with even the smallest, most technical details and frequently refer to some of your thoughts, writings, or conversations. You sound quite knowledgeable about your work, and you are.
But I don't think this is mastery, I believe it is only halfway. The path to master begins by going from simple to complex; starting with nothing and acquiring a collection of information and skills. But eventually things begin to clutter up. There is so much that there is less focus on the most important things. It's divided amongst everything. Not evenly...the most important things get more attention than the smaller details, but that is divided focus nonetheless. This is when we must begin to simplify things. To get rid of the details. We will never forget them, but we somehow find ways to no longer pay any attention to them. I these are things a master has internalized, almost like breathing or reacting when someone calls their name. They become natural, leaving the focus more on the things that matter the most. And once the clutter is cleared, real insight or enlightenment occurs. We can see what matters and fixate on the things that can lead to epiphanies. We can see things clearly and for what they are, why they work, and how to use them in ways others have not yet been able to see. If this process were graphed, it would look like a bell-shaped curve. We all start by focusing on just the basics, build up to a peak, but people who master something begin to simplify what they know and the curve falls back to the basics.
This may explain why things seem so simple when someone who has mastered a skill does it or explains it. I've often found more insight from a single, short phrase than an entire book. They have reduced their focus back to what matters, gotten rid of the clutter, and it's allowed them to see it in it's purest form.
One person that I admire greatly is a man that was beyond his time, Bruce Lee. He's known for martial arts and movies, but most people don't realize what he really was: a philosopher. This is what he really excelled at and what made him special. Martial arts for Bruce Lee was not a way to kick someone's ass. He admits that it was just an outlet to express himself. He became so innovative and great at what he did because of who he was. The truth is, he'd have become great at just about anything he did. There are a lot of old black and white videos on youtube of him. Things he says are incredibly insightful. His quotes are pretty amazing. And while he's known for martial arts, all the things he says can be applied to anything. Martial arts is just one of the things he applied it to and mastered. Simplicity is a very big theme in what he says. Breaking the complex down into the simple, most practical forms. This is how he created Jeet kun do. The took what worked from other styles, understood why they worked, and created this no-nonsence, brutally effective style from it. And from Jeet kun do grew what we know today as Mixed Martial Arts, and Bruce Lee is known as it's father.
That's just one example of many examples that you can find from histories greats. Start with the basics, build it up, and the extract what matters. I'm in the climbing phase, but I hope this bi of insight will push my understanding further than my peers when I reach the peak and know where to go from there.
From experiences and sources, without proof, only speculation, I feel like the path to mastering something begins by making it very complicated. You start off learning and applying the most basic concepts. As you better grasp, understand, and apply those, you add more to it. As you add things into the mix to improve and grow, things begin to get more and more complicated. You know that you are at this point when you cannot explain anything well and completely within one sentence. Often you are familiar with even the smallest, most technical details and frequently refer to some of your thoughts, writings, or conversations. You sound quite knowledgeable about your work, and you are.
But I don't think this is mastery, I believe it is only halfway. The path to master begins by going from simple to complex; starting with nothing and acquiring a collection of information and skills. But eventually things begin to clutter up. There is so much that there is less focus on the most important things. It's divided amongst everything. Not evenly...the most important things get more attention than the smaller details, but that is divided focus nonetheless. This is when we must begin to simplify things. To get rid of the details. We will never forget them, but we somehow find ways to no longer pay any attention to them. I these are things a master has internalized, almost like breathing or reacting when someone calls their name. They become natural, leaving the focus more on the things that matter the most. And once the clutter is cleared, real insight or enlightenment occurs. We can see what matters and fixate on the things that can lead to epiphanies. We can see things clearly and for what they are, why they work, and how to use them in ways others have not yet been able to see. If this process were graphed, it would look like a bell-shaped curve. We all start by focusing on just the basics, build up to a peak, but people who master something begin to simplify what they know and the curve falls back to the basics.
This may explain why things seem so simple when someone who has mastered a skill does it or explains it. I've often found more insight from a single, short phrase than an entire book. They have reduced their focus back to what matters, gotten rid of the clutter, and it's allowed them to see it in it's purest form.
One person that I admire greatly is a man that was beyond his time, Bruce Lee. He's known for martial arts and movies, but most people don't realize what he really was: a philosopher. This is what he really excelled at and what made him special. Martial arts for Bruce Lee was not a way to kick someone's ass. He admits that it was just an outlet to express himself. He became so innovative and great at what he did because of who he was. The truth is, he'd have become great at just about anything he did. There are a lot of old black and white videos on youtube of him. Things he says are incredibly insightful. His quotes are pretty amazing. And while he's known for martial arts, all the things he says can be applied to anything. Martial arts is just one of the things he applied it to and mastered. Simplicity is a very big theme in what he says. Breaking the complex down into the simple, most practical forms. This is how he created Jeet kun do. The took what worked from other styles, understood why they worked, and created this no-nonsence, brutally effective style from it. And from Jeet kun do grew what we know today as Mixed Martial Arts, and Bruce Lee is known as it's father.
That's just one example of many examples that you can find from histories greats. Start with the basics, build it up, and the extract what matters. I'm in the climbing phase, but I hope this bi of insight will push my understanding further than my peers when I reach the peak and know where to go from there.
Value in Fighting For Limped Pots
I somehow came across this website (http://www.parttimepoker.com/) today with a strategy section. The first article I read had some questionable advice for novice players about dealing with LAGs OOP. The authors advice was 1) move tables, or 2) move seats, or 3) play back. I'm totally fine with the first two. The 3rd is pretty treacherous advice for a novice player considering the LAG is playing that style in large part to get this exact reaction to induce an eventual expensive mistake. I would not ever advise an inexperienced player to adjust by making moves OOP against a LAG unless I wanted them to go broke.
In the next article, another player talked a bit about playing in 3bet pots from the BU when 3bet by the blinds. He had some pretty good points early, although his example might not have been the best. He called the 3bet on the BU with 46s, flop was J65, opponent cbet, and he jammed saying that you're often ahead and when behind, you have a draw to 5 outs. I really don't think I like his reasons, and I'm not sure if I like or don't like how the hand was played. However, I do know that for a basic strategy article, his example wasn't a very good one.
Finally, I read the 3rd article and find points that I think are just blatantly wrong. It's a section from Bill Vosti's ebook titled "Playing limped pots in 6max no limit games." I disagreed with several points and think it is more enforcing break-even to marginally winning play than play that maximizes value and crushes levels. I'll break it down point-by-point:
That actually hurts to read, especially the "there's not much value made from winning limped pots" comment. It's my opinion that there is a TON of easy value to get from limped pots. I say it is my opinion because I'm not going to provide the data that proves it wrong, but certainly think I could produce it if I needed to. This is the same thinking that was common several years ago when people were not stealing blinds in cash games. They said "It's not a tournament. What difference does 1.5bbs make? Why get involved with a marginal hand just for that!" I'm guilty of that thinking too when I just started learning NL. But this was not the opinion of the biggest winning players. While others were not stealing and giving up the blinds, they were busy cashing in. The truth is, it doesn't seem like much, but generally a player who is doing very well to crushing a level has a win rate of 5bbs+ per 100 hands. By stealing the blinds successfully once, 1.5bbs, you've essentially accomplished 30% of that win rate in one hand! Since two random hands in the blinds are likely to be weak, stealing often succeeds. People noticed, realized how profitable and important it really was, and now it is common knowledge among most players.
Even this author knows that, which makes it surprising and yet not so, to be saying that. While everyone knows about how picking up the blinds in profitable, it seems like very few apply that to a similar situation: limped pots. It just hasn't caught on as well yet. While you may be OOP in a limped pot, one thing is fairly certain: players mostly have marginal hands or nothing at all. They usually have hands that can not stand up to much pressure. On top of that, now there is even more than 1.5bbs in the pot. There may be 100-150% more. If there are 3bbs in the pot, it may not seem worthwhile to pick up, but as seen with the blinds, it definitely is. Picking up these small pots will increase your win rate as well as substantially add up over the long term.
And the best thing is that the majority of players use the same thinking that the author does: "it's a limped pot, it's just not worth getting involved without a very big hand." That's license to steal. Free money. Don't pass it up, especially in todays games where people are generally playing better. Every profitable situation counts. Sometimes they might have a strong hand and they will definitely let you know when they do. Sometimes the BB picks up AA when you try to steal from the BU. That doesn't make stealing unprofitable. That's because most of the time you're going to be picking up the dead money and that is going to add up.
Overall, this is great advice if you want to be a break-even to marginally winning player. This play seems so weak-tight that the mental picture of the author that I have is someone with gray hair and I'd be highly surprised if they were crushing anything online rather than just grinding out a small win rate.
The best players will always make the most money, and one of the ways they do it is by finding profit in situations other players pass on and maximizing the amount of value they get. Sometimes it's thin value that other players are too timid to try for. But that's why there are only a few top players among millions of others. If a situation can be +EV, even small EV, we should work to learn how to best navigate it, rather than writing it off for others to pick up.
In the next article, another player talked a bit about playing in 3bet pots from the BU when 3bet by the blinds. He had some pretty good points early, although his example might not have been the best. He called the 3bet on the BU with 46s, flop was J65, opponent cbet, and he jammed saying that you're often ahead and when behind, you have a draw to 5 outs. I really don't think I like his reasons, and I'm not sure if I like or don't like how the hand was played. However, I do know that for a basic strategy article, his example wasn't a very good one.
Finally, I read the 3rd article and find points that I think are just blatantly wrong. It's a section from Bill Vosti's ebook titled "Playing limped pots in 6max no limit games." I disagreed with several points and think it is more enforcing break-even to marginally winning play than play that maximizes value and crushes levels. I'll break it down point-by-point:
- "We’re just not used to limping and dealing with hands like top pair no kicker in a small pot. I believe the solution is very simple: just don’t worry about them very much. There’s not much value to be made from winning limped pots. You’ll usually be in the SB or BB in these pots and you should only really get involved if you flop a very big hand."
That actually hurts to read, especially the "there's not much value made from winning limped pots" comment. It's my opinion that there is a TON of easy value to get from limped pots. I say it is my opinion because I'm not going to provide the data that proves it wrong, but certainly think I could produce it if I needed to. This is the same thinking that was common several years ago when people were not stealing blinds in cash games. They said "It's not a tournament. What difference does 1.5bbs make? Why get involved with a marginal hand just for that!" I'm guilty of that thinking too when I just started learning NL. But this was not the opinion of the biggest winning players. While others were not stealing and giving up the blinds, they were busy cashing in. The truth is, it doesn't seem like much, but generally a player who is doing very well to crushing a level has a win rate of 5bbs+ per 100 hands. By stealing the blinds successfully once, 1.5bbs, you've essentially accomplished 30% of that win rate in one hand! Since two random hands in the blinds are likely to be weak, stealing often succeeds. People noticed, realized how profitable and important it really was, and now it is common knowledge among most players.
Even this author knows that, which makes it surprising and yet not so, to be saying that. While everyone knows about how picking up the blinds in profitable, it seems like very few apply that to a similar situation: limped pots. It just hasn't caught on as well yet. While you may be OOP in a limped pot, one thing is fairly certain: players mostly have marginal hands or nothing at all. They usually have hands that can not stand up to much pressure. On top of that, now there is even more than 1.5bbs in the pot. There may be 100-150% more. If there are 3bbs in the pot, it may not seem worthwhile to pick up, but as seen with the blinds, it definitely is. Picking up these small pots will increase your win rate as well as substantially add up over the long term.
And the best thing is that the majority of players use the same thinking that the author does: "it's a limped pot, it's just not worth getting involved without a very big hand." That's license to steal. Free money. Don't pass it up, especially in todays games where people are generally playing better. Every profitable situation counts. Sometimes they might have a strong hand and they will definitely let you know when they do. Sometimes the BB picks up AA when you try to steal from the BU. That doesn't make stealing unprofitable. That's because most of the time you're going to be picking up the dead money and that is going to add up.
- "When you flop top pair, no kicker, it’s only worth one bet at most. K3 on a KQ8 flop is a very bad hand. If there are 2 or more players, I often won’t even put a dime in the pot."
- "When the SB open completes and you check the BB and he checks to you on the flop, it’s OK to fire out a small bet to take the pot. Otherwise, never bet into a limped pot with nothing."
Overall, this is great advice if you want to be a break-even to marginally winning player. This play seems so weak-tight that the mental picture of the author that I have is someone with gray hair and I'd be highly surprised if they were crushing anything online rather than just grinding out a small win rate.
The best players will always make the most money, and one of the ways they do it is by finding profit in situations other players pass on and maximizing the amount of value they get. Sometimes it's thin value that other players are too timid to try for. But that's why there are only a few top players among millions of others. If a situation can be +EV, even small EV, we should work to learn how to best navigate it, rather than writing it off for others to pick up.
Hate to be anti-climactic, but the game was canceled, but is 100% on next week and I'll report the results after. Going back home tomorrow and I'll be getting back on a schedule that I'm still working on. It doesn't seem like there are enough hours in the day. I want to be playing 8-10 hours a day, with time to exercise, time to study/review hands, fit a nap in between sessions, do odd and end stuff, and wind down. As far as playing, I'll start by grinding out the rest of those FPP points in the Stars 210FPP SNG satellite while looking for a good rakeback/bonus deal. Then it's back 6max. I'll be focusing a lot more on playing and reviewing my own play over the next few weeks.
Experiments in Loose/Passive Full Ring
I didn't get as much time to think about it as I wanted. I didn't wake up until 1:30 today. Apparently, that's pretty standard for players, but in this instance it's just due to me still being on Vegas time from a few days ago.
In the game tonight, I'm going to experiment with some 3betting. It will primarily be just 3betting a wider value range. I may not get too many opportunities because the game is so passive. When a player raises, he/she usually has something very strong. But there may be a people who open a bit wider and will always call the 3bet to see the flop so hopefully I will get a seat on their left. This is also the reason I can't 3bet light; if they open, they'll almost always call. To do so profitably would mean they will check/fold the flop with a high frequency, which they may, but there will also often be one or several cold callers. I may leave experimenting with light 3bets to another session, but I don't expect it to be too common or profitable of a strategy.
Isolating is major in weak games. The problem in these ultra loose games is that limpers often call. Everyone wants to see the flop before they fold. They absolutely can't stand to fold what might have been a set, 2 pair, eventual straight, or flush. It's a huge area of grief for them and there isn't a table anywhere that I set down at and not hear someone hit the table because they folded too soon, tell me about how they folded 84 pre-flop but would have hit trips on the River, or let the whole table know they'd have hit a straight. They seem especially frustrated when they would have hit the flop hard, even though there was a raise and a re-raise before them and they folded K3o. So trying to isolate a single player and play post-flop with them can have some random results. I might get 4 callers, even when raising big. I might get a cold-caller in front of me and everyone including the intended target folds. It definitely doesn't seem as easy as tighter games where only 1 or 2 people limp and everyone else, but the limpers, fold to a raise. Still, there's TONS of value in isolating in general and it is certainly worth experimenting with to find the best times and ways to do it in this type of multi-way no fold'em hold'em game. Maybe raising very large or 3betting are key....
I'll definitely be looking to fight a bit harder for orphaned pots. There's good value there with all the limpers/limp-callers and people will often just give them up with little or nothing. It may be small, but it adds up significantly as well as providing a safe, cheap way to creap an aggressive or bluffy image. Often people will not discern the difference when you get caught bluffing with smaller bets at a little pot a few times and the one time you are making big bets and they have a little something. They'll still have the thought of "He bluffs a lot, he could be bluffing" in their thoughts, even though you've never bluffed in this way before.
Finally, I'd like to look for big +EV bluffs via 2nd/3rd barrels. Conventional wisdom says this is very bad and there's certainly some truth in that. You definitely want to bring your head gear because it could end messy. It's also not really necessary to do it in order for image and to get paid off later when you bet big on 3 streets with a set+ because they will often pay you off with anything decent. But I still there is some extra value that can be created by essentially creating more dead money that a future bet will reap. There ranges are often wide and marginal when they call the flop and even the turn.
While they are loose, however, they aren't complete droolers [Disclaimer: If there is a drooler in the pot, this should be avoided]. They want to see cards and not fold too early. They want to make sure they aren't getting bluffed or folding the best hand. But they aren't crazy either. They know the value of money and are embarrassed if they call and lose their whole stack with something ridiculous. Given enough pressure, they will fold marginal hands in a growing pot. So if I run into a situation HU or 3way where I can pretty strongly put the other player/s on marginal holdings (draws, 2nd pairs, very weak TPs), and the board texture is good for it, I may look to build the pot by 2nd barreling good Turn cards and then 3rd barreling good River cards. This should be especially valuable if I can accurately put them on a draw and build the pot on the flop/turn and take it down when the draw whiffs on the River with little hand at all. I will certainly be much more hesitant and require a very scary board texture if I think TP might make up a good portion of their range. I have a lot of work to do here, but I thinking getting very good at identifying these situations could heavily increase my winrate on top of the basic ABC strategy that works in these games.
I also need to practice more in situations where you should either bet 1 street or all 3 streets. There are situations where 2nd barreling and shutting down is very good, and then there are situations where 2nd barreling and never 3rd barreling is spew. If you decide to not shut down and instead 2nd barrel, you must often 3rd barrel to make the 2nd barrel good. Just as a simple example, say we have 34s, the flop is 672hh. We cbet and get called by a loose player. The Turn is a T. We decide to barrel the over and he calls. Shutting down on many River cards, especially more overs/non-straight or flush completing cards, is often going to make the 2nd barrel bad and give up a +EV river bluff. That's because of his range. He very often has a hand like 6x, 7x or a straight or flush draw. If he has a hand like 78, then he called the flop with TP, caught a gutshot on the turn, and wants to see the river where he will fold if beaten. He may have a flush draw that he chased to the river and you have no showdown value with 4-high. A whole lot of his range will be weak hands that he will call 2 streets with and fold on the River. So by 2nd barreling and not 3rd barreling, you are wasting money with the 2nd barrel and passing up on a big pot by not pulling the trigger on the River. You should often just bet the flop and give up if you think a 2nd/3rd barrel will not be profitable because he has a good hand, or you should fire all 3 streets.
Incidently, by betting big on the Turn, you are creating a lot of dead money to pick up on the River. This will significantly add to win rate when done right, and detract when done wrong, so it's important that I work on getting better at this. Also, people HATE folding the best hand in big pots, so showing a bluff here should be incredibly good for you when you have a real hand. They will definitely not forget this hand and be much less willing to fold what might be the best hand again in a future pot together.
I think 80% of my play will be basic ABC strategy. Good situations just don't come up often enough in these games. But by showing just a single big bluff, I think that's all it will take to get huge action on good hands. I will also play a little more aggressively to pick up dead money, and that may get me paid off a little lighter as they get more suspicious. This means that as the night goes on, I can probably valuebet thinner and thinner.
The game starts in a few hours. I don't hope to win, just to play well and run into these situations often enough to get some feedback and learn something. As a recap, the goals are:
- Play an ABC+ strategy
- Fight more for orphaned pots
- Experiment with isolating
- Experiment with 3betting for value wider
- Look for +EV 2nd/3rd barrel spots
