I've had a really good week this last week and this has been due in large parts to sitting in really good games.
I noticed earlier in the week that some bad players from the $200 game were playing in the $600 game and there was even one sitting in the $1000 game with about $800. These looked like games to sit in and take a shot. Also, I spotted a player who was a total maniac at NLHE and he looked like he thought he could profitably play any 4 cards.
Things worked out nicely early on, which was good because I had only earmarked a small proportion of the bankroll to this foray. I concentrated on playing a single table of $1000 PLO and managed to win over a buy-in without doing anything startling. Basically the bad players just gave their money away in bits and bobs. Later I won a bit more playing the $600 game and had a decent session last night in the $400 game.
I actually enjoyed going back to one table and this is something I may try and stick to for a while if I am to play above the $200 game. I think for the long-run goal of becoming a decent PLO player it is essential that I give myself more time to think about how to play my situations as well as being able to spend a bit more time analysing the bad players in the game. This is currently not possible for me when playing 2-4 tables. Its not like I am enough of a PLO expert to be able to play by rote!
I also had a dabble short-stacking the $2000 game with a $400 buy-in, as there was an empty seat to the right of the two most aggressive players in the game. After a lot of folding I was able to get my money in nicely, winning a low-risk $200 or so in less than an hour. These games don't get started very often but there is definitely a possibility that I will try this again.
The good result this week means that the Disney target has been achieved, although I must be careful, as the value of investments may go down as well as up. Its not in the bag until its actually in the bag.
We go on holiday for 15 days on Friday so there's only a few more days left in the month for me as far as poker is concerned. Another couple of nice results would pad the bankroll to give me a nice cushion on my return from the sun.
Monday, 11 February 2008
Friday, 8 February 2008
PLO - big draw v the current nuts
A hand came up last night that got me thinking about PLO in a bit more depth.
I had AsJh10d7s and opened for 18 in the $600 game. The button (on the tight/passive side) and the big blind (decent) called me, so we took the flop 3-handed with 57 in the pot.
The flop was Jd10s8s, giving me top two pairs plus the nut flush-draw. I bet 54 and got raised to 217 by the button. After the BB folded, it was back to me and with the money in the pot already I had too much to fold. The decision was re-raise all-in or just call and re-evaluate on the turn.
My thinking at the time was as follows:
He must have the nut straight (Q9), but probably not a total monster like QJJ9. Hopefully he doesn’t have any spades (reducing my flush chances). I probably have enough outs to correctly call the rest (365) to see the river even if I miss on the turn. If I hit one of my outs I can give him the chance to put the rest of his money in when in pretty bad shape.
There are a few problems with this line of thinking:
If I hit my hand on the turn it will be obvious and he is unlikely to pay me off.
I am unlikely to be drawing dead on the turn, so waiting for a ‘safe card’ here is silly.
Assuming I don’t make my hand on the turn, I am opting to put a large chunk of my money in at approx 25-30% equity when I could have just lumped it in on the flop at 45-50% [2].
I should have just re-raised all-in on the flop and took the toss-up. (I actually had 48% equity against his hand).
This lead me to the following conclusion about how to play a big draw against the current nuts:
Against the nut straight: the flush-draw + full-house draw should get all-in on the flop [2]
Against top set: straight draws + flush draw should keep some money back in case the board pairs on the turn. If the drawing hand hits on the turn, it will be tough for the top set to fold. If a non-pairing blank comes, it is still likely to be correct to call a PSB on the turn [3].
[1] unless he had something as nasty as Qs9sThTc, then I would really be in trouble with only 28% equity on the flop
[2] unless the money is really deep
[3] this is very different thinking to that required to play NLHE
I had AsJh10d7s and opened for 18 in the $600 game. The button (on the tight/passive side) and the big blind (decent) called me, so we took the flop 3-handed with 57 in the pot.
The flop was Jd10s8s, giving me top two pairs plus the nut flush-draw. I bet 54 and got raised to 217 by the button. After the BB folded, it was back to me and with the money in the pot already I had too much to fold. The decision was re-raise all-in or just call and re-evaluate on the turn.
My thinking at the time was as follows:
He must have the nut straight (Q9), but probably not a total monster like QJJ9. Hopefully he doesn’t have any spades (reducing my flush chances). I probably have enough outs to correctly call the rest (365) to see the river even if I miss on the turn. If I hit one of my outs I can give him the chance to put the rest of his money in when in pretty bad shape.
There are a few problems with this line of thinking:
If I hit my hand on the turn it will be obvious and he is unlikely to pay me off.
I am unlikely to be drawing dead on the turn, so waiting for a ‘safe card’ here is silly.
Assuming I don’t make my hand on the turn, I am opting to put a large chunk of my money in at approx 25-30% equity when I could have just lumped it in on the flop at 45-50% [2].
I should have just re-raised all-in on the flop and took the toss-up. (I actually had 48% equity against his hand).
This lead me to the following conclusion about how to play a big draw against the current nuts:
Against the nut straight: the flush-draw + full-house draw should get all-in on the flop [2]
Against top set: straight draws + flush draw should keep some money back in case the board pairs on the turn. If the drawing hand hits on the turn, it will be tough for the top set to fold. If a non-pairing blank comes, it is still likely to be correct to call a PSB on the turn [3].
[1] unless he had something as nasty as Qs9sThTc, then I would really be in trouble with only 28% equity on the flop
[2] unless the money is really deep
[3] this is very different thinking to that required to play NLHE
Tuesday, 5 February 2008
Solid but unspectacular start to 2008
I’ve decided to reinstate the monthly results updates from now. The main reason for this is that I want to have some degree of accountability, which was the main reason I started this blog in the first place. So, January 08 is in the bag and after approx 68 hours play I managed a win of $3445. Not a fantastic result but steady enough I guess. After a bad month in December it was nice to get back to winning ways.
I’m struggling with the Disney target ($6000 in the first 6 weeks of the year) but this is as much to do with volume as quality of play. I would like to achieve the target but I mustn’t let it rule my thought processes when playing.
Going forward it would be nice to improve the hourly rate above the $70 per hour I have made so far at $200 PLO, although I guess $100 per hour is probably the maximum achievable playing 2-4 tables.
At the moment I have only a laptop screen (max res 1280 x 800) and am unable to play without quite a lot of table overlap. I suspect that this is not helping the bottom line. I could do with a more professional set-up but then my evening sessions would feel much more like working than playing. I really ought to consider getting a decent monitor that will allow me to fit 4 tables with no overlap.
I’m struggling with the Disney target ($6000 in the first 6 weeks of the year) but this is as much to do with volume as quality of play. I would like to achieve the target but I mustn’t let it rule my thought processes when playing.
Going forward it would be nice to improve the hourly rate above the $70 per hour I have made so far at $200 PLO, although I guess $100 per hour is probably the maximum achievable playing 2-4 tables.
At the moment I have only a laptop screen (max res 1280 x 800) and am unable to play without quite a lot of table overlap. I suspect that this is not helping the bottom line. I could do with a more professional set-up but then my evening sessions would feel much more like working than playing. I really ought to consider getting a decent monitor that will allow me to fit 4 tables with no overlap.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
