A second consecutive week of disappointment. There was loads of action this week; loads of crazy play; lots of big pots; lots of bluffing.
I played about 13 hours this week, as the games were so good, but I managed to lose money. Only a $59 loss, but still gut-wrenching after some of the big pots I won. Overall, in the big pots, I got my money in really well (approx 18% edge) but this was offset by lots of small and medium losses. Maybe I splashed around too much in the smaller pots, so that by the time I played a big pot they decided I was a loose gambler and decided to give too much action.
I played quite a bit short-handed this week and this is where my worst play came. I tried to win too many pots, but I think ultimately I failed because I didnt fire the final barrel often enough. I wasnt quite aggressive enough: maybe because subconsciously I wanted to avoid the worst of the variance.
I really should stick to full-ring for the time being.
On Sunday night I had the worst session of the week. This basically wiped out any profit I had made so far in the week: pretty much the same as I did the week before.
My last few hands of the week summed up my bad play. I had been playing heads-up against a tight-aggressive player, when I failed to raise him off A10 on an A4789 board. I raised his turn bet with no-pair/no-draw and he called a big bet on the river too. I think if I had seen his cards I wold have probably still made the same move.
Soon after that the table became 4 or 5 handed and I called a raise from him with the button and 63 of diamonds. The flop came A67 and I called his flop bet, before the killer 6 came on the turn and we got all-in. He had the nut full-house, and I thought it best to leave and call it a night there.
These two loose plays symptomised how bad my play had become. These are not mistakes that I normally make. I should have recognised that I was off my game and left immediately. Maybe this is something I can learn from.
Lets hope the rest of the month goes OK
Monday, 8 October 2007
Thursday, 4 October 2007
Learning No-Limit Hold ‘Em from scratch
Somebody posted a question on 2+2 today that really got me thinking.
"There is so much to learn for a beginner, in what order of aspects of the game would the more experienced players say it makes sense to focus on. For example, first is obviously what beats what, then perhaps betting, then pot odds, then position and so on... Of course all aspects of the game have to be considered while at the table (or as much as ur knowledge will allow)There is just so much to learn it would be good to have some kind of logical progression of what to focus on away from the table, depending on what you have already studied and got to some level of grips with.."
This is something that I have thought about before and it’s a really complex subject. I suspect that with enough time, I would like to start by teaching a student how to formulate a strategy for a much simpler game than poker. Then, as they master the fundamentals of strategy formulation, introduce more complexity in the game itself until it eventually becomes No-Limit Hold ‘Em we know it.
Game 1
Consider this very simple ‘poker’ game, contested by 10 players. The game plays exactly like NLHE, except
(1) they receive only one card each
(2) there are no community cards
(3) there is only one betting round
(4) high card wins
In this game, I have no doubt that a great poker player would manage to formulate a strategy that would generate profit. Discussing strategy with the poker novice we could introduce concepts such as
(a) position
(b) pot odds
(c) fold equity
(d) hand-reading
(e) bluffing
(f) stack-sizes
It should become clear quite quickly that a player can play more hands in late position than in early position. Also, it can be explained how raising can be more profitable than calling. We can also introduce risk/reward into the equation.
It wouldn’t take a game theory expert very long to calculate a very profitable strategy in this very simple game. However, not everybody in the game will have the ability or the inclination to work out an optimal strategy. This is where player-reading and hand reading comes into play.
Obviously there would be a lot of guesswork in such a simple game. There isn’t much information to go on when making a betting decision.
Game 2
As game 1, but with the addition of a 3-card flop, after which there is a second (and final) round of betting. The best 3-card hand wins, but there are only trips, pairs and high cards.
This complicates matters greatly, as the element of ‘catch-up’ is now introduced to the game. New concepts can be introduced as follows:
(1) implied odds
(2) outs
(3) pre-flop equity
Also, previously discussed concepts can be expanded on. For example, position becomes more important, as the cost of giving away your hand pre-flop is much greater. Hand-reading is more complicated as there is more information on which to base our decision.
Games 3,4 and beyond
The game can be expanded to eventually reflect NLHE as currently played. If additional betting rounds are added, it becomes obvious that pre-flop equity is less important, implied odds and position more important. Also, the impact of differing stack sizes can be introduced into the equation.
If we add a second hole-card, and expand to include flushes and straights it opens up a whole host of possibilities for our exploration
Conclusion
Its difficult to say which concepts are more important. We need to understand as much as possible about the game we are playing and the circumstances in which we play it.
If we are playing with a short-stack, then maybe we can focus on pre-flop hand equity and position. Otherwise, we really do need to consider all of the other variables.
Once a beginning player has some understanding of fundamentals, they need to play in a game to get some understanding of the flow of the game. They must learn to feel comfortable actually playing the game so that they can think about what is happening and why. Its useful if someone can critique their play, referring back to the fundamentals, as there must be an ongoing process of learning.
Actually, the Theory Of Poker does a great job of explaining these fundamentals. However, sometimes the best way to learn is to have somebody point you towards finding the correct answers for yourself. This probably results in greater understanding.
"There is so much to learn for a beginner, in what order of aspects of the game would the more experienced players say it makes sense to focus on. For example, first is obviously what beats what, then perhaps betting, then pot odds, then position and so on... Of course all aspects of the game have to be considered while at the table (or as much as ur knowledge will allow)There is just so much to learn it would be good to have some kind of logical progression of what to focus on away from the table, depending on what you have already studied and got to some level of grips with.."
This is something that I have thought about before and it’s a really complex subject. I suspect that with enough time, I would like to start by teaching a student how to formulate a strategy for a much simpler game than poker. Then, as they master the fundamentals of strategy formulation, introduce more complexity in the game itself until it eventually becomes No-Limit Hold ‘Em we know it.
Game 1
Consider this very simple ‘poker’ game, contested by 10 players. The game plays exactly like NLHE, except
(1) they receive only one card each
(2) there are no community cards
(3) there is only one betting round
(4) high card wins
In this game, I have no doubt that a great poker player would manage to formulate a strategy that would generate profit. Discussing strategy with the poker novice we could introduce concepts such as
(a) position
(b) pot odds
(c) fold equity
(d) hand-reading
(e) bluffing
(f) stack-sizes
It should become clear quite quickly that a player can play more hands in late position than in early position. Also, it can be explained how raising can be more profitable than calling. We can also introduce risk/reward into the equation.
It wouldn’t take a game theory expert very long to calculate a very profitable strategy in this very simple game. However, not everybody in the game will have the ability or the inclination to work out an optimal strategy. This is where player-reading and hand reading comes into play.
Obviously there would be a lot of guesswork in such a simple game. There isn’t much information to go on when making a betting decision.
Game 2
As game 1, but with the addition of a 3-card flop, after which there is a second (and final) round of betting. The best 3-card hand wins, but there are only trips, pairs and high cards.
This complicates matters greatly, as the element of ‘catch-up’ is now introduced to the game. New concepts can be introduced as follows:
(1) implied odds
(2) outs
(3) pre-flop equity
Also, previously discussed concepts can be expanded on. For example, position becomes more important, as the cost of giving away your hand pre-flop is much greater. Hand-reading is more complicated as there is more information on which to base our decision.
Games 3,4 and beyond
The game can be expanded to eventually reflect NLHE as currently played. If additional betting rounds are added, it becomes obvious that pre-flop equity is less important, implied odds and position more important. Also, the impact of differing stack sizes can be introduced into the equation.
If we add a second hole-card, and expand to include flushes and straights it opens up a whole host of possibilities for our exploration
Conclusion
Its difficult to say which concepts are more important. We need to understand as much as possible about the game we are playing and the circumstances in which we play it.
If we are playing with a short-stack, then maybe we can focus on pre-flop hand equity and position. Otherwise, we really do need to consider all of the other variables.
Once a beginning player has some understanding of fundamentals, they need to play in a game to get some understanding of the flow of the game. They must learn to feel comfortable actually playing the game so that they can think about what is happening and why. Its useful if someone can critique their play, referring back to the fundamentals, as there must be an ongoing process of learning.
Actually, the Theory Of Poker does a great job of explaining these fundamentals. However, sometimes the best way to learn is to have somebody point you towards finding the correct answers for yourself. This probably results in greater understanding.
Monday, 1 October 2007
September progress report
Played 10 hours in the last week of the month and following a bad finish only managed to accumulate $194 earnings in the week. I lost all three of the big pots I played, costing me about another $450 in cash-flow, so the bankroll went down slightly during the week. Hardly a disaster but disappointing none-the-less.
Biggest pot of the week resulted in a $1240 loss.
A loose aggressive player (LAG), with a big stack, min-raised UTG and was called by a weak-tightie (WT). I called on the button with J8, and was pretty pleased to see the LAG bet out $20 on the QT9 flop. He was called by the WT and because this was an action board, including a possible flush-draw, and because the LAG could easily have QQQ, AA or KK in this spot I decided to raise to $140. They both called, which surprised me a little. I thought it was likely that at least one of them must have a flush-draw, so when they both checked the turn (an 8, counterfeiting part of my hand) I was confused as to how much to bet. To be honest, as the time ran down, I panicked a bit and decided to bet all-in for $1080, which the LAG quickly called. The river changed nothing and it was the worst case scenario as he turned over KJ for the bigger straight.
My all-in bet on the turn made no sense at all, as I was only likely to get called by (1) the same hand ie. a naked J, (2) the nuts KJ or (3) the same straight as me with a re-draw to a higher straight and/or flush.
I would have been quite happy to get all-in on the flop, turn or river if the board had blanked off, so the result would have been the same in these scenarios, but I should have managed to lose less as the hand actually did play out, so for this I am a bit annoyed at my play.
On a happier note, I was able to win many small- and medium-sized pots due to, I think, good solid play. This is something that I feel I have improved on during the last few weeks and my September results bear this out. Here is a brief summary:
Hours played: 31.8
Hands played: 2,583
Big pots played: 27
Big pot EV: +1,190 (8%)
Small pot profit: +3,869
Bonuses etc: +72
Total won: $5,131
Obviously, this is a great result on the back of a fantastic break-through month in August. I was able to improve my hourly rate and now feel really comfortable playing at this level.
During the month I think I have improved my control, and have done really well in recognising when to attack and when to back-off a little. For long periods I have felt as though I haven't done anything special at all. Looking back, I realise that what I have managed to do is play my 'A-game', or close to it, for a much higher proportion of total playing time. This is most likely the biggest contributing factor to my success this month.
Having said that, there have still been times when I have caught myself getting a bit agitated. I have been able to recognise these times and rein in the desire to get overly-involved. These situations generally occur when there are some really bad players at the table. It can be so frustrating sitting and watching them lose their money to someone else, whilst I constantly fold my rags, or see my low pocket pairs fail to connect with the flop. Its really important to not fritter away chips here, as this really reduces your earnings.
One noticeable number that pops out of my stats is the number of big pots played. In August this was 69/4879 (1.41%), compared with 27/2583 (only 1.04%) in September. This may or may not be significant. Possible causes include:
Wish me luck.
Biggest pot of the week resulted in a $1240 loss.
A loose aggressive player (LAG), with a big stack, min-raised UTG and was called by a weak-tightie (WT). I called on the button with J8, and was pretty pleased to see the LAG bet out $20 on the QT9 flop. He was called by the WT and because this was an action board, including a possible flush-draw, and because the LAG could easily have QQQ, AA or KK in this spot I decided to raise to $140. They both called, which surprised me a little. I thought it was likely that at least one of them must have a flush-draw, so when they both checked the turn (an 8, counterfeiting part of my hand) I was confused as to how much to bet. To be honest, as the time ran down, I panicked a bit and decided to bet all-in for $1080, which the LAG quickly called. The river changed nothing and it was the worst case scenario as he turned over KJ for the bigger straight.
My all-in bet on the turn made no sense at all, as I was only likely to get called by (1) the same hand ie. a naked J, (2) the nuts KJ or (3) the same straight as me with a re-draw to a higher straight and/or flush.
I would have been quite happy to get all-in on the flop, turn or river if the board had blanked off, so the result would have been the same in these scenarios, but I should have managed to lose less as the hand actually did play out, so for this I am a bit annoyed at my play.
On a happier note, I was able to win many small- and medium-sized pots due to, I think, good solid play. This is something that I feel I have improved on during the last few weeks and my September results bear this out. Here is a brief summary:
Hours played: 31.8
Hands played: 2,583
Big pots played: 27
Big pot EV: +1,190 (8%)
Small pot profit: +3,869
Bonuses etc: +72
Total won: $5,131
Obviously, this is a great result on the back of a fantastic break-through month in August. I was able to improve my hourly rate and now feel really comfortable playing at this level.
During the month I think I have improved my control, and have done really well in recognising when to attack and when to back-off a little. For long periods I have felt as though I haven't done anything special at all. Looking back, I realise that what I have managed to do is play my 'A-game', or close to it, for a much higher proportion of total playing time. This is most likely the biggest contributing factor to my success this month.
Having said that, there have still been times when I have caught myself getting a bit agitated. I have been able to recognise these times and rein in the desire to get overly-involved. These situations generally occur when there are some really bad players at the table. It can be so frustrating sitting and watching them lose their money to someone else, whilst I constantly fold my rags, or see my low pocket pairs fail to connect with the flop. Its really important to not fritter away chips here, as this really reduces your earnings.
One noticeable number that pops out of my stats is the number of big pots played. In August this was 69/4879 (1.41%), compared with 27/2583 (only 1.04%) in September. This may or may not be significant. Possible causes include:
- less big hands received in Sept compared to Aug
- general tightening up of opponents.
As my edge in these big pots was only 8% in Sept (compared with 13% in Aug) its likely to be a combination of both of these factors. Its definitely something I need to keep my eye on in the future, although if I continue to show such good results in the smaller pots, its going to be less of a concern.
It remains to be seen whether I can cope with a sustained period of bad cards/situations/beats. This is the true test of the poker player. This siituation hasn't come up yet, but it will do at some stage.Wish me luck.
Tuesday, 25 September 2007
Been on holiday
Just spent the last week in Ibiza on holiday with the family and some friends of ours. Had a great time despite a couple of days of iffy weather.
I never had time to update the blog before going, so here is a quick recap of the week before we went.
Played 7 hours
Won $2500
Bad luck $400
Withdraw $2000 (10% of bankroll)
Bankroll going forward $18.5k
In the big pots I got my money in really well on many occasions, so this was a great result to have leading into a break. I wonder if a string of bad results would have affected my mood on holiday. I guess not, but things have been going so well lately that its tough to remember a long losing streak and how that feels.
I resisted the temptation to play last night, having arrived back home by tea-time. I resume hostilities later today.
I never had time to update the blog before going, so here is a quick recap of the week before we went.
Played 7 hours
Won $2500
Bad luck $400
Withdraw $2000 (10% of bankroll)
Bankroll going forward $18.5k
In the big pots I got my money in really well on many occasions, so this was a great result to have leading into a break. I wonder if a string of bad results would have affected my mood on holiday. I guess not, but things have been going so well lately that its tough to remember a long losing streak and how that feels.
I resisted the temptation to play last night, having arrived back home by tea-time. I resume hostilities later today.
Monday, 10 September 2007
Nice result, didnt feel very good
Results-wise I should be happy with the last week but I dont feel as though I played that well. I played for 13.5 hours and showed a profit of $1456. I was a little unlucky in the big pots, which were few and far between, but nothing to get excited about.
I won quite a few medium-sized pots without showing down, but overall in the big pots I did no better than break even.
Biggest winner of the week (EV-wise) was when my 77 hit a 997 flop in a 4-way limped pot. I bet it on the flop and the turn and the big blind seemed very keen to call big bets. I guessed he'd hit the 9. When he checked the river I bet all-in (about twice the size of the pot) and he insta-called with K9 (trip 9s).
Biggest move of the week came when I raised in EP with 67-suited and got two callers, both solid regulars. This is something that I do very rarely but I had been playing very tight in that session and people had probably noticed. The flop came QJ4 (all spades) and I fired a near-pot-sized bet as many players will just give up if they dont have a great hand here. One reg called and the turn was a 5 giving me a straight-draw. I fired pretty big again and he called. Now I put him on something like KQ with the K of spades. The river was another 5, which I considered a good card to bluff with as it paired the board. I would have played QQ or JJ exactly the same as I played my 67, so figured that a big river bet would get him to lay down. I wanted to be enough for him to be sure that I was representing exactly QQ, just in case he had flopped a flush, so I bet all-in (almost 2x the pot) and he folded after some delay.
Biggest loser came when I raised to $40 UTG with AK-suited. It folded round to the big blind who made it $120 to go. This was a loose-aggressive player, but I didnt get the impression he was messing about here. However I called, figuring that I had position and I could quite easily be up against QQ or KK. The flop came Axx and he checked to me. I had about $575 left (I started the hand quite low as I had just lost a decent pot and failed to reload in time) and bet $250 to signal that I wasnt messing about. He then raised all-in and at this point I guessed he probably had the other two Aces. I just couldnt bring myself to fold. Booo! I deliberately bet an amount on the flop that looked as if I would never fold to a check-raise so that I could do just that. Then I called and got see his AA. I played this hand like a mug and got punished accordingly.
On Sunday night I played like a gambler, and my results were poor, with a $1200 loss. The table started short-handed and the guy to my right was in every pot fighting for it. I got too involved with him, despite not hitting anything at all, and quickly lost money in decent-sized chunks. So the week ended on a sour note, but I can console myself with the knowledge that I made $100+ per hour this week despite this loss.
The plan for this week is to play well every session and hopefully the results will follow.
I won quite a few medium-sized pots without showing down, but overall in the big pots I did no better than break even.
Biggest winner of the week (EV-wise) was when my 77 hit a 997 flop in a 4-way limped pot. I bet it on the flop and the turn and the big blind seemed very keen to call big bets. I guessed he'd hit the 9. When he checked the river I bet all-in (about twice the size of the pot) and he insta-called with K9 (trip 9s).
Biggest move of the week came when I raised in EP with 67-suited and got two callers, both solid regulars. This is something that I do very rarely but I had been playing very tight in that session and people had probably noticed. The flop came QJ4 (all spades) and I fired a near-pot-sized bet as many players will just give up if they dont have a great hand here. One reg called and the turn was a 5 giving me a straight-draw. I fired pretty big again and he called. Now I put him on something like KQ with the K of spades. The river was another 5, which I considered a good card to bluff with as it paired the board. I would have played QQ or JJ exactly the same as I played my 67, so figured that a big river bet would get him to lay down. I wanted to be enough for him to be sure that I was representing exactly QQ, just in case he had flopped a flush, so I bet all-in (almost 2x the pot) and he folded after some delay.
Biggest loser came when I raised to $40 UTG with AK-suited. It folded round to the big blind who made it $120 to go. This was a loose-aggressive player, but I didnt get the impression he was messing about here. However I called, figuring that I had position and I could quite easily be up against QQ or KK. The flop came Axx and he checked to me. I had about $575 left (I started the hand quite low as I had just lost a decent pot and failed to reload in time) and bet $250 to signal that I wasnt messing about. He then raised all-in and at this point I guessed he probably had the other two Aces. I just couldnt bring myself to fold. Booo! I deliberately bet an amount on the flop that looked as if I would never fold to a check-raise so that I could do just that. Then I called and got see his AA. I played this hand like a mug and got punished accordingly.
On Sunday night I played like a gambler, and my results were poor, with a $1200 loss. The table started short-handed and the guy to my right was in every pot fighting for it. I got too involved with him, despite not hitting anything at all, and quickly lost money in decent-sized chunks. So the week ended on a sour note, but I can console myself with the knowledge that I made $100+ per hour this week despite this loss.
The plan for this week is to play well every session and hopefully the results will follow.
Monday, 3 September 2007
Starting new tables
This is something I notice that many players are not prepared to do, but is something I have always done willingly.
I started doing it originally on UltimateBet as you used to get double player points for being the first player to join a table. Now I have moved on to other sites but I have noticed that there is often good value to be had in waiting at a new table for other players to join.
Often, other regular players will stay away as they dont want to play heads-up against another regular. Or they may sit down but then sit out until some other players arrive. This is fine by me. Generally, the first one or two players to sit down will be weaker players. Maybe they just fancy a gamble and all the other tables are full so they think "Heads up? OK, why not!"
Sometimes they give away their weakness by the amount they sit down with. If its a strange amount, like $455.72 at a $1000 max table, it is quite likely that they have their whole bankroll on the table. This is a favourable situation, as you will find that if you can get them off to a losing start they will be desparate to get ahead. They will often become married to any hand that they raise or call a raise with. When they've lost a good chunk of what they started with they will often gamble recklessly to win it back or go home.
Other players sit down with the minimum buy-in, and will often start to play 'properly'. For a while you can bully these guys and take a few blinds off them before they realise what you are doing. They normally counteract this by re-raising all-in. If I find anything decent here, like AJ or KQ I will normally call their bet and expect to be in decent shape against their range.
Sometimes the min-buy-in players will reload but with their 2nd attempt they genereally play a bit more aggressively.
On some occasions the table will start to fill up quite quicky. Usually at least another couple of 'gamblers' will come along but when the table gets to 5-6handed the multi-tabling regulars usually swoop. This means that the table dynamics change again. You need to play totally differently against the regulars compared with against the gamblers. However, you can try to isolate the gamblers and you will be largely left to it by the regulars.
Its almost implied that there's no point messing with the regulars when there are some loose fish to fry. I try to take advantage of this a little more than most, but you cant be too greedy or you may get slapped.
After maybe 30 minutes the table plays more like a normal full-ring table, as the fish bust out and are replaced by tight regulars attracted by the higher than normal pot sizes. In my opinion, they have arrived too late to extract value from the fish and must patiently wait for a soft spot to arrive and dump off some cash. This is much more difficult as the shark/fish ratio is totally reversed by this stage. I will generally stay at the table until there are no soft spots at all, which rarely happens, or until external factors (such as bedtime!) require me to leave.
I started doing it originally on UltimateBet as you used to get double player points for being the first player to join a table. Now I have moved on to other sites but I have noticed that there is often good value to be had in waiting at a new table for other players to join.
Often, other regular players will stay away as they dont want to play heads-up against another regular. Or they may sit down but then sit out until some other players arrive. This is fine by me. Generally, the first one or two players to sit down will be weaker players. Maybe they just fancy a gamble and all the other tables are full so they think "Heads up? OK, why not!"
Sometimes they give away their weakness by the amount they sit down with. If its a strange amount, like $455.72 at a $1000 max table, it is quite likely that they have their whole bankroll on the table. This is a favourable situation, as you will find that if you can get them off to a losing start they will be desparate to get ahead. They will often become married to any hand that they raise or call a raise with. When they've lost a good chunk of what they started with they will often gamble recklessly to win it back or go home.
Other players sit down with the minimum buy-in, and will often start to play 'properly'. For a while you can bully these guys and take a few blinds off them before they realise what you are doing. They normally counteract this by re-raising all-in. If I find anything decent here, like AJ or KQ I will normally call their bet and expect to be in decent shape against their range.
Sometimes the min-buy-in players will reload but with their 2nd attempt they genereally play a bit more aggressively.
On some occasions the table will start to fill up quite quicky. Usually at least another couple of 'gamblers' will come along but when the table gets to 5-6handed the multi-tabling regulars usually swoop. This means that the table dynamics change again. You need to play totally differently against the regulars compared with against the gamblers. However, you can try to isolate the gamblers and you will be largely left to it by the regulars.
Its almost implied that there's no point messing with the regulars when there are some loose fish to fry. I try to take advantage of this a little more than most, but you cant be too greedy or you may get slapped.
After maybe 30 minutes the table plays more like a normal full-ring table, as the fish bust out and are replaced by tight regulars attracted by the higher than normal pot sizes. In my opinion, they have arrived too late to extract value from the fish and must patiently wait for a soft spot to arrive and dump off some cash. This is much more difficult as the shark/fish ratio is totally reversed by this stage. I will generally stay at the table until there are no soft spots at all, which rarely happens, or until external factors (such as bedtime!) require me to leave.
Record month
Cash-wise, this has been a record month for me. My bankroll has gone up by an amazing $10,726. This beats my previous best for a month by almost $6,000 and that was about 2 years ago. It feels great.
However, as regular readers will know, this has been due in no small part to good luck in the big pots, which I have quantified at $3,800 for August. On top of good luck in the months of June and July this means that my bankroll of $16,200 is a whopping $7,000 higher than it would be if I had received average luck.
This means that I have been able to happily play $5-$10 NLHE without fear of going broke. This in itself is worth a lot of money. If I had run badly, or even fairly, I would have been in so much more danger of going broke and it surely would have affected my play. So, although I have played well for most sessions this month I must acknowledge the impact luck has played.
However, as regular readers will know, this has been due in no small part to good luck in the big pots, which I have quantified at $3,800 for August. On top of good luck in the months of June and July this means that my bankroll of $16,200 is a whopping $7,000 higher than it would be if I had received average luck.
This means that I have been able to happily play $5-$10 NLHE without fear of going broke. This in itself is worth a lot of money. If I had run badly, or even fairly, I would have been in so much more danger of going broke and it surely would have affected my play. So, although I have played well for most sessions this month I must acknowledge the impact luck has played.
For September the plans remain the same:
$5-$10 full ring,
happy to start new tables when required
play well, leave if not playing well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
