Since I started tracking my luck over a year ago things have gone very well. I was able to play $5-$10 NLHE for a long time largely because I took a shot with a short bankroll, played well and, crucially, got lucky more often than not[1].
When I had a bad run I withdrew a large chunk of bankroll, dropped down in stakes and tried to hold on to what I had won. I was concerned that I would do what I had done many times in the past: empty a decent bankroll through tilt after a period of bad results and / or bad luck.
Looking back now, this was not the best course of action to take. What I should have done was drop down in stakes and try to concentrate on playing my best. I realise this is easier said than done and at the time I didn’t have the confidence in my tilt control abilities to do this.
Six months further on I have hit a bankroll dip again [2], but this time there is a difference. In December I had a sustained period of poor play. Just in the last two weeks or so I have been very unlucky, at a time when the quality of my play has been very good.
In the last thirteen days I have run almost 9 buy-ins below expectation in the key pots. The good news is that in cash terms I have only dropped 3 buy-ins; like I said, I have been playing very well.
I constantly read about solid winning players going on 10-15 buy-in losing streaks and I always thought that within these streaks there must be an element of poor play caused by the trauma of unluckily losing a few buy-ins. Having had my first serious run of bad luck for a year or so, I am now totally convinced that this is the case.
If I had been reviewing my results the old-fashioned way, looking purely at the cash-flow, I suspect I would have been cursing my bad luck and dreading the prospect of putting my stack in the middle, expecting to be outdrawn in some freakish manner. However, because I filter out one major element of the luck factor I can ignore this to a large extent and it doesn’t affect my play. I’m sure that if I looked at the cash-flow I would have become frustrated at seeing my good play go unrewarded and that good play could easily have been replaced by losing play. I’m sure that if I had been this unlucky a couple of years ago, I could have lost maybe 10 buy-ins too. In that respect, I have won 7 buy-ins more than I would have won this time two years ago: huge progress.
Overall, despite the recent bad luck, I have still so far received more help from the poker gods than I should have, both in terms of buy-ins and dollar amounts. In effect, any cash received from good luck is excluded from results and stored away, where it can be used later in the event of bad luck. For any accountants out there, it’s the same principle as making provision for falls in such things as currency values or commodity prices at a time when things are good. When things go bad, the provisions are reduced and profits remain unaffected.
I can have no complaints about luck, and even if I did have grounds to complain it would be both pointless and counter-productive. As a result of this philosophy I feel totally assured in my game and can continue playing some of the best poker I have for a long time. I just need to keep applying my edge and can look forward to positive cash-flow at some point in the near- or distant-future.
Notes
[1] ‘got lucky’ includes those times when the money went in well and my hand held up – an often-under-appreciated aspect of poker
[2] not serious in terms of dollar amounts, but significant in comparison with expected results
Thursday, 3 July 2008
Monday, 30 June 2008
Only 2910 hands in the week
I was a bit annoyed that I was only able to play just over 10 hours this week. I had been really positive about my move down to $1-$2 and was really pleased that results had been so good. All I wanted to do was consolidate on my good start and grind out some decent hours. This never really happened, despite having a couple of days off work, and so I am able to reflect on a winning week of only $700 or so when I feel as though I should have played almost twice as much as I did.
I actually played pretty well all week and can only really recall one serious blunder, where I triple-barrelled with an unimproved AK and was shown a full house. Doh!
My results at $1-$2 remain impressive and I started to wonder how much of this was down to the cards running well and how much was down to my edge in the game. Obviously, because I have played only 15k hands many regular multi-tablers will say that there is nowhere near enough data to draw any conclusions. I partly agree with this. However, I have played about 85k hands in the last year, fairly evenly split between the $100, $200, $400 and $1000 buy-in games. My PTBB/100 across all levels comes out at 2.41, including 31k hands at $1000 buy-in at 2.33. This indicates that I am probably a solid winner at all of these levels, and you would expect that I am a bigger winner at the lower levels, so maybe a win-rate of 4 to 5 PTBB/100 is sustainable at the $200 buy-in game.
In addition to the stats there is the general feel of how the hands have played out. For example, I believe I often get an extra value bet out of my opponents where some of the other regulars in the game are happy to check it through. Also, I feel as though I have an edge pre-flop against some of the regulars, who I expect are decent winning players, due to the fact that they have wide discrepancies in their 3-bet raising and 4-bet calling / 5-bet shoving ranges[1].
One thing that I have started to change is the frequency of playing low pairs ie. 88 and down. Basically I have downgraded these hands and will not always play them for a single raise like I did before. The reason for this is two-fold: first, there is the higher possibility of flopping a set-under-set; and second, when out of position it is often very difficult to win a big pot if you do flop a set. Set-under-set is a total disaster: it’s the easiest way to lose a full buy-in whilst having next-to-zero pot equity. Minimising the situations where this can happen should be a profitable exercise.
It was nice to receive a comment on the blog last week. Thanks Rossi! I know there are some regular readers out there because I occasionally check to see where people are connecting from. I would like to hear any comments from readers, no matter what the content. Don't be shy!
I hope to play as many as 15 hours this week but with other commitments it may not be possible. What I must avoid is being over-eager when I do actually play. I need to be aggressive but not try to force the action where it’s not possible. This is a fine line to walk but I think it’s one of the keys to success.
[1] Example, some regulars play maybe 21% (ie. not many) of their hands pre-flop, but they raise with almost all of them. So, when they re-raise my button raise, this means that they probably do this with as many as 15% of their hands. To me this is too often and with many of these hands they will simply fold to an all-in re-re-raise. This means that I can show a clear profit with this re-re-raise, as it doesn’t get called often enough, as long as I don’t overdo it, and as long as they don’t adjust to what I am doing.
I actually played pretty well all week and can only really recall one serious blunder, where I triple-barrelled with an unimproved AK and was shown a full house. Doh!
My results at $1-$2 remain impressive and I started to wonder how much of this was down to the cards running well and how much was down to my edge in the game. Obviously, because I have played only 15k hands many regular multi-tablers will say that there is nowhere near enough data to draw any conclusions. I partly agree with this. However, I have played about 85k hands in the last year, fairly evenly split between the $100, $200, $400 and $1000 buy-in games. My PTBB/100 across all levels comes out at 2.41, including 31k hands at $1000 buy-in at 2.33. This indicates that I am probably a solid winner at all of these levels, and you would expect that I am a bigger winner at the lower levels, so maybe a win-rate of 4 to 5 PTBB/100 is sustainable at the $200 buy-in game.
In addition to the stats there is the general feel of how the hands have played out. For example, I believe I often get an extra value bet out of my opponents where some of the other regulars in the game are happy to check it through. Also, I feel as though I have an edge pre-flop against some of the regulars, who I expect are decent winning players, due to the fact that they have wide discrepancies in their 3-bet raising and 4-bet calling / 5-bet shoving ranges[1].
One thing that I have started to change is the frequency of playing low pairs ie. 88 and down. Basically I have downgraded these hands and will not always play them for a single raise like I did before. The reason for this is two-fold: first, there is the higher possibility of flopping a set-under-set; and second, when out of position it is often very difficult to win a big pot if you do flop a set. Set-under-set is a total disaster: it’s the easiest way to lose a full buy-in whilst having next-to-zero pot equity. Minimising the situations where this can happen should be a profitable exercise.
It was nice to receive a comment on the blog last week. Thanks Rossi! I know there are some regular readers out there because I occasionally check to see where people are connecting from. I would like to hear any comments from readers, no matter what the content. Don't be shy!
I hope to play as many as 15 hours this week but with other commitments it may not be possible. What I must avoid is being over-eager when I do actually play. I need to be aggressive but not try to force the action where it’s not possible. This is a fine line to walk but I think it’s one of the keys to success.
[1] Example, some regulars play maybe 21% (ie. not many) of their hands pre-flop, but they raise with almost all of them. So, when they re-raise my button raise, this means that they probably do this with as many as 15% of their hands. To me this is too often and with many of these hands they will simply fold to an all-in re-re-raise. This means that I can show a clear profit with this re-re-raise, as it doesn’t get called often enough, as long as I don’t overdo it, and as long as they don’t adjust to what I am doing.
Monday, 23 June 2008
Multi-tabling 6-max at $1-$2
I’ve now managed a sustained period of multi-tabling the 6-max tables and results have been great. Even though its only $1-$2 blinds and I am averaging just less than 3 tables I have had a win-rate of almost $70 per hour. The best thing is, that having played so much $2-$4 and $5-$10 over the last year, I am finding that the standard at $1-$2 is really quite bad and it’s not that difficult to find some truly awful players. This makes me think that even though I have only played just over 7,000 hands my results have been roughly in line with expectation.
If I can ‘expect’ to make $60-$70 at this level then I am onto a good thing as pro-rata this is worth about $100,000 a year. The other good thing is that it is pretty much stress-free. Looking ahead, if I could translate this to success at $2-$4, it could be the start of something really big. I know there are players out there making well in excess of $200k a year playing as low as $2-$4.
So how have I managed to finally get the hang of multi-tabling?
Well, I think the first thing is I have gained a lot of experience over the last year, done a lot of thinking about the game and about various situations and have developed a more solid ‘B game.’ In truth, when playing more than one table, it is not really possible to play an ‘A game’ and so you need to have a way to win despite not giving each table your full attention. This means that you have to analyse common situations away from the tables and work out how best to play them, so that when those situations come up you are able to quickly apply your knowledge in line with the balance of probabilities. Obviously you can’t be right every time but you must calculate how to create a long-term edge and then wait patiently for it to materialise.
The next factor is PA HUD. I had never used a HUD until I started playing Omaha on more than one table and this allowed me to spot bad players and quickly get a line on all opponents at the tables. Also, it becomes really obvious when a table has turned bad, signalling the time to leave and find a softer line-up.
I have developed my play to try to remain aggressive in most circumstances. The exceptions are when playing against really over-aggro players and when out of position with weak but probably winning hands against solid players.
Also, my play has become more dependent on the type of opponent I am facing. I can happily re-raise a loose player with A8, and happily fold AK against a very tight player. Against a loose player I will be more aggressive with decent drawing hands, as they will often be in there with a drawing hand too. Against tight players, well, I don’t get involved for big money anywhere near as much as I used to.
These are all simple adjustments and it truly shows that the skill in poker comes down more to applying what you know than simply having the knowledge.
I hope that things can continue as they have. I am going to try to complete 50,000 hands at $1-$2 before I consider moving up to $2-$4. I really need to bed myself in and just grind at $1-$2. After all, $60+ per hour is pretty significant money, especially when it’s tax-free.
If I can ‘expect’ to make $60-$70 at this level then I am onto a good thing as pro-rata this is worth about $100,000 a year. The other good thing is that it is pretty much stress-free. Looking ahead, if I could translate this to success at $2-$4, it could be the start of something really big. I know there are players out there making well in excess of $200k a year playing as low as $2-$4.
So how have I managed to finally get the hang of multi-tabling?
Well, I think the first thing is I have gained a lot of experience over the last year, done a lot of thinking about the game and about various situations and have developed a more solid ‘B game.’ In truth, when playing more than one table, it is not really possible to play an ‘A game’ and so you need to have a way to win despite not giving each table your full attention. This means that you have to analyse common situations away from the tables and work out how best to play them, so that when those situations come up you are able to quickly apply your knowledge in line with the balance of probabilities. Obviously you can’t be right every time but you must calculate how to create a long-term edge and then wait patiently for it to materialise.
The next factor is PA HUD. I had never used a HUD until I started playing Omaha on more than one table and this allowed me to spot bad players and quickly get a line on all opponents at the tables. Also, it becomes really obvious when a table has turned bad, signalling the time to leave and find a softer line-up.
I have developed my play to try to remain aggressive in most circumstances. The exceptions are when playing against really over-aggro players and when out of position with weak but probably winning hands against solid players.
Also, my play has become more dependent on the type of opponent I am facing. I can happily re-raise a loose player with A8, and happily fold AK against a very tight player. Against a loose player I will be more aggressive with decent drawing hands, as they will often be in there with a drawing hand too. Against tight players, well, I don’t get involved for big money anywhere near as much as I used to.
These are all simple adjustments and it truly shows that the skill in poker comes down more to applying what you know than simply having the knowledge.
I hope that things can continue as they have. I am going to try to complete 50,000 hands at $1-$2 before I consider moving up to $2-$4. I really need to bed myself in and just grind at $1-$2. After all, $60+ per hour is pretty significant money, especially when it’s tax-free.
Tuesday, 3 June 2008
Targets for June
I have been reviewing where things are and where I need to be and I have decided to set some goals for June.
MT ratio
I need to increase my multi-tabling ratio from the 2.10 where it currently stands to somewhere up around 3. This will be difficult to be honest, as I will need to try to play longer sessions to achieve this and I don’t know if this will be possible. I might try to play late sessions a couple of times a week, instead of playing shorter sessions most nights. Also, I will need to put in a decent session or two on a weekend. Again this might be difficult as there are other things that require my time.
Hands per hour
This currently stands at approx 190 and I would like this to be much higher.
There are however a couple of problems with setting this as a target. First, it is pretty much dependent on the number of tables I can manage to be seated at. Also, I could improve this figure dramatically by playing more shorthanded tables but the only way to do this would be to sit at 6-max tables. This isn’t something I want to do, as the 6-max community is generally much more aggressive, with much better players. I think that starting new 10-seater games is +EV for me as the players who normally sit down will generally be weaker ones than would join me at a 6-max game.
Win-rate
Obviously, as well as playing more hands it would be nice if I could win more per hand too. As previously mentioned, I don’t feel as though there is much drop-off in my game between my second and fourth table, so hopefully I can at least maintain my win-rate despite playing more tables more often.
Looking back at my stats for the last 5000 hands or so it looks as if I have been committing too much money at times only to fold before showdown. This is a leak that needs to be plugged: either by committing less money before folding or going to showdown more. For the hands that I have taken to showdown I am showing a huge margin (+19.5%). While this looks good, it also indicates that I am probably folding some hands that are +EV. I need to squeeze every last drop from these hands.
Target for the month here is to improve my decision-making at the point of commitment to the pot. Hopefully an improved win-rate will demonstrate improvement in my decision-making here although it is not properly quantifiable.
I don’t feel as though a long-term win-rate of 3 PTBB/100 is impossible for me. This is something I should be aiming for, because if I could make this at $5-$10 then we are in the ballpark of $200k per year pro-rata. This should be the long-term goal.
MT ratio
I need to increase my multi-tabling ratio from the 2.10 where it currently stands to somewhere up around 3. This will be difficult to be honest, as I will need to try to play longer sessions to achieve this and I don’t know if this will be possible. I might try to play late sessions a couple of times a week, instead of playing shorter sessions most nights. Also, I will need to put in a decent session or two on a weekend. Again this might be difficult as there are other things that require my time.
Hands per hour
This currently stands at approx 190 and I would like this to be much higher.
There are however a couple of problems with setting this as a target. First, it is pretty much dependent on the number of tables I can manage to be seated at. Also, I could improve this figure dramatically by playing more shorthanded tables but the only way to do this would be to sit at 6-max tables. This isn’t something I want to do, as the 6-max community is generally much more aggressive, with much better players. I think that starting new 10-seater games is +EV for me as the players who normally sit down will generally be weaker ones than would join me at a 6-max game.
Win-rate
Obviously, as well as playing more hands it would be nice if I could win more per hand too. As previously mentioned, I don’t feel as though there is much drop-off in my game between my second and fourth table, so hopefully I can at least maintain my win-rate despite playing more tables more often.
Looking back at my stats for the last 5000 hands or so it looks as if I have been committing too much money at times only to fold before showdown. This is a leak that needs to be plugged: either by committing less money before folding or going to showdown more. For the hands that I have taken to showdown I am showing a huge margin (+19.5%). While this looks good, it also indicates that I am probably folding some hands that are +EV. I need to squeeze every last drop from these hands.
Target for the month here is to improve my decision-making at the point of commitment to the pot. Hopefully an improved win-rate will demonstrate improvement in my decision-making here although it is not properly quantifiable.
I don’t feel as though a long-term win-rate of 3 PTBB/100 is impossible for me. This is something I should be aiming for, because if I could make this at $5-$10 then we are in the ballpark of $200k per year pro-rata. This should be the long-term goal.
Monday, 2 June 2008
Multi-tabling
I started multi-tabling at $2-$4 a couple of weeks ago and things have been going OK although not great. There are a few adjustments to be made, as basically I am able to only play in ‘no-read’ mode, despite having PA Hud to give me useful stats on my opponents.
Basically, if I am concentrating less than 100% on a particular table then I am unable to make specific player-determined plays based on detailed reads of my opponents state of mind etc. However, I have a solid enough B-game that I am still able to play in a +EV way without fully concentrating on that table. Also, it seems that I am able to play this B-game on 3 ‘side’ tables just as easily as one 'side' table.
So, what I have been doing is keeping one main table, where I start playing heads-up or occasionally join a short-handed table already in progress. This table gets my almost total attention, and on the other tables I play my B-game: very tight in early positions, looser later, aggressive when in the pot. Sometimes this table will stay heads-up or short-handed for a while, occasionally it will fill up quickly. If it fills up, I simply start another table until I have 4 going.
I think the ideal situation is to have one short-handed table and three full auto-pilot tables. That way, I still feel as though I am actually playing a game rather than working a job.
Like I said, so far things have been going OK. One of the problems is that at the moment I rarely have more than an hour or maybe an hour and a half to play a session. So, if there are no seats available I am spending the first 20 minutes or so playing heads-up or maybe 3-handed until things fill up or a seat becomes available on another table. Obviously, the main reason to play at many tables is to increase the number of hands played per hour. In order to truly maximise this it would be better to play longer sessions, therefore reducing the impact of the session start-up. It can sometimes take the best part of an hour to become seated at 4 tables, by which time I am often getting ready to finish.
I’ve also noticed an unexpected anomaly in my results when playing a full table. I have won at a reasonable if unspectacular rate (1.77 PTBB/100) but this has been despite losing a lot of money in non-showdown hands. I have got involved in too many pots where I have put too much money in without getting to showdown. Sometimes I will have folded the winner, sometimes I should have folded earlier, and sometimes I have made the pot too big and allowed my opponent to steal it. This is generally bad play and I need to correct this. Looking back, some of these hands were quite tough to play but I need to have a plan for these types of hands and stick to it.
Here’s an example:
I am in mid-position with JJ and open to $12, Only the big blind (tight aggressive with $372, which I cover) calls and checks the 642 rainbow flop. I bet $28 and he raises to $56. At this point I have no plan as to what to do for the best. Basically I want to get to showdown as cheap as possible but its pretty obvious that a good opponent knows this. After I call the turn card comes a King, which could slow down my opponent if he thinks I would call for $28 more with AK especially if he has QQ or the other JJ. However he bets another $96 which I call again. The river comes another 6 and he bets all-in for $209. I cant think of any hand that I can beat, other than a 3-barrel bluff, and I fold.
I think, on reflection I was OK calling the flop min-raise, after all a Jack on the turn puts me ahead of everything except a flopped straight and we still had more than $300 behind. However, the real decision was on the turn. I really ought to have folded here, at least in part because he should have feared that I could have AK. So, it looks like I wasted $96 here. Obviously, against a loose opponent I would be much happier to get more money in on the flop.
This guy made the check-raise so that the pot-size was just right for him to get all his money in without having to make two really big bets. Well played him!
I played OK too for the most part, averaging about $40 per hour, despite my MT ratio being as low as 2.10. By playing longer sessions I would be able to get this up to 3+ and I should see the hourly rate go up by a similar proportion.
Basically, if I am concentrating less than 100% on a particular table then I am unable to make specific player-determined plays based on detailed reads of my opponents state of mind etc. However, I have a solid enough B-game that I am still able to play in a +EV way without fully concentrating on that table. Also, it seems that I am able to play this B-game on 3 ‘side’ tables just as easily as one 'side' table.
So, what I have been doing is keeping one main table, where I start playing heads-up or occasionally join a short-handed table already in progress. This table gets my almost total attention, and on the other tables I play my B-game: very tight in early positions, looser later, aggressive when in the pot. Sometimes this table will stay heads-up or short-handed for a while, occasionally it will fill up quickly. If it fills up, I simply start another table until I have 4 going.
I think the ideal situation is to have one short-handed table and three full auto-pilot tables. That way, I still feel as though I am actually playing a game rather than working a job.
Like I said, so far things have been going OK. One of the problems is that at the moment I rarely have more than an hour or maybe an hour and a half to play a session. So, if there are no seats available I am spending the first 20 minutes or so playing heads-up or maybe 3-handed until things fill up or a seat becomes available on another table. Obviously, the main reason to play at many tables is to increase the number of hands played per hour. In order to truly maximise this it would be better to play longer sessions, therefore reducing the impact of the session start-up. It can sometimes take the best part of an hour to become seated at 4 tables, by which time I am often getting ready to finish.
I’ve also noticed an unexpected anomaly in my results when playing a full table. I have won at a reasonable if unspectacular rate (1.77 PTBB/100) but this has been despite losing a lot of money in non-showdown hands. I have got involved in too many pots where I have put too much money in without getting to showdown. Sometimes I will have folded the winner, sometimes I should have folded earlier, and sometimes I have made the pot too big and allowed my opponent to steal it. This is generally bad play and I need to correct this. Looking back, some of these hands were quite tough to play but I need to have a plan for these types of hands and stick to it.
Here’s an example:
I am in mid-position with JJ and open to $12, Only the big blind (tight aggressive with $372, which I cover) calls and checks the 642 rainbow flop. I bet $28 and he raises to $56. At this point I have no plan as to what to do for the best. Basically I want to get to showdown as cheap as possible but its pretty obvious that a good opponent knows this. After I call the turn card comes a King, which could slow down my opponent if he thinks I would call for $28 more with AK especially if he has QQ or the other JJ. However he bets another $96 which I call again. The river comes another 6 and he bets all-in for $209. I cant think of any hand that I can beat, other than a 3-barrel bluff, and I fold.
I think, on reflection I was OK calling the flop min-raise, after all a Jack on the turn puts me ahead of everything except a flopped straight and we still had more than $300 behind. However, the real decision was on the turn. I really ought to have folded here, at least in part because he should have feared that I could have AK. So, it looks like I wasted $96 here. Obviously, against a loose opponent I would be much happier to get more money in on the flop.
This guy made the check-raise so that the pot-size was just right for him to get all his money in without having to make two really big bets. Well played him!
I played OK too for the most part, averaging about $40 per hour, despite my MT ratio being as low as 2.10. By playing longer sessions I would be able to get this up to 3+ and I should see the hourly rate go up by a similar proportion.
Monday, 19 May 2008
A-game good, B-game bad
I managed a huge $67 win this week in a rather disjointed 12 hours of play!
Monday was a day off and then Tuesday and Wednesday were largely uneventful before the fireworks began on Thursday. This was fireworks in a good way to begin with as I won one large pot with AA against a very stubborn JJ, most of the money going in on a Q84 2-flush flop. What was he thinking? Was I re-raising pre-flop with rags?
Friday’s early play was a train wreck before some of the damage was repaired in a steady late session. There were two big losses and I think a better player would have avoided at least one of them, although I’m not certain which one.
First, playing 3-handed I raised on the button with K7 and was called by the big blind, who was maybe a little on the tight side. The flop came KK5 with two hearts and I bet a standard $40 when checked to. He raised me to $120 and I re-raised to $310, in theory, so that I could fold if he went all-in. After all, what could he have if not a better King than me or possibly pocket fives? Or maybe a flush draw? I pondered right down to the end of the time allowance whether to call his subsequent all-in and then a strange reflex action kicked in and I called, only to be shown 55.
Then, a bit later, when playing 10-handed I made a river bluff that I suspect would come off a high percentage of the time. I called a mid-position raise with T8 and with the big blind we saw the K75 (two hearts) flop 3-handed. After the raiser checked, which I wasn’t expecting, I decided to have a stab at the pot and fired $80 which the raiser called. The turn was an offsuit 8, and I didn’t want to bet myself out of the pot now that I had picked up a pair, so I checked behind. Also, I wasn’t worried about giving a free card to a flush-draw as this would have been a good flop for the raiser to bet at if he had flopped the flush-draw. By checking maybe it would look to the raiser as if I had a flush-draw. The river came the 9 of hearts and the raiser bet $140 into me. I raised all-in (he had about $640 behind), trying to represent the flush, thinking that I could make him lay down most hands here. In actual fact, he had a straight with the 86 and after great deliberation made the call.
The week-end was a break-even affair, and I only managed a measly 3 hours in total. I lost three biggish pots making second-best hands, but this was erased totally with a nice win when I flopped quad twos. I limp-called against a tight and very aggressive regular who I had tussled with before. The flop came 922 with two clubs and I decided to check to see how much he was going to bet. He made it $70, which I thought was on the high-side in an attempt to get as much in as possible early on, to chop the odds available for a flush-draw with overcard. At this point I decided to raise to $210, as I reckoned it would look no stronger than a flat-call to him and would have the added advantage of possibly getting all the money in on the flop. Like I said, we had tussled before. To my total joy but not total surprise he went all-in and I had the easiest call imaginable.
Overall the week was a disappointment as there were a couple of spells where I lost a bit of focus and started to try to make things happen where the opportunities were not really there. If I am honest with myself, I probably could have made $600-700 if I had played my A- game all week. Like I said, a better player would have probably folded the K7 v 55 hand and that would have saved another $200-300 in equity. On the positive side, I managed to win just short of $1000 in the smaller (non-showdown) pots. This shows that my general level of aggression is OK.
This week I need to maintain my focus at all times. Sometimes I feel as though I am due to hit a run of good situations, like I see others hit day after day. This is just a fallacy: we need to concentrate on maximising all opportunities that come our way. This often means picking up one extra small pot (say $60) every couple of hours. At the time it looks like no big deal but it’s massive in the context of a player’s results.
Monday was a day off and then Tuesday and Wednesday were largely uneventful before the fireworks began on Thursday. This was fireworks in a good way to begin with as I won one large pot with AA against a very stubborn JJ, most of the money going in on a Q84 2-flush flop. What was he thinking? Was I re-raising pre-flop with rags?
Friday’s early play was a train wreck before some of the damage was repaired in a steady late session. There were two big losses and I think a better player would have avoided at least one of them, although I’m not certain which one.
First, playing 3-handed I raised on the button with K7 and was called by the big blind, who was maybe a little on the tight side. The flop came KK5 with two hearts and I bet a standard $40 when checked to. He raised me to $120 and I re-raised to $310, in theory, so that I could fold if he went all-in. After all, what could he have if not a better King than me or possibly pocket fives? Or maybe a flush draw? I pondered right down to the end of the time allowance whether to call his subsequent all-in and then a strange reflex action kicked in and I called, only to be shown 55.
Then, a bit later, when playing 10-handed I made a river bluff that I suspect would come off a high percentage of the time. I called a mid-position raise with T8 and with the big blind we saw the K75 (two hearts) flop 3-handed. After the raiser checked, which I wasn’t expecting, I decided to have a stab at the pot and fired $80 which the raiser called. The turn was an offsuit 8, and I didn’t want to bet myself out of the pot now that I had picked up a pair, so I checked behind. Also, I wasn’t worried about giving a free card to a flush-draw as this would have been a good flop for the raiser to bet at if he had flopped the flush-draw. By checking maybe it would look to the raiser as if I had a flush-draw. The river came the 9 of hearts and the raiser bet $140 into me. I raised all-in (he had about $640 behind), trying to represent the flush, thinking that I could make him lay down most hands here. In actual fact, he had a straight with the 86 and after great deliberation made the call.
The week-end was a break-even affair, and I only managed a measly 3 hours in total. I lost three biggish pots making second-best hands, but this was erased totally with a nice win when I flopped quad twos. I limp-called against a tight and very aggressive regular who I had tussled with before. The flop came 922 with two clubs and I decided to check to see how much he was going to bet. He made it $70, which I thought was on the high-side in an attempt to get as much in as possible early on, to chop the odds available for a flush-draw with overcard. At this point I decided to raise to $210, as I reckoned it would look no stronger than a flat-call to him and would have the added advantage of possibly getting all the money in on the flop. Like I said, we had tussled before. To my total joy but not total surprise he went all-in and I had the easiest call imaginable.
Overall the week was a disappointment as there were a couple of spells where I lost a bit of focus and started to try to make things happen where the opportunities were not really there. If I am honest with myself, I probably could have made $600-700 if I had played my A- game all week. Like I said, a better player would have probably folded the K7 v 55 hand and that would have saved another $200-300 in equity. On the positive side, I managed to win just short of $1000 in the smaller (non-showdown) pots. This shows that my general level of aggression is OK.
This week I need to maintain my focus at all times. Sometimes I feel as though I am due to hit a run of good situations, like I see others hit day after day. This is just a fallacy: we need to concentrate on maximising all opportunities that come our way. This often means picking up one extra small pot (say $60) every couple of hours. At the time it looks like no big deal but it’s massive in the context of a player’s results.
Monday, 12 May 2008
Behind all week...
By the end of the week the result was a satisfactory one: an $887 win in just over 16 hours of play. However, that doesn’t tell the whole story: not by a long way.
Monday was poor but that loss was recovered immediately on Tuesday. The Wednesday loss was a bit worse than Monday’s but took until Saturday to clear off.
There were three big pots where I lost more than I should have done, as I had position on my opponent in all three cases and should probably have folded the river on all three occasions.
First, I raised a loose early position limper from the button holding AA and we took the 955 flop heads-up. He check-called my solid $70 flop bet. The turn came another 9 and instead of shutting down I decided I would try to get some value for my AA. Again he check-called: this time $200. The river was a 7 and he immediately went all-in. For some reason I couldn’t persuade myself to fold against his obvious full-house and called all-in for $545. He showed J9.
Second, I raised from one off the button with AQ and was re-raised to $110 by a solid regular in the big blind. I decided to call and also called his flop (AJ2) bet of $150. When he checked the blank turn I decided that my hand was probably best and bet $360, which he called. The river was the King of spades which put a third spade on board and despite this scary card he bet all-in. Again, ridiculously, I couldn’t persuade myself that I was beat despite the weight of evidence. He showed AK.
Third, I raised to $70 after 5 limpers and the only caller was a fairly tight regular in first position. The flop came 235 (all spades) which was not great for my red Kings. I checked behind hoping to see a blank on the turn, which came an offsuit Jack. My plan was to make a reasonable bet if checked to and then hopefully check behind on the river. Phase one went OK and I bet $120, but he raised me to $275. I called this, thinking I may have the best hand but I got a sinking feeling when he bet all-in on the river, which was an off-suit Queen. Looking back, I couldn’t beat much that he might play like this, but still called only to be shown 64 of spades for the flopped straight-flush.
So, three big pots played poorly by me. But there were others that went OK. Its just a bit annoying that I couldn’t find a fold in a couple of these pots, as the bottom line for the week would have been so much better.
All in all, despite being behind for much of the week, I was able to hang in there and play somewhere near my best game for long periods and finally get ahead for the week. Looking at the microcosm of a single week’s results isn’t really that helpful but some sort of a review process is necessary if I am to avoid falling into bad habits. Gradually, by playing well, the results will come together and I will be able to look back at a successful year.
This blog will be one year old at the end of this month. Maybe then I will do a review of the year.
Monday was poor but that loss was recovered immediately on Tuesday. The Wednesday loss was a bit worse than Monday’s but took until Saturday to clear off.
There were three big pots where I lost more than I should have done, as I had position on my opponent in all three cases and should probably have folded the river on all three occasions.
First, I raised a loose early position limper from the button holding AA and we took the 955 flop heads-up. He check-called my solid $70 flop bet. The turn came another 9 and instead of shutting down I decided I would try to get some value for my AA. Again he check-called: this time $200. The river was a 7 and he immediately went all-in. For some reason I couldn’t persuade myself to fold against his obvious full-house and called all-in for $545. He showed J9.
Second, I raised from one off the button with AQ and was re-raised to $110 by a solid regular in the big blind. I decided to call and also called his flop (AJ2) bet of $150. When he checked the blank turn I decided that my hand was probably best and bet $360, which he called. The river was the King of spades which put a third spade on board and despite this scary card he bet all-in. Again, ridiculously, I couldn’t persuade myself that I was beat despite the weight of evidence. He showed AK.
Third, I raised to $70 after 5 limpers and the only caller was a fairly tight regular in first position. The flop came 235 (all spades) which was not great for my red Kings. I checked behind hoping to see a blank on the turn, which came an offsuit Jack. My plan was to make a reasonable bet if checked to and then hopefully check behind on the river. Phase one went OK and I bet $120, but he raised me to $275. I called this, thinking I may have the best hand but I got a sinking feeling when he bet all-in on the river, which was an off-suit Queen. Looking back, I couldn’t beat much that he might play like this, but still called only to be shown 64 of spades for the flopped straight-flush.
So, three big pots played poorly by me. But there were others that went OK. Its just a bit annoying that I couldn’t find a fold in a couple of these pots, as the bottom line for the week would have been so much better.
All in all, despite being behind for much of the week, I was able to hang in there and play somewhere near my best game for long periods and finally get ahead for the week. Looking at the microcosm of a single week’s results isn’t really that helpful but some sort of a review process is necessary if I am to avoid falling into bad habits. Gradually, by playing well, the results will come together and I will be able to look back at a successful year.
This blog will be one year old at the end of this month. Maybe then I will do a review of the year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
