Had a spare few hours this afternoon and so decided to sit down and commit to going through 1000 hands of 1/2NLzoom.





Something I've noticed (great thing to take note of for anyone interested in zoom poker) is that the players/flop% varies pretty widly throughout the day ( usually anywhere from 10-20%). Given that it was around 15 it was a perfect time to jump in and play some kind of TAG/NIT style. (usually I've had greatest success at the zoom tables when my %flop has been about 10% and the table average around 15%)

Unfortunately even though you might have starting hand ranges down pat, you still need to play well postflop if you want to earn any kind of money, and unfortunately my brain didn't seem to be working as my bankroll took a hit, going from $88.28 to $86.20 (taking a dive as low as ~$84 at one point). So what happened? I think a lot of the blame can fall onto hands like these!

Calling a BB's 3-bet from under the gun with AQs might be questionable, but not too loose IMHO. As for the flop, I flop a nut straight. Now having played so many hands leading up to this where I've accidentally scared someone off I decide not to reraise villain on the flop. Quite frankly the chances that he's just hit a set or is willing to call a check-raise with overcards anyway is huge at this point and well worth the chance of him folding something like queens.

On the turn another blank comes. Once again I have a great spot to reraise with the nuts and if he's going to lead for two streets there's very good odds that he's hit the flop.

Having called for two streets and ready to destroy him, the river comes with one of the only two cards that really should have made me reconsider my actions. With both a potential flush and full house on the board I'm literally only beating AK now and even another AQ has potentially improved to a flush. What's more his range is very likely just TT+ by the way he played this hand. Dumb play by me. 

A more interesting hand:

Try to watch this one just down to the river and let me know what you would have done. I'm thinking this one was more obvious than I gave it credit for at the time but still.

Villain raises my flop bet, making me think he's either hit a jack and I have him outkicked (awesome), or hit a set (understandably less so).

On the turn I check to keep pot size down as much as possible and as I correctly guessed a bet of quarter pot comes down from him. Pretty easy call as he could be semi-bluffing with plenty of drawing hands or have a weaker jack a lot more often than having a set, especially with two 7's now on the board.

My logic behind doing a small bet on the river was to get value from a weaker jack. Alarm bells SHOULD have been going off when he check raised. For some reason I couldn't give him credit for a hand. Had I gone in with a plan on the river, deciding to raise but fold to a reraise, or check and only call if the value seemed good enough, I have a feeling that that wouldn't have happened.


Apart from that I took a bunch of coolers (set of jacks vs. set of 10's) and bad beats (KK cracked by Qd7d), all standard stuff and not worth talking about. But I can't help but notice that having just made the right decisions on those two hands alone would have been enough for me to scrape even despite taking those bad beats. Even in sessions of a mere thousand hands, a lot of variance can be overcome with a bit of levelheadedness and paitence.