PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.


No announcement yet.

Sam's Poker Blog - Leak Busting Edition

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sam's Poker Blog - Leak Busting Edition

    UPDATE This thread starts off really slow ... to skip to the good parts, click here!: Leak Busting at 5nl Hi! So I've been playing poker for a little over a year and a half now, and have been blogging about all the fun/interesting things I've encountered since last October, when I decided it was high time I start trying to actually turn a profit at this hobby ... or at least try to stop losing money ... so much I used to play the leagues, and found to be an awesome way to learn and practice solid TAG poker against quality opponents, and sometimes even make some nice money to boot. Then I switched focus to $1.50 STT's (regular speed), after hearing a lot of profitable players say that picking one game to play is key to winning money over the long haul, and found that to be very true! I blogged about that experience here: October + Goal: To try and turn a profit - went in search of one game I could commit to and learn the ins and outs of - started record-keeping (+/-$ per game) - bought a good HUD (pokertracker) - started playing $1.50 regular speed STT's - started and stopped playing 5nl - encountered variance, tilt, downswings - encountered some tricky hands February + Goal: To try and up my volume of play to 100 games for the month - worked on bubble play (push/fold and ICM calcs, etc) - encountered fatigue - tried to think of ways to pick up and keep chips during a downswing - encountered tilt and burnout, and wound up taking a break from my STT's - started playing 2nl - got to play against 2 pros in WBCOOP which was really scary, but so so exciting!! So the $1.50 STT's wound up turning out pretty good - made something like $75 over 200+ games. But then I got bored and went in search of something new, and wound up deciding to give cash games a go. After continuing on with 2nl (6max), I then moved over to 2nl (6max) ZOOM, and have been having lots of fun, but am finding myself at best break-even in terms of the money. I blog about that experience here: March + - discovered that loose passives seem to be easier to make money off of than maniacs and solid TAGS - discovered that bluffing could be very costly at 2nl - found some articles on how to use certain HUD stats to better tell who's likely to call and who's likely to fold - noticed some key differences between cash game play and SNG play (deeper stacks, need for stack to pot ratio awarenes moreso than relative stack sizes of opponents and stack size relative to blinds, blinds stealing and blind defense) - learned about how to better table select to find those loose passives - started noticing leaks in my game (staying too long in pots, not raising enough to protect my hands, chasing draws, etc.) May 2012+ (Leak Busting Edition) Goal: To try and become profitable at cash games - bought a Leak Busters program to analyze my play and very quicky became profitable - The three big changes I made to my game in the switch to 100bb play: - 1. The deeper stacks allow all of us to play more speculative holdings like pocket pairs and suited connectors, that make big hands (like sets, straights, flushes, boats), so I had to adjust TAG ranging (especially continuing ranges) to include other stuff and not just TPTK - 2. Found out the hard way that there's FAR less fold equity on the flop than in SNGs ... and that if you continue to barrel all the way to the river, the pot gets huge when people are 100bbs deep – ie bluffing can be very costly, especially at 2nl! - 3. Deeper stacks makes it more costly to chase draws, since it's more common for opponents to fire another big barrel on the turn – and with rarely more than 27% equity, it's rarely +EV to continue – I still struggle with this actually LOL!! - became profitable at 2nl with a winrate of something like 6bb/100 - my blog starts getting more interesting at this point - moved up to 5nl - participated in a full-ring vs 6max challenge where my shifted my blogging to this thread, along with the rest of team 6max: Challenge Thread - have been profitable at 5nl, with a winrate of about 6bb/100 here as well - started grinding like crazy and became a Silver Star - but I've got a TON of leaks - there's still lots of recreational players at 5nl. But people are a lot better at this level than they were at 2nl, so there's less room for error Cliffs Notes Version: Been playing about a year and a half, am wanting to learn to be profitable at cash games, but there seem to be leaks in my game that are costing me money. And so the need for for some leak-busting ... will see how it goes! umbup: Sam
    Last edited by TrustySam; Thu Jan 31, 2013, 02:47 AM. Reason: Fixed the color

  • #2

    Notes from PLO Poker - The Big Play Strategy Intro Where's the edge for the good players in this game? In PLO there are a variety of situations in which inexperienced (or merely poor) players can, and frequently do make extremely expensive mistakes. These situations are far from coin flips; one player is often getting by far the worst of it. Here's a list of those situations that most frequently result in big pots, along with a list of which holdings have the advantage in these spots:

    1. Flopped Nut Straight - but only one person has redraws to a better hand (not so common)

    Villain 1 - Ah Kd 8h 7c Villain 2 - Ts 9c 8c 7s (outs to a better straight, as well as a flush)         - 87xx double spade (any spade makes a flush)         - 9987 and 8766 (set plus nut flush – 10 outs to a boat on the river)         - T87x (any 8 or 7 makes the better straight)         - 9876 (any 9 or 6 makes a boat) Board - 9s 6c 5s Lesson - sometimes it's correct to fold the nut straight on the flop (ie when there's two-to-a-flush on the board, don't stack off with just the straight and no outs to improve)
    [/spoiler] 2. Flopped Nut Boat - but only one person has redraws to a better boat (not so common)

    Villain 1 – AKQJ Villain 2 – QJT9 Board – QQJ Lesson – A or K will hit by the river 25% of the time
    [/spoiler] 3. Boat over Boat - Overfull and Underfull (not so common)

    Even otherwise good players occasionally make big mistakes with the underfull, knowing that there is only one hand that can beat them on the flop. EG.
    Situation 1
    Villain 1 – JT98 (overfull) Villain 2 – 8876 (underfull) Board – 998
    Situation 2
    Villain 1 – JT99 (overfull) Villain 2 – JT98 (underfull) Board – 988 Lesson – underfull isn't good enough to stack off with (it will only win small pots or lose big ones, so you need to fold it before you lose your stack)
    [/spoiler] 4. Set over Set (very common)

    Middle/bottom sets often get overplayed - facing considerable action, middle/bottom set are usually either small favorites against drawing hands, or big dogs against bigger sets Lesson - the best way to avoid being tempted to overplay middle/bottom set is to avoid playing smaller pairs to begin win  ▪ (note that 77 is the smallest pair that can even flop top set without a possible straight being present, so that's the lowest pocket pair we should be playing) [/spoiler] 5. Flush over Flush (play for stacks - not so common?)

    According to the book, most people know better than to stack off with the 2nd nut flush? A scenario to be more cautious about would be where two people catch a piece of the flop with 2 of their cards, then pick up a backdoor draw on the turn with another 2 of the 4 cards: EG.
    Villain 1 – Jc Jh Ts 8c Villain 2 – Ac 7c 6h 5s Flop/T/R - Js 4c 3d  Qc Kc Lesson – be careful to avoid stacking off with less than the nut flush
    [/spoiler] 6. Top Set Plus Draws (different from NLHE) (common)

    Because big combo draws can be so much more massive in PLO, sometimes even a flopped bare top set can be a slight dog in the flip. And because big combo draws are so much more common in PLO, we'd like to have redraws to a straight or flush to go with our set. EG.
    Situation 1 - flopped top set with straight draw and backdoor flush draw
    Hero – [COLOR="#CC0000"]Jh Th 9c 9s Villain – Kd Qd Jc Tc Board – 9d 8c 4h Hero/Villain pot odds – 71%/29%
    Situation 2 - flopped top set with a straight draw, but not flush possibilities (versus a stronger opponent draw)
    Hero – Jh Th 9c 9s Villain – Jd Tc 7c 6d Board – 9d 8c 4d Hero/Villain pot odds – 49%/51% Lessons – dry uncoordinated flops make flopping top set a strong favorite, but then it's much less likely to get paid off when no one else connects with the board  ▪ so our goal isn't just to flop top set, we really want to flop a set with redraws to at least a straight and/or flush to go with it, preferably both
    [/spoiler] 7. Dominating Draw vs Draw (very common)

    The majority of the big pots in PLO tend to center around people drawing to straight draws, and so this is where the biggest most expensive mistakes are frequently made. Here are three common scenarios: Situation 1 – a player pays on the flop/turn to draw to a second-best hand, which fills up on the turn/river
    EG. Two 16-card Straight draws
    Villain 1 - Js Td 8s 6d (nut straight draw, backdoor nuttier straight draw, 2 backdoor flush draws) Villain 2 – 8d 6c 5h 4c Board – 9s 7d 3h Interesting Turn Scenarios:
    a) Tie on the turn i. any 5 - any 6/8/T on the river will improve the tie to an outright win ii. 5s or 5d - in addition, any s/d on the river will give the win b) V2 makes the only straight that leaves V1 behind i. any 4 - 13 outs to a better straight (only 3 of which will tie) ii. 4s or 4d - in addition, any s/d on the river will give the win
    Lesson – focus on drawing to the nuts big nut straight draws have great $ potential (Note of my own - drawing to the nut straight (unlike drawing to the nut flush) doesn't require only playing high value cards pre-flop – like, what's considered the 'nut straight' is flop dependent? EG. The nut straight draw on a 974 board, would be JT86)
    Situation 2 – a player pays on the flop to draw to a second-best hand, actually makes the nut straight on the turn, but has no outs to improve and gets outdrawn by the river (by either a better straight or flush).
    EG. Two 13-card Straight Draws
    Villain 1 – Ks Qc Js Tc Villain 2 – Kd Qh Jd Th Board – 9s 8c 2s Pot Odds – V1 will win outright 45% of the time Lesson – try to avoid drawing to a straight on 2f boards, without a flush draw three-straight cards with a suited A have great $ potential EG.
    Villain 1 - As Js Td 9d Villain 2 - Jd Ts 9s 6h Board - 8s 7h 4s Pot Odds (V1/V2) - 73%/27%
    Situation 3 – two players flop strong draws, but one also holds a made hand, and does not need to improve to win People often underestimate the value of having a pair to go with a straight draw
    Villain 1 – KQJT Villain 2 – AKQJ Board – T94 Pot Odds (V1/V2) – V1 will win outright 48% of the time; V2 only 12% (40% of the time they'll tie) Lesson – four connecting cards can produce a 13-card straight draw as well as a pair playing hands with only three useful cards and a dangler are marginal at best, as they give up too much of an advantage to the opponent
    [/spoiler] [/spoiler] Starting Hands So in the Intro, we learned that we're trying to hit the following hands (or a combination of them):   •  The nut straight with redraws   •  The overfull or top set with other draws   •  Big nut straight draws   •  The nut flush draw, with additional stuff going for it A lot of hands may run close in value pre-flop, BUT they differ greatly in how they play after the flop when stacks are deep and the pots are contested multi-way – and only some have the ability to win big pots. Here's a list of playable, and speculative starting hands:

    1. Broadways (High Value, Connected/Gapped, hopefully Suited)

    These are premium drawing hands. When the A is suited, they also have the potential to make the nut flush. Makes - 13+card nut straight draws
    AKQJT – any four, T or higher Axx9 – any other two broadways, in addition to A and 9 (it's especially good if the A is the same suit as one of the others)
    [/spoiler] 2. Middling Connected/Gapped/Suited

    The higher value, the better, since there's a better chance of flopping two-pair/boats that have less chance of getting outdrawn by the river. Lower value runs are much more speculative, requiring deeper stacks to be in play to realize their implied odds. Also, suitedness still matters, because flopping a flush draw can also add a secondary way to win (the book says playing rainbow straight draws gives up too much advantage to the opponent, so we should just fold them and wait for a better hand) a) Perfectly Connected
    Makes - 13-card nut straight draws
    Playable - AKQJ to 9876 (four sequential, anywhere between A and 6 (they have to all be in a row, no gaps)) Speculative - 8765 to 6543 (more speculative because of their lower value) Marginal/Junk - 5432 (doesn't make a 13-card straight draw, and has domination problems)
    b) Connected with One-Gap/Two, One-Gaps/Two-Gaps The size and position of the gap is extremely important! (with the exception of A-high Broadway hands, that don't have domination issues)
    Makes - 16/17-card straight flush draws i. Single Gap - the gap needs to be at the bottom (otherwise it won't be flop the nut straight draw)
    Playable - KQJ-9 to 765-3 (lower value are more speculative) Marginal/Junk - K-JT9 to 6-432 (with the gap at the top, even the K-high one-gapper should be avoided due to domination problems)
    ii. Two, Single Gaps - both gaps need to be at the bottom
    Highly Speculative - KQ-T-8 to 76-4-2 (the odds of flopping the nut wrap are only 25:1, but there's also big pot potential)
    iii. Double Gapped - the gap needs to be at the bottom
    Highly Speculative - KQJ-8 to 765-2 (for the same reason as the 2-single-gaps ... it's hard to hit)
    [/spoiler] 3. Suited A

    A bare nut flush draw has limited value, because in PLO it's hard to get paid off (even from lesser flushes) when it hits. So to have real value, the nut flush needs to have something else to go with it, such as two pair, a set, or a straight draw (so you can get paid while still drawing, as the odds-on favorite) Makes – the nut flush draw, WITH something else a) Suited A with Straight Cards
    Here too, the size and location of any gaps in the straight cards makes a difference (except with Broadways, where domination isn't a problem). Makes – 13-card nut straight draw, with nut flush draw
    Premium - Perfectly Connected - As-T98s to As-654s (the card that's the same suit as the A can be any one of the three straight cards) More Speculative - Two-Gapper (gap on the bottom only) - As-98-5s - As-65-2s (makes the 17-card nut straight, but is hard to hit Risky/Marginal/Junk: - Single-Gapper (even with the gap on the bottom) - As-JT-8s to As-65-3s (will only make the 13-card nut straight half the time (easily dominated)) - Two Single-Gaps - As-Q-T-8s to As-6-4-2s (easily dominated, too hard to hit) - Perfectly Connected – As-543s (doesn't make a 13-card draw (or the nut?)) - One-Gapper (gap at the top) – EG. As-9-76s (easily dominated) - Two-Gapper (gap at the top) – EG. As-9-65s (easily dominated)
    b) Suited A with an Offsuit Pair (ideally, the A won't be the same suit as the pair)
    The set won't hit very often, but when it does it's got very strong big pot potential, and will be a healthy favorite over even the biggest conceivable drawing hands Makes – set, with the nut flush draw
    Speculative - EG. As 9s – 8d 8h (the higher the pair, the better – down to 77) Note – the book's author prefers to have the non-pair be the same suit as the A, and to only play pocket pairs 77 or higher, but he says that a lot of players'll play any suited A with any pocket pair (EG. As Xx – 2s 2h)
    c) Suited A with Two Broadway Cards
    The book says this one of the few instances where it'll be okay to play with a dangler, if the dangler adds the nut flush draw. And 2-5 are better than 7 as suited danglers, since they add the wheel draw as well. Makes – 13-card nut Broadway straight, with nut flush draw
    Speculative - As-KQ-5s to As-JT-2s (still okay to play if the dangler is like a 7s, not okay to play if the dangler is not the same suit as the A and adds nothing)
    [/spoiler] 4. Pair +

    Playing bare pocket pairs isn't advisable - to set-mine profitably in PLO, your hand also needs to have something else going for it. a) Pairs with Suited Connectors
    Premium - EG. Qs Qh Js Th (book doesn't say how low we can go, or whether it's okay to have a gap?)
    b) Double-Paired Hands
    Playable (but limited) - EG. QQ-JJ Notes – a double-paired hand will flop a set about 21% of the time - higher-value/suited/connected double-pairs are even better - the book says it's okay to play KK-33 (with a pocket pair lower than 77, because of the KK) - but says to avoid hands where both pocket pairs are less than 77
    [/spoiler] 5. AA

    The book says this is another rare exception to the rule, where it's okay to play a pair of AA by itself – because top set will be a favorite against all but the biggest draws (AA set can't be outdrawn by better, and an A-high board is less likely to be up against a big wrap straight draw than when the board's J-high). That being said, having other cards that coordinate with the AA greatly improves the hand's potential to improve on further streets, so the quality of Aaxx holdings will vary greatly. a) Suited A (or double-suited)
    Makes – top set with a nut flush draw, overpair with a nut flush draw
    Premium - EG. AsAc-TsTc Note – double-suited will flop a flush draw 24% of the time, and even has the potential to turn a second flush draw
    b) Broadway Cards
    Makes - top set or overpair, with a 12-card nut straight/wrap draw
    Premium - EG. AsAc-QJ
    c) Connectors (especially with Suited A)
    Makes – connectors make it possible to flop okay enough draws to make it profitable to continue to try and set-mine until the turn (EG. Open-ender and nut flush draw, overpair and nut flush draw)
    Speculative - EG. AsAc-9s8c
    d) Second Pair (especially if double-suited) A double-paired, double-suited hand'll flop a set or nut flush draw 45% of the time. And will flop a flush, full house or quads an additional 4% of the time. e) Magnum (that's like ... Super Premium) Any combo of the above f) Two Danglers (especially if unsuited) See the intro to this section for the explanation of why playing with danglers is the exception to the rule in this instance.
    Speculative - EG. AA-9-4
    [/spoiler] 6. Everything Else (Marginal)

    A lot of hands in PLO can look really good, when really they're potential to hit the flop hard is limited. Some of the most common examples: a) Three Broadways, with a dangler (even when double-suited) – EG. Ks Qc Js 5c b) Big Pair with sidecars – EG. Qc Qh 7c 3d c) Suited A (any that aren't listed above) - especially if it's got some combo of other stuff mixed in, like the hand's double-suited, there's another Broadway, and there's two connected cards) – EG. As Jd 7s 6d d) Gaps on Top (especially if cards are high-valued, suited) - EG. J-987 J-98-6 J-9-76 K-T98 e) Rainbow-suited Straight Cards - EG. Jc Ts 9h 8d Note – then the book goes on to say that marginal hands can be played in late position, for cheap (but only then)? [/spoiler] 7. Starting Hand Summary

    a) Premium Hands - these have a better chance to hit the flop strongly Bet/raise these in any position
    AA Hands (except bare) Big Double Broadway Pairs Four Cards T+Higher (Broadways) Suited Sequential Rundowns Suited Rundowns with a Single Bottom Gap Four Cards 9+Higher, Headed by a Suited A Big Pairs Suited Connecting Cards
    b) Speculative Hands - these require some very specific cards to have value, but when they hit produce monster hands/draws Try to see a cheap flop, multi-way, in position, preferably deep-stacked
    Two One-Gappers with the Two Bottom Gaps Double Gapper with a Bottom Gap Smaller Pairs with Suited Connectors Suited A AA with danglers
    [/spoiler] [/spoiler] Starting Hands - Practice Exercises

    Instructions and Exercises

    1. Start by classifying the hand to make sure it's on the list, and fits the bill 2. Try to think up a miracle flop for this hand 3. Use the question of whether the hand flopped big to decide if the hand is premium, speculative, or marginal/junk Example - Qs Jd 9s 7d
    1. Suited Two One-Gapper (higher value) 2. Miracle Flop     i. needs to fill the gaps with exactly T and 8 to make the big wrap     ii. needs two more of one of the suits to add a flush draw Miracle Flop: Ts 8s 6d 3. The miracle flop made a 17-card nut straight draw (with multiple straight redraws), with a spade flush redraw, and a backdoor diamond draw. There's even a straight-flush draw. Answer: So combining 2 and 3, this hand is 'Speculative' because it needed a very specific flop to flop big, but it has the ability to flop big.
    Exercises 1. Ks Kd Qd Js 2. As 9d 8d 7s 3. Jd Jc 6c 3s 4. As Kc Qd 9s 5. 7c 6s 3c 2s 6. 7c 6c 5s 5c 7. As Js Td Tc 8. 9h 7d 5c 3s 9. As 2s 9c 9d 10. Td Ts 9c 4s 11. Kd Qs Jd 8s 12. Ad 9d 8s 6s 13. Qc Js 8c 7s 14. As 8c 4s 4c 15. Kd 9d 6c 6s 16. Qs Js 7c 6c 17. 7s 7d 6s 3s 18. 7s 5s 4c 3c 19. Kc Qs Js 4c 20. As Kd Jc 4s 21. Js Tc 8s 6c 22. Js Tc 9s 8c 23. Qs Qc Js Jc 24. As Ac 8s 7c 25. As Ac 8d 2h 26. Kd Jh Td 9s 27. 8h 7d 5h 3d 28. 7c 6h 5c 4h 29. Qd Js Ts 8d 30. As Ac Js Tc [/spoiler] Quick Answers

    1. Ks Kd Qd Js - premium 2. As 9d 8d 7s - near premium 3. Jd Jc 6c 3s - marginal 4. As Kc Qd 9s - premium 5. 7c 6s 3c 2s - speculative 6. 7c 6c 5s 5c - speculative 7. As Js Td Tc - premium 8. 9h 7d 5c 3s - junk 9. As 2s 9c 9d - speculative 10. Td Ts 9c 4s - marginal 11. Kd Qs Jd 8s - speculative 12. Ad 9d 8s 6s - speculative 13. Qc Js 8c 7s - speculative to junk 14. As 8c 4s 4c - junk 15. Kd 9d 6c 6s - junk 16. Qs Js 7c 6c - junk 17. 7s 7d 6s 3s - junk 18. 7s 5s 4c 3c - near junk 19. Kc Qs Js 4c - marginal 20. As Kd Jc 4s - speculative 21. Js Tc 8s 6c - speculative 22. Js Tc 9s 8c - premium 23. Qs Qc Js Jc - premium 24. As Ac 8s 7c - premium 25. As Ac 8d 2h - speculative 26. Kd Jh Td 9s - marginal 27. 8h 7d 5h 3d - speculative 28. 7c 6h 5c 4h - premium to speculative 29. Qd Js Ts 8d - premium 30. As Ac Js Tc - magnum Notes: 1. Why is #5 considered 'speculative', while #13 is almost junk? I left out runs with a double gap in the middle, because the book said that while it has the ability to flop a 20-card wrap, some of the outs will be dominated - thought it sounded like too risky a holding to play at first? [/spoiler]
    [/spoiler] Post-Flop

    Big Picture Goal

    Some differences between PLO and NL:
    Four Cards - is the equivalent of six hold'em hands. So one pair is rarely enough to win a pot, and two pair is no longer a big hand. If a straight or flush is possible, it is probable that someone has it (and it's usually the nuts) Limit - this makes it much more difficult for one player to get all the $ in, or to price people out, before the flop. This leads to a lot of pots being played multi-way Multi-way Pots - so many pots are contested multi-way, and these build the pot quickly and put a significant amount of $ in play Flop Play - the 'best hand' before the flop is much less likely to stay the best hand after the flop Lesson - add those things together, and basically (especially in multi-way pots), the goal is to always try to flop the following, so that our hand stands a good chance of still being good by the river   1. Big nut draws, or   2. Top set, with redraws
    [/spoiler] Flop Strategy

    A. When to Bet
    1. Flopping big is 50% of the game (this will win big pots) 2. The rest of it is position (this will win small pots, in marginal spots) 1. Flopping Big - start potting it Drawing hands run so big that you won't need to slowplay or underbet to get action. Furthermore, slowplaying is dangerous, because rarely is a hand strong enough to be giving free cards. EGs.
    Low-Value Nut Boat – 77xx on a 766 board (an overcard could give someone with an overpair a better boat – and then there's a danger you might wind up paying the other person off) Top set on a dry, unconnected board – Kkxx on a K82r board (getting to see a free turn card like a 9 would suddenly give a hand like JT76 a 20-card straight draw. If the opponent also picks up a flush draw, they'd actually be a slight favorite, and heads-up it'd be a flip for the pot)
    2. (Semi-)Bluffing in Position Since people don't like to give free cards, most people oop will bet out if they have anything (check-raises are far less common) – thus a check is more often a true sign of weakness. And you can then even bet some of those weaker holdings (like AA, two pair, trips, the underfull, etc), where a pot-sized bet may be good enough to take down the pot. 3. Betting(/Folding) Lesser Holdings, Out of Position Generally, we should be check-folding most everything else when out of position. However, oftentimes being heads-up, with a dry flop that would be hard for the villain to have hit, makes it possible to bet(-fold) some lesser holdings, out-of-position, depending on villain type.
    i. Top Two Pair - will act as blockers against the villain having top/middle set
    •  ideally it'd be higher value, so there's less chance of it getting outdrawn by a better pair •  we'd also like to have 'improvers', like the nut flush draw, or open-ended nut straight draw (A-X top two-pair)
    ii. Top Trip - the lower value the board cards, the better
    •  because holding high-value overcards can add outs to improve the trip to a full-house, so there's implied odds to draw versus a villain who might have flopped a boat
    iii. Middle/Bottom Set - one and done
    •  we can try bet-folding, but need to be careful about continuing past the flop, because a lesser set is a real dog against a better set. Bottom set can sometimes even be a dog to top two-pair.
    iv. Underfull - flopped 2nd nuts, happens on a paired board An underfull can be made two different ways: 1. by holding 76-xx, with a 7-66 flop 2. by holding 66-xx, with a 77-6 flop And is generally a bet fold. But note that there's a couple of things to look out for that can sometimes help us tell where our hand might stand in relation to the villain's
    •  The more connected the two cards are, the more likely it is (relatively speaking) for someone to have flopped a better boat, since playing connectors is so common. So a JJ-T flop is very different from JJ-3, since it's much more likely that someone's playing JT-xx than J3-xx. •  The lower in value the board cards are, the more vulnerable the hand is to getting outdrawn. Because if we flop the current nuts with 66-xx and a 77-6 board, anyone holding the trip, along with three overs, has 9 outs to improve their hand to a better boat. If two people have a trip with 3 overs, they'll collectively have 18 outs.
    v. Trips The book says it's better to have trips when they're on top (EG. 77-4 is better than 9-77, but doesn't say why?) As mentioned in the 'Underfull' section above, with a trip and 3 overs, there's up to 9 outs to improve to a better boat if we're behind, so we can bet-fold, and sometimes even call if the re-raise is small.
    B. Common Beginner Mistakes
    1. Combo Draws and Counting Outs - quality of outs matters much more than quantity per se Lesser holdings (bare nut flush draws, open-enders, two-pair, trips, underfulls, middle/bottom sets, AA, non-nut straight and flush draws, etc.) are all great to have IN ADDITION to your primary draw, so long as they're not the primary draw.   •  they may add additional outs when drawing against a set   •  they may give freeroll outs to a better hand, when up against an identical hand   •  they may provide an escape valve when our draw is dominated by a bigger draw However, it's a common (and expensive!) mistake for people to get excited by all the outs to a straight/flush/boat they've picked up on the flop ... without noticing how many might (not) be clean. Having nut draws is especially important when playing multi-way pots, or deep-stacked. 2. Flopped Nuts Holding AA-76, when the flop comes 8-54 looks so great ... but remember, it's considered a 'sucker holding'! Doubly-so if there's a flush draw on the board. Because our straight has no way to improve, so someone with T9-76 who's currently tied has 8 outs to improve to a better straight ... more if they've got a flush draw to go with it. Lesson - most of the gapped hands can only flop the nuts one way, but the 'Basic Rundown' and the 'One-Gapper' can flop nut draws in more ways than one. With these two drawing hands, it's important to flop 'on top' of the board, to ensure that all your outs are clean, and that you're drawing to the nuts. EG.
    Hero – KQJT (13 outs) Villain – 7654 (3 outs at best (the 5)) Board - 982 Exception - QJT9 on an AKxx board is drawing to the nuts
    3. Flopped Nut Straight Draw, Holding the 'Basic Rundown' - anything but basic There's actually four ways to flop 'on top' with the basic rundown - having the ability to flop the nut straight draw four ways is what makes the 'rundown' such a premium hand EG.
    Hero – JT98 Board – 76x (13 outs – T/9/8/5)     - 87x (13 outs – J/T/9/6)     - 97x (13 outs – J/T/8/6)     - T7x (13 outs – J/9/8/6)
    [/spoiler] [/spoiler] Omaha Odds Calculator Some mistakes I've made already:   •  not discounting my straight draw when there was a flush draw on the board   •  not giving up on my combo draw immediately when the board paired   •  mistakenly thinking it'd be unlikely for anyone to have a straight when there were three cards separated by a gap on the board   •  c-betting too much   •  slowplaying a 'monster', only to get outdrawn Jan. 19, 2014 Everything that the book tells us not to do, for such and such a reason, I've done and had it happen for the exact reason they gave. Just slowplayed a turned flush and got outdrawn by a boat - d'oh! On the bright side, decided to commit to sticking to the starting hand chart to a 'T', no exceptions - and things have been going a lot better. Guess one big benefit of sticking exactly to the chat is that it avoids winding up in tricker spots where we might need to worry about dominated hands? [/spoiler]
    Last edited by TrustySam; Tue Jan 21, 2014, 12:54 AM.


    • #3

      Time to close the door now ... onwards! Gosh, he seems so ready to settle down for life - really hope this girl is a keeper and feels the same ... wouldn't want to see him get hurt ... [/spoiler]
      Last edited by TrustySam; Thu May 15, 2014, 07:11 PM.


      • #4
        Thanks Sam it's very informative.umbup: Good luck at the tables.umbup:


        • #5
          Hopefully it'll seem even better once I get better stuff posted ... still trying to get everything organized, but I keep getting distracted by poker - so addictive hehe!! Saw more nice cashes in your blog - wow, you're on a roll!! Nice!! umbup: umbup: ARCHIVE #1

          Catalog of HA Submissions Betting 1. Find a tricky cbetting hand to add here (one where I remember to consider how the turn card's coordinated with the flop. Archived: a) Refraining from cbetting - middling suited-connected boards - holding a weak made hand, or weak draw - reason is that the flop will connect strongly with a lot of peoples' ranges, so there's not likely to be much if any fold equity. Therefore our standards for continuing based on the strength of our hand need to be much higher, especially in multiway pots b) Refraining from cbetting - A high boards in position - holding a middling strength hand - reason is that we want the opponent's range wide 2. JJ - BET-FOLDING after the river's made our strong hand more of middling strength and we're no longer sure where we stand - FLOP: oop multi-way against aggro players with a wet board, a check-raise might be a better way to go, rather than donking out - TURN: with a flopped top set on a wet board, if you do decide to donk out, it's important to keep barrelling, for both value and protection if the turn doesn't change the value of the set - no slowplay! - RIVER: with a strong hand that might be beat, better to half-bet fold if we suspect we've been outdrawn, rather than check-call - also remember that sets that don't improve to a boat will get outdrawn like 30% of the time - more if the pot's multiway!! Not ready to archive this one yet, since it's such an important area - it seems to be going well though ... NB Be sure to add that exception I've carved out for check-calling against those loose-passives who only bet 20% of the pot 3. AKs - how to get the money in the middle when deep-stacked - Rule: there needs to be 5 streets of betting to get 200bb's in by the river - flop, turn, river, as well as 2 reraises (100bbs usually takes 4 streets of value to get it all in?) - it's oftentimes easier to get more money in by betting big on the turn before a scare card hits on the river - Corrolary: if somebody's check-raised or reraised, then follows through with more barelling, it's usually a sign that they're trying to get stacks in by the river - might be time to re-evaluate the strength of one's hand to make sure it's still good (eg a flush on a paired board if the villain's pretty straight-forward) - also, if I start pumping up pots on the turn, and somebody hits a miracle card on the river, remember to half-bet and be willing to let the hand go if faced with a reraise 4. QTs - getting maximum value out of a strong flopped hand oop - this hand was just like that live training class on how to extract maximum value from our monsters - we should be prioritizing value over protection (value>protection) - so try raising smaller to keep people IN the pot, not chase them out, even if multiway ... betting small keeps peoples ranges wider - especially if they're short-stacked, because it won't take much to get them all-in - and remember, there only needs to be like 4 betting rounds to get all the money into the middle for even a big stack, because of the compounding by street ... so if somebody reraises (which is likely when the flop hits a lot of peoples' ranges), then you can try just calling rather than re-raising their reraise - this might confuse them! - and don't let up off the gas!!! No slowplay!!! 5. KK - Trying to Extract Maximum Value by Trying to Keep People *IN* the Pot (Dec. 6, 2012) - you stand a better chance of keeping people in with mediocre hands by betting less, especially when you have the board locked up - and the bets don't even have to be that large - with 3 opponents, you could bet 1/3 the pot and still make as much as if only one opponent called a pot-sized bet - also, don't forget to take note of peoples' stack sizes - $1.20 was too big when one of them only had $1.85 left behind, and the others were all short too 6. Including Bluffs in Our Ranging, and then Using that Knowledge to Extract Maximum Value NEW (Jan 5, 2013) - this analysis was especially awesome to get since I've gotten so shy about submitting hands now that it's so busy there - and key, because there's so much monkey business in/around the blinds - never thought to look at board texture to see whether there's potential draws they might be semi-bluffing, or whether the board's so dry it's more likely they're just responding to my actions, or whether they they might have a hand with some sdv - something else that was important to note about this hand was that the sb's raises were getting smaller with each passing street - an indication that my hand was likely best, and that there was a chance there to extract more value on the river, rather than checking behind like I did - bet sizing will depend on our bluffing ranges - it should be smaller for pure air, and larger (up to a bluffy-looking shove against gamblers) for hands with sdv Folding 1. AKo - playing TP oop when it could be behind - follow-up to #1 - the half-bet-fold thingie on the river is meant for situations in which we have a middling strength hand with SDV that may get called by worse. It's important to fold to a reraise since there's also a lot of hands we're likely behind - W$SD stat - 60% is unusually high, and it's a sign that the person only likes going to showdown with pretty much the nuts, and rarely bluffs if ever. This means you don't have to worry about doing the half-bet thing with them, because (1) They won't call with worse, (2) They won't try to steal the pot with worse, (3) And they'll only be raising with better. So if they raise on the river, then it's a definite fold because you're beat. 2. When to Fold KK Pre-flop (Jan. 1, 2013) - Okay ... finished having that girl 'moment', and edited out all my hand-wringing lol - I guess like Felix maybe disagrees with this, but I think having a flop cbet of 0% is extreme, even over just 20 hands. AND the villain had the 100% w$sd stat to back it up. So I don't think you can discount it - So then, even assuming Felix' wider range, UTG obviously had AA, because he shoved all-in when the A hit on the turn (which means he didn't have QQ or KK) ... and didn't cbet on the flop when there wasn't an A or a K (which means he didn't have AK). So the question is whether there were enough signs pre-flop to tell that he likely held AA - And I thought there were ... the person wasn't especially loose, the raise was from UTG, he 4-bet into TWO of us (when as I've said before there's only one hand who's equity doesn't seriously erode in a multiway pot), AND made the amount small enough to try to keep us both in. I think the sizing also shows this person knows what he's doing, because he kept it close to the 25bb threshold - that's pretty advanced because when we don't have a lot of experience with 3-betting+, most of us just triple the amount of the previous bet - And polarized utg ranges are too advanced for 5nl - so nobody's 3bet bluffing ... probably Felix didn't know that? Like he did the grinding up thing and spent time at 5nl. But when he was at 2nl when I was there, he was only there for about 5 days. So I'm assuming he was at 5nl about the same amount of time? - He didn't list any of the factors I did, and then discount them - so like ... maybe I should have listed out the assumptions I was making ... like if I had known ... - I think this KK was a fold to the 4-bet ... hopefully next time I can muster up a fold when I feel that way!!! 3. Loose Cannon in the bb - +/-EV to Play oop? NEW (Jan. 5, 2013) - the HA section's one of the best parts of this site - such a great resource to have ... it's no wonder it's gotten so busy lately! So I really, really appreciate all the time the analyzers put into looking over our hands - it's just gotten so crazy in that section recently, it's amazing the quality of feedback we get, when even there's like 8, 10, 12 hands in the queue, and they're all super tricky close calls and stuff. Especially when the analyzers must have so many other things on their plates, like live training, grinding, and real life stuff - so like, I totally get how in looking over 10 hands at once, Felix might not notice stuff like stack sizes (with neoVARTA's hand), etc - next time I'll have to be sure to include my reasons for playing the way I did - I keep thinking stuff is obvious, but I'm forgetting that the analyzers don't have time to notice all the stuff we would about our own hands - stuff like that I didn't necessarily rely on my HUD to make the turn and river calls - I just didn't think somebody at 5nl in the blinds would refrain from betting in position with a hand - you rarely see that. Maybe at higher stakes where people have more self-control? And then the turn helped me - and so by the river, I was questioning what the bb was trying to represent, because it felt like air? I feel like if Felix had taken a closer look at the hand, then maybe he'd have felt the same way? The guy insta-struck me as a monkey - but then I have that 'sixth-sense' for spotting the like-minded, so ... who knows ... there may have been some timing tells, I can't remember ... - as for the HUD ... well after saying that you need a large sample size for stats to be reliable, both Felix and Arty went and relied on the HUD (with a sample size of 80) to make conclusions, like that the villain was passive, and had a type, and was somebody they'd always want to get into a pot with ... - the thing is that this villain had contradictory stats - that's not an issue that arises due to lack of sample size ... it comes from a person acting in a conflicting manner, such that the stats aren't all aggro like they'd be for a maniac, or all cautious like they'd be for a nit. So you can't just ignore the stats that don't align, you have to reconcile them and look for possible reasons why they're coming up confusing? - like, HUD stats are the mathematical representation of a person's preferences/tendencies, as manifested by their behavior? So they should be used to paint a cohesive portrait of the person before being applied, if that's possible? - So when you see that somebody's got a low AF, but cbets the flop and turn 100% of the time, has a float of 50%, and has AF by street that get exponentially greater, one reason that could be happening is because the person calls pre and post-flop raises in position, and then raises when the other person gives up, irrespective of his cards. Which is exactly what he did in fact do with me. So, like, to say he's passive and then conclude that you should fold to a raise from him because he's not one to bluff - that's obviously wrong. - and then like, to want to get into pots with the person, even out of position, because he's been characterized as passive - neither Felix or Arty gave out a strategy for how to beat this guy in light of his bluffs on the turn and river? Was it just to keep folding the best hand until we're sure we have the best hand? But this time the board was dry - what if it's wet the next time? - I think it'd be different if we were in position and didn't have to cbet to prevent him from floating? Because then we could reraise him either pre or post-flop, especially if we had some equity or a scare card came on the turn - I think he'd fold to that if he didn't have anything. But out of position ... I think I'd rather just let the $0.02 go than have to have to call 2 barrels with A high against somebody like this? But it'd be interesting to hear if Felix or Arty did have different ideas on how to better play against this villain other than what they stated? Maybe I should be sharing all this in the thread to give them that chance ... but sometimes things can get awkward ... I don't know that they really see me as somebody who thinks the way I do ... which isn't unusual ... - still super helpful though to hear other peoples' thoughts! Always, always interesting to see things from other peoples' perspective, and hear their thoughts! Very grateful for all the resources here at PSO!! Checking and Calling 1. 99 - how to play against an awkward-sized short-stack on the turn with a strong draw - TURN: a check-raise into a short-stack is usually better than a shove - people may raise with a wider range and then feel pot-committed and call with that wider range - also, you get to see how the person acts first - and if it gets checked back, then you get to see a free card in the face of uncertainty - FLOP: it's more EV to check-call with an overpair, rather than donk out Well now that I've stopped donking out, I'm having trouble thinking of any spots where being up against a short stack was an issue: B+ ? [/spoiler]

          Catalog of HA Submissions - Other Peoples' Hands That are a Lot Like Mine Betting 1. Taking Back the Initiative After Somebody's Donked Out - look for weak/stationny tendencies - a short stack, low valued and uncoordinated flop, bets that are getting smaller with each street, etc - reraise (on flop or turn) if so, and if our hand has lots of equity (actual or potential to improve). Sizing should be about 2.5-3x the donk bet - and be willing to bet-fold to a reraise (shouldn't be as common as a call, and a check on future streets) - will help get max value for hands, increase our options on future streets - add hands where I was bluffing with air - and the hand where somebody was slowplaying QQ Folding I. In Response to River Action From Villain - Bet/Reraise/Check-raise - by Villain Type a) TAG with Low wtsd, high w$sd - 4 to a Straight - especially in the 8-Q range - if somebody's betting big on a scary board, then they must have close to the nuts to not be scared that we have a better hand - and it's just so likely that somebody got to the river with TP, and their kicker made a straight, in the 8-Q range of hands b) Calling Station - 4-to-a-Straight on the board - looser players' ranges are a lot wider, so while it might *seem* implausible for them to have a combo of hands that would have led them to call 2 streets and then make a straight by the river, they're never bluffing II. In Response to Flop Action From Villain - Reraise/Check-raise - by Villain Type a) Maniac - Middling Suited-Connected Board - hand values need to rise, the wetter the board. So When faced with a reraise, is the hand strong enough to be good enough a decent amount of time (or improved by the river enough times), that you're willing to play for stacks? If not, maybe it's better to just fold? - Like, we could call, but what if the villain keeps barreling on future streets? yikes! :( b) Casual Player with Odd Stack Size - Multi-way Pot, Dry Board - check-raiser was doing it into a raiser and a caller - hand values need to rise here too, in multi-way pots, to continue if somebody seems eager to get stacks in the middle - especially on a dry board - since there's no draws the villain could be doing this with - casual players with smaller stacks also tend to play much wider ranges, so the villain could have had any number of sets or 2pr combos on a board that *looks* pretty harmless c) Suspected Maniac - Overbets on the Flop :o - aha! I knew this one from Live Training - surely that's got to be a sign of ... something? :D - even if we think the person might be trying to make a chip grab with a light holding, it's important to not get flustered and remember to range - to make sure we have a strong enough holding to win - and then, the bigger the overbet, the stronger our holding will need to be - it's okay to fold if we're worried our hand isn't strong enough - because we only need to call a few times to come out ahead III. In Response to Turn Action From Villain - by Villain Type a) TAG - Dry Board - nobody's doing this with a worse hand than TPTK, trying to get stacks into the middle - very important to fold, even though the board looks really dry - such a big leak to be losing stacks to sets all the time b) Passive Villain, AF of 1 - GREAT FOLD! Bet-Folding with 2-Pair, 3 Broadways on the Board - 2 pair always looks so strong, but on *this* board, it's really just middling strength - nobody is reraising on this board with worse, especially not somebody so passive - best to just fold ... just fold!! IV. In Response to Pre-Flop Action From Villain - by Villain Type a) New Player to the Pool Limp-Reraises - Folding KK Pre-Flop - it's *always* AA ... has anybody ever hand anything less? :p Checking and Calling 1. Check-caller suddenly check-raises on the river - Ranging for possible backdoor flush draws is key here (there aren't many possible better ones) (Dec. 6, 2012) - you have the 3rd best flush - the board's TP is the same suit as your cards (making it much less likely the person who's been calling your cbets has been calling with a flush draw) - it's a backdoor flush draw, which should be valued "like a blue ribbon hog at the county fair" - this check-raise looked so scary at first site, but after reading Gareth's thoughts, since Croyd was cbetting with a straight draw and flush draw, the opponent's better hands were limited to like Ah9h. Whereas there were so so many worse possible hands the bb could have been playing this way since it looked like Croyd's most likely holding was TP. So while a better flush would be possible, it'd just be one small part of the opponent's possible range, which makes this a good call. 2. LAG triple barrels from c/o - calling with a middling strength hand in position - the pot was already getting pretty big - and top 2 pair on such a connected board, while ahead of lesser 2 pairs like AJ, would have been behind all sets (which were very possible), as well as the straight - so a call better than a reraise (re-check the hand later) Checking and Folding (Jan. 15, 2013) 1. Unknown Villain - When the Flush Draw Completes, Advice is to Just Give Up on the Hand (Jan. 15, 2013) - can't sleep - maybe looking at hand analysis'll help me doze off? - The HA Analysis service is free, so I wasn't crazy about it when Joker made that comment about people maybe responding to different advice differently, depending perhaps on one's style? - At the same time ... when the advice is less than 10 lines long, it oftentimes leaves that question open of what sort of assumptions have been made. Like ... with this hand, wikked was already making 67% pot-sized bets - if he had increased them to 75%, the pot would be $10 by the river and the villain would have only hand $5 left ... what if the villain had only raised $2.50 into a $10 pot? Would it still be a fold? I keep biting my tongue about asking follow-up questions, but now that I asked a couple today, I regret it. I don't know ... just makes me feel uncomfortable. I think I should have just stuck to not saying anything in that section any more ... - but the idea of a fold is interesting, so I guess I'll include it here as a hand to ponder for a while? Bonus: Kind of a Pep Talk (Dec. 7, 2012) - I don't ever really reraise on flops in position with strong hands, but the rest applies, so I've included this - Also, I guess I just kind of like it[/spoiler]

          Catalog of Live Training Concepts Betting 1. Extracting Maximum Value - if you bet 3/4 the pot, you only have to be called 1/3 as often as you would had you bet 1/4 the pot to win the same amount. So it's better to make bigger bets and get called less often, than make smaller bets that get called pretty often. 2. 4-Betting Light 3-Bettors a) Range - should try to stick to A or K high (blockers), and fold everything else that you won't be 4betting for value, or calling with b) Size - should be no larger than around 25% of your stack, because you need to leave yourself room to fold in case the 3-bettor actually has a hand this time and 5-bets 3. 3-Betting Light - just kind of a place-holder ... don't think there's been a class on this yet? Just want to make a point of going back through my notes to see what I've got so far ... Checking and Calling 1. Big Blind is Last to Act Pre-Flop (and also last to act if the orginal pre-flop raiser cbets) (Jan. 6, 2013) a) Being last to act has some advantages ... - being last to act pre-flop (if nobody's 3bet) means that we don't have to worry about getting squeezed, the way we might if we just called in the sb. So we're guaranteed to see a flop if we call - and being last to act post-flop (if nobody's 3bet the original raiser's cbet, assuming there's a cbet) means we'll get to see how the rest of the table responds, and would then have the option of check-raising the original raiser, which could put a lot of pressure on them - this works great with draw (see ep. 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 17, 2012, @18:00) b) Other things we can do from the bb ... - is lead out in multiway pots with strong draws that are too weak to call (with no sdv), and have too little fold equity to check-raise with - or we can lead out on the turn into passive opponents who have checked behind on the flop - this works well with hands like 2 overs - and we can squeeze - also, if it's blind vs blind, we do have position, so maybe I should be looking to play a wider range? - and there's always 3betting into active blinds stealers who will likely fold to any resistence 2. Calling Light 3-Bets - try to stick with hands with A or K (blockers, ability to flop TP and bluff-catch), Shucks, something screwed up and class yesterday didn't get recorded ... not sure I've got the info right with this and will have to wait 2 months for the PSO recording to get released to confirm, because all I remember is KQs ... boo :( :( I guess if this is an average recommended polarized 3bet range, then would the calling range for such a person be the suiteds above the bluffing range, with blockers to the value range? ie ATs-AQs, KJs-KQs, QJs? Maybe also AKo? Not sure :( Thankfully it's not too common at 5nl ... at least not for me - so funny that Croyd says it was happening a lot to him? How could that be? :/ Update: So the calling range from class is: KQs, AQs, AJs 4betting range into light 3-bettors: Ax, Kx ... as a bluff or for value (makes it less likely the opponent holds AK, AA or KK, which means AK is likely ahead?) - must be willing to fold to a shove though? :/ (see Appendix for follow-up hands) 3. Cbetting - Turn Card Coordinates with the Flop 4. Trying to Keep Opponent's Range Wide a) As the overwhelming favorite b) With a middling strength hand [/spoiler] ARCHIVE

          Catalog of HA Submissions

          a)i. AQo - Refraining from Cbetting - middling suited-connected 'action' flops - on those middling suited-connected boards, it's important to have an especially strong hand since it connects so well with so many peoples' ranges. Here the flop was 9TJ double-suited - ie only bet for value (not a good place to be semi-bluffing, because it's highly unlikely to be met with folds all around) - examples of middling strength hands where it might be better to pot control would be hands like (1) bottom 2pr, (2) bottom set, and (3) top pr with an open-ended straight draw I think it's easier to fix stuff that's happening on the flop than when it's happening on the river ... just had to up my standards for cbetting - and wet boards are so common, I guess I got lots of practice too: A Edit, Dec. 31, 2012: ugh ... just noticed I tucked a bit on cbetting in here too - I seem to be all over the place with the cbets. Hmmm ... a)ii. AQo - Exception to the rule listed above (ie it's fine to cbet because we want to get called: our holding is especially strong, so we're cbetting for value and don't mind getting called - #6 cont'd - so if betting for value, bet big and don't let up on the gas ... no slowplay!! - if you flop especially strong, try to think of 2nd best hands that others might hold that would be likely to call - on the other hand, if somebody else seems to have flopped especially strong and appears to be trying to get the chips in the middle, try to have at least a set, or a straight and flush draw plus pair to continue? See above: A- b)i. T7s - Refraining from Cbetting (and reraising) - weak draws with no fold equity - since draws aren't made hands, try to stick to just raising as a semi-bluff where there's fold equity to go with the actual equity (here I was obviously up against TPTK, so there was no fold equity) - where there's likely to be more fold equity - uncoordinated boards - where there isn't likely to be much fold equity - suited, connected, paired boards I've really tightened up with draws, especially against early raisers (as opposed to callers in the blinds - think this one may be good?: A b)ii. 89s - Exception to the rule listed above (ie it's fine to cbet (or even reraise) because we want to get called: the draw is especially strong such that our hand is favored to win by the river, over even AA - if our equity's ahead of AA on the flop (like with a pair and a flush draw, plus a backdoor straight flush draw), the hand is strong enough to be raising for value because it's favored to win by the river (same with on the turn) - try to think ahead to how potential scare cards might hurt the ability to extract value on later streets, and keep that in mind when raising See above: A [/spoiler] Catalog of HA Submissions - Other Peoples' Hands That are a Lot Like Mine

          a. Check-folding or Bet-folding KK when oop on an A-high Flop - better to bet-fold, check-fold, or bet-check-fold, than check-call!! I think this one's fixed - it seemed really weird to bet out at first, but now I really like it and wouldn't do it any other way (check-fold when the board was super wet, or maybe if the opponent was super passive and not prone to raise, or raise much): A b. Checking Behind on an A-High Board - on a dry A-high board with a lower pair, it's okay to check behind rather than make a c-bet. Then if checked-to again on the turn, you can make one then (like, there's no need to worry about protecting one's hand) Dec. 31, 2012 - wow, so I added that check-mark because I stopped cbetting in position on A high boards in a lot of cases ... but didn't notice that this was the place I was using to keep track of cbetting in general, which is such a big and important area. Definitely not ready to archive this subject, but maybe just this hand - will have to try and find a different hand to use to keep tabs of my cbets This hand:A Cbetting: B [/spoiler] Catalog of Live Training Concepts

          1. Scare Card on the Turn (Jan. 6, 2013) - If a higher value card comes on the turn, after we've cbet the flop and been called, this will be scary to an opponent holding a pair lower to the turn card, and so our cbet will likely be met with a fold - It's always nice to have some real equity to fall back on, but here we're leveraging fold equity, because even if the opponent called our flop cbet with just overs, isn't the probably of them making a pair on the turn just something like 12%? And since our turn bet will only need to work some of the time for this to be profitable, it's +EV [/spoiler] [/spoiler] APPENDIX

          Year-End Review and Stuff to Work on in 2013 Intro

          Kind of feel like keeping this more private, so I guess I'll put it here. When setting 'goals', I've tried to stay true to the Jared Tendler method of focusing more on acquiring skills over climbing stakes, and that seems to work best for me I think. So I've stuck with that here. One of the overarching concepts from live training last week was that, as we start advancing in skill (or stake), we should be trying to get past thinking/playing in terms of rules (like that we should "always be 4betting when x" or "never calling when y"). Instead, we should be trying to think more in terms of whether we're getting ourselves into good situations based on reads, etc? I think that pretty well describes what I hope to develop over the next year - and I guess the key is to make better use of one's HUD and notes (to better develop those reads)? So that's info I'll be trying to think more about, both at the tables, and afterwards when I look over hand histories, and work on learning all that the stuff from my list of HA hands. That's a big list! Ought to keep me very busy over the next year lol [/spoiler] Using my HUD to Better Tailor My Moves to the Person

          The timing seems about right to work on developing better reads, because lately I seem to have done a better job of noticing more than just the VPIP/PFR and ATS% stats. Not sure why I bothered to have like 20 on my HUD when I hardly ever noticed most of them But, lately I seem to have gotten better at it. 1. Here's an example of a hand where I used my pop-up to decide to fold to a person showing the following HUD (with a 3B 10%):

          And the person's pop-up - the villain was only 3betting with a 4% range from the button, with most of it coming from the bb into his button, or from the cut-off, which must have been for value? If I had taken the HUD stat at face value, I might have wound up 4bet-bluffing, which would have been a mistake. [/spoiler] 2. And here's an example of a hand where it looks like I picked a bad spot to 3bet-bluff (and just happened to dodge a bullet - this time), based on the person's HUD stats and PokerTracker notes (ft3B of 50%, ftcbet of 0%!!):

          [/spoiler] [/spoiler] Hoping my HUD Can Help With Trouble Spots, Specific to Villain Type A. Problems with TAGs

          Sometimes I think I must get intimidated against TAGs, because sometimes I freeze up and can't seem to find it in me to play the way I want to. They're everything we're *supposed* to be, and they're everything that I'm not - patient, prudent, temperate, moderate, etc. It's such a curious thing, because they virtually all play their hands face up - so it's not like I'm ever surprised to get to the river and find out I was behind the entire time. So I'm hoping that maybe if I become more conscious of each individual TAG's more detailed HUD stats (and not just their VPIPs), maybe I'll feel more confident in making a fold when I should? 1. Staying Too Long in Pots with Weak Holdings Here's a two-part example of where I think being more conscious of the villain's HUD stats might have given me the certitude I needed to make a fold. a)

          Hand 1: Villain had a 0% turn cbet over 180 hands (and a w$sd of 50%) - I guess being a 92% favorite helped bring them out of their shell :/ Although, I might have gotten a bit swayed towards a call by the smaller sized bets? But contrast this hand with the next one ... [/spoiler] b)

          Hand 2: Then ... zomg ... not 2 minutes later, the *exact* same thing happens, against a villain with virtually the SAME stats - 20% turn cbet over 420 hands (and a w$sd of 50%) ... only they were more aggro, so it was super obvious he had a set. Hard not to feel like a bit of a clown ... it's not like I didn't feel like here too I was probably up against AK or KK by at least the turn. Because is this person really playing AJ this way? Folds are always kind of hard for me, but I do tense up a bit ... hopefully next time if I can notice stuff like these two's low turn cbet stat (in conjunction with everything else - the VPIP, the board, etc), I'll be happy to let the hand go ... [/spoiler] [/spoiler] B. Problems with Passives

          1. Loose Passives - Lost Value Most people will tend to take advantage of position to bet people who look weak off of pots - except the passives. If somebody's got an AF of less than 1 (combined with other indicators of passivity), maybe it's important to notice that and try to take over betting to make we get the most value out of our hands when we're both strong, and we're ahead? Here's a hand where I likely would have made much more had I check-raised the flop:

          Almost fell off my chair when I got to showdown and saw how strong the villain was on the turn. This small sample size might have been a bit off, since the c/o was showing a 0% steal from the c/o, and a 0% cbet on the flop. But the 0% cbet on the turn was accurate, and the villain went to showdown with a middling pair - with 4-to-a-straight on the board - so the wtsd of 40% might have been ballpark too. Villain's HUD stats: Next time, hopefully I'll remember to try check-raising on the flop. [/spoiler] 2. Tight Passives - Betting into them When I Have the Worst Hand I've posted this hand before ... mrroberto keeps slowplaying his way to valuetown against me :/

          His HUD stats look normal, as do mine - but I had him color-coded as a slowplayer, and had a note on him (and he must have one on me) ... but I didn't pick up on either tag when we played this last hand. It's hands like this that have me thinking that I probably need to clean up and simplify my color-coding and note-taking system? See below for discussion. [/spoiler] [/spoiler] C. Casual Players

          These are those one-tablers, with the little stacks, who like to limp-call (and call, and call) - or make a mini-donk on the flop, then continue on to the river with the thinnest of equity. And with their wide ranges, it seems like 80% of the time it's going to be ++EV to be looking to value-bet them heavily? So maybe it's a mistake to be too cautious with the value bets against this type of player, just because of the lack of hand history and the passivity? 1. 3 Streets of Value? Here's a sample hand where maybe I shouldn't have let up on the river - even though all I had was A high. Because all the villain had was Q high, and they called two streets with that and the river didn't really change anything? lol??

          Too thin to be considering betting the river as well? [/spoiler] 2. But Sometimes Casual Players Can Make Big Hands That Are Well-Masked If we're going to follow through with #1, then I'm not sure how often we should be worrying about cutting back on betting just in case the person might have made some long-shot straight draw? I'm not sure ...

          [/spoiler] [/spoiler] D. The LAGs

          This is where I seem to really shine - we both like to play big pots, and don't mind playing them with mediocre holdings. But I'm starting to get worried about 3-bets and 4-bets if there's more of them up at 10nl. The new person to the board was saying in his blog that the aggro was way crazy up at 10nl as compared to 5nl. But theawesomenw was saying it's nothing compared to 25nl. So ... I don't know ... Here's some notes I put together on playing back against 3-bets:

          The choice to play back against a potentially light 3bet – why it's profitable when the person also has value bets in their range Value and bluffing range are supposed to be balanced – half for value and half for bluffs ... and there's only so many premium hands that people would 3bet for value. But sometimes people aren't careful – so when you see somebody with a 11, 12 ... 50% range, they're heavily weighted towards having junk in their range – making it much more likely a hand like KQs is ahead, and possibly dominating their range. Which is why it's profitable to call and see the flop, even oop when we know that they're doing that, and they're aggro/reckless/overestimate their fold equity. Responding to a suspected light 3bet – Villain Read is Key What are their pre and post-flop tendencies? Do they 3bet light, or strictly for value? What's their range from that position? Do they have a fold button pre-flop? Post-flop? Ideally we'll have enough hand history to have: - HUD stats - NoteTracker notes - personal notes In the absence of sufficient data, we should assume the person is playing like the 'average' person with similar characteristics for our stake level. - at 25nl, regs routinely 3bet light, particularly into c/o raisers (see Live Training, 'Dealing with 3bets', Dec. 12, 2012) - while at 5nl it tends to come more from newer players in the pool, who perhaps don't realize how quickly the red flags start to appear in one's HUD stats? So know the default. If not confident in your read that the person is 3betting light or for value, it's best to assume the default, and go with that because pre-flop reads are EVERYTHING – moreso than the cards possibly!! Especially out of position!! In light of our read on the villain – would it be best to 4Bet, Call, or Fold? There might be a bit of an instinctual 'fight or flight' response to light 3bets – because somebody's upped the stakes with crap cards and we might be not holding much better ... and we might be out of position to boot. But the worst thing we can do is just react robotically with raises or folds. Last week's live training was also about trying to get us to deal with light 3bets by trying to THINK our way to a best possible solution of the options available. a) If we're tempted to respond to a light 3bet by pressing the raise button – consider a stop-and-go type play instead as an alternative Why it might be superior to the AIPF monkey raises - an overwhelming % of a light 3bettor's range will be made up of unmade hands (according to the chart, if the person's playing by that - must have a read to know if they are). So 2/3 of the time the villain won't connect with the board at all. And with a lesser range, even when they do connect, they may not make TP, or have problems with domination? Sample hand from Live Training: KJs in the c/o (episode "Preflop Aggression" (Dec. 19, 2012), @31:30) Step 1: Villain read – likely to be 3betting light because (1) it looked like the c/o was raising the limper light to isolate (2) the villain was playing like a reg, and at 50nl 3betting light is common? (3) in fact he'd 3bet before ... a couple of times in a short amount of time (but nothing too over the top) Step 2: a. If we connect with the board – min-cbet to hopefully induce a reraise, so we can shove b. If we miss - with decent equity, do the same c. What if we miss completely? – should we bet larger, then check-fold the turn? Or bet-shove anyways? We'd be no worse off than if we'd 4bet shoved in the first place Or would we make the same bet size, but be prepared to fold (bet-fold)? Result of the hand from live training - c/o made TP, and the villain folded to the flop bet. b) If we're tempted to fold or call/check-fold – consider being willing to play for stacks ... it's just a question of when to jack up the pot? Reasons to play back, rather than try to pot control - light 3bettors are counting on people to fold better to turn a profit. You don't want to be folding the best hand to them, when you could instead be getting them to give you money with the worst (if they're aggro). And if you hold an A or a K, then it's less likely they have one, and you might be able to flop TP (or a stronger top pair if they do have one) Sample Hand: A6s in the c/o (episode "Preflop Aggression" (Dec. 19, 2012), @38:00) Step 1: Villain reads a) The sb squeezer was a short-stack, on the loose side b) The button flat-called the c/o's raise c) The bb flat-called the sb's tiny 3bet shove d) And nobody had yet to see the c/o do anything out of line The prediction was that the button and bb would likely fold - which they did. And the 3bettor in the sb had KQo and won on the river - important to note that the A6s was ahead when the money went in! [/spoiler] [/spoiler] Looking for Added Value A. Simplifying My Color-Coding and Note-Taking Systems

          One reason I think a HUD alone'll never be sufficiently reliable to completely eliminate the need for supplementary notes, is that I've noticed some regs deliberately acting contrary to type? Here's a 4-tabling TAG reg whose stats look completely normal. So to look at it, you'd never be able to tell that he doesn't 3bet premiums, he calls 3bets with Arag ... and then there was this hand where he chose to play 54s from the sb, then check-reraised with middle pair and an open-ender: Now that I look back at the hand, it seems like such an easy fold in light of his light of his low AF, and HUGE w$sd. But something confused me when we were in the moment about that check-raise? The NoteTracker had lots of great info, but I'm not sure they would have helped me better find a fold?: Looking back, I feel like a succinct little note saying something like "likes tricky plays, but only continues with value" might have made a difference? Along with maybe a color-code alerting me to check the note box when I get in a hand with this person? Which is a very different system from what I've got set up now. I'm currently using over 30 different colors! And well, I talk in my note box the way I talk in this blog ... like why say something in 5 words, when you can say it in 50? It hasn't been such a huge deal at 5nl to not have an efficient system in place, what with the player pool being decently large in size. Because it's not that often that I get into big hands again and again against the same people. But maybe it'll be more important to have something in place for 10nl? So cleaning up my notes and simplifying my color-coding so that the system is functional seems like it ought to be a real positive? [/spoiler] B. Seeking to Improve my Winrate in the Cutoff

          This ought to be a quick one - because I don't know what's going wrong in this spot. I've really nitted up, and am basically playing it like mp now, but maybe that's made things worse? I remember feeling this way about utg at 2nl though, and once I moved to 5nl utg was just fine - so maybe it's just variance ... but maybe it's not! Will just have to keep at it I guess ... I'm actively on the lookout for clues umbup: [/spoiler] C. Conducting Daily Reviews After Every Session

          This will be new for me - rather than pause my play to inspect hands I want to think about, I've started copying them into a folder for review after playing. Now if I could just remember to review them after playing :( Once I get into the habit, I guess things ought to be fine. I'm still working on this goal-setting thing, so ... that's my excuse for not doing the reviews yet. If I finish this thing and am still not doing reviews after every session ... I guess I'll have to think up another excuse. JK! Will definitely be following through now that it's on my list!! [/spoiler] D. Doing a Weekly Review to Look for Big Picture Issues

          And these reviews I've been doing on occasion - just not as frequently as once a week. Guess I'll start off doing them once a week, but maybe once a month might be good enough. Will have to see how it goes, since I've never done the daily reviews before ... maybe I'll find them to be really helpful, who knows? [/spoiler] Looking to Minimize Losses A. Focusing More on Folding

          I guess I can just cut 'n paste the notes I made up top of this thread a couple of days ago. Just noticed the other day that so many of the HA hands I've been collected as guides for how to better fold, are hands that I haven't done a very good job of following up with. Compared to the effort I've put into trying to improve betting and raising, I've hardly put any effort at all into trying to implement the suggestions for folding. Probably I don't enjoy folding as much as raising - but it's just as important. So I'm adding this to my list to make sure it stays a priority, so that I can make sure I'm doing the best I can in tricky spots? And really, it should probably be one of my top priorities, both as a study-subject, and at the tables ... because I think I call way, way, way too often when I'm behind, and I think it's a really big - but fixable - leak (is 'fixable' a word? If not, I'll just pretend it is ) [/spoiler] B. Seeking to Improve my Winrate in the Big Blind

          Have really let this one slide, because at least in the sb, against people with 90%+ fts in the bb, a lot of the time there's the chance to pick up dead money without having to play very often post-flop. Whereas in the bb, you're pretty much always going to be required to play post-flop oop (unless we 3bet pre-flop and get a fold). But yesterday I made a concerted effort to play back in the bb, and it went really well. A large part of it might have been because of the fact that I've let defending my blinds in the bb slide for so long, that people were giving me credit for finally having a hand (when I didn't). And it was a short session. So I guess I can't expect things to be like this all the time, but I wanted to post it as a reminder to myself that defending blinds are worth the effort - like there's lots of opportunity there, especially against the cutoff, button, and small blind ... [/spoiler] Conclusion: Summary

          So, I've been working pretty hard at trying to learn new stuff and add it to my game. And thanks to all the amazing resources at PSO, I've had a lot of great stuff to work with, so things have been going pretty well this past year! Managed to learn to turn a profit at 2nl, and even managed to move up stakes, and become a silver star - never thought that would have been possible a year ago. And so in the coming year, I'd like to keep adding to what I've been doing this past year. Have just started to look not just at the cards, but more at the overall situation of player reads, and table dynamics (might not fully be ready for that one until next year ... one thing at a time :)). How I intend to do that will be by: 1. Focusing more on the usage of other HUD stats (in addition to VPIP/PFR ATS) 2. Cleaning up and simplifying my color-coding and note-taking system to make it more effective 3. Following up with a daily review of tricky hands and big pots, to ensure that I'm making the best use of the info that was available at the time 4. Following up with a weekly review to look for big picture issues, like leaks by position, etc. Also, as a top priority, I want to get better at folding – it's been plaguing me since ... forever! And it's really starting to become a bigger issue the better the player pool is becoming. So I don't think it's going to be possible to put it off to deal with another day, for much longer. And besides, it kind of makes me feel bad to keep calling when I think I'm behind - so that's additional reason to really get on this ... And that means keeping up to date with live training videos, and the stuff that's getting posted in HA – I may rely more on other peoples' hands for a while ... lately I've been feeling kind of shy ... I guess that's all for now ... but there always seems to be some new topic that's catching my eye, so I guess this'll be a dynamic list that'll evolve and grow over the course of the year - hopefully as I do!! [/spoiler] Appendix: 10nl

          Set this as my 2013 Time Vault goal - and it's all 'locked in' and stuff now, so ... guess that means I've gotta follow through with it now ... :/ [/spoiler] [/spoiler] [/spoiler] ARCHIVE #2

          Year-End Review and Stuff to Work on in 2013

          Using my HUD to Better Tailor My Moves to the Villain

          (Jan. 30, 2013) Wondering if I Should Simplify My HUD?

          Lately I've been wondering how often I waste time looking over the numbers for reassurance that I don't really need, just so I can feel more confident in my decision? Guess part of it stems from not playing with a HUD right now (which seems to be going okay), and part of it stems from TheAwesomeNW's hand where he got reraised when holding bottom set: NW's Bottom Set Because I didn't feel like one needed HUD stats to know his set was no good? Or if one wanted additional confirmation, probably the only stat that was needed was the AF of 0.6? I've been keeping a lot of stats in my HUD since the AF is the ratio of bets and raises to calls ... guess I get some sort of comfort from being able to see what streets and in which positions the person is raising and calling? But probably in NW's hand, we didn't really need to know all that extra info to know that the villain wasn't raising a ton without solid hands, since an AF of 0.6 is so, soooo low, eh? I wonder if I should simplify my HUD? Here's my current setup: Guess some of those flop stats can come out, like 'donk bet' and 'check raise' since I never use them. And I haven't been using 4-bet either ... maybe at higher stakes it'll be more important and I'll want to put it back in? Will have to see how that goes I guess ... Update (Jan. 31, 2013) Guess it's more than that though ... when all the stats by street and position are on the HUD, I can't help by want to look at stuff like ... for TheAwesomeNW's hand I'd have wanted to look at the villain's turn stat's to get an idea of how aggressive he usually is on the turn. And I'd have wanted to look at his wtsd stats. They'd have probably all reinforced the fact that he doesn't stack off light, but didn't we already know that from his AF? I don't know what the solution is to not spending so much time drowning in HUD stats (once I add my HUD back in). Maybe I should prioritize the info with which I make decisions? Like: 1. Rely on the way the hand's played out 2. Rely on color-coding, player notes, #tables 3. Rely first on top-line HUD stats only (VPIP/PFR/AF/#Hands?) 4. THEN look to the rest, only if uncertainty remains? Will see how it goes when I put my HUD back in I guess ... [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Feb. 16, 2013) Went in the Other Direction - Added Some New Stuff :o Gosh, what's wrong with me? lol Said I wanted to simplify ... and did in fact wind up taking out 'donk bet', and 'check-raise'. But now I've gone and added 5 new stats - AF by street, 'saw turn %', and 'river call efficiency'. Was looking at my Leak Busters program, and it was saying that the 'fold to flop cbet' should ideally be between 46 and 63 ... mine's 36. Something I don't understand though from their explanation is that my Flop cbet % is supposedly fine, but my Flop agg % it says is too high. I'm not sure how that could be ... does that mean the *amount* I'm cbetting is too much? The program gave me a manual to read on cbetting, and how to ensure that it's done profitably, by betting less with a wider range (so long as we think they'll fold because of the board texture or because of their stats), or by betting less frequently with stronger holdings? Seems like kind of an important thing to follow up on ... making sure my cbetting is profitable. And have modified my HUD to try and better keep track of the stats the program's suggesting I try to work on. So here's my current setup - this time with my actual stats from two separate sessions (the one before was somebody else's). Not finding the 'saw turn %' or the 'river call efficiency' very useful - guess I can take those out. But AF by street might be useful for policing myself, if nothing else? Oh shucks ... not going so hot there with the trying to fold more to cbets, and lower my AF by street And then also ... maybe I'm imagining things, but I could swear that a HUD is uniquely suited to helping out with bluffing? Like, for not just knowing who to (semi-)bluff, but also to know who might be bluffing us? Maybe because the HUD collects info on peoples repeat habits a lot faster than we're able to amass notes for any particular player, for various different scenarios? I don't know ... probably I'm just imagining things. But in any case, the 2 things I'm hoping to achieve with my new HUD setup are: 1. To try and improve my own play, in the areas that Leak Busters gave me a grade of 'F' lol! Almost everything else was okay ...), and 2. To try and find stats that will help show who's bluffing, and who to bluff? Without going overboard? Will see how it goes I guess :) (Feb. 16, 2013) Update omg, the Leak Buster program is saying my fold to cbets are too low and my AFs are too high ... does it not like my floating/bluffing? lol Guess the program is thinking maybe this might have been a good spot to fold pre-flop/post-flop since I didn't really have a hand? :o My button winrate used to be good, but lately it's been flat. I guess maybe everything's worth a shot ... otherwise how will I ever know what I'm missing? Will give folding when I don't have much equity a try, and see how that goes for a change I guess ... the program didn't like my 3bet-calling range either lol [/spoiler] Hoping my HUD Can Help With Trouble Spots, Specific to Villain Type A. Problems with TAGs

          1. Staying Too Long in Pots with Weak Holdings (Jan. 27, 2013) Couple of hands against some tight 4-tabling regs, one good one I'm unsure about. Villain 1 - Good Hand: Ahhh ... so thrilled I didn't fall for the 'underbetting' trick - don't see this player doing this with anything lower than a trip, like not even a K (which had me beat as well). Although I'm sure there's probably quite a few people who might advocate a call in this spot, since the price was right. lol my challenge thread seems to have a lot of 'like-minded' readers (ie fellow calling stations), who seem to have a tendency to look at my hands and think my looser calls are 'standard', and that what I should really be worried about is folding 'too much'. Of course, I think I've been guilty of reciprocating in their threads so ... lol guess I'll just have to be careful on both fronts there ... Wouldn't be at all surprised if the villain had AK and just flat-called my 3bet in case both of us called, or I responded with a 4bet. Guess this hand went okay. Villain 2 - Unsure: Had a note that this person is tight and super cautious, and is therefore a good candidate to bluff. So after he checked the turn, I took a shot with my open-ender, with the intent of giving up if called. And so we get to showdown, and zomg ... look what the guy turns over :o Ahhh ... so would a value player I guess choose to play a tighter range against this player rather than a looser one with fall-back outs, with the intent of floating and bluffing? Or would it be more EV to stick with the floating/bluffing, and this was just one time where the villain wasn't going to fold? Kind of hard to do either when my ranging of him wasn't right - what would be the best way to play against somebody who's probably better than me ... I guess avoid playing pots with him, eh? So there's my answer ... Wish I had access to my PT so I could check our history for my weekly review though. Turns out the support guy looks to be okay - guess he was just wary because he gets a lot of people who have a hard time following his instructions, and I was wary because there's so many support people who have a hard time following my explanation? He seems very smart, and he seems happy that i'm not super dumb lol. I guess my thing ought to be up and running as soon as I follow up with that. Maybe I'll try to have that done by next week? Not sure how many hands of history I'll still have though ... [/spoiler] B. Problems with Passives

          1. Loose Passives - Lost Value

          (Jan. 27, 2013) These loose-passives continue to be a thorn in my side ... this has got to be the saddest hand I've had in a long time. lol normally I'd raise pre-flop with *any two*, which is pretty much what I had. But I had this person tagged as a slowplayer, so I thought I'd give showing a little restraint a chance for a change, in case they actually had a relative monster like AJ, etc. I just don't even know how am I supposed to play a hand like this, against a player type like this? Not a big pot, not sure why it's stressing me out so much lol ... guess because this player type isn't uncommon at 5nl. Have to remember all those times I've raised pre and cbet post, only to be called down by somebody with a similar type hand who's hit one of their outs. So maybe it was fine? I don't know ... Will have to continue to keep watch to try and come up with some ideas on what's best I guess ... (Jan. 27, 2013) Update So, is this how a solid TAG would play this type of hand? Or am I just getting completely owned by these limpers with their 80% range, or whatever?? Because it's sure feeling a lot like the latter ... ugggghhhhh :( I don't know ... will keep watching out for ideas I guess ... ___________________________________________ (Jan. 27, 2013) Reminder of why learning to play better against passives might matter?

          So, is there that danger of losing value against passives if we play too passively against them, especially the looser ones? Who don't raise a lot, but play so much junk they might call with worse (or fold better)? Not sure about this hand ... was this river bet too thin, in that they might have just not raised with a K or a better pocket pair like TT? Or were they just not going to call with much worse, like a pair of 7's or pocket 8's? Ahhhh ... thorn in my side .... :/ [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Feb. 5, 2013) Change of Strategy - feel like it's important to take advantage of position? Hopefully this'll be +EV in the long-run? Will have to keep tabs on this now that I've got my HUD back - will have to make sure to look over my play in the bb (blind vs blind) during my weekend review. [/spoiler] 2. Tight Passives - Betting into them When I Have the Worst Hand [/spoiler] C. Casual Players

          1. 3 Streets of Value? 2. But Sometimes Casual Players Can Make Big Hands That Are Well-Masked (Feb. 4, 2013) Took a Light 3-bet to Showdown Curiosity finally got the better of me ... although tilt may have been a factor lol. Am thinking of maybe keeping track of what sorts of hands people are showing down with non-standard bet sizes - and along with HUD stats after I get PokerTracker going again, hopefully I'll be able to detect some patterns about who's tending to bet with what? Am putting this hand here I guess because I'm assuming that this person is a lot like the person before this hand, who hit a 3-outer with J6o. But maybe I should be adding the J6o hand instead - as a reminder that maybe sometimes we don't actually do anything wrong, and that sometimes we'll just lose? Anyways ... guess I'll just add the mini-3bet for now, and think about adding some of the other hands later ... Mini-3bet #1: A9o [/spoiler] D. The LAGs

          Playing back against 3-bets: a) If we're tempted to respond to a light 3bet by pressing the raise button – consider a stop-and-go type play instead as an alternative

          (Jan. 6, 2013) Got the Most Perfect Spot to Call a 3bet With Note: The villain only had 2 hands, and a completely blank HUD, so I relied solely on the 1-tabling, short-stack, and 3bet sizing tells (and possibly my monkey radar? :/) - and managed to flop TP with my KQs, picked up a flush draw in addition on the turn, and had the villain 3bet shove into me on the turn with him holding the worst hand. Only the ending turned out less than ideal, but the rest of the hand was pretty thrilling! This is a spot I totally would have been 4-bet shoving light in the past ... I guess because of the short stack. But why get all the money in the middle when we're just flipping, when we could just call and make sure we have better odds? I think this went well ... [/spoiler] b) If we're tempted to fold or call/check-fold – consider being willing to play for stacks ... it's just a question of when to jack up the pot?   [/spoiler] Looking for Added Value A. Simplifying My Color-Coding and Note-Taking Systems

          (Jan. 10, 2013) From 30 Colors Down to 10

          Well, so I simplified my color-coding system, but must say ... am not too sure if it's changed much either way? So I went back to take a look discussion people were having on color coding during the 6-max challenge. And here's what Sandtrap had to say about his:
          Originally posted by Sandtrap777 View Post
          I have: RED - IDIOT YELLOW - DONKEY LIGHT BLUE - FISH DARK BLUE - GOOD PURPLE - MULTITABLE And of course all the notes on the players
          Guess I thought somebody with a killer winrate might tend to have some sort of killer 'system' at the root of his success? Especially since he doesn't use a HUD. Wonder what's the difference between a 'donkey' and an 'idiot'? lol :o May do more research to see what other sort of ideas are out there? But am kind of getting the sense that maybe nobody's note systems will look like anything special, and that they work because the labels have meaning to that person - so what's effective will be whatever works for us? Here's what I've got for now: Green - TAG, reg, folds Blue - limper, donk bettor, station, plays mediocre hands Mauve - active blinds stealer who gives up easily in the face of resistance Lt. Pink - passive aggressive, slowplayer Light Red - LAG, maniac Dark Red - tight, but also a floater/bluffer Orange - tricky - look at notes Hot Pink - active 3bettor - check pop-up Dark Yellow - lucky/heater (lol - I've always had this ... not sure how reliable/helpful it is?) Lt. Yellow - unlucky/downswing (same as above - questionable usefulness ... ) The orange is new - telling me to check my notes ... it seems to be working well so far ... [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Jan. 11, 2013) Testing Out a New Color Tag Now that I've written down my tags, that lt yellow one looks so stupid lol. Guess it's a hold-over from my time playing STTs where I could swear the variance used to sometimes balance out (like if you won a flip against somebody, they'd win the next one). Meh ... :/ Have decided to switch that one out, and put in a new one ... but I'm not so sure this one'll be that much more useful: Aqua - loose caller, folds to cbets In theory it sounds like it ought to be helpful - but in practice, it seems like people tend to be more extreme? Like either people aren't calling loose. And if they are, they're not folding much post-flop either? Meh ... will see I guess ... Update (Feb. 6, 2013) Meh ... Should I Add a Different One? Haven't been finding this tag very useful - I've given it out to a couple of players, but haven't encountered too many repeat situations. It seems to be far more common for players to play with a tight range, but have trouble folding post-flop with overs like AK? Like a 'stationey-TAG'? Funny thing about that, is that I used to be that. And so I thought nothing of others who struggled to fold the same way I would. Guess it's a real sign of progress that play I used to consider standard from other regs, now strikes me as leaky? So what to do about the new tag? Should I take the other one out to try and keep things simple? Just keep it in for now and add the new one? Or include them both under one? Or put them both under 'look at notes'? I've added the new one for now, but the whole reason I felt the need to add this section on simplifying my color-coding was because things got so out-of-control complicated before when I wasn't vigilant about keeping things simple. Maybe I'll delete the 'calls wide, folds to cbets' tomorrow ... guess I can always put it back in later if I change my mind? ___________________________________________ (Jan. 23, 2013) Just Adding the Link to my 'Primer on Effective Note-Taking'

          Primer on Effective Note-Taking Guess I feel like this one's different from the Flush Primer I put together, since none of the observations/ideas were my own - like it's info anybody could get from watching the vid. Although, I do seem to have a knack for processing large volumes of info, and then distilling it down to a simple plan of action. Hopefully people find that helpful - all like, 10 of the readers of my thread or whatever lol First day there hasn't been any new people sign up for this thing that I've needed to add to the list, or any comments in my thread to respond to. Guess I should use today to make some comments in other peoples' threads for a change? I always like hearing other peoples' stories, and find that interesting to read about, but there's like over 50 ppl participating in this thing ... won't be feasible to drop a note in everybody's thread. Maybe I should just start by checking out what the other Zoom players are up to? Anyways, the changes in note-taking feel good already - kind of a blessing in disguise that my HUD crapped out. Finally heard back from PT support, but I'm not too confident the advice I got was good - not sure why my data should all be lost? So stressful ... maybe I'll just play for a bit and not worry about the HUD since I've gotten used to playing without one ... ehhhh .... :/ Guess that's it for now ... [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Feb. 2, 2013) Was Thinking of Maybe Trying to Use Shorthand Abbreviations for Some of my Notes, But Changed My Mind

          Thought maybe it'd be helpful to shorten some commonly used phrases like using 'gs' for 'gut-shot'. But now that I try things out here in this section, I'm struggling to try and remember what the heck I was trying to say with my shorthand - not two minutes after I wrote the original in long form! That's not good! If I'm struggling to comprehend my shorthand with the long-form written *right there* up above that I wrote not two minutes earlier, it seems unlikely abbreviated notes'll be easy to use in-game when it counts. So ... guess I'll chalk up that *great idea* to my brain-fog/meds Anyways ... on a brighter note, my color-coding and note-taking seems to be coming along nicely. Just last week I was making those notes that were duplicative in some ways (by color-coding a person as loose-passive, and then adding a note that the person was a 'station'), and not helpful in others (due to lack of knowing what info would be key to include for future use). And now I've got a nice little thing going where I'm using the color-coding to show loose-passiveness, and then I'm using the note feature to add details like: "value bet - called pot-sized bet on turn with gut-shot and overs" And I've even had occasion to rely on some of my newer notes, and have been finding them helpful. And then because they've been helpful, I remember all the time now to check my notes. And it's been like a great motivator to keep writing more, and to make sure they're clear and provide guidance on how to best play against the person in the future, etc. So everything's going really well. Had another profitable day :) lol ... this note wound up way shorter than it started off ... [/spoiler] [/spoiler] B. Seeking to Improve my Winrate in the Cutoff C. Conducting Daily Reviews After Every Session

          (Jan. 6, 2013) Probably this note better belongs under 'Folding', but I've decided to be as kind to myself as I am to others for a change, and just chalk today's less than stellar showing at the tables to my shifting of gears away from my old habits towards newer, better ones. And maybe there's even some truth to that :) It really made an impact on me to collect hands in a folder ... and to force myself to collect hands I wish I'd folded. Because they started adding up fast, and there was a lot of repeat mistakes - prior to today, I must have been brushing them off and just moving on in the hopes of having better luck with a new hand? So by the end of the day, I was even able to fold AA post-flop to a reraise. Must admit that was hard - not hard to press the fold button, but hard to be left with uncertainty over whether I did the right thing? I'm sure I did, because the villain's tight (VPIP of 13, 3bet of 0, with a 80% w$sd :o over 82 hands). But you never know for sure if you fold I guess, eh? I guess when pots compound fast by street when we bet-bet-bet, pots in that same way compound fast by street when we call-call-call, so I guess maybe I should be thinking it's a good thing to be folding sooner rather than later if it's feeling like my hand might already be in trouble on the flop? So maybe it's kind of cool that I only lost $0.40 here instead of a lot, lot more ... [/spoiler] D. Doing a Weekly Review to Look for Big Picture Issues

          (Jan. 6, 2013) So here's something I might want to do in my weekly review - look over my play against regs? It seems like that might be an important thing to get used to, if the player pool becomes more concentrated the higher up we go? And a couple of things happened this week to make it seem like it might even be a good idea at 5nl. Situation 1: So somebody this week posted a question about winrates in the blinds - and then mentioned how we've played against each other. So I went back to look through my HUD and it turns out we've played each other a lot! 'pdoenix' has a 94% steal from button rate, and a 100% fold to 3bet on the button rate, so it turns out he's raised into me the last 6 times he was on the button and I was in the bb. And I 3bet him all 6 times - yikes!! :o. I got away with it, but the fact that that happened ... it seems like the two of us must be playing way too much on autopilot and must be doing way too little review (relying too much on my HUD and not player review and notes)? Situation 2: I wound up folding AKo in the sb against 2 regs. The TAG in the c/o had a 2% 3betting range - but it's polarized. And I felt squeezed because I didn't know what to expect from the original raiser. I'm most unsure about the 3bettor, because the LAG is actually very straightforward from EP, and in chat (because we were all talking about our hands) he was saying to the TAG (in polish, which I translated with Google) that he had QQ (on a J high board), and that he was telling him that because he wanted him to know he was good, and that he had him by the (censored), and on and on ... and then the TAG with the 2% 3bet rate said 'lol, okay' and folded - it made me feel like I really misplayed the hand and that the TAG was a lot more of a monkey than I thought? Like maybe there's stuff in his hand histories that aren't showing up in NoteTracker and stuff that might come up in a review, I don't know? Will see how it goes I guess ... EDIT: Just rewatched the hand, and the TAG reraised from mp not the cut-off. And the LAG folded on the flop to another reraise, it wasn't the other way around. Still ... he sounded suspicious too - we must have the same info on the reraiser, although it feels like he had it this time? Will see what's in the HUD! (Jan. 13, 2013) Update Am planning on looking over the HUD stats of a couple of regs tonight who have some strange play. Player 1 - the first one's a Russian 4-tabler, and he's got conventional stats, but I've noticed him doing some strange things before, like raise 98o from mp. And then today, this happened: Is that common for people to do that ... check behind, and then call a raise?? Isn't that a little ... unconventional?? Everybody talks about the Russians being really 'out-there' in a bad way, but I got the impression from his response time that he saw something in my stats that made him believe I would bluff if he checked behind ... which would have been a very accurate read! So I'm thinking it could be interesting to see what else is in this player's history? Player 2 - this guy's got conflicting stats - and then he went and 3bet-shoved when the board paired on the turn and I had the nut flush ... guess it's not always such a bad thing to be a station? My big hand of the day ... hopefully my call was the right thing to do? Might be worth double-checking to make sure? Ahhh ... on second thought, may leave this for tomorrow and go grind for an hour before bedtime ... that'd be fun ... ___________________________________________ (Jan. 20, 2013) Roadmap to Playing Flush Draws Wow, so I got a 'wow' for my analysis in the in my Time Vault thread ... that makes me worry that I must be sharing too much info. Am thinking maybe I ought to really cut down the analysis. And am DEFINITELY keeping this strategy bit tucked away here. It's taken me a gazillion screw-ups to finally get to this point where I sort of feel like I've got a handle on how to better play draws ... so, don't see there being much to gain by sharing this with everybody? And then, I said I was going to try to focus first on the villain's range - but ... are flush draws maybe different in that they're so complicated they might require us analyzing our own hands first? Probably not, but I'm not sure I'm ready to do it by focusing on the villain first ... hopefully that'll come in time? Think my play is better than before though, so hopefully the rest'll follow? Anyways ... Intro So, my HUD crashed ... but I remember sets and flushes being my biggest money-makers out of all the hands? So it's exciting to flop a big draw when we have a suited holding - but maybe it's also worth exercising caution to make sure we're maximizing our chances of getting paid when we hit, and minimizing our losses when we miss (to avoid spew)? Step 1. How Strong is My Draw? a. Weak - just a flush draw and gut-shot b. Strong - open-ended straight draw, flush draw, and 2 overs c. Even* - i) Nut flush draw plus over ii) Flush draw and a pair iii) TP lesser kicker plus flush draw * CAUTION - category c is only true if the person has a pair - all those hands will be Step 2. Board Texture and the Villain's Range You should only be reraising with a flush draw (and straight draw or pair) if: 1. Our holding is 'Strong' (category b) - a holding like this is so strong, it'll even be competitive against sets and straights on the flop (if we have outs to make a better one). And our hand ought to still be competitive on the turn, so we're looking to get the money in before the river because we're favored to win against most hands, and in good shape even if we're behind (with our gazillion outs) 2. The villain is weak, and we have reason to believe we'll get a fold if we raise - here we're leveraging fold equity and are semi-bluffing, but have outs to improve if called. We have to be sure the person will fold though, otherwise we'll be in a bit of a quandary by the turn, with a bloated up pot to boot ... - if the board is suited and connected, we should be very cautious and just call if the price is right, we think our outs are likely good, and there's a good chance we'll get paid off if we hit - if the board is A high and we only have a flush draw and gut-shot, we should just call if the raise is 2/3 the pot on the flop, and less than half a pot-size on the turn - the odds aren't great that we'll get paid off, so we might even want to consider folding on the turn no matter what - if the board is paired, gosh ... I don't know. I guess I'd prefer to be in position, and hope the pot can stay small? Otherwise, ditch the draw and move on? I don't know!! :( Will have to think about this some more ... somebody just posted a hand in HA - might be interesting to see if anybody adds any thoughts/ideas on pursuing flush draws on paired boards? Summary - Areas of Spew to Avoid 1. Tone down the aggro with those flush draws and overs that I get all excited about on the flop!! :o Lately I've been getting my money in behind by calling 4bets when people have been holding stuff like sets, so not all my outs were good. 2. Fold a LOT more on the turn - making flushes by the river those couple of times doesn't seem to be paying of enough to make up for the times they're not hitting. So it would seem to be more EV to just fold? I have to be careful about some of the feedback I might be getting in the Time Vault thread - because sometimes people will give out advice that isn't correct. I don't like giving advice out period unless I'm sure it's right, but oftentimes not everybody is quite so careful? Because I'm pretty sure my JTs fold was good - but hearing that feedback from somebody who also has problems folding made me doubt myself, and then I wound up staying too long in that hand against the quad. That being said, the problem with patience is *all mine* and only mine :(, and I guess the faster we fold, the faster we'll get a hand to make up for the one we just had, like I got here? :) [/spoiler] Looking to Minimize Losses A. Focusing More on Folding

          (Jan. 8, 2013) Improving My Concentration - Playing Fewer Tables

          Cut my tables down to 2 ... was going okay for a couple of days, but may need to cut it down to 1 tomorrow ... This hand was just awful ... auto-called a 3bet by accident, then went into auto-pilot and forgot all about trying to play more conservatively - think the villain had something like TT or JJ? Wish I played in a way where I felt proud of my play - and I think folding more would make me feel that way. So hopefully that'll come with practice. If I could concentrate, which hasn't really been there ... (Jan. 13, 2013) Update Wow, so I've been running really bad ... playing even worse. Guess having a stop-loss could have prevented the free-fall, but that's never happened before. And I actually did want to play - so maybe I'll just chalk it up to 'entertainment costs' like Effsea does. Cheaper than a new purse I don't need I guess ... well, it's close ... :/ The one-tabling seems to be helping - the amount of extra detail I'm noticing is incredible. I'm starting to wonder if I should maybe be going back to two tables permanently. But that means a lot more grinding time. I don't know if it'll be possible to make 500VPPs by one-tabling. Is that important? I don't know ... seems like maybe I should be able to play 2 tables just fine. So I guess I'll try that today and see how it goes - need to make up quite a bit of ground ... [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Jan. 10, 2013) Shifting Focus Towards Ranging the Villain

          So there was this HA I just retooled yesterday, titled, 'Set Against Horrible River', and in the answer there was this:
          Originally posted by GarethC23 View Post
          Hey Craig ... I like how this title indicates you are battling against the river card in this hand, not the opponent
          And I've looked at that a bunch of times ... it never occurred to me that that was how I was thinking of laydowns - in terms of (1) My hand, which looked so promising on previous streets, and (2) The board. Didn't ever notice that I had titled all the hands in Section 2 in terms of the hands I was having a hard time folding. And then *just* yesterday I went and retitled the section in terms of the board. I guess we're supposed to be focused first on the raising action of the villain? Like, the order's *supposed* to be: (1) Villain's range (2) In light of board texture (3) And so how does our hand compare? Whereas I've been: (1) Looking at my hand (2) And then the scary board (3) .. And then, well, I must do still do the ranging, but by then it's kind of besides the point when I've already decided I want to call? lol Guess it must be pretty common for a lot of us to get wrapped up in the strength of our own hand, rather than its strength relative to the villains' likely holdings? So that's kind of a big breakthrough to be shifting focus - away from my hand, and onto the villain. Seems like that should help make it easier to let stuff go ... to be thinking more about the straight I'm up against, rather than the set I've got that used to be good? I guess? Hopefully? We'll see ... (Jan. 13, 2013) Update So I only started reorganizing the 'Fold' Collection of HA hands yesterday. But I'm reorganizing it to reflect my shift in focus onto the villain's actions (in light of the board), and what type of hand such action is likely to represent. Before thinking of how my hand compares to theirs. And it's already started to help - can't believe it. I mean like it felt like a really big breakthrough and all, but the change was pretty drastic. Had a villain with an AF of 0 make a HUGE reraise post-flop on a T high board. So it seemed like a pretty clear-cut fold ... with my KK!! umbup: (have to use one of my precious 65 smilies to celebrate that little accomplishment! Yay, me!!) The big breakthrough is that it didn't seem like all that big a deal - because just a week ago in Section C above (Conducting Daily Reviews), I couldn't stop whining about how hard it was to fold AA to a reraise. It just didn't seem like that big a deal today since the villain had such a strong hand - way better than a pair I'm sure. That being said, I had another hand today where I bet ... and wasn't able to muster a fold. I'm not going to post it and just say I did, because I can't stand to look at it lol! It was so rife with mistakes, it'd just be distracting. But there was a bunch of stuff to do with my call on the river that might be worth mentioning. So I made a half-pot bet the river with a straight in the bb, got reraised by the button and called off the rest of my stack (same size as the half-bet) with 3 to a flush on the board ... even though it felt like I was probably beat. But it felt like maybe a fold in this situation might be a little more 'advanced' than the one above? For a bunch of reasons: - with the villain being a complete blank, my focus reverted back to my own hand strength - my straight here was a lot stronger than my pair in the previous hand - there was only a 'little' bit left I would have to call to see showdown - I always experience a wee bit of insta-tilt when I sense that the person outdrew me by ignoring pot odds on the turn - since the villain reraised on the flop, he was either semi-bluffing on the flop, or semi-bluffing on the river ... maybe sometimes I see what I want to see? So I guess those are things I'll have to really watch out for going forward ... but it feels like I made progress today, so that felt really good ... [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Jan. 10, 2013) Bet-Fold or Check-Fold ... What to Do?

          My library of hands from HA seems to be devoted largely to this one subject alone (bet-folding/check-folding) - maybe because it's just so common when playing oop to wind up unsure of where we stand in comparison to the villain, with the board being so wet, holding a hand of middling strength? Some general themes I've culled from looking over all those HA hands?: 1) Wetter boards (middling strength, flush draws, straight draws, paired board) - maybe we might want to be more inclined to check(-fold)? 2) Stronger holdings - maybe we might want to be more inclined to bet(-fold)? 3) Passive players who tend to check behind - we can check to them more often and not have to worry about getting bluffed 4) Tighter players who will only reraise with better and fold worse - we can check or bet and not worry too much about folding if raised? 5) Floater/bluffers - maybe it's better to bet out with a wider range? 6) Looser players - same (since they're calling ranges will be wider?) That being said ... I'm *still* not at all sure about this hand here: So I went check-bet-check ... Maybe it would have been better to go bet-check-check? Or check-check-bet? Check-check-check? Although I'm more confused than ever, have to remember that before, I used to bet-bet-check ... which is by far the worst of all possible lines I'm sure. lol ... so like, there's been progress there, there has ... umbup: Guess that's enough for tonight ... I'm tired ... (Jan. 13, 2013) Update Tried out my idea to mini-bet today and didn't like it in practice nearly as much as I did in theory. Because I got reraised, and then couldn't tell if the person was doing it for value, or whether they were just responding to me not seeming too keen on my hand?? :/ Think I'll just stick to the 5nl standard for now, which is usually half-pot or greater? [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Jan. 27, 2013) January Month-End Assessment

          Here's a hand that kind of represents how my folding's coming along a month in, with my focuses (is that the plural for focus?) on trying to: 1. use better player reads 2. fold earlier to try and avoid tricky situations on later streets with bloated pots - especially out of position, without initiative So I won the hand because it turns out the villain was a maniac/bluffer - which was NOT the read I put him on based on his one-tabling and mini-donk oop into 3 of us. I figured his flop bet to be a semi-bluff with like a flush draw - so even if I was getting a good price to continue, it feels like a bad move on my part to call with just an open-ender (and possibly 2 overs with outs)? And then the flush hit on the turn, so why did I call his turn bet after I made my straight? This just seems like spew. The sticky part is that every time I make bad calls, and it turns out the person had complete air, there's that extra temptation the next time to look a person up, because the *last time* the person had air. I don't know if at 5nl people are bluffing enough of the time for bluff-catching to be +EV? Maybe the only flops I should have been willing to continue with was with TP on a dry board, if the pot could stay small? Or if I flopped an open-ender AND a flush draw? Something to watch out for!! Work in progress I guess ... [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Jan. 30, 2013) Struggling to Make Sense of the 'Mini-3-Bet'

          Ahhh ... so the following 3 hands are the kind of stuff I was hoping to be able to post in the Time Vault Challenge thread, but keeping up with responses seems to be taking a awful lot of time. Have modified my goals on the first page to include spending less time in that thread (lol!) and more time playing and studying. So I guess I'll just keep track of stuff here instead? Will try to keep the hands to a minimum and stick to general themes I guess? Hand 1 - I really screwed up with this hand - playing oop is just the worst. First thing I forgot to do is check the lobby to see how many tables this person was playing. So that was my first mistake. And when I went back to check after the hand was over, the person was already gone. And then, maybe I should have just called the min-3bet to try and keep the person's range wide? And then check-folded to his cbet when I missed? I'm so frustrated with myself, because instead of only losing $0.25, I wound up losing almost a dollar. Looking back on the hand I think the villain had TT? Hope I'm not getting results-oriented, because what if the A or K had come on the flop? But the chance of that happening was only 33% I guess, is that right? So if AK gets 3bet, oop, maybe I should have been looking to keep the pot small or get out? The other alternative would have been to cbet after I 4bet, but that seems like the worst option of all? Hand 2 - Another mini-3bet into my utg raise. Not sure if I should have even called this, because A9s is at the absolute bottom end of my range. What do these people have when they do this?? I noticed he had a short stack, but again forgot to check the lobby in the moment to see how many tables this person was playing - later I did, and he was just playing one. Not sure if my post-flop play was something most people would do? I didn't think TT or 22 would play this way, so I pretended to have one of those hands? And then I had outs if called ... here I put the villain on some sort of smaller pocket pair like maybe 77 or something? Hand 3 - well this hand here shows that reads are everything. The button here is a known TAG 4-tabling reg, so the mini-4bet was obviously KK or AA, which meant I was done with the hand. Guess the big lesson to be learned from these hands is to remember to check the lobby next time I wind up in some non-standard situation? Maybe that would have shown that the villain in the first hand was more experienced? And it would have confirmed that the second was more of a monkey? Am going to try really hard to remember when I play now ... [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Jan. 30, 2013) Hope Folding My Set Was the Right Thing to Do?

          I had bottom set on the flop, and the turn bet was just so confident. And then, oh ... I swear by this, but any time anybody talks while I'm tanking, they *always* have it! Especially in Zoom ... who talks in zoom? This hand is soooo not going in my Time Vault Thread, because nobody's going to agree with my fold here, but I don't see this person doing this with anything other than 88? Oh, and forgot to check the # of tables *again* ... d'oh!! Just checked - it's a 4-tabler ... with a big stack. I think he had the 88. I like my fold, even though probably nobody else would lol ... Update Had peoples' VIP status turned off after they added Chrome star because I found the extra star confusing - like, oh wow, that person has THREE stars, they must be good ... until I would remember that I have 3 stars and I suck LOL!! Anyways ... just turned the VIP status thingie back on, and the person I folded my 77 set to is a gold-star. And most of us at 5nl either have our stars turned off, and/or are Silver. So ... like is a 4-tabling Gold star really playing A8 out of position? He had to have had 88, right? I think so ... Ahhh ... that's the only thing about folding more - you don't get to know for sure ... but I feel like, 95% sure my fold was good, I guess? Have to, have to try super hard to remember to look at the lobby for the number of tables people are playing WHILE we're in the middle of the hand ... will try to get better at that by the end of the day ... [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Jan. 31, 2013) Hope Folding Was the Right Thing to Do, Part 2 Today I folded a boat to what I think was a better boat. The key breakthrough though was that I remembered to check the lobby to see the number of tables the two villains were playing DURING the hand, so I had that info before I bet the flop. Guess it was kind of hard to forget to check with that huge bright red note I had in the corner of the screen reminding me not to Anyways ... the info was key because I put the villain in the bb on either a pocket pair (better or worse), or two overs when he called. So I checked behind on the turn since there was a 50% chance somebody with 2 overs just hit one of of their 6 outs. And then when the villain donked out on the river ... like 77 I guess would be ahead of 44,55,66, and behind 88,99,TT, and also a J if the villain called the flop with 2 overs? I guess it's possible the villain was betting large on the river with worse, but given the 1-tabling, it just felt more like he had the J, didn't it? So ... things are coming along really nicely. Something really, really important I forgot to add yesterday is that if I had gone to showdown with my set of 7's - and lost - I wouldn't have been profitable yesterday. And if I had called this river bet today with my boat, and lost, I wouldn't have been profitable today. Like, I've been feeling for a really long time that my inability to fold when behind was preventing me from showing a profit when instead I've been breakeven - guess last two days has shown that to indeed be the case. Guess it can be pretty hard to turn a profit, even at 5nl. Wow, I'm so tired ... guess I can finally go to bed now since i've done everything on my list ... [/spoiler] B. Seeking to Improve my Winrate in the Big Blind

          (Jan. 8, 2013, updated Feb. 16, 2013) Move from Live Training

          Not sure why I didn't include the citation, but I'm pretty sure it's Ep. 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 17, 2012? Will have to check my notes and add the citation in later. Anyways ... the move is to bet out on the turn with 2 overs, after everybody has checked behind on the flop. Shucks, why haven't I been reading my own blog more often? I totally forgot about this move ... so much lost value :( Note: First time trying to do this - it felt very scary to bet out into two people with possibly just like, 9% equity against a pair, or what have you? But all these moves always wind up working, always ... Probably made things worse by forgetting to look at the opponents ... guess I was a little out of it. Lucky for me that turned out okay, since it's mostly tight regs in the pool tonight ... [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Feb. 16, 2013) Adding my Notes from the 'Live Training' Section up Above (Section 3)

          What's special about the big blind is that it's last to act pre-flop. And if the pre-flop raiser c-bets post-flop, the big blind will also be last to act post-flop as well. a) Being last to act has some advantages - being last to act pre-flop (if nobody's 3bet) means that we don't have to worry about getting squeezed, the way we might if we just called in the sb. So we're guaranteed to see a flop if we call - and being last to act post-flop (if nobody's 3bet the original raiser's cbet, assuming there's a cbet) means we'll get to see how the rest of the table responds, and would then have the option of check-raising the original raiser, which could put a lot of pressure on them - this works great with draw (see ep. 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 17, 2012, @18:00) b) Other things we can do from the bb - is lead out in multiway pots with strong draws that are too weak to call (with no sdv), and have too little fold equity to check-raise with - or we can lead out on the turn into passive opponents who have checked behind on the flop - this works well with hands like 2 overs - and we can squeeze - also, if it's blind vs blind, we have position - and we can 3-bet into active blinds-stealers who tend to fold when people play back
          [/spoiler] ____________________________________________ (Feb. 16, 2013) Feedback from my LeakBuster Program

          Not sure why I never added this, but from Live Training, we got the tip that the type of hands that are okay to call blinds-steal raises with are hands that tend to play well out of position ... those that are: - high-valued - suited - connected Because hands like JTs, QJs, KQs can build strong hands in a lot of different ways, by making top pair with a solid kicker, or by flopping strong draws. And so yesterday, when I ran my Leak Buster program, I found out I haven't been doing as well playing KTo and QTo oop. Those are hands I only play oop in the blinds, so I guess for ME in particular, I should be tightening up my range of high-value/suited/connected hands and let go of the bottom end of my range for now? The problem for me is that I've been misplaying them. Thought it was like bad manners or something to donk out, but then the other day I was watching the second episode of 'The Biggest Blind' (Oct. 18, 2012) and Gareth said it was okay to lead out with draws. Or check-raise, which was another one of the Leak Buster recommendations. So, not sure if this was what either Live Training or Leak Busters was suggesting we do out of the blinds, but it seems to suit my style, so ... *hope* that was okay? :D I'd really like to improve my winrate in the bb ... it's *okay*, but it feels like I there's a lot of room for improvement? Something that's interesting to think about when it comes to the bb and zoom, is whether spending that extra time waiting for the hand to come around, and then playing out of position ... like even if putting in that extra time ups one's bb/100, there's also that option of folding sooner rather than later in the bb, and just moving on to better hands, in position? Not something to worry about yet though, like first things first. Think I'd like to make this my project for the rest of February - just trying to do my best to see what I can do in the bb. And I'll need to tone down the monkey spew ... who knows, maybe that alone'll wind up helping a bunch, who knows!! Will see how it goes :) [/spoiler] ____________________________________________ (Feb. 25, 2013) Feel Like I'm Playing too Recklessly in the Big Blind Part of me feels like I deserved to loose my stack with this hand for choosing to play Q6s against an unknown. The larger problem I'm starting to worry about, is that I've started to develop the habit of playing like this in the bb, even when I was running fine up at 10nl. It feels like a good player wouldn't play the way I do, like I'm way too reckless :( [/spoiler] Dealing With a Prolonged Downswing

          (Mar. 10, 2013) Intro

          So wow, thought that 25,000 downswing I had at 2nl was bad ... this latest one I had at 5nl of over 50,000 hands of break-even/slow-bleed/downswing/running-under-EV ... never had one last that long before - it really put my coping mechanisms to the test. And maybe there'll be even longer ones in the future! Which is why I want to try and remember the stuff I did that helped keep my sanity. In terms of adjusting volume - I've tried speeding up before, to try to get over the hump faster, and so this time I tried slowing down. And both felt equally bad. And I think both equally hurt my win-rate due to tilt I couldn't effectively mitigate. So ... guess there's no magic bullet in terms of volume - maybe it's just whatever we feel like playing (or not playing)? Adjusting VPIP might be one area to possibly modify next time - because both this time and the last time, I kept mine around 17 to 19%, which is about my normal rate. Even when I wasn't getting good cards. So maybe this was a mistake, but the blinds come around so fast, and so it seemed like maybe by playing in position there'd be some opportunity to offset those costs? Except I guess the thing about downswings is that sometimes it's not just about not getting good cards, and not making good hands ... sometimes it seems like everybody else is hitting the tops of their ranges, such that there's not only not very much real equity, there's not a lot of fold equity either? Will have to see how folding more goes next time and if things wind up better or worse? Like was I trying too hard to make something happen out of nothing? One bright side to prolonged downswings is that gosh there seems to be no better motivator for improving one's game - it felt good to try and do 'something' by watching videos and looking over hand histories. Looking over hand histories wasn't as much as an eye-opener as it was during my 2nl downswing, since I've been doing a daily review since the beginning of the new year, and since I'm not a noob to cash games any more. But watching more vids was a big help, with all the new zoom videos. Still going through some of them to make my detailed notes - so, there's still more left for next time And I guess just taking breaks away from poker was helpful too - maybe not thinking about trouble spots at all for like a week is helpful for coming back and seeing things from a fresh perspective? There's other stuff that people do too - doesn't Ovalman sometimes just go and play on other sites? And there was somebody else who's doing the Time Vault thingie who plays both SNGs and Cash Games, who'll only play wherever he's doing well ... was it Paul? Guess those are a couple of other alternatives. Except I only like to play here, and SNGs take so long - maybe I'll just stick with cash, but then again maybe I only say that now because my downswing is over lol. Oh yes, it is!! [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Mar. 26, 2013) Demonstration From Live Training on How To Play When Card-Dead So, WOW - I'm definitely trying way too hard to try and make something happen when card-dead. Gareth didn't play much at all when the cards weren't there - there weren't any float/bluffs in the bb, blind vs blind with 37o, etc. And he still managed to wind up almost a buy-in. Am thinking I'll probably need to rewatch how to do things when the variance takes a turn, so before trying to push through the next downswing, I'll definitely need to rewatch the section on 10nl from the following vid, so I don't wind up making things worse: How to Exercise Patience During a Downswing: See (Ep. 'Zoom On', March 24, 2013 - @34:45 to @1:10:30) Hey, it's almost time for my 5FPP Omaha tourney - and wow, I managed to get all of one note down. Glad to see I'm making efficient use of my time Then again, I probably won't last long, so ... lol ... ought to be back soon. On second thought, why don't I do both? umbup: [/spoiler] Summary

          (Jan. 27, 2013) January Month-End Assessment

          So, a month in, and it looks like I`ve managed to stick pretty well to my big picture goals of: 1. Becoming more conscious of player reads 2. Using folding to maximize EV 3. Conducting daily and weekly reviews So I'm happy about that - I guess sometimes in the day-to-day it can be easy to fall back into old habits? Just need to remain on the lookout for that I guess? (note to self - turn off french keyboard is rhs EDIT: Now it's lhs rhs !) [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Feb. 17, 2013) Summary of Stuff to Work on Next

          1. Ranging a) start pre-flop with a range b) then start narrowing that range down as play progresses by street 2. Big Blind – the '2nd Button' a) Utg opponents – check-raise with draws b) Late position loose stealers i. with high double-barrel % - call with hands that flop well, that'll tend to be ahead of their range ii. with high fold-to-3bet % - 3-bet light (polarized range) iii. with low fold-to-3bet % - 3-bet wide (merged range) iii. with otherwise nitty stats - resteal post-flop by stealing back the lead with a bet c) Passive opponents – lead out turn with overs d) Limpers – squeeze e) Sb – play as many of these as you can 3. Developing Player Reads a) CHECK NUMBER OF TABLES [/spoiler] [/spoiler] [/spoiler] HA Hands

          Catalog of Follow Up Hands to my HA Submissions

          Betting 1. Still looking for a hand to add on cbetting, where the turn card coordinates with the flop
          (Jan. 27, 2013) Where and how much should I have been c-betting? Or not?: Note: Should I have checked the flop instead? Check-call if raised? Check-fold? Good check on the turn? Good bet on the river? Or too thin? And if it was fine, what about the sizing - too big? Too small? I'd like to think I'd have remembered to fold if raised, but I'm not sure I was prepared for that scenario, since I had it in my mind that the person wasn't that strong after checking behind on the turn. Think that might have been a mistake not to at least keep that in mind as a possibility. Ahhh ... so much to work on ...
          2. JJ - bet-folding after the river's made our strong hand more of middling strength and we're no longer sure where we stand

          (Nov. 12, 2012) Runner runner 2pr, super ugly board, multiway limped pot: Note: D'oh! When the river hit, I just *knew* my 2pr was no good - so counterintuitive though to be raising when we think we're beat. Will have to try and see bet-folding as a way to save chips since I call all the time anyways :/ Update ((Dec. 31, 2012): Wow, I really don't like my turn bet - if I had just checked the turn, probably the original raiser would have bet, and then I could have just folded and saved myself the river bet-fold (which I didn't do, but which would have been better than the check-call I made. Oh well, very old hand - I've improved a ton!)
          (Nov. 24, 2012) Donk-bet-folded to a reraise on a paired board with a weak overpair: Note (updated Dec. 31, 2012): Oh, this hand's obsolete - I'd never donk out like that today. Looks like I was up against a better overpair, so I guess the fold was good though
          (Nov. 24, 2012) My first success at betting with the intention of folding to a reraise - 2 streets (turn and river): Note: So, wow ... thought for sure I was behind, and bet the river thinking I was going to get reraised and would have to fold - and wound up winning the hand. Really dodged a bullet there! I think maybe my turn raise was too large :/ But how cool was that to get value on all 3 streets? I wish I had bet the turn smaller, and then I could have folded to a reraise at any time since the board got so scary ... Update (Dec. 31, 2012): Yikes - turn raise was definitely too large. I'm not making them that big any more. See similar hand below where I bet-fold
          (Dec. 31, 2012) Bet out into an ugly board with the intention of folding to a reraise ... and I followed through!: Note: Nothing special about this hand - but contrasting it to the last one I think really serves to highlight the importance of continuing to bet out with a middling strength hand that could still be good, as I did in the last one. Because without picking up that extra value when I have the best hand, just imagine how much harder it would it be to make up for times like here when my good hands like QQ are getting beat? I really, really, really like the bet-fold now that I'm used to it - not just because of all that extra value I've been picking up when I'm still ahead, but also because it has so much more certitude to it than a check-fold. And it's so much cheaper than a check-call. So progress has been pretty rapid :)
          (Nov. 27, 2012) Live Training Demonstration of Value Betting with a Middling Hand, with the Intent of Folding to a Reraise (Ep. 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 17, 2012, @47:00) hand: Ks7s (for class) board: Ah 7h 7d As Tc Note: Wow ... so the value Gareth's getting out of some of the most akward spots is incredible in this session. It's just unlike anything you'll ever see at 5nl, where we're all just holding our breath in spots like this, hoping to get to see a cheap showdown. I guess when you've got a middling holding, and bet with the intention of folding ... and are able to follow through by folding (!), then that makes possible all these other opportunities. Once we recognize that there's value to be had I guess ... which isn't something I've noticed much since it takes all my effort to try and fold when I should. So I wonder how hard/easy it'll be to spot these types of spots where we should be betting again rather than trying to get to showdown for cheap? I guess like everything it's gonna take more some practice, eh?
          (Dec. 24, 2012) This hand's just like the Live Training one up above ...: Note: ... only, not. Sometimes it gets hard to separate the play from the results ... on one level, it feels like I must have played this hand okay? Didn't I play it just like in the live training demo (more or less)? On another level, I didn't win, so ... it's very confusing. Hopefully next time I bet I'll get called and win a nice little pot and feel more confident that I'm going in the right direction ... not really feeling that way right now ...
          (Dec. 31, 2012) Update to above - so I've been getting some nice results lately ... on some pretty ugly boards too: Note: Here I bet with the intent of folding on both the turn and the river - and instead had my raise on the river met with a fold. The frequency at which people are calling my bets on such ugly boards, and then folding or going to show down with worse as been downright shocking to me! It's really got me wondering how many times I've check-folded and been bluffed off the best hand. Oh well, I know how to play better now :)
          (Dec. 31, 2012) Tricky Spot #1 - 3 broadways on the flop, 4 to a straight on the turn, paired board on the river: Note: Is there ever a time the board is SO ugly, that we don't even want to bet-fold, but just check-fold? Note - check the villain's stats and add later
          (Dec. 31, 2012) Tricky Spot #2 - bet with the intent of folding on the river from middle position into 3 people, after it's been checked around 2 streets ... with A high: Note: Too thin? :D
          [/spoiler] 3. AKs - how to get the money in the middle when deep-stacked

          (Dec. 19, 2012)Damm ... really bungled this one up badly :/ Note: It's been so long since I've actually had a hand like this, I got used to needing to try to keep people in rather than value-betting. The villain tanked forever on the river - think him having the Ah tilted things in my favor ... as well as my silent begging to the poker gods for a call ('please, please!'). That being said, I'm not even sure where I should have started jacking up the pot - flop? more on turn? They're so busy in HA I don't want to ask ... I don't know ... :/
          [/spoiler] 4. QTs - getting maximum value out of a strong flopped hand oop
          a) (Nov. 5, 2012) Calling a Reraise, Not Letting Up on the Gas : Note: Really happy with this one - think it turned out well :)
          (Jan. 27, 2013) Think I'm *still* underbetting?: Note: Gosh, after getting a look at the hand the bb called to the river with, I'm totally kicking myself for not having bet larger on the flop and turn. Maybe since this flop was both suited, AND connected, I could have gotten away with more? Something I've never stopped to take note of before? That being said, I *only* had 2nd nuts, and since 97s was in this person's range, I could have been raising larger and drawing dead, so ... :/ Guess I'm doing better at value betting right out of the gate and not letting up than I did before, so maybe I should make a note of that too ... that there's been progress :)
          (Jan. 28, 2013) Live Training Demonstration of Maximizing Value with a Flopped Nut Flush (Ep. 'MicroZOOMing', Aug. 30, 2012, @19:30 hand: Td Ad board: 8d 4d Qd 5s 9h Note: Can't sit still ... picked this Wed. edition Zoom class to hopefully see lots of folding (which there was in fact lots of), and wound up running into this hand which was so similar to the one I just had (with a middling-valued, semi-connected flop). So the betting idea here was to: 1. Bet medium on the flop (63%) 2. A little bit bigger on the turn (74% - not too small, but not too big), and 3. Bet really big on the river (92% - close to pot, because worse made hands will call, but all missed draws will fold) In the live training hand, JT and 76 would have made a straight on the river - and the villain wound up calling that huge river bet with Q9 (2pr). So looking back at my hand, where I think I used my 66% hot-key, I bet: 1. 63% (round-off) 2. 63% (yikes - round-off again! Rounded down!! :() 3. 74% (round-off - rounded up this time) Wow, never realized there was so much variance with the hot-key round-off. Those keys are really handy, but looks like maybe it's worth it to just type in the amount or use the bet-slider? Maybe that's something to experiment with? Oh ... forgot to add the note I had on the villain in the hand above - will have to fetch it from my notes another time, but in case I forget, apparently I tried to bluff the villain off a double-paired board on the river, and he check-raised me, and then I called his check-raise ... and we wound up splitting the pot with our tied A kickers. So he surely must have made a note of how much of a monkey I am lol. Really have to start remembering to check my notes, because given our history, he more than anybody probably would have been willing to call bigger bets. Even so though, I doubt I'd have ever gone as high as 74% and 92% on the turn and river, so I guess that's the main thing to note - is just how much bigger I should be making my bets with flopped nut flushes. I guess now I know ... could tell I was still losing value ... I guess that's it ... feels like there's something more I wanted to say, but now I can't remember ...
          5. KK - Trying to Extract Maximum Value by Trying to Keep People *IN* the Pot

          (Dec. 6, 2012) Live Training Demonstration of Value Betting to Try and Keep People in the Pot as a Way to Maximize Value (Ep. 'Value in All the Right Places', Oct. 31, 2012, @00:30 hand: 3d 3s board: Ac 3h 4d 6c Jh Note: See also Live Training Demonstration of Value Betting to Try and Keep People in the Pot When You've Got the Board Locked Up (Ep. 'Staying Aggressive', Nov. 14, 2012, @28:20 hand: Ah As board: Js Ad 5c 2h
          (Dec. 24, 2012) This one worked out so perfectly ... : Note: I remembered everything this time - to range people for 2nd best hands that might call ... granted, that's not so hard to do when there's only 2 different cards on the board and one's an A. But still ... and then I remembered to not let up on the gas. This is the kind of hand I used to only be able to make about $2.70 off of, if I didn't get help from the opponent via a reraise - was always so scared somebody could tell I had a quad if I raised too much (lol), so jamming the river was out of the question Think winning this hand was probably better than getting a visit from Santa! Always feels better to earn something I guess ... and I've been working really hard to try and get better. Kinda sucks that I'm impatient as all heck, get bored and gamble too much, am always curious to see what other people are holding, etc etc, hence progress is slow-going ... but I guess I am getting better ... Hoping to be able to sneak some hands in on my mobile app tomorrow while we're all sitting around (not) watching football ... :D
          [/spoiler] Folding 1. AKo - playing TP oop when it could be behind

          a) (Nov. 13, 2012) Check-Fold Failure #1: Note: Ugh ... lemme thing about this one some more - so much fail in just one hand ... where to start? :/
          [/spoiler] Checking and Calling 1. 99 - how to play against an awkward-sized short-stack on the turn with a strong draw

          (Nov. 15, 2012) Found a 'Different' Way to Play Short-stacks oop ... lool Note: Step forward or step back? Maybe a bit too reckless? :(
          [/spoiler] [/spoiler] Catalog of HA Submissions - Other Peoples' Hands That are a Lot Like Mine

          Betting 1. Taking Back the Initiative After Somebody's Donked Out

          (Dec. 3, 2012) Live Training Demonstration Reraising into a Donk Better Rather Than Just Calling (Ep. 'Adventures in 5nl Zoom', Sept. 5, 2012, @26 Note: So, wow ... I guess the hand was too weak to call and just play for value - but it had lots of potential, when combined with the weakness that was shown by the donk better (is it 'better' or 'bettor'? :/)? There were two backdoor draws, as well as two overs - and also the potential for a scare card to come, so there was likely going to be more fold equity on the turn too? Wow ...
          (Dec. 3, 2012) D'oh! Note: I don't know what happened :D ... guess I forgot about all the stuff I learned yesterday for a minute. Next time :)
          (Dec. 3, 2012) Faced a Check-Raise Rather than a Donk Bet (but the person was just on a draw) Note: Darn, can't help but feel like I misplayed this in some way :( Told myself I was going to try to give check-raises more credit - but my NoteTracker had something about this person playing draws aggressively, and I guess that was all the excuse I needed to keep going lol. Maybe I was supposed to raise the turn once the sb didn't continue the betting on the next street? So much to learn with this game ... I don't think I'll be ready to leave 5nl for another 200,000 hands! And so tired tonight ... maybe I'll stop to make a pot of chili and watch some training vids instead of playing ...
          (Dec. 12, 2012) One Good One ... Note: Small donk bets, dry board
          (Dec. 12, 2012) ... And One Not-So Good One Note: Was scared to re-open betting - maybe I lost value there? :( It's always a little bit startling when somebody does that out of nowhere ...
          (Dec. 12, 2012) More Donkaliciousness Note: Since this move is so new, I keep imagining that one of these times, somebody who's persistent with their donk bets will have flopped the nuts and I'll have just value-towned myself. But it's starting to look like those fears may be unfounded:D ... oh well about the ending - very happy with the way the hand played out ...
          [/spoiler] Folding I. In Response to River Action From Villain - Bet/Reraise/Check-raise - by Villain Type a) TAG with Low wtsd, high w$sd - 4 to a Straight - especially in the 8-Q range
          (Jan. 9, 2013) Player new to the pool had high w$sd, board had 3 to a straight + flush, board was paired Note: So it's okay to check-fold on the river - we don't have to cbet every time ... I've been wondering for the longest time whether there are some situations where it just seems so likely that we're beat, that it's okay to just check-fold ... and it turns out the answer was there in the original hand all-along. Just didn't notice until it got repeated in NW's hand the other day - there seems to be a lot of repetition in the HA section, so I'm glad I'm keeping track of progress and stuff, so the next time a similar hand comes up I can focus on a different aspect of the analysis and learn something new I guess ... This river bet felt like spew. In keeping with my pledge to start thinking less of my TP holdings on the turn if called, especially if the board pairs, was on alert by the river and only bet a bit ... which looks like it was 'a bit' too much still lol. Guess I got so retrained into bet-folding that now I've got to add check-folding back in so I'll have lots of options and will be able to practice picking the right one for each situation. Guess there's always the chance this villain was bluffing like the one NW was against, but mine had those stats I was telling NW about - maniac-looking, but with a 100% w$sd in like only 53 hands or so. I think he was just on a heater, so I'm not too worried about having gotten bluffed ... looks like he had 99, or even TT? Update (Jan. 31, 2013) When I've been watching videos, I don't think I've been paying enough attention the process of ranging with the intention of knowing what worse hands the villain is likely to call a river-bet with (and what better the villain is likely to reraise with). I think I've just been betting with middling strength hands - and here I didn't even have that, so this river bet was just awful. Guess at the time I was hoping my raise would prevent the villain from bluffing if he was floating?? Sounds so silly to say now, what with the board being so wet - yikes! Oh well, guess the most important takeaway is to remember to watch out for ranging next time I watch a vid ...
          b) Calling Station - 4-to-a-Straight on the board
          (Dec. 2, 2012) It's Not Like I Didn't See the Straight Draw Complete ... it was just so hard to believe a person would have called 2 streets with just a straight draw? :/   Note: D'OH!  The limp-calling should have been the big red flag, and then the calling and calling.    But maybe too I should have bet larger on the turn?  Although I would have still wanted a call, so it couldn't have been too large ... ughhh ... have to think of a way to let these better-than-a-pair hands go when it's obvious they've been outdrawn on the river by a miracle card ... should be able to think of something! :)  Update : See also Live Training (Ep. 'Adventures in 5nl Zoom', Sept. 5, 2012, @12:30-17:00 - so omg, apparently this was a classic bet-fold situation (emphasis on the 'fold' :/).  Because I still had half my stack left (50bbs, or $2.50) - that's no small amount to be calling off, eh? So like, maybe that's another thing to try and take note of before pressing the call button?  Is how great it would be to be able to salvage half a buy-in - I'll have to try really hard to remember to think of folding in terms of chips saved? Also, I forgot to remember to give more credit to check-raises and reraises that aren't coming from the cutoff, button, or blinds, where it's more common for people to try to pull all sorts of funny stuff?  Oh, I don't know ... hmmm ...
          II. In Response to Flop Action From Villain - Reraise/Check-raise - by Villain Type a) Maniac - Middling Suited-Connected Board b) Casual Player with Odd Stack Size - Multi-way Pot, Dry Board
          (Dec. 1, 2012) Live Training Demonstration of Folding an Overpair to a Check-Raise with a Dry Flop (Ep. 'Adventures in 5nl Zoom', Sept. 6, 2012, @15:45) hand: Ks Kc board: 6d 8d Ts Note: Multiway, 3bet pot against an utg pre-flop deep-stacked raiser - the red flag was that the person looked willing to stack off a whole 200bbs, and just a pair isn't usually good enough. I guess I won't be ready to play deep-stacked until I stop being such a station ... could be a while :D
          c) Suspected Maniac - Overbets on the Flop
          (Feb. 15, 2013) Villain Donk Shoved 94bbs into a 6bb Pot :o Note: Shucks, I got so caught off-guard with the overbet-shove, I totally forgot to range, and just called based on the fact that I had TP, and the villain hadn't 3bet pre-flop (so he didn't likely have AK). But I should know better ... I posted this hand months ago, where I had better than TPTK, and the villain had defended his blind with 23 and flopped a straight: I'm just lucky I had the backdoor flush draw, which I didn't actually notice ... and that the board wound up making a straight - yikes! That's lucky enough reason right there why I should never complain about a bad beat again! Although mine do seem a lot worse ... never mind ... Think this stuff'll be super-important to know for 10nl, since people seem more eager to make chip grabs with lighter holdings in the blinds area? So I'm glad I've come to be aware of all this stuff now, while I'm still at 5nl. Am a little bit scared to go back, but maybe sometimes being afraid can be good if it motivates us to try and better prepare I guess? I'm always worried about being prepared ...
          (Feb. 16, 2013) Update New Forrest hand from HA - TP and Flush Draw Gets Check-Raised on the Turn In Forrest's hand, it looked for sure like Forrest was behind. But I guess the villain was giving him the right odds to call? With my hand, guess yesterday I was automatically assuming that anybody who would donk-shove their stack must have more than a pair. But maybe that's not the case? People do the strangest things sometimes ... I'm sure there are some villains who would shove 67bbs with TPNK - or less! Should I have included Ax (top pair, lesser kicker) in my ranging, like AJ, AT? Or even draws (4h 6h?), or the lower 2-pair (35s?)? Like is my hand here more like Forrest's first hand, or his second? In the second we both had TP and flush draw potential, but the first hand was the one with the overbet? Against top 2-pair, I guess my AQ was doing okay ... but against a set I'd have been in bad shape. On the other hand, against a hand like AJ, my AQ would have been in such good shape. I don't know?
          III. In Response to Turn Action From Villain - by Villain Type a) TAG - Dry Board
          (Nov. 25, 2012) So I Called This Hand a Cooler Two Months Ago ... Today, I'm Pretty Sure I'd Have Folded the River Note: ... the opponent was playing like a straight-forward TAG and the timing tell when the J hit on the turn was overwhelming. I guess 3-outers are rare enough that calling two more streets isn't going to have a huge impact on our winrate. But I can't help but wonder what it'd be like to just fold when I think a TAG's got my hand in bad shape. Lately I sort of been tempted to give that a try ... Update (Jan. 31, 2013) Something I missed the first time around was the fact that the villain's raises were getting progressively larger as a % of the pot. Usually TAGs make bets smaller after getting called 2 streets. So that, combined with the timing tell, and the fact that the river bet was almost pot-sized ... I don't see myself calling the river bet today. The villain could have had so many hands that beat my 1pr, right? Not just AJ, but also AA, JJ ... or any set for that matter ... really, what was I beating that would be three streets except AQ?? :/
          (Feb. 23, 2013) Almost an Exact Repeat of My Hand from Nov. 25, 2012 Note: Have to admit, mostly I folded this hand because the larger raise on the turn reminded me of the hand I posted in November, rather than because I was actively ranging during the hand. And then after folding, I had some doubts about whether folding was the right thing to do ... like maybe I should have called to see what the villain did on the river? But now that I re-read my notes, I'm leaning more towards being glad I folded when I did - because it's the same situation as before ... the only hand I'm ahead of would be like AsTs. And I was behind all sets, AJ, AK. Actually the more I talk, the more I'm glad I folded. That being said, maybe I'll have to be careful about how liberally I apply the 'turn bet is getting bigger' rule - like I'll really, really have to work on ranging to make sure I'm not folding too much on more draw-heavy boards, where people could be raising big with hands with more than one thing going for them? Like maybe this 'rule' might be better suited to dry boards only? Sample size of 2 :/ ... maybe not even ... ?? lol Will have to keep closer watch - geoVARTA's posted some interesting hands in HA ... hopefully a good discussion gets going on those ...
          b) Passive Villain, AF of 1 - GREAT FOLD! Bet-Folding with 2-Pair, 3 Broadways on the Board
          (Nov. 25, 2012) So Two Months Ago, I Didn't Think This Fold was Obvious ... YIKES!!! Note: ... although I did *just* finish saying I wanted to try and give turn reraises more credit lols. Ahhh ... such a dry board, and the turn looked fairly harmless. And the c/o had such high VPIP/PFR/Steal stats - although just over 20 hands. But I missed that their AF was only 1 :/ It doesn't feel so bad to call and lose when I'm surprised to see what the other person's holding, because then I wind up learning something about the blinds spots in my ranging. So I guess I still get something out of the experience. Also, everybody at 5nl struggles with the same spots as me - what if I had had AA and the c/o was raising with the worst hand? A lot of these hands seem to wind up evening out at this stake, so it's not so bad to miss the occasional fold I guess. But probably 10nl isn't so forgiving, eh? Update (Jan. 31, 2013) Wow, this call is atrocious!! I've come a LONG way in 2 months ... think that shift in mindset I made at the beginning of the month towards focusing on the villain rather than my own hand changed everything. Because I just can't imagine calling that reraise today with 3 to a straight on the board.
          IV. In Response to Pre-Flop Action From Villain - by Villain Type a) New Player to the Pool Limp-Reraises - Folding KK Pre-Flop
          (Dec. 13, 2012) Hand From Nov. 25, 2012 Note: So the last time somebody limp-4bet into my KK's was 2 1/2 weeks ago? I've been limp-4bet about 12 times since then, and have folded every other hand ... the next time it happens and I happen to be holding KK, I'm going fold that too! I'm just gonna do it!! Instead of losing $4.38, I'd only be losing $0.20 ... such great savings ...
          Checking and Calling 1. Another Overpair to a Paired Board that's Blind vs Blind - Close Call!

          (Nov. 18, 2012) Think Maybe I Actually WAS Supposed to Cbet here ... oops! Note: Well, this hand isn't really similar at all, since I was oop in mp and had two callers behind me. Maybe because this was one of those situations where I was supposed to bet-fold or bet-check-call or something? I guess going to showdown for less than a stack was okay though, eh? Hopefully?
          (Dec. 11, 2012) Another One That Doesn't Fit The Mold Note: I don't know ... My heater ended so fast ... it's not like me to not be able to just stick with things, but this downswing's killing me. I think I need a break.
          [/spoiler] 2. Checking Behind on an A-High Board (Instead of Cbetting)

          (Nov. 17, 2012) Refraining from cbetting - made pair of K's, but Villain in the bb had a 100%FTS, AF 1 Note: Discovered by accident that it's probably a terrible idea to c-bet a caller in the blinds who has a 100%FTS(bb) over 52 hands, VPIP of 14, and an AF of 0.25. Folded my pair of K's to the villain's near pot-sized bet on the turn.
          (Nov. 17, 2012) Refraining from cbetting down to the river - with 3rd best pair Note: Hope the call on the turn was the right thing to do, rather than fold or reraise?
          (Nov. 17, 2012) oops, I screwed up and cbet in position with QQ on an A-high board, and look what happened Note: Would have been interesting to see what the c/o did on the turn if I had checked behind, with TP no kicker
          (Dec. 31, 2012) Refrained from cbetting with KK - check-folded the turn to a large raise from a TAG reg Note: Got a little distracted away from cbetting, but checking behind with a big pocket pair like KK on an A-high board seem to be coming along fine. I folded based mostly on the villain calling a 3bet oop with a VPIP of 15 (453 hands), and on the size of his bet on the turn. But I'm trying to become more conscious of other stats (see year-end review). Villain had a W$SD of 60% (WTSD of 29%) - that came up in another HA hand ... and I wish I hadn't missed it, because what if his AF wasn't 3 but was instead 1, and he only bet half the pot instead of 3/4? But see below ...
          (Dec. 31, 2012) Refrained from cbetting with QQ, then folded the turn to a less than half-pot bet ... and it's been knawing away at me ever since - I would have liked to call! Note: Funny thing though, after posting the last hand ... and then applying what I learned from that, I just noticed this villain's stats, and maybe the fold was the right thing to do after all. Only had 30 hands on the villain, and they were on the loose side (VPIP/PFR of 28/10). But FT3B was 100%, and W$SD was 100% as well (WTSD 25%, no AF). I only folded because I wasn't feeling very lucky - which is such a stupid reason to be calling/folding lol. Think reviewing hands after every session the way I plan to this year, where I go back and double-check everybody's stats ought to hopefully help me become more conscious of all the info that's there just waiting to be applied. I think this hand's ready for archiving - it's just advanced HUD stats I need to practice using, and there's probably other hands I can use to work on that ...
          [/spoiler] [/spoiler] Catalog of Live Training Concepts

          Betting 1. Extracting Maximum Value

          (Nov. 28, 2012) Live Training Demonstration of Value Betting Bigger on the River (at the risk of not getting called on occasion), rather than betting smaller to ensure a call (Ep. 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 17, 2012, @36:20 hand: Qh Qs board: 6s 6d Qd 6c 5h Note: The turn raise is interesting too, because it's so common for so many of us at 5nl to go turtle when we've got the nuts, and feel like our hand is face-up. Gareth bet $1.70 into $2.10 on the turn with the best boat ... and got a call. I'd have probably raised about $0.40? So much lost value ... See below for my hand:
          (Nov. 28, 2012) Still Making Mini-Raises with the Nuts to Try and Get a Call :/: Note: The saddest part is that my hand was almost *exactly* like the one I just posted - and I went and did my little mini-raise thingie again on the river ... d'oh! I guess old habits take time to replace with new ones - so hopefully I can remember next time to try betting a little larger ...
          (Nov. 28, 2012) Tried out a Bigger 'Thin Value' Bet on the River umbup:: Note: Um, so wow! Well didn't that work out great! :) Well, I like to call call call, so I guess it should come as no surprise to me that everybody else does too lols :D. Kinda nice that I was able to get 2 calls - and one of them just had middle pair!
          (Nov. 28, 2012) Tried out a Bigger Bet on the River - hmmm ... : Note: Another success! So thrilled!! :) Very exciting to learn new things :) :) Think I may *still* be raising a little too small though? Was a little big scared of getting check-raised. But probably that wasn't something to be worried about since nobody had raised yet, and the board was pretty wet. I wonder how much more the person was willing to call ...
          [/spoiler] 2. 4-Betting Light 3-Bettors a) Range - should try to stick to A or K high (blockers), and fold everything else that you won't be 4betting for value or calling

          (Dec.13, 2012) What Not To Do Note: Had no plan for what to do post-flop if my 4bet had actually gotten called - maybe that should have been a sign 4-betting 44 might not have been the way to go lols. But I looked around the internet and couldn't find anything about 4-betting light 3betters, so I'm not sure how else people are supposed to know this sort of stuff if not for class? Next time I'll know what to do :)
          (Dec.19, 2012) I just don't even know what I'm doing here ... :/ Note: Villain's a more aggro-ish but otherwise tag reg - PokerTracker note: [P] 3Bet range {AKs,AKo} (2) Damm ... last week in live training I asked about calling with middling pocket pairs. And Gareth asks what I mean by that, like TT? And I say more like 88, 99. Guess I shouldn't have limited the range there ... what was I supposed to do with TT?!??
          [/spoiler] b) Size - should be no larger than around 25% of your stack, because you need to leave yourself room to fold in case the 3-bettor actually has a hand this time and 5-bets

          (Dec.13, 2012) What Not To Do, Part 2 Note: Didn't think AJ was good enough to call a 3-bet with ... not sure why I instead decided to shove this time - seemed at the time like a good way to discourage a call? :o Ahhh ... will add more tomorrow - enough for today ... Also, apparently it's 'bettors' and not 'better' ... so why does it look so funny? :/
          (Dec.13, 2012) See this HA hand for recommended 4bet-sizing Note: hmmm ... $1.10 is a lot less than a shove :D I guess sometimes I like to shove if I think I'm ahead of the person's range, so I don't have to play a 3bet pot out of position. But maybe I should give playing AK post-flop a try and see how it goes. See below for a time where I just called, played AK post-flop, and it turned out okay ...
          (Dec.17, 2012) Can't Seem to Bring Myself to Just 4-Bet at the Risk of Getting Called (and wind up having to play AKo oop against a monkey - ick!!) Note:I don't want to wind up like Croyd! I'm not even convinced the button against Croyd even had anything, because if he's played Croyd as often as I have, he must know too that he won't go to showdown with less than the nuts. I wouldn't know that about him if he hadn't been targeting me, so I refuse to feel bad about bluffing him off every hand, not just the 'last one' ... but I still do ... Anyways, back to my hand: Villain's stats: 10% 3bet, 17% 3bet from the button (edited), NoteTracker: [P] 3Bet range {ATo} (1) But See 2+2 Discussion: "if you're certain your opponent has a properly polarized 3betting range, flatting with hands like KQ or AJ will leave you dominating 2/3 or more of your opponent's range. The question is how to balance..." Maybe there's more than one right way?
          [/spoiler] 3. 3-Betting Light

          (Dec. 22, 2012) Will have to check my notes to see if this was *okay* ... :/ Note: Ahhh ... suspect I was really scraping the bottom of the barrel here, even if utg was super loose. Probably I shouldn't play when I'm too tired to put too much thought into things - yikes. Hopefully it was *okay* :/ Think I got my idea from Tatiana ... I like her hair and her top and her earrings in the picture ...
          (Dec. 23, 2012) Live Training Demonstration of a light 3-Bet Squeeze from the blinds (Ep. 'Preflop Aggression', Dec. 19, 2012, @27:00 hand: As 4s board: - Note: Okay, well, here's a 3bet hand. So the rationale for squeezing was that: 1. The squeeze had a high likelihood of garnering folds - utg is tight and is likely to give the squeeze credit, and the c/o just posted the blind and completed utg's pf raise, and 2. Raising was better than calling. See below for my attempt to do the same ... lol ...
          (Dec.23, 2012) Well, got a win - but not in the way I had hoped for ... yikes! :D Note: Ahhh ... fun to try something new. And fun to win. Not sure what happened with the 'squeeze' there lol - either my player reads were off with the initial raiser (pf raiser = maniac ... add hud stats later), unless he just actually had a hand this time that was worthy of calling a 3bet with if the c/o were to come along? c/o was a weekend casual type. I guess having okay cards is always an important backup plan for when pre-flop doesn't go the way we had hoped? Nice to flop top 2pr ... and have it be good! Although I can't imagine that happening too often, so next time I'd better be more careful about being sure about my player reads ...
          (Dec.23, 2012) Yikes 2.0 lol - Am starting to think my time would be better spent just sticking with the basics Note: So I'm clearly picking the wrong type of person - maniacs'll go all-in with A high before they'll ever fold. The funniest part is how he so had my number - there's nothing in my stats to indicate to him what I was doing ... because I just started joking around today out of boredom. I'll have to take a closer look at my betting patterns to see what it is he picked up on for him to have check-shoved the way he did. lol! I could swear that's what happened to f1nlaion with that A3s hand - was the villain not worried that he might have had AA? Unless he had it? But if he had it, would he really donk out against somebody so aggro rather than check-shove? It kind of felt to me like he had something like QJ, and put f1nlaion on a 4bet bluff? Takes one to know one monkey ... it's unsettling to me how often I'm and how easily I'm so often able to say that :/ Always wished I were a nit ... Anyways ... man, not sure how I'm going to get my volume in - Wednesday maybe ...
          [/spoiler] Checking and Calling 1. Big Blind is Last to Act Pre-Flop (and also last to act if the orginal pre-flop raiser cbets) (Jan. 6, 2013) a) Being last to act has some advantages b) Other things we can do from the bb See Appendix 2. Calling Light 3-Bets - try to stick with hands with A or K (blockers, ability to flop TP and bluff-catch),

          (Dec.13, 2012) Button was a Suspected Maniac, but my Sample Size was Too Small to Confirm Note: So having to play post-flop here turned out okay ... not so bad to be out of position and bluff-catch with TP ...
          (Dec.14, 2012) This Hand Kind of Spiralled Out of Control :( Note: Guess I don't always think things through ... PS Villain's stats and NoteTracker notes: [P] 3Bet range {KTs} (1) PPS Didn't actually show my hand in the real hand Update: (Dec.17, 2012) I guess because the 3bet was small, we're supposed to be calling pretty wide - hmmm ... see below for further discussion ...
          (Dec.17, 2012) Guess in Position Against a Suspected Light 3-Bettor There's no Reason Not to Just Call, eh? Note: What a monkey that guy was ... takes one to know one I guess ... Is it possible there's like ... 'metagame' considerations at play? Like, 'fold equity' + 'actual equity' + not having to deal with this player too much in the future after showing down KJo? :o I don't know ...
          (Dec.17, 2012) More 'Metagame' Considerations - 2-Parter

          Pt.1 Pt.2 Note: ++EV? :D On another note, I'm so curious about what this player's stats must be like: ... I'm pretty careful to keep mine looking normal, but sometimes I start wondering if they're creeping up when people start looking me up. I wonder if that's what was happening with him in this hand here: Gosh, have to go grind - hopefully I can catch up by tomorrow at the latest ...
          [/spoiler] [/spoiler] [/spoiler] ARCHIVE

          Catalog of HA Submissions

          a)i. AQo - Refraining from Cbetting - middling suited-connected 'action' flops

          1.a. (Nov. 14, 2012) Middling Suited-Connected Flop - No Cbet with Overs: 1.b. (Nov. 14, 2012) Multiway A-high Semi-Wet Board Against 2 Unknowns - No Cbet with Missed Flop: Note: maybe it's too early to get excited about making progress, but I could swear that my cbets are feeling more like they're happening with a sense of purpose and direction. I think all that help from live training and hand analysis is making a big difference! (Nov. 15, 2012) Note #2: Gosh, well I'm just so thrilled with the way (b)i. went - turned out so perfect!! :) :) Am not sure I applied the criteria right for (b)ii. though - guess it depends on whether the KK in the sb would have folded to a double- barrel or not? Need to think about this some more ...
          [/spoiler] a)ii. AQo - Exception to the rule listed above (ie it's fine to cbet because we want to get called: our holding is especially strong, so we're cbetting for value and don't mind getting called b)i. T7s - Refraining from Cbetting (and reraising) - weak draws with no fold equity

          (Nov. 15, 2012) Refraining from that Bad Habit of Reraising Draws on the flop when I'm Flipping against TPTK who isn't Going to Fold: Note: Not sure where I picked up that habit of bloating up the pot with just a draw, but it was feeling really nice by the turn to feel like I still had room to fold on the river if my hand didn't improve - and the other person still called a small raise on the river ... so thrilled!! :)
          (Nov. 23, 2012)Top Pair and Second Nut Flush Draw with 2 to a Straight Flush Draw, and 3 to a Straight on the Turn Note: Well, I still feel like a massive hee haw, but I guess maybe it's more accurate to say that some spots are going to be easier to fix than others, and that ones like this might take a lot more practice? I guess I haven't had a spot like this in a while, so my mind just went on autopilot, instead of remembering to wait, and be cautious. Hopefully next time I can remember, because the advice I've been getting from Gareth has been so helpful - when you start making money right away after getting advice from somebody, you know you can trust them without having to be cautious, so that's been wonderful - such a great addition to PSO :) Anyways, with this KJs, I wish I had (1) bet smaller on the turn, and (2) just called the check-raise rather than feeling like I might as well 4bet to put us all-in since the cut-off might have had a straight? Then I think I would have been able to fold to a river shove if my flush didn't come in on the river? Should double-check the math on the bet sizes to see if this would have been feasible ...
          (Nov. 23, 2012)Pair and a Flush Draw with 2 Broadways on the Flop, 3 Broadways on the Turn when the Flush Came in Note: Ugh, guess I should have just folded this hand pre-flop, eh? Was a little card-dead though and thought maybe I could win the pot with a bet post-flop since the person was new. Then I actually made a hand :/ Well, the reraise on the flop was obviously a mistake. And then, the reraise of the check-raise on the turn when the flush came in and mine was just 6-high ... I should have known better there too. I guess I just got so excited to make a big hand that I forgot to think about my holding in terms of its strength relative to the sb's possible holdings. Hopefully the more times I repeat the same mistakes and catch myself making them *after* the fact, the easier it'll be to catch them as they're happening so that I can remember to do things differently in the moment?
          (Nov. 27, 2012)Made the 3rd Best Flush on the River, but the Board Paired, and the Nit in the SB Donked Out - Reraise or Call? Note: Not my usual line to just call in this type of situation - but I was worried about getting reraised. Maybe I was being too cautious though because I've been in a prolonged downswing? Or maybe it just feels weird because it's not my usual line? Villain's stats: VPIP of 11, AF of 1.5, but only 28 hands. Not sure if I did the right thing by just calling or if I lost value ... :(
          [/spoiler] b)ii. 89s - Exception to the rule listed above (ie it's fine to cbet (or even reraise) because we want to get called: the draw is especially strong such that our hand is favored to win by the river, over even AA [/spoiler] Catalog of HA Submissions - Other Peoples' Hands That are a Lot Like Mine

          a. Check-folding or Bet-folding KK when oop on an A-high Flop

          (Nov. 17, 2012) Forgot to bet-fold with KK oop Note: Wow, so I thought I had kicked this habit. May be fatigue from the grind - ever noticed how old habits come back when we're not playing our best? I've started to get pretty exhausted from the grind ... only about 75VPPs left to go though - then I can kick back and really look over all this stuff and just have fun again with learning new tricks :)
          (Nov. 17, 2012) Should have check-folded with KK oop Note: Ugh, what a horrible flop! Not even sure whether it would have been worth betting out at all, or whether this KK was just not meant to win. Kinda spewy to do that check-call :/ Hopefully when I'm not so tired I'll play better ...
          (Dec. 31, 2012) Bet out with JJ on an A-high board, with the intention of folding to a reraise Note: This one seems to be fine - guess I haven't updated in ages because it's become so second-nature, it never occurred to me to bother to post it. Had a hand just the other day where my cbet got reraised and I wound up folding, but I can't seem to find it ... could have sworn I had QQ. Will have to try looking for it again later, and hopefully will be able to add it then.
          [/spoiler] [/spoiler] Catalog of Live Training Concepts

          1. Scare Card on the Turn

          (Nov. 22, 2012) Scare Card on the Turn: Note: Boy, so wow, is my game ever a mish-mash of some things going right, *some* of the time. And some parts of my play feeling totally unharnassed and out of control Just went and signed up for a Knockout Turbo with my 6-max challenge ticket - what a donkfest! I fit right in ... And am also playing one table of zoom at the same time ... and well gosh, if this wasn't the bright spot of my day ... this hand just turned out so totally perfect ... my very first float-plus-scarecard-bluff!! Just so so thrilled!! :) My redline game seems to be a lot better than my playing of actual cards ... wish it were the opposite ... :/
          (Nov. 25, 2012) Scare Card on the Turn: Note: Have been printing money after learning this scare card trick Wish I had better actual equity, but the sb's a reg with an AF of 5, so maybe having mostly just fold equity was okay?
          (Nov. 28, 2012) Scare Card on the Turn: Note: Printing money
          (Dec. 16, 2012) Scare Card on the Turn: Note: oop, multiway, against two tighter regs with some decent equity - guess this one's ready to be archived :)
          [/spoiler] [/spoiler] [/spoiler] [/spoiler] [/spoiler]
          Last edited by TrustySam; Tue Apr 30, 2013, 12:55 PM. Reason: Doing a little spring cleaning :)


          • #6
            Originally posted by TrustySam View Post
            Hopefully it'll seem even better once I get better stuff posted ... still trying to get everything organized, but I keep getting distracted by poker - so addictive hehe!! Saw more nice cashes in your blog - wow, you're on a roll!! Nice!! umbup: umbup:
            thanks Sam hope the run continues and i am able to build a decent BR before the variance hits I'm keeping the $109 ticket intact and see if i can find time to play it. Good Luck at the table to both of us.umbup:


            • #7
              Hey thx for the good luck wishes ... need all the help I can get!! GL GL to 2 too!! umbup: umbup: 10nl Stuff


              I. Intro

              A. First Impressions of 10nl

              (Feb. 1, 2013) 10nl's going *okay* so far - if only because everybody starts off new stakes on a heater, don't we? So, it's hard to have too rough a go when we're getting good hands. But that can't last. Not sure why I felt the need to take a shot today - I guess I felt bad and wanted to have something to look forward to. Am using the same Jared Tendler method for shot-taking that I used when I first started playing 5nl, where we're supposed to try to focus more on gathering info on play at the new stake rather than our stack? So I've tried to keep that as my focus, although I still have my stop-loss of 3 buy-ins in place, just in case. Feel like I waited the *perfect* time to first take a peek at 10nl, but I must be the last person from 5nl to do so, because it turns out I've got at color-coding and/or notes on a good 33-50% of the field - and they on me. So play hasn't felt so, so different in terms of the regs. They seem to be the better of the regs though, so they're playing like the best regs who are still at 5nl - like they seem to be masking hands a bit more? Also, bet sizing seems to be a bit more varied, even with TAGs? And I noticed a LOT more deeper stacks? That's something I started to try to do at 5nl, but guess it might have to be a much bigger area of study up at 10nl? The big difference up at 10nl seems to be with the casual players - there seem to be about 4x as many wild monkeys as there are at 5nl. Which could be a good thing or a bad thing I guess. On the one hand, I know all their tricks. On the other hand, my K-high bluff-catching got beat twice today - once by A-high, and another time by a pair of 2's with a 4 kicker ... fml lol. I guess so long as I stick to value, maybe this'll be where most of the money'll come from up at 10nl? Have been relying heavily on my color-coding and note-taking. And also the # of tables people are playing. And that's been all I needed so far. Made a great fold based just on color-coding and #tables, and wound up dodging a heap of trouble as a result, which allowed me to end the day up a buy-in rather than break-even. So my run of great-folds seems to continuing up at 10nl ... am super thrilled about that ... Guess that's all I can think of for now ... think there was a lot more, but am so tired. May need to take a little nap now ... [/spoiler] B. Stuff I'll Need to Work on at 10nl to Be Profitable

              (Feb. 10, 2013) So there's theory that David Sklansky came up with about there being various 'Levels of Poker Thinking': Level 1 - What do I have? Level 2 - What does my opponent have? Level 3 - What does my opponent think I have? Level 4 - What does my opponent think that I think they have? Guess I'm still stuck deep in the thick of Level 2 lol. The thing is that, wasn't Sklansky's idea that we only play one level above our opponent? Like there's no point in trying to think about what our opponent thinks we have if they're not even ranging? I don't know if it's possible to work on Level 3 thinking at 5nl, because there's so many people who are still just playing the cards in front of them. But from what I saw at 10nl, I don't know if it's going to be possible to be profitable with just a Level 2 game? And then, my Level 2 'game' isn't even that great to begin with ... I guess it's been good enough for 5nl, but my ranging's not super sophisticated like in live training. So, I guess in this section I'll try to include examples of the type of skills I'd like to develop up at 10nl now that i'll have the chance ... and because I think I'll need to, to turn a profit. [/spoiler] [/spoiler] II. Hand Ranging

              A. Trying to Get More Specific with Ranging

              Guess I'll just list out examples as my guide? 1. Ranging to Know What Hands We'd Like to Call a Raise
              HA hand - how much to bet on the turn with 2pr Ranging for hands that likely called the flop, that will either want to continue no matter what, or fold no matter what:
              Originally posted by GarethC23 View Post
              You did not bet the turn too large. If anything you bet it too small! I would bet .40 there pretty often since it seems extremely likely villain has an ace and is going to fold non aces to .35 anyways. Does that makes sense? We got value from 88 or T9 or those type of hands on the flop and they are usually going to give it up on the turn esp by this player, so now we should focus on AT/AJ for the most part, in terms of getting value.
              2. Ranging a Caller to Know Whether to Semi-Bluff the River with a Made Hand
              Live Training - Blinds steal and C-bet from the SB gets called by the BB(Ep. 'Micro Zooming', Aug. 30, 2012, @9:00) hand: 9d 7d board: Qs 3d Kh 7s Ac I think it's a lot different to be not betting the river because the board got ugly and there's 3 overs, than it is to have ranged the villain, and expect to see the bb holding QJ, QT, AJ, AT. Long-shot possibilities since this is 5nl were pocket pairs like 55 (I'd go so far as to include stuff like J3o, based on some of the hands I've seen people go to showdown with ... that is if I were ranging! :/) Villain here did wind up having AJ ...
              3. Ranging With a Middling Strength Hand Prior to Bet-Folding
              Live Training - Bet-folding oop on the River (Ep. 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 18, 2012, @1:30) hand: Kd 9s board: 9c 7s Qh 2s 6h Expected better hands that might call: Qx (weak kicker) Expected worse hands that might call: 9x (worse kicker), pocket 8's This is the type of hand I was most interested in finding an example of. I've kind of been 'cheating' with ranging by using the strength of my hand as a guide for when to 'bet-fold', rather than going that extra step of thinking about which specific hands it's likely the villain might be holding. And because I'm not doing that, sometimes I've been getting the feeling that I'm raising when I shouldn't (because nobody was going to call with worse, or all people were likely to have was better, etc)?
              4. Using Our Knowledge of a LAG's Calling Range to Plan Out How We Expect to Win Post-Flop (in the monkey zone - cut-off/button/blinds)
              Live Training - 3-Betting KQo from the BB ... for Value (Ep. 'Playing From the Blinds', Oct. 10, 2012, @15:00) hand: Ks Qh board: button folded pre-flop to the 3-bet The decision was made to 3-bet for value, after ranging the villain and expecting his 3-bet calling range from the button to be filled mostly with hands like KJ, KT, QJ, QT, and worse. I just finished talking about how the play seemed more strategic up at 10nl ... guess I was talking mostly about the tight regs :D There was also that noticeable increase in maniacs, reraising with BPNK (bottom pair no kicker), etc. My 3betting value range at 5nl is strictly hands with absolute strength ... AK, QQ+, sometimes JJ depending on the villain. But I guess I never thought to widen my range when people are prone to calling wider - because I've never stopped to range anybody. This should work well sb vs bb too.
              5. Ranging to Try and Figure Out if the Villain Might be Bluffing
              Live Training - TT in the Cutoff, Cbet Gets Check-Raised from the SB on the Flop (Ep. 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 17, 2012, @17:15) hand: Ts Th board: 9c 8d 8c Qd 3s villain: preflop-called, flop-check-raised, turn-2/3bet, river-125%pot bet The person's line didn't make a lot of sense. So the process of trying to determine whether the villain was bluffing was to:
              a) Rule out as unlikely, all the possible hands the villain could have been holding (unlikely because of the betting line he took) KcQc - ruled out as more likely to bet small on the river, if at all JT - discounted because of blockers, and also unlikely to get shoved on the river with a paired board (99 wasn't discussed, but I guess the flop check-raise would be unusual?) 8x - only likely to take this line if had a boat (like maybe 8Q?) b) Then try to think of drawing hands that might have missed, that he could be trying to bluff with on the river Here, the check-raising bluffing range would have been mostly limited to flush draws like JcTc, JcQc, KcQc, and all those made a pair or a straight on the turn. So the only busted flush draw that the TT was still beating would have been the lower end of the draw, 6c7c, so the TT was a reluctant fold.
              Bluff-Catching Tip Live Training (Ep. 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 17, 2012, @22:30) When people use that overbet to try and push you out of the pot - the bigger the bet is, the less often you have to call for it to be profitable to bluff-catch. So try and pick times where you feel fairly sure something's up, and you have a decently strong hand. So even if the person's only semi-bluffing, you aren't still beat (like I tried to do with my K-high at 10nl those two times lol!!) Oh shucks ... midnight already :(. Was kind of fun to play the Depositor Freeroll, but probably it slowed down my video watching and note-taking ... hmmm ... hard to find the right balance of fun and 'serious' study :D Guess I'll have to stop now ...
              6. Hand of Mine - Incomplete Ranging NEW (March 3, 2013) Guess quads are rare enough, that they're easy to overlook - but they're not so rare that I can afford to keep making this same mistake, I don't think. Guess whenever there's a paired board, there's always a possibility the villain could have a trip, boat, or quad. Thought I was pretty good about being more cautious with flush draws and paired boards, but taking that cursory glance over my biggest losses, there were a couple of spots where I got sloppy. Very important to be careful with these paired boards!!
              [/spoiler] B. Ranging Exercises

              1. Check Behind, or Bet(-Fold)?

              (Feb. 13, 2013) Was going to leave this until tomorrow, because my HUD is taking a long time to set up ... but I'm just dragging my heels because this hand makes me feel anxious and insecure .. Not at all sure what I was supposed to do on the river! Here was what I was thinking when I checked behind: - my overpair isn't TP to a made hand any more - a K would have me beat - there's also 3 to a straight on the board - so maybe I should just check behind and hope I win Well, let's see if I can remember what we're *supposed* to be thinking in this spot ... - villain was color-coded 'TAG, regular' - he called a mp raise in the bb, but didn't 3bet - so does that tell us something about his range? Is it okay to narrow it down right now to 88-JJ, KJs, KQs, ATs, JTs? - then villain check-called a big raise on a 945s board with flush draw - what does that mean??? All I was thinking about was 99. But I guess I should have also been thinking about the hands I was beating too, like TT, JJ, and overs with a spade flush draw? So that was a HUGE VOID of non-thought right there!! I wish the underline function were working, because I would have liked to underline that last sentence!! - then the straight draw completed, and in my mind I guess I eliminated 78 and A2 as unlikely holdings, so I bet big again - and got called again!! now I'm super scared of the 99!! - guess I should have been considering eliminating all those flush draws plus overs? But they weren't even on my mind, so it's kind of hard to eliminate something that's not there lol :D - were TT, JJ and 99 the only realistic holdings by the turn? Could we even go so far as to eliminate 99, since there wasn't a check-raise on the flop or turn? Gosh, it kind of looks like NOT betting the river was a big, big mistake? Sad face :(( Seems so silly to have been worried about the K, now that I go through those steps I was supposed to be doing at the table ... So much lost value on the river - I'll bet the bb would have called another half-pot bet, which would have been an extra $1. Gosh, maybe I should stay at 5nl for another 25,000 hands, and just play one table and try to practice ranging before I think about going anywhere? Guess there's no hurry ... because I'm a Level 1 thinker, boo ...
              (Feb. 14, 2013) <3 Update Had a similar hand to yesterday's, and was able to make an extra $0.50 on the river ... that felt really good ...
              [/spoiler] 2. Am I Being Bluffed? Is it Okay to Call?

              Forrest bluff-catching with A high My hand: Villain - one-tabler, wasn't looking at my HUD What I was thinking: - those bet sizes are weird - maybe they have AA, but it feels like a LAG not a slowplayer - on the flop I'm hoping the player wasn't calling with like KQ and just hit - on the turn, I was stuck in no-man's land! What now?? - I felt a little pot-committed ... but then the button took *forever* to shove - like at least 15 seconds. And then I knew I was good. Maybe I should have just shoved myself if I was going to call? :/ Okay, what was I supposed to be thinking? - I guess I was supposed to be thinking of SPECIFIC HANDS the villain might have been holding? - would that be ... any pp incl. AA? Any 2 Broadways? Ax? - then the call on the turn ... here I wasn't paying attention to stack sizes because I don't know what to do with them, because that Live Training class on 4-betting hasn't been released yet. Was my bet too big? Were both of us pot-committed? I guess nobody's ever pot-committed, but maybe did the button feel that way? So does that affect the ranging? - now I am confused - because the button didn't have anything! But if I were ranging, wouldn't I have to assume that all he had was Qx or better (like AA slowplayed)? - I wish I better knew what to do ... It's already past midnight, but I don't want to go to sleep ... I want to keep looking at poker stuff. Oh well Monday is a holiday, so I can do stuff then I guess ... Family Day'll be more fun than Valentine's Day :p
              [/spoiler] 3. NW's Hand from HA - Nut Flush Plus Redraw, Villain Check-Shoves

              [/spoiler] Hand Ranging Primer + Exercises

              (Feb. 25, 2013) Culled from the following Episodes of Live Training: - 'Value in All the Right Places', Nov. 1, 2012, @10:30 (hands #2,3) - 'River Decisions', Dec. 27, 2012 (hands #1,2) A. Where does our hand stand in relation to the villain's? 1. What hands beat us 2. What hands do we beat B. Where might the villain think his hand stands in relation to ours? 1. What stronger hands in our range would we play the same way? 2. What weaker hands in our range would we play the same way? C. Determining bet size 1. What's the largest sized bet that the weaker hands will call? 2. How do we hope this bet will be perceived? D. What do we plan on doing if reraised? 1. Reads on the villain – are they the type to bluff? 2. Villain's reads on us – do they think we're the type to bluff? 3. Have we given them any reason to perceive weakness in our line 4. The way the hand's played out – are there reasons to perceive weakness in their line? (ie are there any inconsistencies)? 5. Are there draws they could be playing this way? 6. Do we have outs to a redraw? 7. Do they want us to call or fold? ___________________________________________ (March 29, 2013) Lessons Learned From Those Hand Ranging Exercises From My Time Vault Thread Here's the 6 hands from the Time Vault Thread: 1. AhKd vs Reg - Trip with Draw to the Nuts, Reraised 2. 8hTh c/o vs button - 2pr on Wet Board, Reraised 3. KdKs vs Stationney Reg - Nuts on Dry Board 4. KsQd vs utg Limper - Trip, My Reraise Gets Called 5. TdKh c/o vs d - Cbet (with draw) and River Bet (with straight, not flush), Mini-Reraised 6. KcJd b vs b - TPTK on Wet Board, Mini-Reraised So to start, the plan was to just stick with (A) and (C) from the chart - see this post: ... have to take a break - the blinds are starting to rise in my background tourney ... ... bubble girl's back - got mini-reraised by somebody holding the nuts and busted out a couple of hundred short of the bubble, came back here and went to work on updating this section, then my computer crashed ... fml Methodology Anyways ... so the focus of these exercises was on trying to practice ranging for hands we beat, and not just hands that were beating us - which isn't something I've ever gotten in the habit of doing. These exercises took forever, and didn't come naturally. But hopefully putting the time in here away from the tables to start, will make things easier going forward? Observations - Hand Ranging Hand 1 - remember to consider combo draws on wet boards Hand 2 - wider ranges and wetter boards make for much more complex ranges - default range for a button call of my cut-off open: • 56s+ • QJo+ • KTo+ • pocket pairs • Ax suited? - shortcut tip - villains could be holding anything: (better save in case my computer crashes) • straight draws • flush draws • combo draws (straight and flush draws) • pair plus draw(s) • pair only (including overpairs) • 2pr • set Hand 3 - without betting tells from passives, those other player reads are going to be super important for ranging: • HUD stats (or lack thereof) • number of tables • stack sizes • limping, donk bets, mini-raises - don't forget to think about *actual* hands the other player might have chosen to play pre-flop!! Hand 4 - So here's the default range for 'average' casual player that I came up with: • broadways • Ax suited • face card gappers, like K8o+? • suited gappers, down to maybe 46s • suited connectors, 23s+ • (value hands - 89s+, AJ+, pocket pairs, etc ... probably less likely, but still possible?) - and at the more extreme end: • any Ax • any face card (especially suited) • any two? lol ... important to be prepared, perhaps - and then something important to remember about ranging of better players - that bet sizing tells might not always be reliable against regs, if they're masking the strength of their hand in some way (by underbetting, semi-bluffing, waiting a street to value bet a monster on a dry board ... can't remember why that came up with this hand in particular, but there it is ... Hand 5 - something interesting about this hand was that the person reraised on both the flop and the river. So either the person had a stronger hand on the flop and a weaker one on the river, or vice versa, since all the draws came in by the river? - so what to do, when that's the case? I'm still not sure ... Hand 6 - be careful not to give casual players in the blinds too narrow a range, especially on wet boards? Observations - Other Stuff Hand 1 - nobody ever really check-raises 2 streets, so the villain probably didn't like the river card - remember to bet larger into people who go to showdown too often Hand 2 - try to find a way to remember that even though my hand may have improved in terms of absolute strength on a future street, it may have actually gotten worse in terms of relative strength - maybe a reraise should be a bit of a red flag? - also, *improving* to 2-pair, when the board improves to 3-to-a-straight, or 3-to-a-flush? Hand 3 - some 'Blocker Theory' and 'Combinations Theory' stuff: • with 3 K's already taken, there were *still* almost as many AK combinations possible (5), as there were QQ's (6) for the villain to have • but it was statistically more likely for the villain to be holding QQ, with 3 K's having already been dealt? Not sure what the theory is to describe that ... reversion to the norm, or something like that? Must have been asleep in that class, I dunno lol Hand 4 - see above Hand 5 - not too fond of check-calling with just draws ... hopefully this hand is an old one? - in any case, when on draws to try and notice which outs might improve our hand, but improve somebody else's more. Or not help at all. Hand 6 - super important to remember to check the number of tables the person is playing!! Such a valuable piece of info to have - don't want to be without it ... - and if it's suspected that the villain has mini-reraised with some sort of draw that hasn't hit by the turn, maybe be willing to call a turn c-bet up to about 60% with TPTK? [/spoiler] 4. Hand Ranging Semi-Fail - River BWP (April 22, 2013) Ehhh ... so two things I guess I was hoping would improve after practicing ranging was: 1. Getting better at being more specific with ranging, and 2. Learning to think about hands we're beating, and not just hands that are beating me. With this hand, well I think there was some improvement with #1 - based on the villain's HUD stats, he seemed most likely to be holding a big pocket pair like QQ or KK? Unfortunately #2 didn't happen at all - kind of bummed to realize that, after all that time I put into ranging all those hands in my Time Vault thread. At least in terms of the actual hand, it wasn't a big deal either way to bet or not bet. Just not sure now what I can do to better get in the habit of thinking about hands that I'm beating, so I'll better know next time whether to bother betting, and for how much ... [/spoiler] [/spoiler] III. Planning a Hand

              A. Trying to Think Ahead to How We Might Want to Respond on Future Streets

              (Feb. 27, 2013) Intro to Hand Planning (It can help us avoid putting in more money than we intended, and help us avoid getting into tricky spots where we don't know what to do!)

              Never did an intro, since I just added the new section headings yesterday. Guess I'll just move my notes from up top to here? So, well guess I'm not much of a planner lol, because I seem to be struggling to try and grasp this concept of planning a hand ... like, to the extent where I'd be able to summarize the idea behind it in a couple of lines, as like an action plan? I do see the value of planning ahead though when I watch Live Training classes - it'd be nice to not as often be finding myself in the middle of a hand with a 4-bet pot, having missed the flop, wasting my time bank wondering how I wound up in such an awkward spot lol!! :( And I see how costly the lack of planning can be all the time at the tables - like maybe that's how sometimes *people* wind up making such unbelievable bluffs? Because *they* didn't plan for the hand to turn out that way, and so *they* resort to a bluff because *they're* desperate to win? :D I have that hypothesis though, that betting as a bluff - for it to be believable - requires as much planning as betting for value? So, I guess if it's a planned bluff, that has a reasonable chance of coming across as a plausible hand, it'd be one thing - but to be bluffing out of desperation, I think that's something I really want to try to avoid? So those are the reasons I'm starting the following two sections on 'Planning a Hand', and 'Bluffs', even though I don't yet feel like I have a good grasp of the concept. Guess I'll just keep trying to find examples of interesting spots, and hopefully some of the concepts'll start to better gel in my mind? So then I'll be able to put together a 'primer' on hand-planning, and betting for value or as a bluff on future streets [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Feb. 14, 2013) EG1. From Live Training: Middle Pocket Pair Pre-Flop - thinking ahead to post-flop

              I think I've got better examples of thinking ahead to future streets, but this hand helped me decide to fold this overpair? Hopefully it was a similar enough situation? :/ Live Training - Folding a Middling Range Pocket Pair to a 3-Bet (Ep. 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 18, 2012, @14:20) hand: 7d 7c board: (folded pre-flop) One of the reasons given for folding to the 3bet is that it would be difficult to play a middling pocket pair out of position in a 3-bet pot on later streets. So here's my hand: Like, what was I going to do on the turn? Check-fold? I guess I beat 88, but that's about it? EDIT: Gosh, I hope my fold was *okay* ... Update (Feb. 27, 2013) Had a good result 4-betting 99 out of position, and think that confused me into thinking it wasn't such a bad thing to do. Somewhere along the line, think I forgot that folding 99 to a 3-bet isn't so much about whether my hand's ahead of the villain's, so much as it is about avoiding playing 99 out of position? So ... guess I just wanted to add these 4 hands from the last couple of days, just to keep track of this leak, in case I wind up in similar spots in the days to come ... Also, Live Training vid on 4-bets should be coming out soon - just in time to refresh my memory of where/when it's okay 4-bet, and when it's better to fold. That ought to help too ... 1. Suspected Maniac in the bb calls my 4-bet, and I Get Super Lucky and Flop a Set Kind of one of those times, maybe it would have been more EV for me to not flop well? Because then, next came ... 2. My 10nl Adventure - Suspected Maniac in the bb calls my 4-bet, and the Flop is Bad Ugh ... nothing worse than sitting there, staring at a flop, wondering how you wound up in such an awkward spot :/ 3. Passive Tight Reg in the bb 3-bets me Pre-flop, and I Fold ... So this one went okay ... 4. Then Today, I got Mini-4-Bet by the Button ... and I Called Sigh ... well, I won the hand - but not before kicking myself about 10 times post-flop. The only question I have is whether I should have folded pre-flop to the 4-bet, or post-flop as a check-fold? Guess maybe this is where planning could make a difference, because then I could have called the 4-bet with the intention of set-mining, and check-folding to a c-bet? So, well ... hopefully next time I'll do better. Gonna go watch vids now ... [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Feb. 25, 2013) EG2. From Live Training: Missed Flop, Little Equity - thinking ahead to which turn cards to double-barrel

              Think this is a better hand than the one I posted up above, because there's post-flop play. But maybe the one above's good too? Guess I'll leave it in for now ... Live Training - Cut-Off Blinds Steal Attempt - Button Calls Behind (Ep. 'Staying Aggressive', Nov. 14, 2012, @12:20) hand: 8h Th board: Qc 7c 4d Qs Ts So the decision was made ON THE FLOP to continue betting on the turn it was a scare card. Which is the opposite of getting bummed that we've completely missed the flop, and giving up after doing the 'one and done' thing. And so because the turn card was the opposite of a scare card (and anybody who called the flop bet was likely to call the turn bet for the same reason), this was a check on the turn. (And a bet on the river for value, since the villain checked behind - so it wasn't likely the button had a Q. Villain called the half-bet on the river, and mucked A4o :o) [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Feb. 25, 2013) EG3. From Live Training: Draw-Heavy Flop - Draws and Over - planning to double-barrel the turn

              Unless the turn was a J. Live Training - MP Raise Gets Called by the Button (Ep. 'Staying Aggressive', Nov. 14, 2012, @20:30) hand: Ah Jd board: Qh Kh 9d This is an interesting hand, because if I had bet the turn, I'd have likely given up if it hadn't been met with a fold - I guess because the board is so wet? [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Mar 1, 2013) Found an Article on Planning a Hand

              Looks like I already learned a lot of the steps from Live Training? Sort of? lol. Steps-wise - definitely ... the order of execution's exactly in-line with the re-organization I put in place at the beginning of January, that made such a big change on my ability to follow through with folding (Appendix > Looking to Minimize Losses > A. Focusing More on Folding > (Jan. 10, 2013) Shifting Focus Towards Ranging the Villain). I guess maybe about all the info I need to be planning a hand is about there ... I just have to start learning how to use it? lol So continuing to watch vids, and practicing what I see ... hopefully stuff'll start sinking in little by little ... Gosh, I should see if I can get that picture to show up a bit larger - maybe tomorrow ... [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Mar 10, 2013) Preliminary Hand Planning Primer

              Well, I've been meaning to add this for a while - think this'll be a really important start to learning how to plan hands. This was Gareth's analysis of the following: TommyGun's Hand from HA
              Originally posted by GarethC23 View Post
              I think we have played the hand really well up to this point. I think our best decision at this point on the turn, facing a double barrel, is to check-raise all in. If you expect your opponent to be betting at this board with a wide variety of holdings, including weak AX on the turn, then we can put a lot of pressure on him. He can choose to fold a lot of his turn betting range, which is a huge coup for us. If not, we have a maximum number of outs. The alternative is to check and call the turn with the plan of either leading when we hit or check-raising all-in. There are some problems with this. First is that we don't have a good plan for when we don't hit, basically surrendering the pot. This means that on occasion we will lose to something like QJ on the river or a pair that we could have folded out. We also aren't guaranteed to get paid because getting there, especially with spades, will be quite obvious and our opponent will often make better decisions than us in position on the river. I'll stop there for now, hopefully this makes sense. Main point is we are out of position (disadvantage) and have real equity. We think we have fold equity as well and we can get rid of the oop disadvantage as well by check-raising all-in.
              So the basic steps of hand planning might be something like this: A. Study villain, do the ranging in light of the board, figure out how our hand measures up in relation to his (I compressed this part because it's discussed at length elsewhere) B. So what are the alternative courses of action? 1. Check-raise 2. Check-call 3. Check-fold (4. Bet ... in other situations, if the villain hadn't acted yet) Edit (Mar. 11, 2013): See Update below C. And for each of those alternatives listed above, what are we going to do if we make our hand? Or don't? 1. .. Okay, this is the point where my mind turns into a peanut Think I have a hard time 'seeing' something that hasn't happened yet - or like, I know there's only two possible outcomes ... but I can't help but think in terms of specific cards? Maybe it would help to take a hand with an actual ending, and try practicing out the steps listed here? Like the way Croyd and I tried to hand range in HA. Yes, it took us each about 30 minutes and a scratch pad ... but that was a start! lol. Also, I wonder if some scenarios might be more complicated than others. Like this might be an advanced scenario - maybe I should start with TPTK and a dry board? Think this is a really big start though - to have some direction and a *plan* for how to plan a hand ... very pleased with that! umbup: Update (Mar. 11, 2013) Continued/revised from above: C. And for each of those alternatives listed above, what are the possible outcomes? 1. Check-raise a) Villain folds b) Villain calls, and we have great equity 2. Check-call a) Hand doesn't improve b) Hand improves D. Okay so for each of those outcomes, what now? 1. Check-raise a) Villain folds - we win! b) Villain calls, and we have great equity - a solid portion of the time we'll win 2. Check-call a) Hand doesn't improve - since it's unlikely the villain will fold to a shove, we can't bluff and must check-fold because J-high is very unlikely to be the best hand - we lose b) Hand improves - we likely have the best hand, but how do we best extract value here since a donk bet will likely turn our hand face-up after check-calling two streets? Can we count on the villain to raise, or will he more likely check behind? Well this is not good Okay, well the extra steps I added today are a huge improvement over what I put down yesterday. But now I'm lost on how to figure out which of the two possible courses of action is the best. Maybe I'll need to stare at it for a bit and ponder it some more? That always seems to help umbup: [/spoiler] ___________________________________________ (Mar. 26, 2013) EG4. From Live Training: Draw-Heavy Turn, and the Villain's Slowing Down - good opportunity to check-raise and barrel the river? Live Training - Loose Passive (Ep. 'Preflop Aggression', Dec. 20, 2012, @31:45) hand: 5d Kd board: 8s 7s 5c Ts One reason this spot might be tempting - the villain had a wide range, and seemed to be betting according to the strength of his holding. So he appeared to be holding a pair, when he bet small into a very wet board - good spot to reraise and pretend to have a straight or flush? But Gareth says don't do it!! What if he didn't wind up folding on the turn - even IF the river was a brick, would he fold the river if he didn't fold the turn? And what if the river card was a J or a spade? Not so tempting after all ___________________________________________ (March 26, 2013) EG5. From Live Training: Small Pair oop - gets min-raised Live Training - versus Loose Semi-Aggressive Passive (Ep. 'Dealing with 3-Bets', Dec. 13, 2012, @34:05) hand: 8c 2d board: 8d 9s Qc This was another spot where the villain was playing really loose, and then making mini-bets in position with weak holdings. So the BPNK was probably good on the flop - I guess the overriding consideration that made this a fold was that question of how was the hand going to hold up on the turn and river if the villain were to keep barrelling. Are situations like these called hands with reverse implied odds? Like we can either win a little or possibly lose a lot? Funny how it was so easy to learn to ignore the fact that we we're never getting immediate odds to call raises from TAGs with small pocket pairs. But I can't seem to do the same when the same principle (in reverse) applies to folding hands that are ahead. Sigh ... Some nice benefits for those who think ahead! One of these days, maybe I'll be able to do that too [/spoiler] [/spoiler] IV. Bluffs

              A. Catching Them

              (Feb. 26, 2013) When I was up at 10nl that first time I went snooping around, it seemed like there was a lot more bluffing and aggro, especially in the blinds? So I guess in this section, I'll try to start up a collection of common spots, and then hopefully some patterns'll start to emerge? 1. Overbets 2. Inconsistent Story - Trying to Represent Too Many Hands, on a Scary Board
              a) Live Training (Ep. 'River Decisions', Dec. 27, 2012, Hand1) hand: Ad Qd board: 5h Ah 2d 4d 5d The villain reraised the turn, and then potted it on the river. And if the villain had had a straight on the turn, he wouldn't have likely made his river bet so big. While if he had had a set on the turn, he probably wouldn't have reraised with 4 to a straight on the board.
              3. No Story - Not Really Representing Anything, on a Dry Board
              a) Live Training (Ep. 'River Decisions', Dec. 27, 2012, Hand2 @31:00) hand: Ad Kh board: Kd 5c 9s Ac 5d The villain reraised the flop on the driest of dry boards, with 3-card gaps in between each flop card, and no flush draws.
              Update (Mar. 3, 2013) Started to get so much better at folding, that I actually had to start worrying about folding *too much*! It became enough of a concern that I decided to call a couple of those 'mini-reraises' that people seem to like to do when they've got a monster of a hand. You know like a check-reraise of $0.25 into a $1.45 pot or whatever lol. But every time I called, they had what they appeared to have, so it was seeming like my folding was in a good place? Although that was during my downswing - now that the tide has turned, there's been a couple of interesting spots. This one was exactly like Live Training - so glad I made a point of taking a close look at that spot in the vid, because otherwise I might have been tempted to fold the flop? :o Seems like my entire *game* comes from watching other people play ... not sure what I can do about that though lol. Guess I'm not much of a natural, so I'm really grateful for the great learning materials here at PSO ... and it's nice to have my winrate bounce back up thanks in part to this hand ... $$ hehe
              [/spoiler] B. Making Them [/spoiler] V. Deep-Stacked Play

              (Mar. 10, 2013) Really, really need to be careful to avoid accidentally getting involved in deep-stacked situations. Because so many more people know how to play deep-stacked up at 10nl, and they all play really well. While I'm still working on plugging up leaks. So until I plug all those leaks, and manage to learn more about deep-stacked play - which probably isn't going to be for a long, long time ... like another year at least ... will have to make sure to cash out and buy back in as soon as my stack gets close to $15.00 (150bbs). Have to be very careful!! Don't want to accidentally wind up in awkward spots like this one!! Deep-stacked Hand from the Replayer [/spoiler] VI. 3-Bets, 4-Bets, and Reraises

              A. Intro

              So the hope for this section is that I can find a wide range of sample hands of 3-Bets/4-Bets/Reraises, so that I'll have a plan for for most every possible scenario that might arise. Because reraised pots seem to have a tendency to spiral out of control so quickly otherwise - it seems like it ought to be a huge advantage to only be stacking off when we WANT to be, rather than because we wound up in a bidding war against another donkey? I mean donkey ... *just* a donkey lol Better save my stuff - my internet keeps cutting out :/ [/spoiler] B. Getting 3-Bet, 4-Bet and Reraised

              Will just jot down some quick points for now 1. Pre-Flop a) General Rule Generally we should stick to playing 3-bet pots with value hands, and try to be in position whenever possible. Some examples to highlight just how selective we ought to be in picking which spots to defend ... i. AJo utg Facing a Squeeze
              (April 22, 2013) Live Training (Ep. 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 18, 2012, @27:15) AJo in this spot is “one of the worst hands to have ... there's all the difference in world between having an off-suited hand and a suited hand in that situation,” so it's a fold. That's even in spite of the fact that in the face of a mini-reraise, we'll generally be getting a good price to call and see the flop in hopes of making 2pr or better. And I guess that's even in spite of the fact that the villain *might* have been trying to squeeze light? Because playing out of position against two people is just such a disadvantage?
              ii. AKo in the bb Gets 4-Bet from a Reg in the Cut-Off
              (April 22, 2013) Live Training (Ep. 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 17, 2012, @41:40) The Villain here was only had a 5% 4-Bet, which is so small it doesn't even include QQ or AQs. I should add the 4-bet stat to my HUD and see if it's more of a factor than it was at 5nl.
              b) Special Circumstances i. Mini-Reraises - we should be calling wider, to set-mine, or to try to make a 2pr hand ii. OOP - calling 3-bets should be strictly limited to: - villains we know for sure are 3-betting light - but have a fold button - when we have a high-valued, suited, and connected hand like KQs 2. Post-Flop - if uncertain about where our hand stands in relation to the villain's, consider whether we have outs to a better one [/spoiler] C. Making 3-Bets, 4-Bets and Reraises

              1. Pre-Flop a. Squeezes See Time Vault thread discussion: i. Squeeze Attempt into an unknown utg limper, and unknown mp raiser gets called - disaster!
              (April 22, 2013) This is *exactly* the type of situation I was hoping to avoid, in putting so much time and effort into studying how to best 3-bet - so not ideal to be playing for stacks with A9s TPMK ... sigh ... Guess the takeaway from this hand is that I should have been thinking about what sorts of flops I was going to be willing to stack off with post-flop BEFORE trying to get 'fancy'? And if I didn't know how the villains were likely to respond to a reraise, then it might have just been better to fold pre?
              b. From the Blinds into a Stealer with a Wide Calling Range
              Find that hand from Live Training where KQo was 3-bet for value into somebody with a wide steal range ... sometimes it's like looking for a needle in a haystack trying to find a particular hand that's on my mind. Hopefully it won't take too long ...
              2. Post-Flop a. Sizing - My Hand from HA

              (April, 2013) - 3-bet sizing doesn't have to be 3 times the villain's raise - it can be larger or smaller, depending on what it is we hope to achieve with it [/spoiler] [/spoiler] D. AK - Special Considerations

              One of the best hands in poker - but not a made hand. What to do, what to do ... Just a list of resources for now - have to add notes later!
              1. Notes I posted about when to reraise and when to just call, and why: AK spots from Live Training (various episodes) a) General Rule: Call Behind a PFR
              (April 7, 2013) Since most raisers in early position tend to be tight, we should be calling behind with AK to keep hands like AQ, AJ, KQs, JTs in play. Otherwise if we 3-bet, people will only be willing to continue out of position with hands like QQ that are slightly ahead. And they'll fold all those hands AK dominates, such that we'll only make like $0.15. Or worse - we could get 4-bet by a hand like QQ, where we're actually still competitive, and would have position - and then we'd have to fold.
              b) Exceptions to the General Rule: 3-Bets, 4-Bets and Reraises
              (April 9, 2013) i. 3-betting into weaker players, for value (even if they're utg) - see IDing the Regulars (Oct. 4, 2012) @3:16 ii. 3-betting into loose players, for value (default assumption for a cut-off raiser) - see Preflop Aggression (Dec. 19, 2012) @7:48 iii. Squeezing into limpers, for value - the one example from Live Training happened to be from the blinds, but Gareth said he'd play it the same way in position - see Adventures in 2nl Zoom (Sept. 12, 2012) @34:36 (from the sb) - exception - if the players are tight - and beware those limp-reraisers ... y'all know who I mean :/ iv. 4-betting cold into a loose 3-bettor, for value - the example from Live Training is from the blinds, but one of the reasons given for cold 4-betting was that the 3-bettor was on the button. So if the assumption was made that he was 3-betting wider, maybe it'd be the same for the button if the cut-off was a maniac? Not sure about this one, but thought it'd be important to include jic? - see Read that Hand @6:47 v. 4-betting into 3-bettors from the blinds (willing to get stacks in pre-flop, unless the villain is tight) - sb - see MicroZOOMing (Aug. 30, 2012) @13:58 - bb - see Four the Win @3:47 vi. 5-betting into a loose 4-bettor (the default assumption for a cut-off player) - see Preflop Aggression (Dec. 19, 2012) @10:48 vii. 4-betting into a squeezer, after calling behind an open-raiser - Discussion: see Preflop Aggression (Dec. 19, 2012) @4:34
              2. Hands from HA: a) Pre-Flop
              i. Exception to 3-Bet/Squeeze from the SB: (April 7, 2013) • Villains are both unknown • Both were deep-stacked (over 300bbs) • One raised UTG So it's assumed that their ranges were pretty tight, and so therefore it was best to just call with AK, rather than attempt and 3-bet and get called by both. Which would make the pot HUGE, and we'd be playing out of position against two tight players
              ii. Flat-Calling vs Cold 4-Betting (and Sizing): (April 12, 2013) The Dilemma: Forrest was new to the pool, no player reads, and ... • villain 1 raised utg, and villain 2 min-3-bet from mp - so usually that would mean a tight range • but villain 2 wasn't playing with a full stack - which usually means a more casual-type player The Options: Gareth said it was okay to do either (4-bet or just call) ... I guess if we think the hijack is a not-so-good player, then we're supposed to want to keep them IN the pot? One advantage to 4-betting would be of one of them folds, because then it'd be easier to play against just one person. But one disadvantage to 4-betting is if we get 5-bet, and have to fold without getting to even see a flop. Also, Gareth points out that with that possible weak person in the hijack, what if utg decided to flat-call with KK or AA to try and keep them in the pot? I guess whichever we choose at any given time might depend on how strong are our reads? 4-Bet Sizing: Gareth reminds us that sizing isn't just about the % of our stack, or about the % of the pot ... we should consider those two factors, and also the size of the villain's 3-bet. And since the villain's 3-bet here was only $3.50, a better size for a 4-bet would have been around $8.50
              a) Post-Flop
              i. 4-Bet Pot, Calling Villain Check-Raise with TPTK: (April 9, 2013) hand: Ks As board: 3c Kd Js Stack-to-Pot Ratio Rule: At this stack depth, with this board, we should be stacking off with TPTK - because there's lots of $ in the pot, not much $ left, and TPTK on a dry board is a pretty strong hand. With so much $ in the pot, we don't need to be *as* sure we're ahead, since we only need to invest a little more to win a lot. Also, when there's so little $ behind, villains have an incentive to try and leverage fold equity with draws. And here, Forrest had blockers to AA, KK, and AJ. Plus, something that was suspicious was that the villain check-shoved his entire stack, rather than making a calculated reraise that Forrest might have been more tempted to call?
     [/spoiler] [/spoiler] VII. Extracting Maximum Value

              A. Intro

              Well, so in last week's class (Zoom On - the class for which I hold the only known recording in the world ... fingers-crossed it's still intact on the hard-drive of my broken computer ), Gareth was saying that something he's noticed at lower stakes is that we're not as good at getting value from our strong holdings. Except it's kind of hard to know what we're doing wrong when we're *that* person, who's doing that thing wrong? Think this hand from today's class (Playing a Fool (April 1, 2013), @0:50) pretty much says it all - decided to stick the video clip in for easy access: Gosh, so the most I'd ever probably raise on the river would be $2.15 ... that's a whole $1.60 less than Gareth's $3.75 - that's almost double what I'd have been able to get from the *same* spot!! But the part to really take note of, was that there was the expectation, that in betting the $3.75, the villain would hopefully call with A high - and did - because Gareth was thinking that it didn't look like he had anything (and that therefore his bet size would look bluffy?) So I guess 'level 3 thinking' is the big difference? Have another example from HA below ... [/spoiler] B. Sample Hands

              1. Forrest's Boat from HA - betting to get called on a wet board, when there's signs the villain's hand isn't super strong

              (Mar. 29, 2013) Guess ranging of the villain's hand will be important too - in knowing what hands we're hoping will call? Looks like there'll be some overlap with my 'Hand Ranging' section. But it kind of seems like betting (and maybe folding too?) might be the kind of thing that's easier to learn with lots of examples? And having a section free to add hands to'll make it easier to do that (April 3, 2013) Update Okay, so what's important to note specifically about ranging is that Gareth relied on the villain's check-call on the turn, on the following board, to rule out a stronger hand like a straight or set: board: 3c Jc 8d 9d And therefore, it was determined through ranging, that the sorts of hands that might still be in the pot would most likely be: Villain's likely range: TT, JT-AJ, QQ-AA <-- We're supposed to be able to do this! Come up with this range before betting, so we know how big a bet those sorts of hands might be willing to call. So Forrest made about a half-pot bet of $11.50 into $22, and Gareth recommended one about $3 bigger. (Villain had AA)
              [/spoiler] 2. Live Training - flopped nut flush with an interested customer (from my archives below)

              (April 7, 2013) Episode: 'MicroZOOMing', Aug. 30, 2012, @19:30 hand: Td Ad board: 8d 4d Qd 5s 9h The betting idea: 1. Bet medium on the flop (63%) 2. A little bit bigger on the turn (74% - not too small, but not too big), and 3. Bet really big on the river (92% - close to pot, because worse made hands will call, but all missed draws will fold) Villain called the big river bet with Q9o. Summary: bigger, bigger!!
              [/spoiler] 3. Live Training - special situation: big hand, dry board, multiway pot (from my archives below)

              (April 9, 2013) Episode: 'Value in All the Right Places', Oct. 31, 2012, @00:30 hand: 3d 3s board: Ac 3h 4d 6c Jh The betting idea: We can make more by betting half-pot, and getting 2 people to call, than if we bet the standard 2/3 to 3/4 and only get one caller. Because people might be tempted to call with TPNK, MP, etc.
              [/spoiler] 4. Live Training - hand that demonstrates the idea that it's more EV to bet bigger at the risk of not getting called on occasion, rather than making bets smaller to ensure a call (from my archives below)

              Episode: 'The Biggest Blind', Oct. 17, 2012, @36:20 hand: Qh Qs board: 6s 6d Qd 6c 5h Bet Sizing: tbc
              [/spoiler] 5. Another Forrest Boat from HA - ranging to see what worse hands might call (so then we'll know how big to bet)

              (April 9, 2013) Just adding the hand for now - will add notes later. Not even sure if it should go here, or would be better-suited for the ranging section? Hmmm ... maybe any ranging that involves ranging when we've got a big hand, so we'll know how much to bet, I'll keep here? Better look over the other section first ...
              [/spoiler] 6. My Attempt at Betting as Seen in Hand #2 with a Turned Flush
              (April 22, 2013) On the one hand, this hand was a step forward in the sense that I didn't hesitate to pot it after making my flush. On the other hand, this hand was a step backwards in that I wasn't ranging at all, and was just looking at my own hand. Not sure how much I should have shaved off for only having the 4th nuts oop on a highly coordinated board, blind vs blind, against an unknown. But the next time I'm in a similar situation, that'd be nice to at least remember to think about those things ...
              [/spoiler] [/spoiler] [/spoiler] [/spoiler] .
              Last edited by TrustySam; Wed Jul 24, 2013, 03:18 AM.


              • #8
                Originally posted by TrustySam View Post
                Hey thx for the good luck wishes ... need all the help I can get!! GL GL to 2 too!! umbup: umbup:
                your very welcomeumbup: tnx for the GL GL


                • #9
                  Leak Busting Hey, so I went pouring over the details of my book 'Small Stakes Hold'em', trying to apply their advice to my hand histories, but basically their advice boils down to this: 1. Making TP, 2pr, or 3pr is great. BUT TP is very vulnerable when the board's paired, there's 2 to a flush or the board, or 3 to a straight. 2. Having overcards as well as a flush draw or straight draw can sometimes be as good as TP (unless the board is paired, there's 2 to a flush or 3 to a straight for somebody else and not you) Like it was pretty straightfoward info ... So I can't decide if hands like this one were misplayed and in what way: (This is a zoom hand against an unknown opponent) So, dry board, no flush draws, no straight draws unless they have A4, A5, 45, which seemed unlikely. You think I should have: a) Bet more on the turn to try and get them to fold, instead of trying to get one more street of betting? b) Or you think it was a decent gamble, BUT if I try to get 'fancy' I need to be prepared to fold on the river to any pushback? (Odds - Preflop:45%, Flop:91%, Turn:95%, River:0%) I confused myself because I wasn't sure if they knew how strong I was, and they thought they were better off than they were or what ... maybe just wishful thinking? Maybe for people without my calling station tendencies, option b is the most EV way of playing over time. But for somebody like me, I shouldn't have pushed my luck if I was going to have problems folding on the river? Oh, and then I not only had problems folding ... I went and RERAISED!! I guess that might have been a titch optimistic, eh? I've got a similar hand where I made an even lamer call for an even bigger shove :/
                  Last edited by TrustySam; Wed May 09, 2012, 06:54 AM.


                  • #10
                    Leak Busting - Plan B Screw the book - got myself some software instead! I'm optimistic it's gonna help tame that little donkey inside me that's always wanting to come out and play umbup:


                    • #11
                      i'm bad at cash game but as per MTT, anyone limping UTG you must put him in any pair, AsJs+. When he call your 3Bet. a decent pair of at least 99+. AsQs+ flop , turn, half pot bet is good as your ahead. but at the river you must bet half the pot in case he has under pair and he thinks your bluffing and you still have a chance to fold if he shove or call on his reraise if you read it as a bluff saving chips and your not out of the tourney. Just my 2 centsumbup: Hope it helpsumbup:
                      Last edited by PINOY_HITMAN; Thu May 10, 2012, 07:32 PM.


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by TrustySam View Post
                        Leak Busting - Plan B Screw the book - got myself some software instead!
                        I did get it and it helped me a lot. I don't regret it umbup:


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by PINOY_HITMAN View Post
                          i'm bad at cash game but as per MTT, anyone limping UTG you must put him in any pair, AsJs+. When he call your 3Bet. a decent pair of at least 99+. AsQs+ flop , turn, half pot bet is good as your ahead. but at the river you must bet half the pot in case he has under pair and he thinks your bluffing and you still have a chance to fold if he shove or call on his reraise if you read it as a bluff saving chips and your not out of the tourney. Just my 2 centsumbup: Hope it helpsumbup:
                          Hey, Hitman, that's an awesome tip about half-betting the river too - that never even occurred to me. I should have been more careful about the possibility that they might have had something like 89s, or 88, or then the 99 - and then if they check-raised me I could either make a smaller call or fold. And then even if they only had AQ or A8 or 77, etc, I'd be getting more by betting half anyways then if I made a whole pot-sized bet and they folded. This whole process of spotting leaks and trying to find solutions has been pretty interesting overall - like a puzzle or something. But I must say it's been at times confusing too - I can understand how people could become discouraged with poker. Like spotting leaks is one thing. But then knowing how to fix them can be another. I used to sometimes raise too much on dry boards to try and chase people out of pots to avoid getting drawn out, then I decided to try betting less to keep people in as a way to extract more value, but then this happened. If you hadn't suggested that 3rd way of continuing to bet half, I'd have probably gone back to my old ways of betting more to get people to fold, which doesn't sound like it's the right way to be playing AK on a dry board. So thanks so much for guidance - it helps a lot!!! umbup: umbup:


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Sandtrap777 View Post
                            I did get it and it helped me a lot. I don't regret it umbup:
                            Oooh, that makes me feel even better about buying this software - seeing as you're on fire in SCOOP!! Yes!!! umbup: umbup: My whole leak busting thing has been so all over the map and lacking in direction, with me trying a little bit of this and a little bit of that in hopes that something would stick and make a difference. So buying this software was just another attempt to try something else. But I must say, the software's way better than I could have imagined. For people who aren't familiar with it, it analyzes your hand histories and compares them with stats/results of winning players and then spots pattern where you don't measure up and offers concrete suggestions on how to improve. Like it knew about me calling too much on the river (LOL! How did it know? ) But then it also noticed other things, like that I'm treating hands like ATo and KQs like it's AK. And this was really interesting - it said that if you haven't made at least a pair to go with your flush draw by the turn, then you're usually just have about a 20% chance of making a hand by the river, so it's a waste to continue. Their recommendations seem solid, so I going to try to play the way they suggest and see how it goes ... it would seem like it ought to help umbup:


                            • #15
                              Hot off the presses! That turn card setting up the flush draw was kind of scary - I was tempted to make a bigger bet to chase them out of the pot, but it turned out okay. No call on the river this time, but it felt good to make the half bet umbup:



                              X Cookies Information

                              We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.