So I presented a few tricky spots yesterday where I wasn't sure what the best line was. On Hand 1, a lot of you indicated folding or check calling... in looking back, I do agree that that was probably best, mainly because there aren't any hands that would realistically call me with hands that are worse than mine. But... being the 6 max aggro monkey that I am, I ended up jamming in Hand 1.
Full Ring - 2-4NL, relevant stacks
Villain ($486.90)
Hero ($433)
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [Ah Kh]
2 folds
Hero raises to $14
1 fold
Villain calls $14 from CO
Button and both blinds fold
*** FLOP *** [Kc 5c 5d]
Hero bets $24
Villain calls $24
*** TURN *** [Kc 5c 5d] [Th]
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero bets $65
Villain raises to $130
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero has requested TIME
Hero ???
I jammed here, got instacalled by KK. That was one hand I DID NOT expect to see. Again, I think most of you had it right. Folding or even check calling would have saved me money.
Hand #2
Another full ring table 2-4NL (7 players in hand)
Relevant stacks:
Villain ($253.40) <--- BB
Hero ($416)
One additional info is that villain calls A LOT of hands preflop. I don't have the stats with me but his VP$IP was like 35-40%.
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to RecessRampage [Jc Tc]
Hero raises to $14
5 folds
Villain calls $10
*** FLOP *** [7s Qs Jh]
Villain checks
Hero bets $22
Villain calls $22
*** TURN *** [7s Qs Jh] [Qd]
Villain has 15 seconds left to act
Villain bets $44
Hero calls $44
*** RIVER *** [7s Qs Jh Qd] [Kc]
Villain bets $162
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero has requested TIME
Hero ???
I ended up making a hero call here. I didn't like my hand enough to make a raise on the turn so I called to keep the pot small. On the river, I felt that he either had T9 that got there or it's a missed flush draw and I have seen him take stabs like that... I mean you kinda have to if you're a loose player... He flips over Q9 and I lose another pot. I was shocked to see a Q in his hand.
See, but then hands like this happen where I kinda hate the spot I'm in and yet I make a call based on the fact that the sequence doesn't make sense and I turn out to be right...
6 max - 2-4NL
Seat 1: tturquoise ($923.10)
Seat 2: SkeetOnQQ ($533)
Seat 3: RecessRampage ($402) <--- SB
Seat 4: Mano Nera ($1,167.95) <--- BB
Seat 5: TooCool4Skool ($613)
Seat 6: slypigdave ($790.50)
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [Qh Jc]
3 folds
SkeetOnQQ raises to $12 <--- button
RecessRampage raises to $40 <--- SB
Mano Nera calls $36 <--- uh oh
SkeetOnQQ calls $28 <--- adlfkjadklfjljsdfjakljd
*** FLOP *** [6s 5h Jd]
RecessRampage checks
Mano Nera checks
SkeetOnQQ has 15 seconds left to act
SkeetOnQQ bets $35
RecessRampage calls $35
Mano Nera folds
With two players calling my reraise, I got scared so I checked... Mano Nera must have had AK?
*** TURN *** [6s 5h Jd] [9d]
RecessRampage checks
SkeetOnQQ checks
*** RIVER *** [6s 5h Jd 9d] [5c]
RecessRampage checks
SkeetOnQQ bets $100
RecessRampage has 15 seconds left to act
RecessRampage has requested TIME
RecessRampage ???
See, here's where I got confused. But then this board is kinda terrible because now, there are so many hands that would beat me and so few hands that I beat. I mean he smooth called a reraise so he must have a decent hand. But then I thought QQ-AA would have repopped since those are not hands you want to see a 3 way flop with. Middle pocket pairs like 55, 66, 99 all hit the sets but then I thought there's now way a hand like that would check the turn especially after I called the flop bet. Then he fires out a bet on the river? This made no sense. If he had a hand like AJ, he would certainly check on a board like this against a reraiser since the only hand that would realistically call him is a hand that beats his. So, in this instance, I thought it was more often a bluff, thought maybe he has AK (and didn't want to jam preflop into two guys, one of which who smooth called a reraise) so I called.
He flipped over J8 sooted and so I took this pot.
Weird weird spot...
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Tricky Spots
Here are a few interesting spots that I got into last night and wanted to know what you would do if you were me. Preferably, include why you would call, raise, or fold and the hand ranges that you think the villain could have that would lead you to the action you would take.
Full Ring - 2-4NL, relevant stacks
Villain ($486.90)
Hero ($433)
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [Ah Kh]
2 folds
Hero raises to $14
1 fold
Villain calls $14 from CO
Button and both blinds fold
*** FLOP *** [Kc 5c 5d]
Hero bets $24
Villain calls $24
*** TURN *** [Kc 5c 5d] [Th]
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero bets $65
Villain raises to $130
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero has requested TIME
Hero ???
Again, WWYD?
Another full ring table 2-4NL (7 players in hand)
Relevant stacks:
Villain ($253.40) <--- BB
Hero ($416)
One additional info is that villain calls A LOT of hands preflop. I don't have the stats with me but his VP$IP was like 35-40%.
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to RecessRampage [Jc Tc]
Hero raises to $14
5 folds
Villain calls $10
*** FLOP *** [7s Qs Jh]
Villain checks
Hero bets $22
Villain calls $22
*** TURN *** [7s Qs Jh] [Qd]
Villain has 15 seconds left to act
Villain bets $44
Hero calls $44
*** RIVER *** [7s Qs Jh Qd] [Kc]
Villain bets $162
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero has requested TIME
Hero ???
Again, WWYD? Would you have done something different on the turn?
There was another hand that I thought I saved on here that apparently didn't so that's all for today...
Full Ring - 2-4NL, relevant stacks
Villain ($486.90)
Hero ($433)
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [Ah Kh]
2 folds
Hero raises to $14
1 fold
Villain calls $14 from CO
Button and both blinds fold
*** FLOP *** [Kc 5c 5d]
Hero bets $24
Villain calls $24
*** TURN *** [Kc 5c 5d] [Th]
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero bets $65
Villain raises to $130
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero has requested TIME
Hero ???
Again, WWYD?
Another full ring table 2-4NL (7 players in hand)
Relevant stacks:
Villain ($253.40) <--- BB
Hero ($416)
One additional info is that villain calls A LOT of hands preflop. I don't have the stats with me but his VP$IP was like 35-40%.
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to RecessRampage [Jc Tc]
Hero raises to $14
5 folds
Villain calls $10
*** FLOP *** [7s Qs Jh]
Villain checks
Hero bets $22
Villain calls $22
*** TURN *** [7s Qs Jh] [Qd]
Villain has 15 seconds left to act
Villain bets $44
Hero calls $44
*** RIVER *** [7s Qs Jh Qd] [Kc]
Villain bets $162
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero has requested TIME
Hero ???
Again, WWYD? Would you have done something different on the turn?
There was another hand that I thought I saved on here that apparently didn't so that's all for today...
Monday, August 25, 2008
"It's not about the name on the back but the letters in the front"
The Olympics are over and now, I can focus on other important things like fantasy football. I have yet to see a single football game since the Olympics consumed my entire free time. There were obviously tons of stories from this Olympics but the one sport I enjoyed the most was basketball.
Now for some of you, you might think that I would say basketball because I play all the time and naturally, it's my favorite sport... except I hardly watch any NBA games (except for the playoffs) and in the past, I actually did not enjoy watching the US men's basketball team. But this year, it was different. For the first time in a long time, I felt like these guys played like a team and it was actually entertaining as hell to watch. They kept repeating that this was about the team and not about the individual players. "It's not about the name on the back but the letters in the front." Whether they meant that or not, I thought that was really cool and they definitely stuck by it and played like it. I think the biggest proof of that is the fact that of the top 10 scorers (measured by ppg), there is only one US player... in 9th place and that's D Wade. (LeBron in 11th, Kobe in 13th). There are 5 guys averaging double digit scoring closely followed by Bosh with 9.1 ppg. It just shows that they spread the ball around and everyone is contributing to the win. Like I said, I really enjoyed watching all their games and though this is not the "Dream Team", it was the first time in a while that I thought "Man, this is a great team and I can't wait to see their next game."
This may not be the most talented team but a Kobe & Kidd backcourt tandem (or even better is Kobe and Chris Paul) is 10x better than the Marbury and Iverson combo... and this coming from a guy who actually likes Iverson... a lot.
If for some reason you missed the gold-medal game, you can watch the entire game here. As a matter of fact, you can watch every single sport. Personally, I think that's cool as shit.
One thing that I thought was interesting from the gold medal game was what it must be like to be 17 years old and be matched up against guys like Jason Kidd and Chris Paul (how is Chris Paul NOT the starter????). That was the case with Ricky Rubio. He's 17 years old, considered to be the best point guard ever to come out of Europe (really, how big of a compliment is that though?). According to wikipedia, in Slam magazine, he was compared to Magic Johnson... now that's gotta be a joke right? I mean Magic? Really? Only guy who could match up (and possibly school) Magic is LeBron. That kid is damn good. But nonetheless, I thought it had to be crazy wild for a guy who is 17 to be playing against one of the best PGs in the NBA. When he's eligible, he'll obviously be very much sought after. That should be a fun time.
I'm gonna miss the Olympics. For the past few weeks, it's like the playoffs atmosphere the whole time and that was fun. Japan sucked as usual and I lost my prop bet with Schaubs but nonetheless, I just love watching sports and all the drama that unfolds. But thank god, football season is right around the corner. Give it a few weekends and I won't even think about the Olympics at that point.
Now for some of you, you might think that I would say basketball because I play all the time and naturally, it's my favorite sport... except I hardly watch any NBA games (except for the playoffs) and in the past, I actually did not enjoy watching the US men's basketball team. But this year, it was different. For the first time in a long time, I felt like these guys played like a team and it was actually entertaining as hell to watch. They kept repeating that this was about the team and not about the individual players. "It's not about the name on the back but the letters in the front." Whether they meant that or not, I thought that was really cool and they definitely stuck by it and played like it. I think the biggest proof of that is the fact that of the top 10 scorers (measured by ppg), there is only one US player... in 9th place and that's D Wade. (LeBron in 11th, Kobe in 13th). There are 5 guys averaging double digit scoring closely followed by Bosh with 9.1 ppg. It just shows that they spread the ball around and everyone is contributing to the win. Like I said, I really enjoyed watching all their games and though this is not the "Dream Team", it was the first time in a while that I thought "Man, this is a great team and I can't wait to see their next game."
This may not be the most talented team but a Kobe & Kidd backcourt tandem (or even better is Kobe and Chris Paul) is 10x better than the Marbury and Iverson combo... and this coming from a guy who actually likes Iverson... a lot.
If for some reason you missed the gold-medal game, you can watch the entire game here. As a matter of fact, you can watch every single sport. Personally, I think that's cool as shit.
One thing that I thought was interesting from the gold medal game was what it must be like to be 17 years old and be matched up against guys like Jason Kidd and Chris Paul (how is Chris Paul NOT the starter????). That was the case with Ricky Rubio. He's 17 years old, considered to be the best point guard ever to come out of Europe (really, how big of a compliment is that though?). According to wikipedia, in Slam magazine, he was compared to Magic Johnson... now that's gotta be a joke right? I mean Magic? Really? Only guy who could match up (and possibly school) Magic is LeBron. That kid is damn good. But nonetheless, I thought it had to be crazy wild for a guy who is 17 to be playing against one of the best PGs in the NBA. When he's eligible, he'll obviously be very much sought after. That should be a fun time.
I'm gonna miss the Olympics. For the past few weeks, it's like the playoffs atmosphere the whole time and that was fun. Japan sucked as usual and I lost my prop bet with Schaubs but nonetheless, I just love watching sports and all the drama that unfolds. But thank god, football season is right around the corner. Give it a few weekends and I won't even think about the Olympics at that point.
Friday, August 22, 2008
Table selection vs Seat selection
So Gnome and I have been exchanging a few thoughts in regards to game selection. He's a big believer in game selection and from what I can tell, he spends time trying to find the right table where there are bunch of losing players. I, on the other hand, just tend to go find an open table and sit. So, when Gnome asked me why I didn't game select, I thought it was a point worth discussing here and also, I thought that maybe I can share what I do. I mean even though I don't necessarily spend the time to game select, I don't just sit at any table.
Now, one easy way to find the juiciest tables is obviously through tableratings.com. However, when I was first introduced to this site, one thing I noticed was that all the "good" tables had waiting lists that were like 5 or 6 deep. By the time I would get seated, the table would be filled with all the sharks. I just felt like I was spending too much time looking for the game and not enough time playing it. So, I kinda stopped looking.
When the other day, Gnome left me a message about why I don't game select, I decided to give it another go. Just to come to the same conclusion. Here were some of the things I noticed in regards to the highly rated (ie, most donkish) tables:
- waiting list that is as deep as the number of seats for the table
- bunch of short stackers (you mean there's hardly any post flop poker AND the only guys you would be playing a big pot against would be the better players at the table)
So, I went back to my old method... which was looking for tables with the least waiting list or an open seat. However, I don't just sit at any table. One thing I like to make sure when I put myself at the table or the waiting list is how deep the table is. I don't want to be at a table where the full buy-in is $400 and yet half or more of the table only has like $100 in front of them. Once I see that everyone has a fair amount in front of them, I would sit there... but this is what I do (maybe to make up for the lack of game selection)... I seat select.
In other words, I might not be as picky about which table I go sit at but one thing I make sure is whether the seat I'm about to take is a good one. See, the thing with game selection is that you could find a table with a bunch of donkeys which is fine except if your seat sucks, it's not as cool. Let's say you find a highly rated table with a bunch of losers. You get on the waiting list and poof, a seat opens up. You go to the table and you find a few shorties here and there. Then you notice that to your left is a big stack aggro solid player... that's terrible. Almost to the point where it's not worth sitting there.
So, here are things I look for when I look at tables or when I'm seated and I'm deciding whether I really want to buy in or not:
- who is to my left (both immediate and two seats to my left)
- what are the stack sizes in relation to my position
- how deep are the general stacks at the whole table
You obviously want the uber aggro to your right instead of on your left. You also want the deeper stacks to be to your right. In other words, you want the ideal position on any of the stacks that could really hurt you and in a cash game, you are at liberty to choose your seat... at least initially. And obviously, you want the stacks to be fairly deep so that it doesn't just turn into preflop poker.
Do you seat select at all? Do you practice game selection? Have a nice weekend all. I have my fantasy football draft coming up tonight and I am not prepared...
Now, one easy way to find the juiciest tables is obviously through tableratings.com. However, when I was first introduced to this site, one thing I noticed was that all the "good" tables had waiting lists that were like 5 or 6 deep. By the time I would get seated, the table would be filled with all the sharks. I just felt like I was spending too much time looking for the game and not enough time playing it. So, I kinda stopped looking.
When the other day, Gnome left me a message about why I don't game select, I decided to give it another go. Just to come to the same conclusion. Here were some of the things I noticed in regards to the highly rated (ie, most donkish) tables:
- waiting list that is as deep as the number of seats for the table
- bunch of short stackers (you mean there's hardly any post flop poker AND the only guys you would be playing a big pot against would be the better players at the table)
So, I went back to my old method... which was looking for tables with the least waiting list or an open seat. However, I don't just sit at any table. One thing I like to make sure when I put myself at the table or the waiting list is how deep the table is. I don't want to be at a table where the full buy-in is $400 and yet half or more of the table only has like $100 in front of them. Once I see that everyone has a fair amount in front of them, I would sit there... but this is what I do (maybe to make up for the lack of game selection)... I seat select.
In other words, I might not be as picky about which table I go sit at but one thing I make sure is whether the seat I'm about to take is a good one. See, the thing with game selection is that you could find a table with a bunch of donkeys which is fine except if your seat sucks, it's not as cool. Let's say you find a highly rated table with a bunch of losers. You get on the waiting list and poof, a seat opens up. You go to the table and you find a few shorties here and there. Then you notice that to your left is a big stack aggro solid player... that's terrible. Almost to the point where it's not worth sitting there.
So, here are things I look for when I look at tables or when I'm seated and I'm deciding whether I really want to buy in or not:
- who is to my left (both immediate and two seats to my left)
- what are the stack sizes in relation to my position
- how deep are the general stacks at the whole table
You obviously want the uber aggro to your right instead of on your left. You also want the deeper stacks to be to your right. In other words, you want the ideal position on any of the stacks that could really hurt you and in a cash game, you are at liberty to choose your seat... at least initially. And obviously, you want the stacks to be fairly deep so that it doesn't just turn into preflop poker.
Do you seat select at all? Do you practice game selection? Have a nice weekend all. I have my fantasy football draft coming up tonight and I am not prepared...
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Floating 101
Quick nonpoker observation - Usain Bolt is a freakin machine.
For those of you that don't know, this guy crushed the 100m dash in the Olympics, cruising the last 20-30m (that's a fifth to the third of a race!!) with arms wide open as if to say "GET YOUR POPCORN READY!" Some people talked about how he should have ran through the race to really make the world record untouchable. The way I see it, he's running against 8 other allegedly fastest guys on earth. If he can crush them that bad, hell, I wouldn't say shit if he turned around and ran backwards the last 20 meters. Taunt away. I love showmanship. Is that even a word? I don't know. Whatever. And then I watched him destroy the 200m last night. Oh my god. Last night, the 8 others on that field must have felt what it feels like to get up to the tee earlier in the year when Tiger was crushing it. They're fighting for second cuz the top player is so dominant. Just sickening.
Alright... back to poker...
So, today, I wanted to talk about floating. In the past, and maybe still at 1-2NL and below, if you were in position, one of the moves you could make was to float the flop cbet with the intention of taking it away on the turn. For a while, the cbet was like the norm and people were pretty much cbetting any flop. So, one of the things that worked if you were in position is that you can call one bet on the flop to see if the guy actually has a hand. Unless he can double barrell, you can take the pot away on the turn when he checks to you. Now, I'm assuming everyone knows what floating means. Basically, floating is cold calling a bet, usually without really a draw, with the intent of taking the pot away on the turn. Now of course, if you are randomly doing it, it's probably more prone to becoming a leak rather than a move. The key here is to be able to read your opponent as well as understand the texture of the board. For example, let's say a fairly tight MP raises and you call from the CO with a suited connector... let's say, 67s. The flop comes AK9 rainbow. If he cbets, you calling here is certainly called floating but probably not a good idea. I think it's more effective when the texture of the board is unlikely that it hit your opponent. And then the key would be to try to see what hand you can convince your opponent that you have.
Full Tilt Poker Game #7734621116: Table Trails End (6 max) - $2/$4 - No Limit Hold'em - 0:05:49 ET - 2008/08/21
5 handed
Seat 2: Hero ($400) <--- BB
Seat 6: Villain ($400) <--- SB
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [2s 2c]
3 folds
Villain raises to $16
Hero calls $12
I debated 3 betting here and I think that's fine too. But, the villain is an aggro so I decided that he's more likely to 4 bet here if he had any two face which I obv wouldn't be able to call. Plus, I felt that if I hit a set, I could get paid a fair amount. But I could really go either way. Just one example of a hand where I call instead of 3 betting.
*** FLOP *** [5s Ad Ah]
Villain bets $20
Hero calls $20
Now, this is a standard cbet by the villain. But with the board being what it is, it's very unlikely that the villain hit his hand. Of course, he could have and that's the danger of floating. Now, another thought might be that it's very likely that I have a better hand here than the villain so why not raise? I gave that some thought as well. But, this villain was an aggro but he wasn't completely clueless. So, at this point, regardless of the cards, I decided that I'm gonna play this hand like I have the A. And here, if I had the A, this is how I would play it. So I chose to smooth call here with intent of taking the pot away on the turn. Here, my cards are 22 but really, that's insignificant. It's all about the texture of the board.
*** TURN *** [5s Ad Ah] [4c]
Villain has 15 seconds left to act
Villain bets $56
Hero raises to $156
Villain folds
Uncalled bet of $100 returned to Hero
Hero wins the pot ($181)
The turn card was about as good as I can ask for. Another low card that's unlikely to hit the opponent. Villain was bold enough to fire out another bet, knowing full well that I could be floating the flop with two face cards but without the A or a high pocket pair, he cannot call this raise especially the way it's been played. The only thing I'm noticing now is that my raise size could have been smaller. Here, I make a move to take it away but keep in mind that if the villain shoves, I can't call here. And if he doesn't have the A, he will fold even if I bet like $125. In other words, if smaller bet sizes would accomplish the same goal with the same percentage of risk, making the bet size smaller would obviously save you some money in the long run. Bet sizing is so key in the long term winnings of a player.
Either case, it worked out here. In a tough 6 max game where the players are constant raising, betting, and 3 betting, you're gonna have to really learn to read the texture of the board and make plays at times to keep you afloat. The best players know how to do this which is why if you look up some of the very strong regulars, they will be showing ridiculous BB/100 numbers. That's generally a result of knowing when to turn up the heat and playing their opponents' cards instead of their own.
For those of you that don't know, this guy crushed the 100m dash in the Olympics, cruising the last 20-30m (that's a fifth to the third of a race!!) with arms wide open as if to say "GET YOUR POPCORN READY!" Some people talked about how he should have ran through the race to really make the world record untouchable. The way I see it, he's running against 8 other allegedly fastest guys on earth. If he can crush them that bad, hell, I wouldn't say shit if he turned around and ran backwards the last 20 meters. Taunt away. I love showmanship. Is that even a word? I don't know. Whatever. And then I watched him destroy the 200m last night. Oh my god. Last night, the 8 others on that field must have felt what it feels like to get up to the tee earlier in the year when Tiger was crushing it. They're fighting for second cuz the top player is so dominant. Just sickening.
Alright... back to poker...
So, today, I wanted to talk about floating. In the past, and maybe still at 1-2NL and below, if you were in position, one of the moves you could make was to float the flop cbet with the intention of taking it away on the turn. For a while, the cbet was like the norm and people were pretty much cbetting any flop. So, one of the things that worked if you were in position is that you can call one bet on the flop to see if the guy actually has a hand. Unless he can double barrell, you can take the pot away on the turn when he checks to you. Now, I'm assuming everyone knows what floating means. Basically, floating is cold calling a bet, usually without really a draw, with the intent of taking the pot away on the turn. Now of course, if you are randomly doing it, it's probably more prone to becoming a leak rather than a move. The key here is to be able to read your opponent as well as understand the texture of the board. For example, let's say a fairly tight MP raises and you call from the CO with a suited connector... let's say, 67s. The flop comes AK9 rainbow. If he cbets, you calling here is certainly called floating but probably not a good idea. I think it's more effective when the texture of the board is unlikely that it hit your opponent. And then the key would be to try to see what hand you can convince your opponent that you have.
Full Tilt Poker Game #7734621116: Table Trails End (6 max) - $2/$4 - No Limit Hold'em - 0:05:49 ET - 2008/08/21
5 handed
Seat 2: Hero ($400) <--- BB
Seat 6: Villain ($400) <--- SB
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [2s 2c]
3 folds
Villain raises to $16
Hero calls $12
I debated 3 betting here and I think that's fine too. But, the villain is an aggro so I decided that he's more likely to 4 bet here if he had any two face which I obv wouldn't be able to call. Plus, I felt that if I hit a set, I could get paid a fair amount. But I could really go either way. Just one example of a hand where I call instead of 3 betting.
*** FLOP *** [5s Ad Ah]
Villain bets $20
Hero calls $20
Now, this is a standard cbet by the villain. But with the board being what it is, it's very unlikely that the villain hit his hand. Of course, he could have and that's the danger of floating. Now, another thought might be that it's very likely that I have a better hand here than the villain so why not raise? I gave that some thought as well. But, this villain was an aggro but he wasn't completely clueless. So, at this point, regardless of the cards, I decided that I'm gonna play this hand like I have the A. And here, if I had the A, this is how I would play it. So I chose to smooth call here with intent of taking the pot away on the turn. Here, my cards are 22 but really, that's insignificant. It's all about the texture of the board.
*** TURN *** [5s Ad Ah] [4c]
Villain has 15 seconds left to act
Villain bets $56
Hero raises to $156
Villain folds
Uncalled bet of $100 returned to Hero
Hero wins the pot ($181)
The turn card was about as good as I can ask for. Another low card that's unlikely to hit the opponent. Villain was bold enough to fire out another bet, knowing full well that I could be floating the flop with two face cards but without the A or a high pocket pair, he cannot call this raise especially the way it's been played. The only thing I'm noticing now is that my raise size could have been smaller. Here, I make a move to take it away but keep in mind that if the villain shoves, I can't call here. And if he doesn't have the A, he will fold even if I bet like $125. In other words, if smaller bet sizes would accomplish the same goal with the same percentage of risk, making the bet size smaller would obviously save you some money in the long run. Bet sizing is so key in the long term winnings of a player.
Either case, it worked out here. In a tough 6 max game where the players are constant raising, betting, and 3 betting, you're gonna have to really learn to read the texture of the board and make plays at times to keep you afloat. The best players know how to do this which is why if you look up some of the very strong regulars, they will be showing ridiculous BB/100 numbers. That's generally a result of knowing when to turn up the heat and playing their opponents' cards instead of their own.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
River decision hand and random blog pimpage
Before I get started, a quick nonpoker blog pimpage for those of you who may have nothing else to do... or for those that may have more time now that yours truly lost his gchat capability to work. I will say... as much as I hate losing gchat at work, that's the best move they made... My productivity has increased dramatically as a result. Well, anyways... Here are two nonpoker blogs, both of which were started by my friends. This guy seems to have been posting for a while but I just found out.
Crumbs of knowledge - This is one of my buddies that I went to Montreal with. He has a better recap than I can ever put together.
Here's one that my friend just started yesterday.
Another waste of time - If stuff like 30 something year old woman picking her nose and eating what comes out of it makes you laugh, his humor should be right up your alley. I think he's gonna post about his fantasy football debacle (which he already did) and the sports teams he likes (Bears and Cubs) so go check it out and give him some love... after all, he thinks bloggin is a waste of time.
Alright... done with the pimping. Now on to regular programming:
First is a hand where I played it poorly but the cards and a decent read on the river saved me:
Full Tilt Poker Game #7721058389: Table Rose Canyon - $2/$4 - No Limit Hold'em - 23:10:47 ET - 2008/08/19
8 handed - effective stacks:
Villain in CO - ($418)
Hero on the button ($400)
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [Js Jc]
4 folds
Villain raises to $14
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero calls $14
both blinds fold
Here, I could go either way. More often than not, I would 3 bet with JJ but this just happens to be a hand where I didn't.
*** FLOP *** [3c 9c Td] (Pot $34)
Villain bets $18
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero raises to $56
Villain has 15 seconds left to act
Villain raises to $112
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero calls $56
This hand got weird in a hurry. I see a ten high flop which I figured was good for my hand. Then this guy puts out a weird small bet for about half the pot. Since the board was pretty draw heavy, I figured I'd just put in a raise and get Ax type of hands to fold. The only thought that I had (which is why timer kicked in) was that I did wonder if I raise, if I'm opening myself up for another big raise where I would be forced to let my JJ go... and his range of doing that could be huge if he has clubs in his hands. Nonetheless, I put in a raise and as I worried, villain puts in another raise... except this one is a minraise. Now, I'm totally confused. I did wonder if I was up against a set. And this is where I think I make a bad play. I suspected a set... and yet I call.
*** TURN *** [3c 9c Td] [Ac] (Pot $258)
Villain checks
Hero checks
I didn't know what to make of that card. I felt like maybe I can bet here but I chickened out. Part of the reason I chickened out was because I actually had the Jc. Now that he checked, I wasn't sure if I were completely beat. Maybe he had a set and he hated the club. Or maybe he was checking to checkraise with his clubs. I just decided that it was worth seeing one more card since I have position here.
*** RIVER *** [3c 9c Td Ac] [4c] (Pot $258)
Villain has 15 seconds left to act
Villain bets $136
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero has requested TIME
Hero calls $136
On the river, this was my thought process. The 4th club comes on the river. Then villain bets out $136. A good bet size for a call me bet. Big enough that it should get most hands out without the flush. Small enough that it looks like a sucker bet. The problem is, his sequence in the hand didn't make sense. On the flop, remember, I sensed that I was up against a set (yes, I know, that still doesn't explain the call on the flop). On the turn, he checks when the flush draw completes. Of course, he could have been waiting to check raise but it just didn't make sense. So, with my Jc, the two cards that would beat me here would be Kc and Qc. So, now, I had to think if the villain could have either one of these cards. And this is what went through my head. If he has a Qc, he would not bet here. He would be happy to show down and maybe call a bet from me but there's no way he's betting out here with the second nuts because then he gets all the worse hands to fold and only the Kc would call that bet. So, I ruled that out. Then now, there's only one card that beats me. Kc. Question is, does he have it? Of course, he could. But instead of putting him on one hand, I decided to give it a range of what would make him bet out. He either has Kc or he is now trying to buy this pot. Since I KNOW that he doesn't have Qc, I, for all intensive purposes, basically have the second nuts with Jc. On this board, with this pot size, he would be betting a fair range of hands where he feels that he could get hands like two pair and sets to fold. AK would be a possibility, KQ (with no Kc) might also be possible or KK or QQ with no club would also be possible. So, in the end, based on the flop and turn action, I actually narrowed it down to he either has KK with a Kc, or QQ with no club. His flop reraise was small so it could be a set too. But that was the range I eventually narrowed it down to. I thought he probably won't bet with trips since he does have showdown value but you never know with these guys so I couldn't totally exclude that possibility.
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Villain shows [Qd Qh] a pair of Queens
Hero shows [Js Jc] a flush, Ace high
Hero wins the pot ($527) with a flush, Ace high
I think villain's main mistake was the small reraise on the flop. If he puts in a solid reraise there, I can't continue with JJ. It was still a bad call by me, given my instincts that it could be a set but on such a draw heavy board, there's no way I would want to entice anyone to stick around.
Here's an interesting hand where I wish I was good enough to fold the turn to the initial bet...
Full Tilt Poker Game #7721139300: Table Mountain Home - $2/$4 - No Limit Hold'em - 23:16:47 ET - 2008/08/19
Seat 1: Hero ($414.70)
Seat 2: ($400)
Seat 3: ($321.30)
Seat 4: Villain1 ($286.90)
Seat 5: Villain2 ($400)
Seat 6: ($411.50)
Seat 7: SB ($527)
Seat 8: BB ($855.90)
Seat 9: Villain3 ($177.30)
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [Ac Kc]
Villain3 calls $4
Hero raises to $18
2 folds
Villain1 calls $18
Villain2 calls $18
Button folds
SB folds
BB folds
Villain3 calls $14
*** FLOP *** [9d Qs 5c] (Pot $78)
Villain3 checks
Hero checks
Villain1 checks
Villain2 checks
Terrible flop. I'm really done with this hand. I'm just hoping someone bets so I can fold... instead it checks around.
*** TURN *** [9d Qs 5c] [Ks] (Pot $78)
Villain3 bets $28
Hero has 15 seconds left to act (I hate that turn card!)
Hero calls $28
Villain1 has 15 seconds left to act
Villain1 has requested TIME
Villain1 raises to $136 <--- thank you!
Villain2 folds
Villain3 raises to $159.30, and is all in
Hero folds
Villain1 calls $23.30
Really doesn't matter what Villain3 did here, I was gonna fold anyways to that raise since this board is terrible for AK. The only thing I hate about the turn card was that I caught a piece AND the guy bets out such a small amount in comparison to the pot that I couldn't find the fold button... That's probably a leak...
Villain3 shows [5d 5h]
Villain1 shows [Td Jc]
*** RIVER *** [9d Qs 5c Ks] [3h]
Villain3 shows three of a kind, Fives
Villain1 shows a straight, King high
Villain1 wins the pot ($421.60) with a straight, King high
That's all for today. Hopefully, I'll have more hands to post soon.
Crumbs of knowledge - This is one of my buddies that I went to Montreal with. He has a better recap than I can ever put together.
Here's one that my friend just started yesterday.
Another waste of time - If stuff like 30 something year old woman picking her nose and eating what comes out of it makes you laugh, his humor should be right up your alley. I think he's gonna post about his fantasy football debacle (which he already did) and the sports teams he likes (Bears and Cubs) so go check it out and give him some love... after all, he thinks bloggin is a waste of time.
Alright... done with the pimping. Now on to regular programming:
First is a hand where I played it poorly but the cards and a decent read on the river saved me:
Full Tilt Poker Game #7721058389: Table Rose Canyon - $2/$4 - No Limit Hold'em - 23:10:47 ET - 2008/08/19
8 handed - effective stacks:
Villain in CO - ($418)
Hero on the button ($400)
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [Js Jc]
4 folds
Villain raises to $14
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero calls $14
both blinds fold
Here, I could go either way. More often than not, I would 3 bet with JJ but this just happens to be a hand where I didn't.
*** FLOP *** [3c 9c Td] (Pot $34)
Villain bets $18
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero raises to $56
Villain has 15 seconds left to act
Villain raises to $112
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero calls $56
This hand got weird in a hurry. I see a ten high flop which I figured was good for my hand. Then this guy puts out a weird small bet for about half the pot. Since the board was pretty draw heavy, I figured I'd just put in a raise and get Ax type of hands to fold. The only thought that I had (which is why timer kicked in) was that I did wonder if I raise, if I'm opening myself up for another big raise where I would be forced to let my JJ go... and his range of doing that could be huge if he has clubs in his hands. Nonetheless, I put in a raise and as I worried, villain puts in another raise... except this one is a minraise. Now, I'm totally confused. I did wonder if I was up against a set. And this is where I think I make a bad play. I suspected a set... and yet I call.
*** TURN *** [3c 9c Td] [Ac] (Pot $258)
Villain checks
Hero checks
I didn't know what to make of that card. I felt like maybe I can bet here but I chickened out. Part of the reason I chickened out was because I actually had the Jc. Now that he checked, I wasn't sure if I were completely beat. Maybe he had a set and he hated the club. Or maybe he was checking to checkraise with his clubs. I just decided that it was worth seeing one more card since I have position here.
*** RIVER *** [3c 9c Td Ac] [4c] (Pot $258)
Villain has 15 seconds left to act
Villain bets $136
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero has requested TIME
Hero calls $136
On the river, this was my thought process. The 4th club comes on the river. Then villain bets out $136. A good bet size for a call me bet. Big enough that it should get most hands out without the flush. Small enough that it looks like a sucker bet. The problem is, his sequence in the hand didn't make sense. On the flop, remember, I sensed that I was up against a set (yes, I know, that still doesn't explain the call on the flop). On the turn, he checks when the flush draw completes. Of course, he could have been waiting to check raise but it just didn't make sense. So, with my Jc, the two cards that would beat me here would be Kc and Qc. So, now, I had to think if the villain could have either one of these cards. And this is what went through my head. If he has a Qc, he would not bet here. He would be happy to show down and maybe call a bet from me but there's no way he's betting out here with the second nuts because then he gets all the worse hands to fold and only the Kc would call that bet. So, I ruled that out. Then now, there's only one card that beats me. Kc. Question is, does he have it? Of course, he could. But instead of putting him on one hand, I decided to give it a range of what would make him bet out. He either has Kc or he is now trying to buy this pot. Since I KNOW that he doesn't have Qc, I, for all intensive purposes, basically have the second nuts with Jc. On this board, with this pot size, he would be betting a fair range of hands where he feels that he could get hands like two pair and sets to fold. AK would be a possibility, KQ (with no Kc) might also be possible or KK or QQ with no club would also be possible. So, in the end, based on the flop and turn action, I actually narrowed it down to he either has KK with a Kc, or QQ with no club. His flop reraise was small so it could be a set too. But that was the range I eventually narrowed it down to. I thought he probably won't bet with trips since he does have showdown value but you never know with these guys so I couldn't totally exclude that possibility.
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Villain shows [Qd Qh] a pair of Queens
Hero shows [Js Jc] a flush, Ace high
Hero wins the pot ($527) with a flush, Ace high
I think villain's main mistake was the small reraise on the flop. If he puts in a solid reraise there, I can't continue with JJ. It was still a bad call by me, given my instincts that it could be a set but on such a draw heavy board, there's no way I would want to entice anyone to stick around.
Here's an interesting hand where I wish I was good enough to fold the turn to the initial bet...
Full Tilt Poker Game #7721139300: Table Mountain Home - $2/$4 - No Limit Hold'em - 23:16:47 ET - 2008/08/19
Seat 1: Hero ($414.70)
Seat 2: ($400)
Seat 3: ($321.30)
Seat 4: Villain1 ($286.90)
Seat 5: Villain2 ($400)
Seat 6: ($411.50)
Seat 7: SB ($527)
Seat 8: BB ($855.90)
Seat 9: Villain3 ($177.30)
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [Ac Kc]
Villain3 calls $4
Hero raises to $18
2 folds
Villain1 calls $18
Villain2 calls $18
Button folds
SB folds
BB folds
Villain3 calls $14
*** FLOP *** [9d Qs 5c] (Pot $78)
Villain3 checks
Hero checks
Villain1 checks
Villain2 checks
Terrible flop. I'm really done with this hand. I'm just hoping someone bets so I can fold... instead it checks around.
*** TURN *** [9d Qs 5c] [Ks] (Pot $78)
Villain3 bets $28
Hero has 15 seconds left to act (I hate that turn card!)
Hero calls $28
Villain1 has 15 seconds left to act
Villain1 has requested TIME
Villain1 raises to $136 <--- thank you!
Villain2 folds
Villain3 raises to $159.30, and is all in
Hero folds
Villain1 calls $23.30
Really doesn't matter what Villain3 did here, I was gonna fold anyways to that raise since this board is terrible for AK. The only thing I hate about the turn card was that I caught a piece AND the guy bets out such a small amount in comparison to the pot that I couldn't find the fold button... That's probably a leak...
Villain3 shows [5d 5h]
Villain1 shows [Td Jc]
*** RIVER *** [9d Qs 5c Ks] [3h]
Villain3 shows three of a kind, Fives
Villain1 shows a straight, King high
Villain1 wins the pot ($421.60) with a straight, King high
That's all for today. Hopefully, I'll have more hands to post soon.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Game selection
Game selection was never too high on my priority list. I mean I've heard others preach it but I just wanted to sit at an open seat... as long as I didn't have like a known aggro or a known super solid player to my left, I was ok with that. So, I never really got into visiting sites like tableratings.com that would have information on which tables are the most lucrative, etc... plus those always seem to have a huge waiting list like 5 or 6 deep... in a 6 max game... I mean by the time I would get there, it would be filled with sharks who wanted to play in the "juicy" game.
However, recently, with my woes in 6 max, I did take a step back and gave the game some thought. And you know what? The games are actually pretty freakin tough, I think. I mean it's either the games have gotten tougher or I just regressed... or a combination of the two. But in all honesty, I do believe that the games have gotten tougher. Now don't get me wrong. There are still tons of donkeys out there. But in a normal 6 max game, I would have 4 tables open and 4 or 5 of them at each table are regulars... that's generally not a formula for a lucrative night.
When I first converted to 6 max, the thought was that 6 max would be more profitable since you would be forced to play more hands and so if you can make better decisions, it would lead to more profit. The thing is, with the 6 max tables (at least at 2-4NL and above), the games are so much more aggressive and a lot of players are willing to get it all in preflop that I'm not sure too many of us would have as significant an edge as we used to. The thought is this. If I thought 6 max could be more profitable, and hence I make the move there, so would a lot of others who were doing well in full ring matches right? I mean guys who make money want to go some place where they can make even more money. So, it brings over all these guys that already made money, who are willing to work on their game, who dedicate the time to study and next thing you know, you're just passing cash around from one player to another, just to be redistributed the next night.
As I mentioned before, I felt like I was running bad and playing bad. So, I decided to go back to my bread and butter which was the full ring game and I noticed one significant difference. The game is so much slower and more passive. Maybe during my foray in 6 max, I've gotten aggressive. That's probably some of it but the amount of limping in these games were unbelievable. And then I thought to myself, you know what? Since 6 max has gotten so aggressive, any new player who wants to just "try" NLHE is probably back playing 9 handed where it's rare that they would get 3 or 4 bet (as opposed to 6 max which is like pretty much the norm).
So, game selection may not be something I would seriously do yet but I do know now that I would be looking at 9 handed games first and then a few 6 max tables where there might not be as many regulars... no point in being in tougher games when there are plenty of sheep waiting to be skinned.
However, recently, with my woes in 6 max, I did take a step back and gave the game some thought. And you know what? The games are actually pretty freakin tough, I think. I mean it's either the games have gotten tougher or I just regressed... or a combination of the two. But in all honesty, I do believe that the games have gotten tougher. Now don't get me wrong. There are still tons of donkeys out there. But in a normal 6 max game, I would have 4 tables open and 4 or 5 of them at each table are regulars... that's generally not a formula for a lucrative night.
When I first converted to 6 max, the thought was that 6 max would be more profitable since you would be forced to play more hands and so if you can make better decisions, it would lead to more profit. The thing is, with the 6 max tables (at least at 2-4NL and above), the games are so much more aggressive and a lot of players are willing to get it all in preflop that I'm not sure too many of us would have as significant an edge as we used to. The thought is this. If I thought 6 max could be more profitable, and hence I make the move there, so would a lot of others who were doing well in full ring matches right? I mean guys who make money want to go some place where they can make even more money. So, it brings over all these guys that already made money, who are willing to work on their game, who dedicate the time to study and next thing you know, you're just passing cash around from one player to another, just to be redistributed the next night.
As I mentioned before, I felt like I was running bad and playing bad. So, I decided to go back to my bread and butter which was the full ring game and I noticed one significant difference. The game is so much slower and more passive. Maybe during my foray in 6 max, I've gotten aggressive. That's probably some of it but the amount of limping in these games were unbelievable. And then I thought to myself, you know what? Since 6 max has gotten so aggressive, any new player who wants to just "try" NLHE is probably back playing 9 handed where it's rare that they would get 3 or 4 bet (as opposed to 6 max which is like pretty much the norm).
So, game selection may not be something I would seriously do yet but I do know now that I would be looking at 9 handed games first and then a few 6 max tables where there might not be as many regulars... no point in being in tougher games when there are plenty of sheep waiting to be skinned.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Hitting the reset button
It's actually quite amazing how quickly time flies. I just noticed that my last post was... well, a week ago. Work hasn't been crazy but enough to keep me busy. I probably still work a good 10 hrs a day which is not bad since I already mentioned here that I can't remember the last time I only had to work 40 hrs in a week.
On a more personal note, I am going through a lot of things. Some I can share here, some I can't... at least not yet. But between divorce, hectic work, surprisingly busy social life, and a few other things that are going on in my life, my focus on poker has dwindled to say the least. I probably only set aside about an hour per day to play poker which is why I really haven't played in MTTs... and hell, these days, even when I do, I barely last an hour so maybe it makes no difference. My game is in a tailspin, I feel like, and I think that's mainly because my focus has been going.
One thing I really noticed about my game is how it goes wrong after a nasty beat. I'm not talking about tilting... even though I guess it is tilting. I'm not cussing or shouting or breaking anything but my game goes a little off course after a bad beat. It's like continuing to drive with poor alignment in your car. At first, you think the alignment might be slightly off. Then you hit a bump. And then you notice that the wheel seems to be pulling you to one side more than usual. But you keep going... and before you know it, your alignment is shot, your tires are worn down and boom, costly expense to fix it all up.
Chad, who recently made his come back into the blogging world, wrote a great post about entitlement. And that really hit home in the sense that that's how I feel after a bad beat. That's how my game goes off course. In other words, I only have about an hour to play. I play decent for a little while and let's say that over a few tables, I'm up a few hundred. And then I get bad beated... and then next thing I know, I'm playing a lot more hands (and a lot worse hands), thinking "now that I got bad beated, I'm entitled to dishing out a bad beat of my own." Wow... what a misguided thought process. But I'm just putting it out there. So, here's one example where I got bad beated...
*Warning - bad beat hand coming up*
PokerStars Game #19676346088: Hold'em No Limit ($2/$4) - 2008/08/17 - 00:56:24 (ET)
Table 'Gliese' 6-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: Bo$$playa425 ($467.45 in chips)
Seat 2: Dirty Vizzer ($366 in chips)
Seat 3: vavilon ($403.40 in chips)
Seat 4: sampy345 ($528.15 in chips)
Seat 5: Bidicha ($1406.80 in chips)
Seat 6: cariadon ($464.10 in chips)
cariadon: posts small blind $2
Bo$$playa425: posts big blind $4
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Dirty Vizzer [Kd Kc]
Dirty Vizzer: raises $10 to $14
vavilon: folds
sampy345: folds
Bidicha: folds
cariadon: raises $28 to $42
Bo$$playa425: folds
Dirty Vizzer: raises $80 to $122
cariadon: calls $80
*** FLOP *** [4c 2h 6d]
cariadon: bets $342.10 and is all-in
Dirty Vizzer: calls $244 and is all-in
Uncalled bet ($98.10) returned to cariadon
*** TURN *** [4c 2h 6d] [7h]
*** RIVER *** [4c 2h 6d 7h] [8h]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
cariadon: shows [Ah Kh] (a flush, Ace high)
Dirty Vizzer: mucks hand
cariadon collected $733 from pot
I mean this is an ideal situation. The idiot decides to overplay his AK and go ahead and jam. To use Bayne's phrase, I was compelled to call an all in with KK on this all low board. I lose this pot and then next thing I know, instead of continuing to play patient poker, I go into this weird mindset. Next thing I know, I'm slowly spewing money. That's the worst part. It's not even that I am getting involved in big pots with small hands and spewing... it's like I'm raising more hands with garbage, getting a lot of action and having to fold. It's just terrible, terrible poker.
So, I decided that I am going to get myself refocused. Like LJ mentioned to me, I was losing focus and my mind wasn't in poker anymore for a while. I'm gonna change that. It's like with Windows. When there's a problem, reboot and voila, everything is back to normal. If I'm committed to only playing for an hour, that's what I'm gonna do regardless of the result. I'm gonna be patient and not let the beats affect me. After all, I'm not entitled to the money on the table any more than anyone else. I just need to remind myself to continue to stay focused and control only the things I can control which is how I play - not the cards that are dealt to me or not the way the opponent plays.
On a more personal note, I am going through a lot of things. Some I can share here, some I can't... at least not yet. But between divorce, hectic work, surprisingly busy social life, and a few other things that are going on in my life, my focus on poker has dwindled to say the least. I probably only set aside about an hour per day to play poker which is why I really haven't played in MTTs... and hell, these days, even when I do, I barely last an hour so maybe it makes no difference. My game is in a tailspin, I feel like, and I think that's mainly because my focus has been going.
One thing I really noticed about my game is how it goes wrong after a nasty beat. I'm not talking about tilting... even though I guess it is tilting. I'm not cussing or shouting or breaking anything but my game goes a little off course after a bad beat. It's like continuing to drive with poor alignment in your car. At first, you think the alignment might be slightly off. Then you hit a bump. And then you notice that the wheel seems to be pulling you to one side more than usual. But you keep going... and before you know it, your alignment is shot, your tires are worn down and boom, costly expense to fix it all up.
Chad, who recently made his come back into the blogging world, wrote a great post about entitlement. And that really hit home in the sense that that's how I feel after a bad beat. That's how my game goes off course. In other words, I only have about an hour to play. I play decent for a little while and let's say that over a few tables, I'm up a few hundred. And then I get bad beated... and then next thing I know, I'm playing a lot more hands (and a lot worse hands), thinking "now that I got bad beated, I'm entitled to dishing out a bad beat of my own." Wow... what a misguided thought process. But I'm just putting it out there. So, here's one example where I got bad beated...
*Warning - bad beat hand coming up*
PokerStars Game #19676346088: Hold'em No Limit ($2/$4) - 2008/08/17 - 00:56:24 (ET)
Table 'Gliese' 6-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: Bo$$playa425 ($467.45 in chips)
Seat 2: Dirty Vizzer ($366 in chips)
Seat 3: vavilon ($403.40 in chips)
Seat 4: sampy345 ($528.15 in chips)
Seat 5: Bidicha ($1406.80 in chips)
Seat 6: cariadon ($464.10 in chips)
cariadon: posts small blind $2
Bo$$playa425: posts big blind $4
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Dirty Vizzer [Kd Kc]
Dirty Vizzer: raises $10 to $14
vavilon: folds
sampy345: folds
Bidicha: folds
cariadon: raises $28 to $42
Bo$$playa425: folds
Dirty Vizzer: raises $80 to $122
cariadon: calls $80
*** FLOP *** [4c 2h 6d]
cariadon: bets $342.10 and is all-in
Dirty Vizzer: calls $244 and is all-in
Uncalled bet ($98.10) returned to cariadon
*** TURN *** [4c 2h 6d] [7h]
*** RIVER *** [4c 2h 6d 7h] [8h]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
cariadon: shows [Ah Kh] (a flush, Ace high)
Dirty Vizzer: mucks hand
cariadon collected $733 from pot
I mean this is an ideal situation. The idiot decides to overplay his AK and go ahead and jam. To use Bayne's phrase, I was compelled to call an all in with KK on this all low board. I lose this pot and then next thing I know, instead of continuing to play patient poker, I go into this weird mindset. Next thing I know, I'm slowly spewing money. That's the worst part. It's not even that I am getting involved in big pots with small hands and spewing... it's like I'm raising more hands with garbage, getting a lot of action and having to fold. It's just terrible, terrible poker.
So, I decided that I am going to get myself refocused. Like LJ mentioned to me, I was losing focus and my mind wasn't in poker anymore for a while. I'm gonna change that. It's like with Windows. When there's a problem, reboot and voila, everything is back to normal. If I'm committed to only playing for an hour, that's what I'm gonna do regardless of the result. I'm gonna be patient and not let the beats affect me. After all, I'm not entitled to the money on the table any more than anyone else. I just need to remind myself to continue to stay focused and control only the things I can control which is how I play - not the cards that are dealt to me or not the way the opponent plays.
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Wow, I'm a dork...
Finally, the uber busy period of work is over. To kinda get my mind off of work and also to kinda do something where I don't have to stay focused/use my brain, I decided that a new video game is in order. As I browsed around Circuit City, I finally caved in and decided to give Rockband a shot. I heard so many good things about it and I thought banging away on drums would be a good way to get rid of the stress.
I'm not gonna lie though... when I brought the huge box home and as I was unpacking and taking the stuff out, putting the guitar and drums together, I felt like such a dork... as a matter of fact, I haven't felt that dorkish in a long long time. I pretty much felt like a downright loser when I was putting the drum set together... to the point where I was just laughing by myself. Eventually, I was able to get it set up.
I'm not gonna lie. This game is downright addicting. Oh my god. Now, I can't stop playing... seriously, the only reason I stopped is to watch the Olympics for a little while. So, I figured I'd blog about it while I watch the Olympics. The only bad beat about this game is that I bought the Wii version... and apparently, the PS3 or Xbox version comes with the ability to download songs. I'm not 100% sure but it's based on the Rockband website... I saw you can download like System of the Down and stuff. Are you fuckin kidding me? And I can't seem to do that on the Wii... now THAT's a bad beat.
But either way, it doesn't matter. The game comes with like 63 songs and I also bought like the track pack that has an additional 20 songs so that should keep me busy for a while.
This game rocks. I'm banging away on my drums. I hope swimming ends soon so I can go back to banging away.
I'm not gonna lie though... when I brought the huge box home and as I was unpacking and taking the stuff out, putting the guitar and drums together, I felt like such a dork... as a matter of fact, I haven't felt that dorkish in a long long time. I pretty much felt like a downright loser when I was putting the drum set together... to the point where I was just laughing by myself. Eventually, I was able to get it set up.
I'm not gonna lie. This game is downright addicting. Oh my god. Now, I can't stop playing... seriously, the only reason I stopped is to watch the Olympics for a little while. So, I figured I'd blog about it while I watch the Olympics. The only bad beat about this game is that I bought the Wii version... and apparently, the PS3 or Xbox version comes with the ability to download songs. I'm not 100% sure but it's based on the Rockband website... I saw you can download like System of the Down and stuff. Are you fuckin kidding me? And I can't seem to do that on the Wii... now THAT's a bad beat.
But either way, it doesn't matter. The game comes with like 63 songs and I also bought like the track pack that has an additional 20 songs so that should keep me busy for a while.
This game rocks. I'm banging away on my drums. I hope swimming ends soon so I can go back to banging away.
You know you're lucky when...
I check my email and find this...
cashier@fulltiltpoker.com to me
show details 6:45 PM (6 hours ago) Reply
This is an automated message sent from Full Tilt Poker.
Full Tilt Poker Tournament #53538117 Iron Man $30,000 Freeroll NL Hold'em
Buy-In: $0.00
462 players
Total Prize Pool: $30000.00
Start Date: August 9 4:45 PM ET
Dear RecessRampage,
You finished the tournament in 164th place.
There has been $75.00 added to your account.
Congratulations!
Thank you for participating.
Funny thing is, we met with the realtor today at 6pm. This tournament started at 4:45. And I was working out so I didn't really log on until 5:10pm... just with the intent of doubling up or busting... but doing neither... I just won a biggish pot to enter into 1st break with approximately 3600 chips. I hopped in the shower, closed down my laptop and figured it's just a freeroll and I wouldn't last to the money. Nothing like playing in a tournament for maybe 15-20 minutes, sitting out the rest of the time and getting paid. Man, tournaments are easy. :)
cashier@fulltiltpoker.com to me
show details 6:45 PM (6 hours ago) Reply
This is an automated message sent from Full Tilt Poker.
Full Tilt Poker Tournament #53538117 Iron Man $30,000 Freeroll NL Hold'em
Buy-In: $0.00
462 players
Total Prize Pool: $30000.00
Start Date: August 9 4:45 PM ET
Dear RecessRampage,
You finished the tournament in 164th place.
There has been $75.00 added to your account.
Congratulations!
Thank you for participating.
Funny thing is, we met with the realtor today at 6pm. This tournament started at 4:45. And I was working out so I didn't really log on until 5:10pm... just with the intent of doubling up or busting... but doing neither... I just won a biggish pot to enter into 1st break with approximately 3600 chips. I hopped in the shower, closed down my laptop and figured it's just a freeroll and I wouldn't last to the money. Nothing like playing in a tournament for maybe 15-20 minutes, sitting out the rest of the time and getting paid. Man, tournaments are easy. :)
Friday, August 8, 2008
Olympics tilt
F*ckin shit...
Last night, despite the fact that the first preseason games of NFL started, I ended up watching Olympics soccer because... well, my team was playing against Team USA. It was basically the two of thes shittier teams in the division that are going at it but hey, I will never miss Japan v USA. Now for those of you who are casual soccer fans, don't get your panties up in a bunch and tell me how great US is in soccer also because this is an under 22 (with a few exceptions) league and the division also includes Nigeria and the Netherlands (apparent 2 year champs of the U-22 league).
Anyways, Japan generally sucks cuz we have all these guys who could do a lot of things with the ball and has good speed but no one that can score. Basically, no finisher and that has always been the thing about Japan's soccer teams, whether it's the actual Japan national team or the U-22 league. But it doesn't help when the official blows two fuckin calls. Two calls that were in the penalty box that would have resulted in a penalty kick which for all intensive purposes are considered a guarantee.
Here's an excerpt from an article:
After taking the lead, the U.S. was intent on defending it and did so capably, albeit with a bit of luck. Midfielder-turned-defender Maurice Edu was fortunate on at least two occasions not to be called for a penalty kick after committing fouls in the box, but Senegalese referee Badara Diatta turned a blind eye.
Said a relieved Edu: “It was pretty intense toward the end of the game as they were pushing a lot of bodies forward. There were a lot of scrambles in the box, but the referee made the right decisions to let certain plays go on.”
I mean seriously dude... TWO missed calls? At least call one. Do your f*ckin job!!!! This is the only game that Japan had the chance to win/tie. Jesus...
Now, Japan definitely had their chances so the fact that they didn't capitalize on any of several very good looks at the goal is where Japan sucks. But when they get unlucky with the calls, there's no way they could even sniff the victory...
What a way to start the olympics.
Last night, despite the fact that the first preseason games of NFL started, I ended up watching Olympics soccer because... well, my team was playing against Team USA. It was basically the two of thes shittier teams in the division that are going at it but hey, I will never miss Japan v USA. Now for those of you who are casual soccer fans, don't get your panties up in a bunch and tell me how great US is in soccer also because this is an under 22 (with a few exceptions) league and the division also includes Nigeria and the Netherlands (apparent 2 year champs of the U-22 league).
Anyways, Japan generally sucks cuz we have all these guys who could do a lot of things with the ball and has good speed but no one that can score. Basically, no finisher and that has always been the thing about Japan's soccer teams, whether it's the actual Japan national team or the U-22 league. But it doesn't help when the official blows two fuckin calls. Two calls that were in the penalty box that would have resulted in a penalty kick which for all intensive purposes are considered a guarantee.
Here's an excerpt from an article:
After taking the lead, the U.S. was intent on defending it and did so capably, albeit with a bit of luck. Midfielder-turned-defender Maurice Edu was fortunate on at least two occasions not to be called for a penalty kick after committing fouls in the box, but Senegalese referee Badara Diatta turned a blind eye.
Said a relieved Edu: “It was pretty intense toward the end of the game as they were pushing a lot of bodies forward. There were a lot of scrambles in the box, but the referee made the right decisions to let certain plays go on.”
I mean seriously dude... TWO missed calls? At least call one. Do your f*ckin job!!!! This is the only game that Japan had the chance to win/tie. Jesus...
Now, Japan definitely had their chances so the fact that they didn't capitalize on any of several very good looks at the goal is where Japan sucks. But when they get unlucky with the calls, there's no way they could even sniff the victory...
What a way to start the olympics.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Few concepts floating in my head
I'm not sure where this post is going to go. I just have had some thoughts that's been swimming in my head and I just want to "put it down on paper"... virtual paper, I guess.
1. Playing position
Naturally, we all know that position is important. Question is, how often do we practice what we preach? How different is your VP$IP or PFR% by position? In many places, you see articles talking about how your PFR should be fairly close to your VP$IP. In other words, almost every time you enter a hand, you come in raising. But is this really true? Does that mean that if there's an EP raiser and you want to play your 78s you should be reraising? Maybe sometimes but if that's how you always play, I'm not sure if that's truly profitable (contradiction to this statement to come shortly). Also, what kind of hands do you want to call a raise in the later position? Let's say there's an UTG raiser who is a solid player who generally understands position. Assuming you're gonna call on the button (the calling part is hypothetical so please don't argue this point... well, it won't matter, I won't acknowledge it), isn't better to call with a suited connector than two broadway cards? (this is the part where you can argue)
In other words, if you choose to call a EP raise with KQ, what happens when you flop the Q and you face a bet on the flop. Do you raise? or do you call? If you raise and he shoves, do you fold? If so, why even bother playing a hand where if you hit, you might not be ahead at all? If you call with a hand like 89s, unless you hit it big, you can smooth call the flop bet (assuming you caught piece) and peel another card to see what happens. You can still lose the pot when he fires another and you don't improve but again, easier to get away from with a lower suited connector than two broadway cards, no?
2. Reraising with moderately good hands
Here's where I contradict my above statement about not reraising with suited connectors. In 6 max, it seems almost standard to reraise with AQ+ and TT+. There are some looser players who will 3 bet more than just that range but if you are to expand the range, is it better to include hands like AJ, KQ, KJ or is it better to include hands like T9s, 89s, 67s? Of course, position is relevant so let's start with the instance where a CO or button raises, you are in the blinds and you 3 bet and you get called. I think a person's 3 bet calling range is tighter than a person's 3 bet range. Betting range > calling a bet range, right? So, you reraised and got called. Let's say you hold AJ and the flop comes A high. It's kind of a good and bad flop. Good in the sense that you hit. Bad in the sense that you probably won't get action unless you're beat. And the problem is this. You built up the pot preflop with the reraise and now you hit your top pair. How do you play it? Cbet? Check with the intention of raising? If you cbet and the opponent shoves, now what? Can you really fold considering the pot must be offering pretty decent odds at that point... And really, you fold after 3 betting AND hitting? Seems spewy. But if you were reraising with suited connectors, decision making would be easier, no? And if you hit it hard, it's very well disguised so there's a good chance you would be playing for stacks with a superior hand. Of course, I'm not advocating 3 betting with all suited connectors and garbage hands. But I do wonder if there's a point where if you want to expand your 3 bet range, it's better to incorporate suited connectors rather than just going down the chain of top x% of holdings.
3. Checkraising on the flop
I've come to hate check raises. No, not when the opponent does it to me but rather when I do it. Is there any other move that screams big hand than a checkraise? Checkraise seems to be a good way if you want to kill value out of your good hand. It also seems to be a good way to get stacked off with what you thought was a good enough hand but turns out it's not. In other words, if you only checkraise with monsters, checkraises are worthless right? You get one extra cbet out of the guy and that's it (unless your opponent is a moron or stubborn - but if he's stubborn, it doesn't have to be a checkraise to get his stack... if he's a moron, it probably doesn't have to be a checkraise to get his stack either). On the rare occasions where your checkraises are called or shoved on, more often than not, you're probably in bad shape. But by checkraising, you also build up the pot, you're already obviously out of position, and you kinda announced your hand.
Let's say that you are in a blind v blind situation... I'm not stealing this from cmitch but he did have an interesting post that really exemplifies what I've been thinking. Willwonka also had a similar one here. Basically, if you checkraise, you are pretty much turning your hand into a bluff, no? Worse hands will probably fold, better hands will not... of course, it is very situation dependent and I'm NOT suggesting pulling the plug on checkraises. But in a situation where your hand range is very limited, checkraises kill the value of a strong hand and builds the pot in situations where you are likely behind. Of course, if you're aggressive enough and you also checkraise with a wider range, I think that's ok but then you're going to start playing bigger pots with not as strong a holding so it has its pros and cons. Well, back to what I was saying. Let's say you're in a blind v blind situation and you have a good hand. Let's say AK for example. And you're in the SB obviously (otherwise, you can't checkraise in a blind v blind situation). You raise, BB calls, flop comes K-x-x. You check, he bets, you raise. Ok, I mean really? What does that accomplish? Only way he will call that is if he beats you. But against most players, you are announcing that you have a K or a hand that beats a K. So, unless he's got a set or two pair, you're not gonna get any action. If he has a K, it might encourage him to fold. Of course, if he has nothing, then congratulations, you got one extra bet out of him. Instead, wouldn't cbetting here make more sense? Same as if you flop a set. Wouldn't betting out make more sense than checkraising? You're still building the pot. Since you're the aggressor, if you want to build the pot bigger, maybe checkraise the turn. But checkraising the flop doesn't seem like such a good play to me.
Unfortunately, I still do that sometimes too and I kick myself when the opponent folds because more often than not, I am probably losing value.
Of course, there are exceptions to everything I mentioned above. Checkraising is fine as long as your range is balanced in that you will do it with a bluff as well as a monster. But I think more people tend to do it more so on the "only with monsters" side of the scale rather than a "bluffing" side of the scale.
I don't know. As I reread this post in the preview pane, it's not exactly conveying my thoughts. But at least it's down in writing. I think I'm gonna think about it more and tweak some of these points. It's just my random rambling that's been swirling in my head and I just wanted to get it down.
Any thoughts are welcome as usual.
1. Playing position
Naturally, we all know that position is important. Question is, how often do we practice what we preach? How different is your VP$IP or PFR% by position? In many places, you see articles talking about how your PFR should be fairly close to your VP$IP. In other words, almost every time you enter a hand, you come in raising. But is this really true? Does that mean that if there's an EP raiser and you want to play your 78s you should be reraising? Maybe sometimes but if that's how you always play, I'm not sure if that's truly profitable (contradiction to this statement to come shortly). Also, what kind of hands do you want to call a raise in the later position? Let's say there's an UTG raiser who is a solid player who generally understands position. Assuming you're gonna call on the button (the calling part is hypothetical so please don't argue this point... well, it won't matter, I won't acknowledge it), isn't better to call with a suited connector than two broadway cards? (this is the part where you can argue)
In other words, if you choose to call a EP raise with KQ, what happens when you flop the Q and you face a bet on the flop. Do you raise? or do you call? If you raise and he shoves, do you fold? If so, why even bother playing a hand where if you hit, you might not be ahead at all? If you call with a hand like 89s, unless you hit it big, you can smooth call the flop bet (assuming you caught piece) and peel another card to see what happens. You can still lose the pot when he fires another and you don't improve but again, easier to get away from with a lower suited connector than two broadway cards, no?
2. Reraising with moderately good hands
Here's where I contradict my above statement about not reraising with suited connectors. In 6 max, it seems almost standard to reraise with AQ+ and TT+. There are some looser players who will 3 bet more than just that range but if you are to expand the range, is it better to include hands like AJ, KQ, KJ or is it better to include hands like T9s, 89s, 67s? Of course, position is relevant so let's start with the instance where a CO or button raises, you are in the blinds and you 3 bet and you get called. I think a person's 3 bet calling range is tighter than a person's 3 bet range. Betting range > calling a bet range, right? So, you reraised and got called. Let's say you hold AJ and the flop comes A high. It's kind of a good and bad flop. Good in the sense that you hit. Bad in the sense that you probably won't get action unless you're beat. And the problem is this. You built up the pot preflop with the reraise and now you hit your top pair. How do you play it? Cbet? Check with the intention of raising? If you cbet and the opponent shoves, now what? Can you really fold considering the pot must be offering pretty decent odds at that point... And really, you fold after 3 betting AND hitting? Seems spewy. But if you were reraising with suited connectors, decision making would be easier, no? And if you hit it hard, it's very well disguised so there's a good chance you would be playing for stacks with a superior hand. Of course, I'm not advocating 3 betting with all suited connectors and garbage hands. But I do wonder if there's a point where if you want to expand your 3 bet range, it's better to incorporate suited connectors rather than just going down the chain of top x% of holdings.
3. Checkraising on the flop
I've come to hate check raises. No, not when the opponent does it to me but rather when I do it. Is there any other move that screams big hand than a checkraise? Checkraise seems to be a good way if you want to kill value out of your good hand. It also seems to be a good way to get stacked off with what you thought was a good enough hand but turns out it's not. In other words, if you only checkraise with monsters, checkraises are worthless right? You get one extra cbet out of the guy and that's it (unless your opponent is a moron or stubborn - but if he's stubborn, it doesn't have to be a checkraise to get his stack... if he's a moron, it probably doesn't have to be a checkraise to get his stack either). On the rare occasions where your checkraises are called or shoved on, more often than not, you're probably in bad shape. But by checkraising, you also build up the pot, you're already obviously out of position, and you kinda announced your hand.
Let's say that you are in a blind v blind situation... I'm not stealing this from cmitch but he did have an interesting post that really exemplifies what I've been thinking. Willwonka also had a similar one here. Basically, if you checkraise, you are pretty much turning your hand into a bluff, no? Worse hands will probably fold, better hands will not... of course, it is very situation dependent and I'm NOT suggesting pulling the plug on checkraises. But in a situation where your hand range is very limited, checkraises kill the value of a strong hand and builds the pot in situations where you are likely behind. Of course, if you're aggressive enough and you also checkraise with a wider range, I think that's ok but then you're going to start playing bigger pots with not as strong a holding so it has its pros and cons. Well, back to what I was saying. Let's say you're in a blind v blind situation and you have a good hand. Let's say AK for example. And you're in the SB obviously (otherwise, you can't checkraise in a blind v blind situation). You raise, BB calls, flop comes K-x-x. You check, he bets, you raise. Ok, I mean really? What does that accomplish? Only way he will call that is if he beats you. But against most players, you are announcing that you have a K or a hand that beats a K. So, unless he's got a set or two pair, you're not gonna get any action. If he has a K, it might encourage him to fold. Of course, if he has nothing, then congratulations, you got one extra bet out of him. Instead, wouldn't cbetting here make more sense? Same as if you flop a set. Wouldn't betting out make more sense than checkraising? You're still building the pot. Since you're the aggressor, if you want to build the pot bigger, maybe checkraise the turn. But checkraising the flop doesn't seem like such a good play to me.
Unfortunately, I still do that sometimes too and I kick myself when the opponent folds because more often than not, I am probably losing value.
Of course, there are exceptions to everything I mentioned above. Checkraising is fine as long as your range is balanced in that you will do it with a bluff as well as a monster. But I think more people tend to do it more so on the "only with monsters" side of the scale rather than a "bluffing" side of the scale.
I don't know. As I reread this post in the preview pane, it's not exactly conveying my thoughts. But at least it's down in writing. I think I'm gonna think about it more and tweak some of these points. It's just my random rambling that's been swirling in my head and I just wanted to get it down.
Any thoughts are welcome as usual.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Leaving money on the table
Can you believe it? An actual poker post from yours truly. This hand came up last night and I wasn't sure if I left some money on the table by not betting the river.
Full Tilt Poker Game #: Table Ward (edu, 6 max) - $2/$4 - No Limit Hold'em
Villain is in the BB with $384 to start
I'm on the button.
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Jd Js]
3 folds
Hero raises to $14
SB folds
Villain calls $10
*** FLOP *** [Kc 6h 9h]
Villain has 15 seconds left to act
Villain checks
Hero bets $22
Villain calls $22
Any thoughts on the bet here? Honestly, I considered checking behind. If this were a rainbow thought, I am totally comfortable checking behind here but with the heart draw and semi drawish board, I thought I would bet out. Am I turning JJ into a bluff here? I don't think so but any thoughts on that would be appreciated.
*** TURN *** [Kc 6h 9h] [6c]
Villain checks
Hero checks
I didn't like the villain calling and seeing the 6 come on the turn. If he has a K, it could be that he would raise me... or just call with a K weak kicker? Either way, I figured I would check behind here to keep the pot small. Betting here would definitely make my JJ a bluff here, right?
*** RIVER *** [Kc 6h 9h 6c] [5s]
Villain checks
Hero checks
This is where I hesitated but wussed out and checked. In hindsight, I am wondering if I am leaving money on the table here by not betting. In case your thought was that he would only call with a hand that beats you, I totally disagree. It's rare for someone to checkraise the river. Checkraising river seems like such a -EV move to me. You announce that you have a big hand, you can only do it if the opponent bets, and again, you're missing out on the value every time the opponent checks behind with a hand that would have called your bet. So, generally speaking, on the river, if someone checks, they have a weakish hand. That doesn't mean it's a weakish hand that will fold. So, of course, if he had a K, he would call. But I could see him calling with TT, a 9, 77, 88, or even a 5 (like Ah5h or something). All the other hands like a 6 or a boat, set, straight, woulda bet at some point and definitely would bet the river for fear of losing value. So, when he checks, should I bet here? And I'm not looking to get him to fold a better hand. I'm actually looking to get value with my second pair. Is that retarded based on the action? I'm not sure. My JJ is clearly under repped so maybe there's room for value bet? Thoughts please.
And for anyone who cares, here's the showdown (even though, IMO, for the purpose of discussion, showdown is irrelevant). And no, Bruechips, I don't have stats on this guy.
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Hero shows [Jd Js] two pair, Jacks and Sixes
Villain mucks [As 9s] - two pair, Nines and Sixes
Hero wins the pot ($71) with two pair, Jacks and Sixes
Full Tilt Poker Game #: Table Ward (edu, 6 max) - $2/$4 - No Limit Hold'em
Villain is in the BB with $384 to start
I'm on the button.
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Jd Js]
3 folds
Hero raises to $14
SB folds
Villain calls $10
*** FLOP *** [Kc 6h 9h]
Villain has 15 seconds left to act
Villain checks
Hero bets $22
Villain calls $22
Any thoughts on the bet here? Honestly, I considered checking behind. If this were a rainbow thought, I am totally comfortable checking behind here but with the heart draw and semi drawish board, I thought I would bet out. Am I turning JJ into a bluff here? I don't think so but any thoughts on that would be appreciated.
*** TURN *** [Kc 6h 9h] [6c]
Villain checks
Hero checks
I didn't like the villain calling and seeing the 6 come on the turn. If he has a K, it could be that he would raise me... or just call with a K weak kicker? Either way, I figured I would check behind here to keep the pot small. Betting here would definitely make my JJ a bluff here, right?
*** RIVER *** [Kc 6h 9h 6c] [5s]
Villain checks
Hero checks
This is where I hesitated but wussed out and checked. In hindsight, I am wondering if I am leaving money on the table here by not betting. In case your thought was that he would only call with a hand that beats you, I totally disagree. It's rare for someone to checkraise the river. Checkraising river seems like such a -EV move to me. You announce that you have a big hand, you can only do it if the opponent bets, and again, you're missing out on the value every time the opponent checks behind with a hand that would have called your bet. So, generally speaking, on the river, if someone checks, they have a weakish hand. That doesn't mean it's a weakish hand that will fold. So, of course, if he had a K, he would call. But I could see him calling with TT, a 9, 77, 88, or even a 5 (like Ah5h or something). All the other hands like a 6 or a boat, set, straight, woulda bet at some point and definitely would bet the river for fear of losing value. So, when he checks, should I bet here? And I'm not looking to get him to fold a better hand. I'm actually looking to get value with my second pair. Is that retarded based on the action? I'm not sure. My JJ is clearly under repped so maybe there's room for value bet? Thoughts please.
And for anyone who cares, here's the showdown (even though, IMO, for the purpose of discussion, showdown is irrelevant). And no, Bruechips, I don't have stats on this guy.
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Hero shows [Jd Js] two pair, Jacks and Sixes
Villain mucks [As 9s] - two pair, Nines and Sixes
Hero wins the pot ($71) with two pair, Jacks and Sixes
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Work tilt
adflkjasdklfjaklgiopaeasdfjkl;asefjasdl'fj
That's generally how I feel. This is the third or 4th Sunday in a row that I've had to work. Since I don't play too many tourneys, it's not like it matters that I am not playing poker on Sundays but weekends are generally juicy even in cash games and the fact that I'm not playing poker right now hurts. Instead, I'm doing my best to put in more hours so I can keep reducing my $/hr (since I'm obviously not an hourly employee).
It's not even the work that bothers me. It's just that with all the hours I've been putting in, I feel like I'm constantly fatigued. Of course, I'm sure it's all about perspective so for some of you, you probably think "I work 60 hrs a week AND I have two kids to take care so quit your whining." Seriously... if you think that, more power to you but this is my blog so if I feel like bitching about work, I'm gonna do so.
The most aggravating part is that my team is just not performing at the level that I want them to perform. Now I'm not gonna lie. I've always been a very demanding guy. Whether it was sports or work, I expected everyone to give their 110% at all times. That's just how I was. I only had one gear and it was always pedal to the metal. Work hard, play hard. If you're gonna do it, give it your all. I know it sounds cliche but that's pretty much how I live my life. Don't get me wrong. Everyone works hard, puts in longer hours than probably most other departments in this company. We're one of the very few (if not the only) groups that never gets an internal transfer. Just to give you a background, our company is very popular for having internal postings and internal transfers. They encourage you to move to different parts of the company so you can see many different facets of the company as well as making you a very well rounded individual. So, it's fairly common that after about 2 years in a certain department, someone would move to another department. And yet, no one moves to our group. Ever. Our entire group is comprised of external hires or complete newbies who had no choice in the matter. That says something about our group. Now, some of you might think, could it be the nature of the work and not just the hours? Yes and no. Except our "sister department" which is the other half of external reporting still gets a few internal transfers. We have none. That's very telling.
I will say this. Considering the hours we work, we're probably the rowdiest group. I mean for those of you that know me, this is a team that's lead by me. For those of you that worked with me, you know how I am. I might be tough on you but I'm pretty certain that I am up there when it comes to a "fun guy to work with." So, one of my positive feedback that I received was that despite the hours that my team is putting in, the team morale is very high. But I have to admit... I am starting to fade. I'm just getting tired of being worked like this. The team works hard but their experience level is not where it needs to be for the level of work we do and that also comes back to me in the sense that I have to put in additional hours to either cover for them or show them what's missing. Admittedly, with some of them who has 5+ years of experience, I am fairly frustrated but I think I am doing a surprisingly good job of hiding that (I generally wear my heart on my sleeve so usually, you would know how I am feeling).
I'm not sure where I'm going with this. I just wanted to rant. Hopefully I'll start writing about poker more. Between my busted pinky and the work hours, I haven't had time to play basketball or poker... two things I love. My pinky will keep me away from bball for at least a month. Things are just not going good.
Fuckin shit. Maybe I need to go take those vicodin pills...
That's generally how I feel. This is the third or 4th Sunday in a row that I've had to work. Since I don't play too many tourneys, it's not like it matters that I am not playing poker on Sundays but weekends are generally juicy even in cash games and the fact that I'm not playing poker right now hurts. Instead, I'm doing my best to put in more hours so I can keep reducing my $/hr (since I'm obviously not an hourly employee).
It's not even the work that bothers me. It's just that with all the hours I've been putting in, I feel like I'm constantly fatigued. Of course, I'm sure it's all about perspective so for some of you, you probably think "I work 60 hrs a week AND I have two kids to take care so quit your whining." Seriously... if you think that, more power to you but this is my blog so if I feel like bitching about work, I'm gonna do so.
The most aggravating part is that my team is just not performing at the level that I want them to perform. Now I'm not gonna lie. I've always been a very demanding guy. Whether it was sports or work, I expected everyone to give their 110% at all times. That's just how I was. I only had one gear and it was always pedal to the metal. Work hard, play hard. If you're gonna do it, give it your all. I know it sounds cliche but that's pretty much how I live my life. Don't get me wrong. Everyone works hard, puts in longer hours than probably most other departments in this company. We're one of the very few (if not the only) groups that never gets an internal transfer. Just to give you a background, our company is very popular for having internal postings and internal transfers. They encourage you to move to different parts of the company so you can see many different facets of the company as well as making you a very well rounded individual. So, it's fairly common that after about 2 years in a certain department, someone would move to another department. And yet, no one moves to our group. Ever. Our entire group is comprised of external hires or complete newbies who had no choice in the matter. That says something about our group. Now, some of you might think, could it be the nature of the work and not just the hours? Yes and no. Except our "sister department" which is the other half of external reporting still gets a few internal transfers. We have none. That's very telling.
I will say this. Considering the hours we work, we're probably the rowdiest group. I mean for those of you that know me, this is a team that's lead by me. For those of you that worked with me, you know how I am. I might be tough on you but I'm pretty certain that I am up there when it comes to a "fun guy to work with." So, one of my positive feedback that I received was that despite the hours that my team is putting in, the team morale is very high. But I have to admit... I am starting to fade. I'm just getting tired of being worked like this. The team works hard but their experience level is not where it needs to be for the level of work we do and that also comes back to me in the sense that I have to put in additional hours to either cover for them or show them what's missing. Admittedly, with some of them who has 5+ years of experience, I am fairly frustrated but I think I am doing a surprisingly good job of hiding that (I generally wear my heart on my sleeve so usually, you would know how I am feeling).
I'm not sure where I'm going with this. I just wanted to rant. Hopefully I'll start writing about poker more. Between my busted pinky and the work hours, I haven't had time to play basketball or poker... two things I love. My pinky will keep me away from bball for at least a month. Things are just not going good.
Fuckin shit. Maybe I need to go take those vicodin pills...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
