Mad Props and More Limit Strategy

First of all, HUGE props and congratulations to DoubleAs, finally breaking through and winning his seat to the WPT in Aruba. The utmost in congratulations, man, and it doesn't hurt too much that Aruba is my favorite place on this planet. A great reward for a great NL Holdem player and teacher. Congrats again!

Second, I know Felicia's in Phoenix right now, and I'm sending a ton of positive thoughts and wishes her way.

Third, remember that the WPBT event is tonight at 9 PM at PokerStars, it's a $20+2 NLHE tourney. You'll find it under the Tournament Tab, then under Private. Password is "the hammer." I can't play (besides the fact that it would be almost 20% of my remaining bankroll) because I won't be leaving work until 9 PM tonight :-(. Next time, folks.

Limit Pre-Flop Strategy

You know, HDouble continues to refer to a former-RGP'er named Abdul Jalib. This guy honestly has put out some of the best limit strategy info out there, Sklansky, et al included. Abdul used to post to a website, Positive EV (www.posev.com), which to my knowledge isn't active anymore, but thanks to HDub (and Google Groups), we still have some of his essays on limit holdem, and they're honestly some of the best writing I've seen on limit anywhere.

He suggests things like limp/raising with monster pre-flop hands like AA, based upon EV alone. AA has an EV of almost 4 times the BB, so if you raise with it and steal the blinds, you have theoretically cost yourself winnings. His evaluation also takes into account the fact that having someone draw out on you with a monster like AA or KK will happen infrequently enough that it becomes a profitable play to allow someone in pre-flop, then play your hand fast post-flop. He also mentions that if someone raises your limp, you should immediately re-raise, having the effect of a check-raise. A quote,

Without other concerns, in a tight game, you should raise with marginal hands, and limp (and re-raise if raised) with your strongest hands. This contradicts Sklansky and Malmuth. Balance your hands that you could have in various pre-flop scenarios, mixing strong with weak, and weak with strong, so that you do not give too much information away by your actions, yet strive to still play most hands appropriately.

This is profound advice, and he's right. He completely contradicts what Sklansky and Malmuth have been teaching as ABC poker. But if you think about it, Abdul's right on the button. Think. Consider pre-flop play. If you're at a 2/4 table, and you open with a raise, even in LP, it will only take limpers another SB to call you. You only need to play 1/2 and 2/4 online for 5 minutes to see this in action. Tighter players with marginal hands will toss them to a raise. Looser players with worse hands may call, but simply stealing the blinds with AA sucks. In tighter games, it is not long-term profitable to raise with AA. Limp/re-raise is much better, and though you may get sucked out on, the additional profit you realize from having a more multi-way pot will likely make up any suck-out losses you may take. After all, 5 players will create a bigger pot than 2, right? The major caveat is that if you decide to do that, you will need to play very well post-flop, not giving free cards, taking them when they're given, and by blasting people out who are desperately trying to draw on you. It is both the curse, and the challenge of Limit Hold'em. How much of a bet will make you toss that hand away?

I don't advocate for Abdul's advice alone, nor do I advocate for Miller, Sklansky, and Malmuth. It's just a different perspective from a successful player.

Rough Plays

I had my rough share of rough plays in the last couple of days, as I had mentioned. I made a lot of second-best hands, and there is no worse hand in poker than the second-best hand. I played PL O8B last night, turned a boat with deuces full of kings (with 2-2-K on board), bet the pot (about $14), got called, watched an ace hit the river, and then watched my opponent call my all-in bet as he had the case 2, and an ace to boot. It's been really rough, and I can see what THG is going through, because I seem to be attracted to second-best hands lately. I bet out with flushes, get called, then someone makes their boat on the river. I've taken yet another bankroll hit, and it's frustrating. I know I'm a solid player. Live game results, and prior online results tell me that. The only thing I keep thinking is that this damn online poker thing is actually a lot harder than most give it credit for. If you're a consistent winner online, congratulations! Domenic cashed out $1000 from Stars, then got pounded by the cashout curse. Welcome to my world. I'm at the point right now where I have almost no idea how anyone can be a consistent winner against the caliber of players online without a little luck (and of course, not calling that last bet). Seriously though, on the O8B hand, would you lay down the nut full house? Would you suspect that the player would call your bet with just trip 2's? I led out, he called and had the nuts. To make it worse, it was on PARTY! I threw $50 on Party last night, played some $25 NLHE, blew that in literally 20 minutes. Hopped on to an O8B table, gone in 20 minutes too. Party is really fishy. The only thing worse than losing to fish is losing to fish when they hit their hands. I lost a TON of money relative to my bankroll last night. My Stars account is down to $126.75, and Party is empty. It's almost at the crisis point where I'm willing to give it up.

Is it that people are really right, that I shouldn't be playing scared online? I'm at that point. I'm playing frightened. Live, like at the casino, I am anything but scared. Live tourney, anything but scared. It feels like I'm playing with 4 Gus Hansens and 5 Daniel Negreanus. I get dealt QQ, flop trips, play them fast and hard, get to the river, and find that my opponent sucked out a straight with 85o just calling all the way. That's actually in the back of my mind. Nothing is more useless than a frightened poker player, and that's what I am right now.

It's just so damn hard to let go of a game that you are obsessed with love, even when the tilt monster rears its ugly head. It seems lately that the more I keep repeating my mantra that a tight aggressive player will win out in the long run, the more I keep losing. Have I degraded to weak-tight out of fear of bad beats? Obviously not, since I got blasted half way to California by second-best hands... It's just something I need to work through, and it makes me pose a question:

I've asked before about how people deal with running card-dead. The answer is actually simple, and involves a little bit of Zen--patience. My question now is two fold: Have all of you experienced significant downturns in your bankroll? And, of course, how did you deal with it? I know everyone has probably busted out at one time or another. It just seems for me that I've had short bursts of incredible winning, followed by longer downturns where I give it all back. That scares me, because that's the hallmark of a fish, a truly lucky player. I want to always be known as the player who wins based on skill, with a little bit of luck. I've never considered myself a fish. Is it the exaggerated self-image that authors point out that all poker players seem to have at one point or another? Am I a fish? More to the point, is it possible to be a fish with an overall Holdem win rate of 3 BB/100 hands, a 21.10% VP$IP, and a total aggression factor of over 2?

Losing self-confidence is a real bitch.