The Biggest Loser(s), Online Poker Edition
It's time for our regular analysis of the hands that lose me the most money. I came up with ten hands using the following criteria:
VP$IP > 50.00%
BB/Hand < 0
This highlights hands that are inducing you to put money into the pot, yet that are costing you bets in the long run. Each has its own reasons for being so damn costly, but this should be a therapeutic discussion of what costs you most. I encourage you to examine your PT database to do the same.
1) A3s (VP$IP: 95.45%, -1.25 BB/Hand) and 2) A4s (VP$IP: 90.00%, -0.75 BB/Hand): These hands are a train-wreck waiting to happen. I wrote previously about the dangers of AK. Why is it so hard to chase with these hands? Maybe it's the NL roots, where implied odds are more of a factor, or maybe it's just stupidity. I only went to showdown 18.18% and 28.57% of the time with these hands, respectively, and to make those stats worse, I only won at showdown with them 25 and 37.5% of the time respectively, but to really make it bad, I called 2 bets cold a total of 9 times in 52 times dealt pre-flop.
Why do these suck so bad? Easy. Ace-little suited is a hand where you're hoping for a flush. You're going to flop a flush less than one percent of the time (0.9%). You'll flop a 4-flush 4.7% of the time. Flopping a nut flush forces you to check. Any lead bet will likely force everyone out and win you the small pot there. Flopping an ace gives you top-pair, weak kicker, and flopping a 4-flush almost forces you to chase.
These hands have -EV written all over them. From Pokerroom.com :
Funny thing is that these hands have much more value in NL, just because of the implied odds they provide. If a player "just barely" gives you proper odds to chase a flush in NL, you can have a pretty large pot by the river. If that river card gives you the flush, even if no more money goes into the pot, you're going to win a very large pot. In limit, without a boatload of players coming along with you, it could be that these hands just can't generate the pot sizes needed to create large pots are large implied odds situations. The other way these hands can win is with "bookend" hands (pairing your ace on the flop and your kicker later). Both these situations can give you large pots. The problem is not being able to lay down the hands without having the odds to make calls.
Your odds to hit from a flush draw on the flop are 1.9-to-1 (or approximately 2-to-1). This makes almost any call +EV on the flop. The odds to hit a flush draw from the turn are 4.1-to-1. You'll need a fairly large pot to make the turn call, and this is likely where you lose the most bets. If the pot is small, there is no point in continuing on the turn. If you have the flush draw plus the top pair looking for the bookend, this adds 3 outs to your options, so long as you believe that your two pair will be good. This option would yield an almost even money call on the flop (1.2-to-1), and a 2.8-to-1 call on the turn (to hit either the flush or two pair). Not bad. Your worry, however, is that if you hit another ace on the flop, someone else who has you outkicked may have already hit their bookend hand, and you're drawing virtually dead to either just your flush or runner-runner. Either way you look at it, you have to look at these hands as hands where you can actually make an intended hand and still lose. You're playing for the nut flush and falling back on the bookend. It's as much a drawing hand as you can handle.
3) QQ (VP$IP: 100%, PFR 90.63%, WtSD 65.52%, W$SD 21.05%, -0.68 BB/Hand): This is just a function of rough luck, and not laying down a hand when you're in trouble. In LHE, with so many chasers playing any king or ace, either one of those cards coming on the board can mean that you're already beaten. As you can tell, this is an automatic raise and re-raise, pretty much regardless of position. Funny part is that overall the hand is a winning hand for me, but in a BB/hand examination, it turns out to be a losing hand (likely from the prevalence of the above mentioned chasers at the lower-limits, and the opposite propensity of higher (3/6) limit players to fold A and K-rag to raises pre-flop, therefore eliminating showdowns and large pots).
4) TT (VP$IP: 97.73%, PFR 63.64%, WtSD 57.14%, W$SD 41.67%, -0.56 BB/Hand): See above. The vulnerability of hands like JJ-99 have been written about since the dawn of time. If you raise pre-flop, get called, and an overcard comes to your tens on the flop, more than likely, short of hitting a set, you're likely screwed. TT is a solid starting hand--just be prepared to lay it down--no whimpers, okay?
5) K9s (VP$IP 52.63%, PFR 5.26%. WtSD 9.09%, W$SD 100%, -0.39 BB?Hand): This is a hand I used to play as a youngin' limit player. I've since sworn it off, except for an occasional attempt to steal the blinds from the button. You know my VP$IP used to be near 25%? Christ, I might as well have been pissing bets up the pole. Funny part is that I have the discipline to let it go, but why limp with it to begin with? It's a worthless hand, and it's EV is derived from hitting a king-high flush. which as we all know, may not even be good. Bad idea, kids. Real bad idea. Now I know that some smartass will be posting a comment about the merits of suited 3-gappers, and that's great. Leave that shit to the pros. I'll be happy with my lovely little 18% VP$IP, thank you very much. NL Tourney, you ask? Different ballgame.
6) 88 (VP$IP: 87.23%, PFR 25.53%, -0.36 BB/Hand and 8) 66 (VP$IP: 90.00%, PFR 7.50%, -0.23BB/Hand): Ah--my friends the middle pairs. You suck. In today's world of no-foldem-holdem, it is possible for these hands to win unimproved. For the most part, however, they are great set-it-or-forget-it propositions, like their smaller pair bretheren. 88 is generally +EV from any position, but part of that EV lies in your ability to lay it down if you know you're beat. 66 is considered +EV from LP, but without hitting a set, I'm really leery about taking this non-powerhouse to showdown.
7) ATo (VP$IP: 85.94%. PFR 25.00%, WtSD: 52.73%, W$SD: 31.03%, -0.24 BB/Hand) and 10) AJo (VP$IP: 95.45%, PFR: 81.82%, -0.19BB/Hand): Rough hand. You should not be calling a raise with this, just for the sake of its easy domination. It's not suited, so your best shot at a winning hand is to pair your ace or ten and hope it ends up being TPTK. You also have a shot at a Broadway straight, but that requires a lot of help. Odd thing is that ATs wins almost 1 BB/Hand for me. What does that imply for you? Suited, goot. Offsuit, no goot.
9) KQo (VP$IP: 85.19%, PFR: 11.11%, -0.22 BB/Hand): What the hell is so damn nice about an offsuit connector? An ace--you're beat. What does that mean? On 24% of flops, you're already drawing to a hand where you need at least two cards to win. Needing runner-runner ANYTHING is just really bad. Not really bad, but dog-shit bad. And so -EV. It is admittedly tough to get away from. Limp with it? If you must, but only in LP and only when a gaggle of people are limping with you. NEVER cold call a raise with this junk, and only call a raise after you in LP if the other donkeys do first. You need a big pot to make this worth it, and don't be afraid to dump it DESPITE the large pot.
I've pretty much officially (re)-moved back to 3/6 online after dropping down to accomodate the smaller bankroll. I've evened out at a win rate about 3.3 BB/100 overall, and that makes me happy. The move back to 3/6 is something that I really look forward fo, since at 2/4, there really isn't a whole lot of challenge. Variance is there, but I think I'm a solid example of how a solid player will overcome that variance over time. It's frustrating when some fish takes a $50 pot from you in 2/4 because he hit his 3-outer on the river that he called 3 raises to get to, but in the long run, with patience and good play, you'll still be way ahead. My last 2/4 session cost me an $80 buy-in, mainly because it was just one of those sessions: When I got dealt QQ, somebody else was dealt KK. I had AJ, they had AQ. It happens. I've been such a consistent winner at that level that it didn't really affect the win rate very much, if at all. It just didn't seem to be a challenge any more. I had a similar feeling at 0.50/1 and 1/2 before. I think part of it is that when you move down to lower limits after playing such relatively higher limits, making decisions doesn't make you uncomfortable. Josh Arieh said it best in a journal entry a few months back. He was golfing with Michael Jordan (!?!?) and they decided to make a little friendly wager on their match. Josh, known as not only a great poker player, but as a pure gambler, asked Jordan how much they should play for per hole. Jordan is reportedly a pretty good low-handicap golfer, and Arieh can reportedly hold his own. Jordan's response: "Whatever makes you uncomfortable." 2/4 doesn't make me uncomfortable anymore. I had touched on this in my last post, and expressed my desire to play 6/12 or higher at the Taj or the Trop the next time I go. I know I make the right decisions. When it's a dollar, or even four dollars to call a bet, it just isn't uncomfortable--it becomes just fun. 2/4 feels like I'm playing nickel/dime at the kitchen table with my 11-month old goddaughter. That's not to say that I won't play 2/4 anymore. Whether as a change of pace, or just to keep positive flow coming, 2/4 is still fun to me. It just doesn't make me think deeper to make a decision. It may sound arrogant, but even if I screw up, I know that I'm a good enough player at that limit to make it up quickly. 3/6, and the next step on Stars, 5/10, which I am still a virgin at, will force me to make better decisions. It will serve to jumpstart additional learning, and the development of more skill. Then, watch out world.
You know, I really wish somebody would invite me to a friggin' home game in my area. Domenic, bud, feed me!
Anyhoo, married life is nice, thanks for asking, and truthfully, it's not different from "single life." I've been with my wife now for more than 12 years. We dated for a little less than 9 years then moved in together 3+ years ago, and we've been a true team ever since. People always tell me that it's "different" when you get married. I say, "How?" We've had all our finances held jointly since before we moved in together. We still have our own accounts, which will not change. We both contribute to the house, and none of it changes. The only real difference is that now I get to call her my wife, and I get to correct her when she calls me her boyfriend, and that I get to wear a ring around (a very nice ring, I might add). You know, I never had any doubts about the missus, but I'll tell you--as long as neither of you change YOURSELVES after you say your "I do's," your relationship won't change either. We're now a little more open to having a baby, which would likely be the biggest change for both of us, but the key is remembering what made you fall in love with the other person. Take some time every day, no matter how busy you are, no matter how crappy she may look first-thing in the morning, and think about one little thing that you absolutely adore about her--her little curls, her pretty brown eyes, the little dimple you see when she smiles at you--something that reminds you of why you got together with/married this woman in the first place. You'll do much better that way. Also remember that you're a team. You may do more one day, she may do more another day. No matter what, as long as you are both driving toward the same goal, you'll get there, and you'll be happy getting there. Always be honest with her too, and never spend bill money on poker. It's just totally -EV...
VP$IP > 50.00%
BB/Hand < 0
This highlights hands that are inducing you to put money into the pot, yet that are costing you bets in the long run. Each has its own reasons for being so damn costly, but this should be a therapeutic discussion of what costs you most. I encourage you to examine your PT database to do the same.
1) A3s (VP$IP: 95.45%, -1.25 BB/Hand) and 2) A4s (VP$IP: 90.00%, -0.75 BB/Hand): These hands are a train-wreck waiting to happen. I wrote previously about the dangers of AK. Why is it so hard to chase with these hands? Maybe it's the NL roots, where implied odds are more of a factor, or maybe it's just stupidity. I only went to showdown 18.18% and 28.57% of the time with these hands, respectively, and to make those stats worse, I only won at showdown with them 25 and 37.5% of the time respectively, but to really make it bad, I called 2 bets cold a total of 9 times in 52 times dealt pre-flop.
Why do these suck so bad? Easy. Ace-little suited is a hand where you're hoping for a flush. You're going to flop a flush less than one percent of the time (0.9%). You'll flop a 4-flush 4.7% of the time. Flopping a nut flush forces you to check. Any lead bet will likely force everyone out and win you the small pot there. Flopping an ace gives you top-pair, weak kicker, and flopping a 4-flush almost forces you to chase.
These hands have -EV written all over them. From Pokerroom.com :
| Cards | SB | BB | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | D |
| A4s | -0.03 | -0.06 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.19 | 0.03 | 0.18 | 0.08 |
| A3s | -0.12 | 0.02 | -0.06 | 0.07 | 0.10 | -0.08 | -0.08 | 0.12 | 0.01 | 0.04 |
Funny thing is that these hands have much more value in NL, just because of the implied odds they provide. If a player "just barely" gives you proper odds to chase a flush in NL, you can have a pretty large pot by the river. If that river card gives you the flush, even if no more money goes into the pot, you're going to win a very large pot. In limit, without a boatload of players coming along with you, it could be that these hands just can't generate the pot sizes needed to create large pots are large implied odds situations. The other way these hands can win is with "bookend" hands (pairing your ace on the flop and your kicker later). Both these situations can give you large pots. The problem is not being able to lay down the hands without having the odds to make calls.
Your odds to hit from a flush draw on the flop are 1.9-to-1 (or approximately 2-to-1). This makes almost any call +EV on the flop. The odds to hit a flush draw from the turn are 4.1-to-1. You'll need a fairly large pot to make the turn call, and this is likely where you lose the most bets. If the pot is small, there is no point in continuing on the turn. If you have the flush draw plus the top pair looking for the bookend, this adds 3 outs to your options, so long as you believe that your two pair will be good. This option would yield an almost even money call on the flop (1.2-to-1), and a 2.8-to-1 call on the turn (to hit either the flush or two pair). Not bad. Your worry, however, is that if you hit another ace on the flop, someone else who has you outkicked may have already hit their bookend hand, and you're drawing virtually dead to either just your flush or runner-runner. Either way you look at it, you have to look at these hands as hands where you can actually make an intended hand and still lose. You're playing for the nut flush and falling back on the bookend. It's as much a drawing hand as you can handle.
3) QQ (VP$IP: 100%, PFR 90.63%, WtSD 65.52%, W$SD 21.05%, -0.68 BB/Hand): This is just a function of rough luck, and not laying down a hand when you're in trouble. In LHE, with so many chasers playing any king or ace, either one of those cards coming on the board can mean that you're already beaten. As you can tell, this is an automatic raise and re-raise, pretty much regardless of position. Funny part is that overall the hand is a winning hand for me, but in a BB/hand examination, it turns out to be a losing hand (likely from the prevalence of the above mentioned chasers at the lower-limits, and the opposite propensity of higher (3/6) limit players to fold A and K-rag to raises pre-flop, therefore eliminating showdowns and large pots).
4) TT (VP$IP: 97.73%, PFR 63.64%, WtSD 57.14%, W$SD 41.67%, -0.56 BB/Hand): See above. The vulnerability of hands like JJ-99 have been written about since the dawn of time. If you raise pre-flop, get called, and an overcard comes to your tens on the flop, more than likely, short of hitting a set, you're likely screwed. TT is a solid starting hand--just be prepared to lay it down--no whimpers, okay?
5) K9s (VP$IP 52.63%, PFR 5.26%. WtSD 9.09%, W$SD 100%, -0.39 BB?Hand): This is a hand I used to play as a youngin' limit player. I've since sworn it off, except for an occasional attempt to steal the blinds from the button. You know my VP$IP used to be near 25%? Christ, I might as well have been pissing bets up the pole. Funny part is that I have the discipline to let it go, but why limp with it to begin with? It's a worthless hand, and it's EV is derived from hitting a king-high flush. which as we all know, may not even be good. Bad idea, kids. Real bad idea. Now I know that some smartass will be posting a comment about the merits of suited 3-gappers, and that's great. Leave that shit to the pros. I'll be happy with my lovely little 18% VP$IP, thank you very much. NL Tourney, you ask? Different ballgame.
6) 88 (VP$IP: 87.23%, PFR 25.53%, -0.36 BB/Hand and 8) 66 (VP$IP: 90.00%, PFR 7.50%, -0.23BB/Hand): Ah--my friends the middle pairs. You suck. In today's world of no-foldem-holdem, it is possible for these hands to win unimproved. For the most part, however, they are great set-it-or-forget-it propositions, like their smaller pair bretheren. 88 is generally +EV from any position, but part of that EV lies in your ability to lay it down if you know you're beat. 66 is considered +EV from LP, but without hitting a set, I'm really leery about taking this non-powerhouse to showdown.
7) ATo (VP$IP: 85.94%. PFR 25.00%, WtSD: 52.73%, W$SD: 31.03%, -0.24 BB/Hand) and 10) AJo (VP$IP: 95.45%, PFR: 81.82%, -0.19BB/Hand): Rough hand. You should not be calling a raise with this, just for the sake of its easy domination. It's not suited, so your best shot at a winning hand is to pair your ace or ten and hope it ends up being TPTK. You also have a shot at a Broadway straight, but that requires a lot of help. Odd thing is that ATs wins almost 1 BB/Hand for me. What does that imply for you? Suited, goot. Offsuit, no goot.
9) KQo (VP$IP: 85.19%, PFR: 11.11%, -0.22 BB/Hand): What the hell is so damn nice about an offsuit connector? An ace--you're beat. What does that mean? On 24% of flops, you're already drawing to a hand where you need at least two cards to win. Needing runner-runner ANYTHING is just really bad. Not really bad, but dog-shit bad. And so -EV. It is admittedly tough to get away from. Limp with it? If you must, but only in LP and only when a gaggle of people are limping with you. NEVER cold call a raise with this junk, and only call a raise after you in LP if the other donkeys do first. You need a big pot to make this worth it, and don't be afraid to dump it DESPITE the large pot.
I've pretty much officially (re)-moved back to 3/6 online after dropping down to accomodate the smaller bankroll. I've evened out at a win rate about 3.3 BB/100 overall, and that makes me happy. The move back to 3/6 is something that I really look forward fo, since at 2/4, there really isn't a whole lot of challenge. Variance is there, but I think I'm a solid example of how a solid player will overcome that variance over time. It's frustrating when some fish takes a $50 pot from you in 2/4 because he hit his 3-outer on the river that he called 3 raises to get to, but in the long run, with patience and good play, you'll still be way ahead. My last 2/4 session cost me an $80 buy-in, mainly because it was just one of those sessions: When I got dealt QQ, somebody else was dealt KK. I had AJ, they had AQ. It happens. I've been such a consistent winner at that level that it didn't really affect the win rate very much, if at all. It just didn't seem to be a challenge any more. I had a similar feeling at 0.50/1 and 1/2 before. I think part of it is that when you move down to lower limits after playing such relatively higher limits, making decisions doesn't make you uncomfortable. Josh Arieh said it best in a journal entry a few months back. He was golfing with Michael Jordan (!?!?) and they decided to make a little friendly wager on their match. Josh, known as not only a great poker player, but as a pure gambler, asked Jordan how much they should play for per hole. Jordan is reportedly a pretty good low-handicap golfer, and Arieh can reportedly hold his own. Jordan's response: "Whatever makes you uncomfortable." 2/4 doesn't make me uncomfortable anymore. I had touched on this in my last post, and expressed my desire to play 6/12 or higher at the Taj or the Trop the next time I go. I know I make the right decisions. When it's a dollar, or even four dollars to call a bet, it just isn't uncomfortable--it becomes just fun. 2/4 feels like I'm playing nickel/dime at the kitchen table with my 11-month old goddaughter. That's not to say that I won't play 2/4 anymore. Whether as a change of pace, or just to keep positive flow coming, 2/4 is still fun to me. It just doesn't make me think deeper to make a decision. It may sound arrogant, but even if I screw up, I know that I'm a good enough player at that limit to make it up quickly. 3/6, and the next step on Stars, 5/10, which I am still a virgin at, will force me to make better decisions. It will serve to jumpstart additional learning, and the development of more skill. Then, watch out world.
You know, I really wish somebody would invite me to a friggin' home game in my area. Domenic, bud, feed me!
Married Life
Anyhoo, married life is nice, thanks for asking, and truthfully, it's not different from "single life." I've been with my wife now for more than 12 years. We dated for a little less than 9 years then moved in together 3+ years ago, and we've been a true team ever since. People always tell me that it's "different" when you get married. I say, "How?" We've had all our finances held jointly since before we moved in together. We still have our own accounts, which will not change. We both contribute to the house, and none of it changes. The only real difference is that now I get to call her my wife, and I get to correct her when she calls me her boyfriend, and that I get to wear a ring around (a very nice ring, I might add). You know, I never had any doubts about the missus, but I'll tell you--as long as neither of you change YOURSELVES after you say your "I do's," your relationship won't change either. We're now a little more open to having a baby, which would likely be the biggest change for both of us, but the key is remembering what made you fall in love with the other person. Take some time every day, no matter how busy you are, no matter how crappy she may look first-thing in the morning, and think about one little thing that you absolutely adore about her--her little curls, her pretty brown eyes, the little dimple you see when she smiles at you--something that reminds you of why you got together with/married this woman in the first place. You'll do much better that way. Also remember that you're a team. You may do more one day, she may do more another day. No matter what, as long as you are both driving toward the same goal, you'll get there, and you'll be happy getting there. Always be honest with her too, and never spend bill money on poker. It's just totally -EV...
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home