Patience in No-Limit Holdem

"No-Limit Poker is hours of utter boredom mixed with moments of sheer terror.

No-Limit Holdem is a game of patience. Patience in waiting for the right hand. Patience in waiting for the right board. Patience in waiting for the right time to make the right move. It's part of my problem with this damn game...

Said, woman, take it slow
It'll work itself out fine
All we need is just a little patience
Said, sugar, make it slow
And we come together fine
All we need is just a little patience
(patience)
Mm, yeah

When you play limit holdem, aggression is king, just as it is in NL. In limit, you value bet every last miniscule edge of equity. It's a game where someone like me (a hyper aggressive type) can just beat the opposition into submission, beat them (usually) to the point where they just can't imagine calling off another $20 to try and catch a 3-outer (even though the less-evolved actually do that--and have the balls to make their hand). NL is a game based more on patience, and yes, getting your money in with the best of it.

I been walking the streets at night
just tryin' to get it right
hard to see with so many around
you know I don't like
being stuck in the crowd
and the streets don't change
but baby the name
I ain't got time for the game...

The difference in NL is that there are so many more plays to make, so many more ways to bluff at something, so many more angles. Implied odds turn the game into a downstream thinking game, much like chess, whereas in LHE, many decisions are based on pot odds, then and there, with implied odds a distant second. I've come to realize that NLHE, while at it's basics is stupifyingly simple, is truly a game complex in both its many thought processes and it's many levels that those processes exist on.

It's not as simple as ABC. It's just not enough to make a move--you (as mentioned previously) have to be mindful of why you make the move, and of exactly what you hope to accomplish with said move downstream. Not just on the next street--on the next street, and even the next hand.

So, let's review. NLHE is a game where you can set up moves for a whole session with moves you make in one hand. It's a game where you not only need to master the thought of what's happening now, but what's going to happen 2 cards and 2 betting rounds from now. Add on top of that the whole fish factor, and...

Damn. This is a tough game.

Current State of the Shark:

Playing somewhat scared. Not of losing bankroll, but of monsters under the bed. Usually a trip to the Taj tends to restore confidence in my game, but all it did for me was re-affirm that sometimes, yes, Virginia, there are indeed monsters under the bed. Big hairy ones, with scales, flippers, and for Chrissakes, green friggin teeth... As I mentioned in the trip report , it starts to suck when you think, "naah, he can't have _________ (insert suckass hand here)," but that little buzzer is going off, so you lay down your made hand to see that in fact, yes, he does have ________(insert same suckass hand here). How many players do you know that can lay down top set in LHE on the flop? All for an appropriate fear of monsters under the bed. It takes the fun out of the game when you just have that feeling that it just isn't your day--and it turns out to not be your day.

I know it's just a correction or something like that, but it seems like playing scared makes me less effective of a player (really--no shit), and it makes me not enjoy the game I have come to love.

Remember, though, in the end, it's just poker.

Continuation Bets in No-Limit Holdem

Picture the scene. You're in late position, 2 off the button, and you look at Ace-King in clubs. Woohoo! You raise the standard raise, 6 times the big blind and get two callers, one a prior limper, and the big blind.

The flop comes Queen-high, with no clubs. What next? You missed the flop. Great. The BB checks, and the action is to you. What now?

You fire out a continuation bet. You have a strong hand, one which still may be the best hand, and now, you have to defend it, along with the money you've already put into the pot. The continuation bet is something that is vital to success in no-limit holdem, as is the way to play against or defend against it.

Today, I was playing $50NL at Full Tilt and I had a real good one on my hands. A player two to my right who consistently called my pre-flop raises and folded to my continuation bets. He was a veritable ATM. I'd have AK on a Q-7-4 flop, fire out a 2/3 pot bet and his hand would hit the muck before you could blink. Another hand, I'd have QJ, on an ace-high flop, and I'd fire a 3/4-pot continuation bet and watch him fold. I stole about six small pots off him by doing this (which was of course, a by-product of my table image, and 18% VP$IP and 14% PFR at the table), and I could imagine him steaming at his keyboard as small pot (~$5) after small pot slid over to me. So, with about $13 left in front of him, he decided to take a stand. I raised to $2 on the button, as I was prone to do, and he called from MP, leaving us heads-up on the flop that brought K-6-2. I fired out my nice standard $3.50 bet into a $5 pot, and he immediately pushed all in. I insta-called and flipped over my KK, and he flipped J6o. He was drawing dead to running 6's, and he couldn't do anything about it. Why did this happen? Because he didn't understand the idea of a continuation bet, and what to do with it.

In most standard (not-too-loose, not-too-tight) games, there is an automatic tendency among many players to "check to the raisor," especially pre-flop. In fact, in many cardrooms, you'll catch many players, especially old-timers actually saying, "check to the raisor." When you're the raisor, this is like music to your ears. You're essentially getting a free crack at the pot, which especially if you're heads-up, will end up in your chipstack far more often than not.

Continuation Bet as Semi-Bluff

Pre-Flop: You get AJs on the button and you open-raise. Why? Because you have a strong hand, you wish to eliminate weaker hands, and you want to build a pot with players you may have dominated. Your standard raise (game and table-texture dependent) is fine here. The BB calls, as does an EP limper.

Flop: Q-4-6 rainbow. BB checks, EP checks, and with the action to you, you bet 3/4 pot. Why? You don't have a made hand, but the two limpers are showing weakness by checking to you. You have nothing to slow play, so the only appropriate action is to bet. You want to semi-bluff here that you caught a piece of the flop, and drive out anyone who caught, say, middle pair, and want to try their luck to catch two pair or trips. The size of your continuation bet should vary by table texture (see Phil Gordon's excellent Little Green Book for more on this) and it should be enough that most players won't have odds to draw to the next street, and enough still that a check-raise would have to be significant enough that you absolutely know you're beaten. Many recommend varying between 2/3 times the pot and 1 1/2 times the pot.

In this situation, you know that anyone who calls your bet is either a) drawing, b) sitting with a queen in their hand, or c) stupid. Anyone who raises your bet more than a min-raise (which, even though some advocate that min-raise=monster, I have NO respect for) is either trying to bluff you off YOUR pot, or has a significant holding themselves, whether a made hand or a big draw.

Therefore, this bet accomplishes many things. Frequently, you will win the pot immediately. Other times, you will have enough information to make a nice laydown, and other times, you will build a nice pot for you to win later.

Continuation Bet as Punctuation Mark

New hand. You look down at QQ on the button. You make a standard raise, two players call, and the flop comes A-Q-3 rainbow. Many players would slowplay this, but I'll give the argument against it. When a table knows you'll fire out a continuation bet, they're more likely to play along with mediocre (or just second best) holdings. Here is a perfect example. People love to limp-call with AQ, Ax suited, KQ, things like that, particularly at lower limits like $25 and $50 NL.

If it's checked to you, believe that they themselves (or at least one of them) are waiting for your continuation bet. Fire out a low-end bet (2/3 the size of the pot), and wait for the check-raise to come.

Being consistent with the contination bet (except of course when it's obvious you're beat or you sense weakness) will help you both in the current pot and in future pots down the road.

A Life Changing Picture

No poker content here. We got our 3-D Ultrasound done, and here's my daughter, still in the womb. I'll get to meet you soon, honey. Daddy loves you.

Movin' On Up

You know, I gave a lot of thought to poker Tuesday night, and yesterday, and last night. So when my wife woke me up last night (pregnancy can be a real pain in the ass), I fired up Full Tilt and played some $50 NL. After playing almost 10000 hands of $25 NL, I'm only at a meager 1.47 BB/100. I know I'm a better player than that, so hey, let's move up a little and see if some of the problem is that I'm not taking the stakes seriously enough.

Many players will tell you that once you've been at a level, it's difficult to move down again significantly. If you're used to playing 10/20 LHE and playing for $300 pots, then believe me, a $20 pot at the 25s is like, well, (in the words of Josh Arieh) "tiddlywinks." Maybe some of the problem is that I've grown complacent with stakes, money, anything.

Well, on my seventh hand of $50 NL, I dropped a stack. I looked down at AK of hearts in the BB. My eventual opponent was in MP, and he min-raised to a dollar. Now, you all are well aware of how I feel about min-raises, so of course, I jack him up to $3. He re-raises me to $7.50, and I think. Hmmm. This guy is in my DB from $25 NL with a VP$IP of 72% and a PFR of 31%. His raise and re-raise means exactly what? To me, his raise and re-raise mean he has exactly two cards in front of him. So I bang him again, to $20. He then comes over the top and goes all-in for his $48 stack. Whoops. Phil Gordon says that the 4th raise means aces. What the hell does the 5th raise mean? I figure I'm only a significant dog to AA or KK, so I call. He flips over Aces. Whoops. To kick me in the junk one last time, he rivered a flush. Hey, he played a great hand.

RE-LOAD!

To make a long story short, that was by far the low point of my night. I finished up in excess of two buy-ins, once by cracking limp-called aces pre-flop with QT on an 8-9-J flop, and so-on...

It feels good to be on the plus side of the ledger again.

Taj Trip Report

Another Tuesday off, another trip to the Taj. It's been a while, but I just wasn't prepared for what I faced. Did you ever have a day where you just couldn't get rolling? That was me yesterday. I sat at the table with Domenic and promptly won 3 pots in 4 hands. I was up only about $40, because the table was rather tight, but still, up is up.

Most players never remember the large pots they've won, but they can remember the bad beats in vivid detail...

The pendulum swung both ways yesterday, with me slapping a rough one on Domenic with 96s taking down his AQs with an 9-A-6 flop, yet I caught two of the toughest BACK-TO-BACK.

First hand, I look down to see A9 of hearts in MP. I raise it and get 3 callers (typical for an AC 3/6 game). I flop TPTK with a 9-5-2 flop, with 2 hearts. I lead out, same 3 call, turn card is a non-heart 4, I lead out, one guy calls. River brings the 7 of clubs, and I lead, and this moron RAISES? I call and he turns over a suited hammer in diamonds. Yes, 72s. He called my pre-flop raise COLD with 72s. Called my flop bet with a pair of deuces, 7 kicker. Called my turn bet with the same. He says, "Wow. 4 hours and $400--I finally win a pot." I actually start to steam, and say, "Well, you know, sir, maybe if you don't play garbage like 72s, you wouldn't be down $400." He gets up to go to the bathroom. Throughout my observation that day, if he flopped ANY pair, ANY draw, he would call to the river. A truly horrible player.

NEXT HAND, still MP, I look down at pocket kings. I raise, get 2 callers. Flop is 8-2-5. I lead, get called. Turn is an 8. I lead, get called. River is a J. I lead, opponent raises, I call, he turns over Q8. I literally spike my kings across the table, gather my chips and cash out, down $128. I was on irreversible tilt.

I really didn't handle it appropriately, but I mean, this was ridiculous. I actually laid down top set during the session, and second set as well, because one donkey at our table played any two suited and sucked out flushes TWICE. Two sets, two losses, but the salvaging fact of yesterday was that if I didn't make those laydowns, I'd have been down even more. I also laid down TPTK with AK on an A-3-5 flop. My opponent flipped over 42o for the flopped nut straight. If big laydowns are victories (and I believe them to be), I had a great day yesterday. Probably the greatest day ever by a player who lost 4.27 BB/hour. I laid down pocket jacks to a woman who had never played in a live casino before. The flop was ten high (T-6-Q IIRC), the turn was an ace, and the river another ten. I laid it down on the river (after she check-called the flop and turn and led out on the river), and she accidentally exposed her hand after I mucked. She had T7o. I laid down QQ on an Ace-high flop with 5 players firing back and forth. None of them had an ace, two of them turned the same straight.

That was the kind of day it was. Ugh.

Next time will be better.

Hey, the upside--Domenic took home $100 playing solid poker. As long as we break somewhat even playing the fish, I'm happy. Good job by you, dude.

The Theory of No-Limit Poker

Big title, eh? Sounds like I have a great deal to live up to in this post. I actually think I can. Everybody who is anybody knows all about Sklansky's Fundamental Theorem of Poker:

Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponents' cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose. Conversely, every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have if they could see all your cards, you gain; and every time they play their hands the same way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you lose.

But here, I suggest the Theory of No-Limit Poker: In addition to the above, I submit this:

In No-Limit Poker, every action, every bet, every element of every bet--down to the amount of the bet--exists for a reason. Every decision has a desired consequence. If you cannot determine the appropriate rationale or consequence for completing a given action, the action does not have appropriate EV.

To apply this theory, we need to consider each action in the hand individually. Take for example (no, please--take it) this hand I played yesterday:

Seat 1: Donkey ($20.15)
Seat 2: Button ($23.30)
Seat 3: SB ($9.75)
Seat 4: BB ($17.80)
Seat 5: UTG ($22.15)
Seat 6: UTG+1 ($35.80)
Seat 7: MP1 ($10.20)
Seat 8: MP2 ($9.65)
Seat 9: Hero ($46.35)
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero: (Ah Ac)
2 folds,MP1 raises to $0.50, 1 fold, Hero raises to $1.25, Donkey calls $1.25,3 folds, MP1 calls $0.75
*** FLOP *** (8s 2h Js) ($4.10)
MP1 checks, Hero bets $2.60, Donkey calls $2.60, MP1 folds
*** TURN *** (8s 2h Js) (3h) ($9.30)
Hero bets $9, Donkey calls $9
*** RIVER *** (8s 2h Js 3h) (9s) ($27.30)
Hero bets $7.30, Donkey calls $7.30, and is all in
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Hero shows (Ah Ac) (a pair of Aces)
Donkey shows (Qs 7s) (a flush, Queen high)
Donkey wins the pot ($39.85) with a flush, Queen high

I'm not using this as a bad beat post, but as a description of where I went wrong here:

PRE-FLOP: (Ah Ac)
Hero raises to $1.25
What am I doing?
Re-raising.

Why?
I want to tell the table that a) I have a strong hand. b) I want to make anyone with a weaker hand pay to see any flop that can beat me. c) I want to build a pot for me to win if/when people DO call.

Why that amount?
The original raise was a wimpy min-raise, so I raised to 5BB, 2.5x the original raise.

FLOP: (8s 2h Js)
Hero bets $2.60
What am I doing?
Betting $2.60.

Why?
To show strength and to eliminate any flush draw from calling.

Why that amount (about 2/3 pot)?
This is where I made a mistake. Part of me wants the call, therefore the sub-pot-sized bet. The other part wants to price out draws, but do I bet enough here? Anyone with a flush draw has 9 outs, not including any overcards or pairs they may have. We'll assign 10.5 outs, and assume that the player has (As 2s), the hand least likely to fold here. The opponent has about 3.5-to-1 odds to hit with 10.5 outs, or 4.2-to-1 odds to hit with a naked flush draw. My bet gives him only 2.57-to-1 on his money, which means he would need >18 outs to correctly call, so my bet was technically and mathematically correct, but the question is--would he have called given a full-pot bet? We'll never know.

TURN: (8s 2h Js) (3h)
Hero bets $9
What am I doing?
Betting a full-pot sized bet--$9.00

Why?
To build a potential pot, and to price out the now two flush draws that are out there on the board.

Why that amount (Full pot)?
Again, I'm trying to price out any potential drawing players. With two draws out there, I need to bet large. I need to protect my hand, which is quite vulnerable, not only to the flush draw, but also to any potential two pair hand. I bet $9 into a $9.30 pot, meaning that the caller is getting only slightly more than 2-to-1 on his money. This means that even with 10.5 outs (drawing potentially to two pair as well as a flush) he's 3.38-to-1 against making a hand. With a naked flush draw, he's 4.11-to-1 against making a hand. Again, my bet is mathematically and technically correct, but he calls anyway. To correctly call this bet, he would need in excess of 23 outs.

RIVER: (8s 2h Js 3h) (9s)
Hero bets $7.30
What am I doing?
Betting $7.30 to put my opponent all-in.

Why?
Frustration. This could have been my severe error in this hand. Was I a) trying to bluff that I made the flush and price out any weaker flushes? b) trying to push him off a hand? c) Just seeing if he'd lay down a busted heart draw?

Why that amount?
I felt that if he had to go all-in with a weak flush that he would let it go, or I was just pissed off, frustrated, or whatever. It was also a sense of a blocking bet, because if I had checked it, he would've pushed his last $7.30 in, and I would've been forced to call.

He called and showed down the Queen-high flush, sending my aces to the muck as the losing hand.

I'm not sure this hand would have or could have gone differently regardless of how I played it. The opponent had a VP$IP of 71%, a PFR% of 3%, and an Aggression Factor of 0.84, an extra-loose calling station. In hindsight, and being results-oriented, perhaps a stronger push on the flop would've forced him out. Maybe pushing all-in there, or pushing all-in on the turn may have helped, but again, we'll never know. The opponent made errors at almost every decision point and still won the hand. That's where the gambling part of poker comes in.

Let's analyze the opponent's play:
PRE-FLOP:
Error #1--He called a raise and re-raise cold with Q7s. Even speculatively, this is a decidedly -EV move. At this point, he made up his mind that if he flopped a flush draw, he would chase it to the river.

FLOP:
Error #2--He called a flop bet without sufficient odds to draw to a flush. He did have a two-gapped 3-to-a-straight draw as well, but even adding the 1.5 outs to that doesn't give him odds to profitably call the bet.

TURN:
Error #3--He called a pot-sized bet with nowhere near the odds needed to call. Even if you factor in the implied odds, he's calling $9 to win $30.85 more TOTAL(3.42-to-1) on his weak flush draw (4.11-to-1).

RIVER:
His first correct play of the hand. With a flush, you have to call this bet. Even if I had a higher flush, being that pot-committed, you have to call the last $7.30 off your stack to see if I bluffed it the whole way. My action prior says I don't have the flush. You have to call here, getting 4.75-to-1 on your money that I don't have a suited king in spades or a suited ace in spades.

Ok, this is some real second- and third-level thinking here. How about a chart based upon how much you need to bet, relative to pot-size, to price an opponent out of a draw to a hand that could potentially be better than yours? Much of this is read-dependent, obviously, but based upon what you know about an opponent's hand, maybe this can give you a guide.

You Put Opponent On...	Opponent's Outs	Odds Flop to Turn	% of Pot to Bet	Odds Turn to River	% of Pot to Bet
Flush Draw	9	4.22:1	35%	4.11:1	35%
Flush Draw + 1 Overcard Flush Draw + GSSD	12	2.92:1	53%	2.83:1	55%
Flush Draw + 2 Overcard Flush Draw + OESD	15	2.13:1	89%	2.07:1	94%
OESD	8	4.88:1	26%	4.75:1	27%
OESD + 1 Overcard	11	3.27:1	45%	3.18:1	46%
OESD + 2 Overcards (high end)	14	2.36:1	74%	2.29:1	78%
GSSD	4	10.8:1	11%	10.5:1	12%
GSSD + 2 Overcards	10	3.70:1	37%	3.60:1	39%
2 Overcards	6	6.83:1	18%	6.67:1	20%
Pair (using 1 hole card)	5	8.40:1	14%	8.20:1	15%
Pair + Flush Draw Pair + Flush Draw + GSD	14	2.4:1	72%	2.29:1	78%
Pair + OESD	10	3.70:1	38%	3.60:1	40%
Pair + GSSD	6	6.83:1	18%	6.67:1	20%
Pair + Flush Draw+ OESD	17	1.76:1	1.33 X pot	1.71:1	1.41 X pot

That table essentially is all about how much you should bet to make sure that an opponent's call will be incorrect. Of course, it is just a guideline, and using the guidelines to the letter will pretty much ensure that you'll get sucked out on your share and more. Bet stronger than the guideline. Better to win small pots than lose a big one.

I hope to use some of this information to not only create more articles, but also to refine your (and my own) hand analysis skills. When looking at a hand you've played, one of the things I've learned is to review the hand from the opponent's perspective. That will likely be the focus of my next article. Good luck at the tables, and happy reading!

Finding Your Way

I had been thinking this weekend, about life, about poker, about a lot of things. The last post was somewhat hard for me to write, since it was an admission of sorts, not of failure, but of "what now?" Of course, sometimes nature has a way of providing you with a bit of insta-perspective, which in my case, never hurts.

I took the weekend off from everything poker, with the exception of changing my PokerAce HUD layouts. No, I didn't come up with something profound to do with the program. I simplified them. Majorly--but more on that later.

Saturday we picked out the baby's furniture and put down our deposits, and did a few other things "baby-related." Then, shortly after we stopped for dinner, we got caught in the mini-blizzard from hell. For any of you East Coast-ers out there, you know what I mean. We left at 3pm, it was 56 degrees, and drizzling. The winds picked up, and by 9:30pm, it was snowing heavily, and 32 degrees! We literally couldn't see more than a few car lengths in front of us coming home. We only got a coating on the roads, an inch or so on the grass, but that wasn't the big thing.

Sunday, we relaxed at home. The missus went to Babies 'R' Us to check out some more stuff to register for, but she complained of a headache before she left. I took her blood pressure and it was a little elevated, nothing to worry about, but just something to take notice of. When she came home, the headache was worse and her blood pressure at her mom's house was climbing. She called the doctor, and we were off to the hospital. To make a long story short, she's fine, the baby's fine, everybody's fine.

Whew.

What it did, however, was put everything in more of a realistic perspective. I didn't give a damn about anything else but my wife and baby. Nothing else mattered, and you know what--it shouldn't. Not poker, not the remodeling, nothing. We got home from the hospital about 10:30, and she says to me, "You need to relax. I'm fine. Baby's fine. Go do something. You're driving me crazy. Go play poker or something."

I know you shouldn't play under any type of stress, but at her urgings, I fired up Full Tilt and played some $25NL. An hour and a half later, I was up to $91 on one table, $65 on another, and $47 on my third. She's been aware of my struggles as of late, and she looked at the laptop from over my shoulder and leaned over me, draping her arms across my shoulders and kissed me. She just said, "Feeling better?"

I was. On many different levels.

Now: Back to your regularly scheduled poker post.

What's the difference? I figured it out. The answer isn't more data--it's less. At least for me. The only stats I have up on the HUD right now are the auto-rate icon, VP$IP, PFR, AF-Total, and # of Hands. Nothing else. If I want pop-up stats, I'll see WtSD, W$SD, Aggression Frequency, and their BB/100.

I was over-thinking poker. Immensely. I over-thought every bet, every raise, every everything, and I got away from using my own instincts on a player and trusting numerical reasoning. It cost me. Last night (and again this morning) I broke it down, and made it simple. The results are there. I'm getting back to reading players hands, rather than analyzing each move based upon numbers on the HUD. It's paying dividends.

Please don't think I'm running down Josh's fantastic program in any way. On the contrary, I think it's a vital tool to use while playing online poker. The best feature--the ability to customize the HUD to whatever you want it to display. Maybe my mind doesn't quite work on the advanced track that I think it does. Maybe it's that it exactly works on that advanced track. I'm not sure. The only thing I know is that it works for me.

That, and that mother-to-be, and baby are fine. That works real well for me.

Another Crossroads Post

I'm at another crossroads in my poker life. It's the crossroads of Frustration Street and Jaded Avenue. 2005 was a very successful poker year for me, not to mention a success IRL. I started out playing 0.50/1 LHE and ended up playing 5/10 full time and taking cracks at 15/30, winning thousands of dollars along the way. I have long since cashed out my initial investments, and have been playing on OPM (other people's money) for months now.

Before you stop reading and say, "Christ, not another whiny bad beat post," I can tell you that no, this isn't another bad beat post.

Here's the problem. I've struggled since October '05, essentially just pushing money around a table, but not really getting anywhere.

I tried bonus whoring. Very counterproductive for me. When you buy into a site and start playing 2/4 during a bonus time, EXPECT fish to draw on you. I had more than my share. So, I decided to pare back my sites, and keep my money between Full Tilt and PokerStars. I made that decision in December, and since then it seems like I've just won money and gave it back. Either I'm running great hands into the one hand that can beat me (that the opponent can't POSSIBLY have), I'm running QQ into AA, or AJ into AQ, or I have hands like the gem where KK lost to K5o (yes, you're right--that is a 9-to-1 favorite pre-flop...). Just today, I had QQ all-in pre-flop against AK, and I just KNEW he was going to hit. He did, with a K on the flop. Then, he called me a fish. Can you f***ing believe that?

Either way, I'm frustrated with poker. Very frustrated. I know I'm playing generally solid poker--nobody plays great all the time, and I've been prone to some real tilt-fests over the last 3 months as well--but the results just aren't there.

I feel that I'm at least as good a player as I was in October (when I was just demolishing the Stars 5/10 FR game), but for some reason, either because I can't take playing $25 NL as seriously, or that I cashed out so much of my winnings that I don't have enough to really play the 5/10 anymore without playing scared, or...I don't even know. I just can't get off this 3-month long schneid, and it drives me crazy. I can pinpoint the date it started--October 12, 2005. I was at my high water mark, after taking a shot at the 15/30 game and winning $400 in about half an hour. I played the next day and got slaughtered (as evidenced here--8th post down). That started the downward spin. I was able to right the ship, but it just seems as though I can't break through since that point. I don't know if it's psychological, if I'm just enduring bad beats and tilting in response, or if I'm just playing sloppy. Is it the pseudo-pressure I put on myself by pronoucing myself semi-pro?

Either way, I want it to stop.

I can think of a few things this year that made me feel indestructable:

1) Winning the $20 LHE MTT on Stars.
2) Placing 13th of 300+ in a $55 MTT at the Taj Mahal in AC.
3) Running over live tables pretty much wire to wire.
4) The quick hit n run session at the 15/30 in October.

And for the flip side?

1) Cashing out less than I deposited at InterPoker--AFTER the bonus. (12/05)
2) Doing the same at Empire. (10/05)
3) My big (relative) downswing at 5/10 at Stars late in the year.

I think a great deal of the key is not getting too high or too low--but just playing your game. I also think I'm going to redeposit a little more into Stars (excess from the NetTeller account) to get up to about $1200 over there, and get back into the 3/6 game and move up accordingly. I'll keep the Full Tilt account for playing NLHE and a few mixed game tournies, since Stars doesn't yet offer them (Otis...). I just have to get past this, because I do love poker--I love the competition, the mental stimulation, and yeah, the money ain't bad either.

Thanks for listening, and all comments are welcome as always.

What About the OTHER Gambling Mecca?

I was just wondering--actually, I've been wondering for a while--and not that I really think it would matter for me, but has anybody thought of having a Blogger gathering in Atlantic City? You know, on the EAST COAST???

Just a curiosity...

A Pet Peeve of Mine

I've been playing the $25 NL over at Full Tilt, and I've discovered something that drives me INSANE. I'm in LP, dealt AT and I open raise to 4 BB. Flop comes 3-4-T, two hearts, and my ace is a heart. The BB, a dipshit of the highest order, min-bets a quarter into a pot of $3.10. With TPTK, I, of course have no respect for that and raise him to $1.00. He calls it. The turn card comes an offsuit 5. The pot is now $5.10, so what does he do? Min-bets another quarter. I come over the top for the pot and he folds. He reveals that he mucked Q7.

What the hell was the point of that? He calls a raise with nothing (but a draw to a draw), then folds to a raise with a draw.

Two hands earlier, I saw the most assinine example of min-betting I've ever seen. I watched the same donkey execute a min-bet on the turn (a quarter) into a $5 pot. The two players between him and I FOLDED TO IT!!!

You're giving up a $5 pot for a quarter?

I actually wanted to give a lesson, but as I write this, I have pocket kings and the douchebag decides to min-raise me to $0.50. I re-raise him to $1.25 and he folds.

I'm going to change my blog's tagline--Making my millions at the poker tables, one quarter at a time.

Stupidity--why does it bother me so?

Redesign...

Hope you like the redesign--a new year, a new Cardroom. Enjoy everybody!

I Had to Share...

I came home from work today and played ran over a PLO table. The highlight? This beauty (even though I really don't like posting histories):

Full Tilt Poker Game #371412423: Table Allen - $0.10/$0.25 - Pot Limit Omaha - 18:50:37 ET - 2006/01/06
Seat 1: UTG ($24.85)
Seat 2: UTG+1 ($28.65)
Seat 3: UTG+2 ($9.75)
Seat 4: MP1 ($17.45)
Seat 5: Hero ($80.20)
Seat 6: CO ($26)
Seat 7: Button ($5.25)
Seat 8: SB ($10.25)
Seat 9: BB ($11.85)
SB posts the small blind of $0.10
BB posts the big blind of $0.25
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [Kh 5c 9d 9c]
1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.25, 2 folds, Hero calls $0.25, CO calls $0.25, Button calls $0.25, SB calls $0.15, BB checks
*** FLOP *** [5d 5s 4d]
SB checks, BB checks, UTG+1 checks, Hero bets $1, 3 folds, UTG+1 calls $1
*** TURN *** [5d 5s 4d] [5h]
UTG+1 checks, Hero checks
*** RIVER *** [5d 5s 4d 5h] [2h]
UTG+1 bets $1.75, Hero raises to $5, UTG+1 folds
Hero shows [Kh 5c 9d 9c] (four of a kind, Fives)
Hero wins the pot ($6.65)

Hero: TQB!!!

I just had to.

Great Article on When Playing By the Book Isn't Correct

Was perusing through All-In Magazine, where I found this article by Rick Fuller: I highlighted the major point in bold type.

One of the most common mistakes that can cost you a lot of money over the long haul is calling a bet on the river when you know you’re beat. It’s a huge leak for a lot of players—one I’m familiar with because I’m actively trying to remove it from my own game.

“Well, I’ve got pot odds,” you say to justify your call. But it doesn’t matter. In these situations, pot odds mean less than a marriage proposal from Britney Spears. Yet so many of us make the call anyway, thinking we have no choice. Earlier this year, I was playing in a $20/40 limit Texas Hold’em game. I was in early position and raised with pocket queens. A loose player behind me called, and another loose player re-raised all-in, making it $50 to go. A very tight, predictable player—I’ll call him Rocky—capped the action at $70. The big blind called, putting it back on me. I had $40 invested and wasn’t going to fold pocket queens. For only $30 more I was going to see a flop. I called and the player behind me called—making us five-handed with one dude all-in. The flop: K-7-4, all spades.

The big blind and I both checked as I looked back at my cards to confirm that one of my cards was indeed the queen of spades. The loose player also checked, and Rocky bet out $20. The big blind folded—putting the decision on me. I was pretty sure Rocky had pocket kings. That’s what I put him on before the flop, and I was sure that all he would bet in this situation were a set of kings or possibly pocket aces with the ace of spades. (The way he played, there were no other hands with which he would’ve capped the action pre-flop.)

I was pretty sure he didn’t have aces because he didn’t check his cards after the flop. Although it’s possible that he would have remembered which aces he held, most players at this level will at least take a peek to double-check. Yep, I was almost certain that Rocky had flopped a set of kings.

Now I had to decide what to do. It was possible that one of the two players behind me had the ace of spades, but they both played a ridiculous amount of hands, so it was just as likely that they held any two random cards. I also knew that the player who was not all-in would be likely to draw to a lot of spades, including the jack or the ten. With the pot size at $360, I decided that making the $20 call was the right thing to do here. I threw in my chips casually and the player behind me folded—leaving just Rocky, All-In and me. Burn and turn … six of spades.

I was watching Rocky’s face as the card came. He got a disgusted look that seemed genuine enough. I fired $40 toward the pot; Rocky thought about it for just a minute and reluctantly called, still looking perturbed. The river … six of hearts—pairing the board. Rocky’s eyes lit up, and at that moment I knew I was beat.

I checked to him and he bet $40. It was at this point that I made the mistake that can cost a player a lot of money over the course of time. There was $500 in the pot and it was just $40 to give myself a chance to take it down. I figured that I had the pot odds to call—because if Rocky was bluffing and I was right about that only one time in 12, it was a profitable play. But there was a major problem with this line of thinking.

Rocky was a very tight, passive player who would have been more than happy to check and show down just about any hand except for the nuts. I knew this, but for some reason still decided to call. I did not have the pot odds because I knew that I was beat. Sure enough, Rocky rolled over the K-K for a full house, the exact hand that I knew he had.

Leak.

There are times when you simply have to ignore pot odds and lay down your hand. This applies to pot-limit and no-limit Hold’em games as well. A favorite ploy of many no-limit tournament pros is to make such a small bet on the river that their opponent feels they simply have to call. If there’s $4,000 in the pot and I bet $400, and you know that I will bluff at least one time in ten in this situation, then you have to make the call…right? No! If you know, either through a read or betting patterns in play that you are beat then you do not have to call. Save the chips for use in a better spot.

In limit Hold’em, one of the keys to success is the ability to “save bets.” I used to believe that earning an average profit of one big bet per hour made me a good player. But if that’s my goal as a professional, then in the hand described above, I had just blown my expected earnings for the hour. Errors like this one tend to really add up over the course of a single session, not to mention an entire year. Folding on the river when you know you’re beat—just a slight tweak to your game—can significantly increase your expected winnings—from 1 big bet per hour to 1 or even 2 big bets per hour.

That’s not to say that you should always lay down a hand to a river bet when you suspect you’re beat. If Rocky were the type of player capable of making a bluff in that situation, then I wouldn’t have been so confident about his pocket kings, and my decision to call would’ve been easy and correct. But, after playing together all night, I knew Rocky better than that—and thus I should’ve known better than to throw “just another $40” into the pot, no matter how sumptuous it looked.

It's the anti-ToP argument. At a certain level of poker (which I can say that I may or may not be at currently), you need to trust your reads and toss pot odds out the window. Just because there's 12 BB in the pot, and there's a 4-flush on the board that beats your 2 pair, do you call because he might be bluffing? Pot odds theory says yes. Rick Fuller and I say no. Trust your reads, kids.