400nl Session Review

Doing a hand history review today with one this blog's readers has helped me to remember just how important it is to be constantly thinking and evaluating your game approach in every spot. I think he takes it for granted as he's always done it, but I often just stop doing it as soon as I string a few winning sessions together. If ever I'm struggling in future please remind me to do this every day.

I played a 400nl session last night with some spots I need to analyse.

http://weaktight.com/3021058 - 'MuscleSuperStar'. Weird reg. Wins very well but weird in the sense he has a flop cbet % of 24%. I've just checked and it's just as low OOP as IP...... how this translates into 3bet pots is that he has a very strong cc range in 3bet pots. I say strong, he'll cc AK hi and stuff like that, as well as pure bluffs.

Now, I don't want to copy this style or anything, but I do need to better understand it. Why is betting the flop in 3bet pots good anyway? Well, to win the pot, to get value, and to stop giving away free cards, and to balance your bluffs. If he's check calling so much, then he's going to win the pot less, get less value, give free cards and not be able to bluff the flop.

So long as I understand this, then what this means is that I should be pretty happy flatting IP VS him and thus do it with a wider range.

After cc, he's capable of firing two barrells as a bluff, betting twice for value, check raising or turning a hand into a bluff. Sometimes he check folds too. I don't know what his cbetting range is...... searching my database I can only find one and that was KQ on ATx, so it's possible his cbetting range is still really weak.

Given everything I've just written, I think I should check the flop to see a free card and take it from there. Once I've bet and he calls it's just shutdown city, and I possibly couldn't even barrel any Qs or As given he can just have them a lot.

Some triple barrells, both VS the same guy:

http://weaktight.com/3021085 - he floats a ton. On the turn, I think his call 2 range differs enough from his call 1 range that I can bet profitably in a vacuum, (KJ, TT, 9x), then on the river his call 3 differs enough from his call 2 that I can bet 3 (Qx, weak aces, other pure floats).

http://weaktight.com/3021097 - this one I like less, but again I am EP and he's floaty enough to have a ton of stuff like QJ, and he's in a nightmare spot with most Ax anyway. I dislike my river size, I think bigger for both value and bluffs to discourage bluff shoves, and I think there's a decent chance he's shoved something like 99.

http://weaktight.com/3021105 - sometime yesterday I remembered how cool small bets are. Having the 2 aces out there is a dream spot as there's probably only 8 combos in his range that can call down (all AQ).

http://weaktight.com/3021109 - funny spot, I think this is as close to a total river merge as you can get. Some regs definitely look me up with 76 here, some others find a fold with 88. My options OOP on all streets where bet or CF, and I think my river bet leads to far greater things happening than does checking.

http://weaktight.com/3021117 - result left out. You tell me, I was pretty torn. On the one hand he's definitely capable of having a bluff and turning hands into bluffs, on the other........ he sees me as a bad station and I don't think he likes burning money.

http://weaktight.com/3021122 - included as I've been torn in these spots for a while, but settled on always betting them, the smaller the better.

dan

400nl Again.......

Going to play a session now, then break down various aspects of it. In particular I want to focus on villain's ranges in certain spots, how it affects their overall game, and how it weakens them in certain areas.

Inexplicably, my default read on a lot of FTP regs is still a little hazy. Just writing notes doesn't do it justice, I should be doing proper analysis of their tendencies and then making sure I understand the strategy implications, and then studying it hard enough to make sure that what I've learned has been committed to memory.

The other thing I want to concentrate on is big pots. Bit of a generalisation you might say, but currently I'm winning at default by virtue of all small pots, and then leaking a ton of money once the pot goes beyond a certain size.

Decent analysis of this session to follow.........

200nl Session Review

Played 4 tables for 55 minutes, played 393 hands, won an amount in line with 5ptbb,

I didn't win or lose more than 45bbs in any hand. My non-SD winnings really suffered in this session, but I think the benefit of 4 tables and utter concentration allowed me to make some biggish folds:

http://weaktight.com/3004638 - tight OOP flatting range, it's possible that the turn is a fold. I think he bets too big on the river with a nutted hand, in his shoes with TT I'm trying to approximate the bet size to halfway between KQ and a pure bluff. $63 I'm probably looking up with AK, while still folding AJ types.

http://weaktight.com/3004643 - I planned to 3bet/ call this BvB. The guy flats OOP a lot, though his 4bet stat was relatively low, but I just felt that BvB with the blockers and deeper stacks that any 4bet was going to be a bluff a decent amount. I can probably call/ float/ win VS AK on ~ 55% of boards, but on this rainbow with no heart I think it's a sad flop fold.

http://weaktight.com/3004645 - I really need to decide in these spots if I want to bet TT-KK every time here, or check them and check some weak aces as well. I'm starting to like the 2nd option especially IP. Villain had a tightish flat OOP range too, but looseish stats and knowing nothing about him I kinda wished I'd looked him up as he has a great spot to float OOP and lead the river with all bluffs. I don't know if anyone else thinks like that though.... again I should've maybe found out.

http://weaktight.com/3004648 - squeezing's a funny old game. I call this most of the time, but lately I really hate squeezing KQo, AJo etc and I'd much rather have this hand VS a calling range. Timed on the flop bet, but I think it's mandatory given 88-TT types, plan was to shove turn so he saved me some money if he had say a pair and a heart out.

I'm going to play several more 4 table sessions of 200nl, really hammering in this approach before I tread back to 400nl.

dan

Forensic Detail

Just a quickish note to remind myself of how important every single detail is when playing poker. Particularly the midstakes where edges are small and variance is like a tidal wave.

I played the last couple of days and lost a shit ton of money. Spent the day reviewing the hands, and there's virtually nothing there that would really show me up as a noob. Everything is 'close', and bordering on 'standard', and at worse 'maybe a little spewy but probably OK in this spot'.

What I'm saying is that........ that level of analysis doesn't really cut it any more, if indeed it ever did. My default ~ B game at FTP 400nl is I think ok, but the thing is that the level of knowledge comprising that B game simply makes me on par with every other reg in those games.

Knowing to 3bet bluff, 4bet bluff, double barrel overcards, PSR, squeeze, squash, check raise, use stats: all the default 'weapons' of the game are not only extensively used, but the counter strategies widely understood and deployed by all players as well.

I believe where the decent edges currently lie are in the tiniest of details and acting on those details. Things like knowing that Gopheresque shoves every nutted hand on the turn regardless of board texture but calls weak hands and draws. Having such information and acting on it can easily make an instant 200bb difference to your bottom line.

I'm not just talking about reads. I'm talking about the small factors that you miss either when not paying enough attention or playing too many tables (the same thing obviously). Small things like:

• J7 bvb, lets 3bet. OH WAIT, I don't know much about this guy
• A6s UTG lets raise it up. OH WAIT, tough table and likely to get 3bet.
• Turn a full house with 33 on j73 7, bet bet bet. OH WAIT, think about my whole range, I'm always giving up or check calling medium strength hands in this spot.
• Facing a 3bet IP holding T8s, lets flat. OH WAIT, this villain always bets 3 streets and doesn't have that weak a 3betting range anyway, I can never see showdown profitably.
• Holding 22 OTB facing a BB 3bet, snap fold. OH WAIT, this guy always check gives up when his ~AK type hands miss, I can call and see showdown a lot.

It's the OH WAITs that are the super important thing. They go missing when playing too many tables or not concentrating.

Where this is going is that I think I'm going to drop to 4 tables for a while and just concentrate on absolutely everything. There simply won't be a decision too small to pause for at least a few seconds and really consider the situation carefully. I think I struggle to do this with 6 tables, never mind 9 and never mind 12 which has just accounted for a lot of $.

So review to follow.......... with focus on forensic detail in every spot

dan

Session Review

Ok........ so I have some hands saved. Not all of them super interesting, just food for future thought.

http://weaktight.com/2979537 - some bad bluffs really. a) my perceived stab and turn stab range is going to be pretty wide, b) Gopheresque is in the top 3 percentile of 'supsicious of me' regs on Full Tilt. I just need to be bluffing him in only the very best spots for it, and value betting him like crazy with a super wide almost merged range.

http://weaktight.com/2979547 - really really torn on the flop. On the one hand, I'm probably giving up AQ type hands on this board, so it's nice to be able to check a hand with some improvement potential that isn't just giving up. On the other hand, I'm not actually CRAI with anything. So, I'm balanced when it comes to the check, but not the CRAI part. Hmm, maybe I should just always bet, I guess I have some bluffs such as A8hh, and the times I have those bluffs that can bet this board tallys nicely with the times I have a pair+OESD type of hand like this. yeah definitely I should just bet and throw in A8.

http://weaktight.com/2979557 - Dodgeball tells me if villain's cold 4bet % is over 3 then 5bet jam a lot. His was 10. This has actually yet to let me down so this cancels his costly advice about 3bet jamming every turn raise on a card villain 'should' just be calling.

http://weaktight.com/2979562 - I'm going through a stage of 4betting nothing IP. This means I have to flat much wider so I'm not dead money every time I raise. I really liked how I played this, a flop stab is blatently a CC from AK type hand. Similarly on the turn. So waiting for a river scarecard is the best way to win this hand as this is exactly how AJ goes down, but important is betting a river amount that makes him indifferent to calling or folding. I'm starting to realise that both my bluffs and value bets need to be on the higher side in general.

http://weaktight.com/2979568 - villain is a nit. He hardly ever 3bets, but has 5% OTB and thus some bluffs. I should be 4bet bluffing rarely though. What annoyed me about this hand is that if I'm 4betting A9s, then I'm also 4betting AT, AJ, AQ and probably all Ax. Because I want to 4bet bluff him so rarely (but not never!) I should literally only 4bet bluff AQo .

http://weaktight.com/2979573 - 14% 3betting range, and barrelly. Included this as I'm folding the best hand so option and I need a solution. Answer is to 4bet call 55-99 and AK VS him given he 3bets/5bets 22-44. So, a deviation from my non-4bet-IP strategy needed for this guy.

http://weaktight.com/2979577 - villain suspicious and slightly bad. I planned to bet twice and CC the river VS QJ, KJ, 87 as I don't think he can value bet a T and JJ+ gets 4bet close to 100%.

River I have to jam (sigh of relief when he TIIIIMES), and I think his call VS my range on that card is bad.

http://weaktight.com/2979581 - annoying spot. A turn bet accomplishes nothing, but my hand is face up by the river. The answer is certainly to check Tx and 7x on the turn and jam the river. I'm pretty sure I would've, and thus I'm happy enough with this hand.

http://weaktight.com/2979586 - villain is really tight, and his leads are clearly TT-QQ. His turn bet becomes a bet for information, and I think deep IP in this spot it's only fair to manipulate that information to our advantage.

Ashes Bets

These are my 3 Ashes bets. I'm clearly in love with the 3.1/1 I got on England, but with the threat of rain I've laid off against the draw..... so I'm currently break even at worst, with a potential profit of £540 if England win and Pietersen gets his 100, he's currently on 82 or something.

Market

Selection

Type

Bet ID

Bet placed

Odds req.

Stake (£)

Liability (£)

Avg. odds matched

Date matched

Test Series / Australia v England (2nd Test) / Match Odds

The Draw

Back

960222635

04-Dec-10 06:33

2.6

128.00

2.6

04-Dec-10 06:33

Test Series / Australia v England (2nd Test) / England Score 100 - 1st Inns

Kevin Pietersen

Back

957075505

02-Dec-10 20:42

5.1

20.00

5.1

02-Dec-10 20:42

Test Series / Australia v England (2nd Test) / Match Odds

England

Back

957075426

02-Dec-10 20:41

4.1

180.0

dan

Current Problems

I think my current A game is really good. I think my current Z game makes me the biggest loser at 400nl, and I think that my B game is the same as my Z game.

I made two big mistakes today. One was getting really tilted by chat, and the other was checking my results. The chat thing was just one of those usual haters (villain is MattTheCat if anyone wants to slowroll and win $50) type things, but for some reason it really riled me today. It was in conjunction with losing a ton of all ins as a huge favourite, and I spent 10 minutes arguing back before spewing off a ton of money on other tables.

The checking results thing...... well, I wouldn't actually call that a mistake in itself. It's more of a sympton of a terrible mindset that leads to terrible play. I couldn't help myself as I felt I was stuck a decent amount (not as much as I thought). Immediately after checking, I felt the effects.

The thing about not checking is that the benefits of not knowing only really build up after a period of time, so the bliss of not knowing a week in far outweight the benefits of not checking in a single 40 minute session. Looking at the results just sets me back to zero, but there's a pathetic needy side of me that doesn't feel the 'reward' of my efforts until I've some green numbers and some inclining lines.

I'd love to go all month without checking. I don't know how plausible that is though. My mindset is just soooo good when I have no short term care.

As for the chat thing, I just emailed support to ban my chat. Yeah sure I just shouldn't get tilted like that as a professional, but it's one area of work that just doesn't need to be there when you can flick a switch and turn it off.

Other general problems, I'm too loose UTG at the moment again. It means I'm not balanced frequency-wise when it comes to double and triple barrelling. I need to consciously give myself a pat on the head for folding 65s.

I only just discovered today the marking hands thing in HEM. I assume you can do that while you play? If so, that's going to really help me with posting all marked hands after every session. I really believe that constantly being in a critical mindset is super important. There's no such thing as 'well I know enough now, time to print money by playing a gazillion hands'.

One last general problem is the lack of knowledge of regulars. I'd say there's a band of around 25 FTP regulars who I treat entirely the same, and only through more regular session reviews am I going to be able to fix this blatent leak.

Session review to follow.

dan

The Month That Was(n't)

There you have it; played well for the most part, had some tilty sessions but less than usual, and just lost every single time all the money went in. Not much more to say, I'm happier with my game than at any other time, and so long as I keep working on improving then hopefully I should do ok.

The plan is to only check HEM or cashier for results a week at a time, so I'll post again next Wednesday.

dan