Also dicey, let say I agree to 100 coin flips, but only 1 per day for the next 3 months, would you do it. I don't have a problem with what you said about risk aversion, I agree somewhat, it's that you arbitrarily define your sessions as day to day as opposed to month to month, year to year or even life to life

I'd skeptically take your $10 bill. But in the real world nothing is free so I'd be watching my back for a while.

Can we start today?

I chose 1 day for the casino example for no particular reason other than casinos get to the long run on a daily basis (probably). I view poker as one long game. It's true that it does have sessions and I do compute my win rate on an hourly basis. But there's no reason for that other than convenience and to conform to the standard.

He likely defines it from day to day, or from session to session, because that is the length of time he has to spend feeling bad if he had a losing session, until he has the possibility of having another winning one.

Personally, I logically understand that it's "all one session", and I don't try to manipulate my results to have more winning sessions or anything like that, but I can't help feeling worse after a big losing day and better after a big winning one (but not as much better as it is worse after a losing one). I would have thought after many years of playing it would not happen much anymore, but it really has not improved much at all. I'm sure a lifetime tendency to depression makes it affect me more than the average person, but I imagine it affects almost all people somewhat.

In my case, I would take the $10 EV on $50 at any time, even if just for one trial, because the $50 loss isn't that big a deal to me. But if I was offered the same kind of deal, with $10K EV on $50K risk, I would likely sadly turn it down, because I know the loss of $50K would be too much for my system to take.

Poker is weird. And the human condition is weird too. I'm risk adverse. But I'm much more likely to play again tomorrow if I win today - in fact it's almost a guarantee. But if I lose several sessions in a row, I'll walk away for several weeks sometimes. It's almost like I can't stand winning because if I win I just keep coming back until I lose.

Luckily I'm not playing for a living. I don't know how people can do that - I'd be a nervous mess!

Update. I'm running good lately. My loss rate is down to $0.79/hour. I actually won 6.5 big bets last night in a 2 hour session that included a flopped set of aces cracked by flush on the river, running QQ into KK, and losing with KK to runner runner 8 when opponent held A8o no ace on the board.

No, equilab is full of standard LHE ranges. In addition, you can do post flop range modifications -- select everything that flopped 2 pair or better and use that as villain's range. Also, it is free... thus, it is the tool to download and use.
I don't think stove actually exists any more. You can find old versions.
You can enter whatever ranges you want, so you can modify ranges to do whatever. Again, don't obsess over any of this. If you can download and run equilab, just do that. If not, find a tool that works. The secret here is in spending time thinking about villain ranges, rather than obsessing about his exact hand after the showdown. It is transforming how you think about poker.

These are all normal emotions. At some point, you may drop $10k at the casino, know it was just money in your box, have a nice meal, and forget what happened before you get home. Understanding the irrationality of it all helps.
Here's where to start, stop focusing so much on results. You're re-figuring your hourly win/loss rate after every session. Don't. Scribble your results down in your book, but don't total up anything (only total every month or even longer).

For a bonus, focus on something that matters -- try to remember as well as you can one hand that had a tough decision. Think it through away from the table. Maybe post it here. Also go back over your overall decision process in the session. Did you make some bad/bored calls? Did you miss some value bets because you were gun-shy after some beats? Spend more time writing that stuff down in your log than on parsing your results.
This is also results focused thinking. You choose not to make a loose limp with a suited 3 gapper UTG, your flush comes, and you think you were wrong to fold? Stop doing this. You don't get to play hands knowing the outcome. K9s is a snap fold UTG in a "not loose - not tight and passive" game. It is unplayable UTG in about any game. They play this hand because it got lucky once. We are tight in early position. If you thought K9s was playable and folded it (due to fear of variance?), you were 2x wrong. 1 for not knowing playable hands. 2 for folding a hand you thought you should have played.

Most importantly, you need to analyze hands based on what you knew at the time. If you thought it was improper to play the hand and folded, that's a correct decision. Stop there. What happens next (7 limp and then you flop a flush) is just noise. It doesn't change a correct decision, because the information wasn't available.

If you're commonly playing suited 3 gap hands in EP, you can fix stuff in your game. Really pay attention to your EP ranges. Ask yourself why you're playing hands by open limping. Find a starting hand chart.

There is no equilab for MAC. I guess it's PokerCruncher for me. Looks good and has good reviews. Looks like it does everything Flopzilla does and more. $30 - gots to be worth it.

Intellectually, yes. Emotionally, no. I'm not even close to there ... but I've came a long way believe it or not.

I enter every session into my spreadsheet before I play another session. The spreadsheet updates everything automatically. I don't think it impacts my play - I don't even think about it. My results are what they are. There's nothing I can do about them. Thinking about that would take time away from focussing on my opponents and correctly reading the board. A lot can be gleaned from the board when you consider your hole cards as blockers and such. I actually spend time thinking at the tables about what I'm going to do if certain cards come on the turn and river. And I think about both how to build the pot (trapping players for extra bets) and put pressure on players I'd like to see fold (paying attention to relative position). Sometimes i'll wait for a safe card on the turn and then check-raise the turn depending on position. The check-raise is an awesome tool. There's lots of ways to play hands and playing them differently throws your thinking opponents off your trail.

No, I never thought i was wrong to fold. I guess it's just not even worth mentioning so I shouldn't have wrote it. But K9s is a pretty hand (especially hearts). My thought process was: I'd play this hand every time if the flop goes off 5+ handed for 1 bet. It's not likely anyone has AK because there's no raise pf. So straights should do well and many players like broadway cards with or without a 10 - so the straight should win big pots. Two pair should do well too. A pair of 9's is good. A pair of K's not as good but should still win a decent proportion of the time. I think it's a winner. But not from UTG because I don't know what's going to happen pf. It could get raised or it could go 3 handed - neither of which do I want to be there. This game was passive but not loose enough to take the chance and play the hand. I had 0 regret when I saw the flush get there - it wan't a flopped flush. I just noticed it - that was all. I then noticed I would have lost to a bigger flush. No inner smile -- no thought of wow I dodged something. I just noticed - that is all. And I do think it's an example of playing lower variance style - K9s isn't a horrible hand. If I know I'll see a flop 5+ handed for one bet, I'll do it every time.

No, I don't like suited 3 gappers. They don't make nut straights, except for AT. But AT also has some high card strength - so I usually raise (UTG I may just fold). But AT can be tricky because when you raise, you still might lose to a better ace when an ace hits the board. AJ, AQ, and even AK don't like to re-raise in 4/8 + AJ and AQ will just call down when an ace hits the board - so you end up value owning yourself. But those are the breaks - I still think you win more with AT than you lose with AT.

PokerCruncher it is --- I'll keep concentrating and refining the things I'm concentrating on now and I'll incorporate range analysis and think about opponents ranges. Having PokerCruncher will likely cause me to be more interested in opponents ranges so I'll spend more time noticing and remembering better. Thanks dude!

I got PokerCruncher. It's powerful and awesome!

But I kind of feel like I'm in the same boat as chillrob. I played last night and I think I'm noticing things that may be valuable, but I don't know how to make use of it. I don't know how to make meaningful use of PokerCruncher.

I noticed a girl call my raise from the small blind with an unsuited one gapper. She check-called the two-tone flop. Then bet out when the turn card completed the flush. Another guy called. I thought and folded my over cards (not in the right suit). She bets the river and gets called. She had 2-pair on the flop. And the other guy had QQ. Her play seems crazy stupid to me and the QQ guy was just way too passive pf imo.

How do you think about this and ranges. She called a raise super wide. QQ dude limp called a raise with QQ. Should I be like "floorman - table change please" or is this exploitable in some way?

I also saw a guy limp J4o UTG. And another guy only call out of the blind with AKo

I'm not sure how to gauge and range these types of players.

There was another crazy slow-playing jackass who wanted the dealer to have esp with regard to what he was doing. And he would bring chips out to the line in his hand and then pause 8 seconds only to check. It's not like he was looking around at players and angling for information. He was just being a jackass. But he was easy to play against because his raising range was like any ace or king. I would routinely re-raise him. He got the best of me, but I was ahead going into all out confrontations. A notable hand was a kill pot. $2 dead in the pot and an extra Big Blind as a player returned to the table and posted. So there's $18 up for grabs before the anyone sees cards. Crazy Jackass raises. I 3! with AJo. Folded to him and he calls. pot = $54. Flop is 986r. He checkraises and has 8 left. I put him all in. pot = $94. Turn 7. River 2. He turns up K7o. The notable part of this hand was K7o was inline with his playing style.

KJo or 53o? You mention "another guy". We'd need the action. It could be slightly bad she played. It could be terrible. People in small stakes games can be stubborn with money already in the pot.

Again, not knowing how many people in the pot, can't say.
Every time they play a hand in a way worse than you'd play it, you win. You saved getting 3 bet by a better hand.
These are both good for you. Start figuring out how they play their ranges. Does AKo guy only raise KK+? Does J4o guy play every hand or is he just willing to play <random> after not playing for a little while, so bored.
It is like jon_locke told chillrob -- if you have a profitable hand vs. a top 50% range, the villain playing top 60% + J4o (a like bottom 5% hand), your hand became more profitable. Sure, you weren't exactly right, but knowing exactly how wide that wide is isn't the point.

Try to correlate his fake strength with his hand. Is he showboating because he's a home game guy and likes screwing around? Is he trying to stop you from betting?
Is his having a good time harming you?
You're putting him on a range. That's good. He sucked out, but that's fine/standard. His playing short means you saved a tough decision with A-high. You should actually look at flop equity. He was about favorite on the flop, oddly. About 14 outs twice? Run the numbers, it will be close. Could be your redraws push him down. Would you rather have AJo or 33?

Yes, that is exploitable. Or, really, they are exploiting themselves. It takes some thought to actually see it. I sometimes play with a nit who refuses to raise AK because "it never holds up for him." But, of course, sometimes he does win a pot with it - only the pot is much smaller than it should be because he didn't raise preflop and get all the extra money into the pot when he was a favorite. I see him raking in a pot that is much smaller than it should be, and I just smile inside knowing that he has donated money from the pot to all the other players who didn't have to put in extra money preflop. If I have a hand that will win 30% of the time, and there are 5 players in the pot (so I'm only putting in 20% of the chips), that's an easy raise. Learning to guess at the win percentages is done with the equity tools you are hearing about in this thread.

Also, how does your QQ person continue after the flop with a big pair like that? Often at the low limits, you'll see players who will limp in preflop with hands as strong as AA, but then always raise the flop (and never raise the flop for anything else). Or sometimes they will even wait until the river until they raise their AA. They think they are being clever, waiting to raise. But if you spot the pattern, it is very easy to play against these players when you know their hands, or, more accurately, the range of hands they usually play certain ways.

Thanks!

Thanks everyone!

This thread is treasure for me. I think I know what to do to get better. Unfortunately, it involves a four letter word ..... I like 3 letter words better than 4 letter words!

I think turn is a clear fold. I m not sure about 3! Preflop


从我的 iPhone 发送，使用 Tapatalk