This is much better advice than me just telling what I'd raise. Anyone who's serious about getting better should do exactly this if they haven't already.

One of my longterm bad habits is not fiddling with calculators even though I'm well aware that I'm making mathematical errors. I've always focused on more of the logical and post-flop side of the game, even though preflop affects post-flop.

I know there's tons of poker apps out there, but very recently I've been contemplating writing an Android app as an "emotional investment" to use a calculator more (and a good intro to Android development). Touch screens seem better suited than traditional PCs for this sort of thing anyway.

Equilab is amazing and free. The process of putting villains on a range of hands is valuable. Understanding the equity of your hand and your range vs their range is a starting point for any serious analysis. I never used to do this either. Then I decided it was important and never replied to a post without doing a stove. The assumptions you make about villains is important, and your stoves clearly show what you assume. This work informs your intuition, and most good players have a feel for the results after a while.

Does 32,000 hands of LHE online (starting in Jan 2013), with about 65% of that 6-max, plus 34 total hours of live 4/8LHE with 11 of those coming in 2014 and another 11 in Jan and Feb of 2013 (I took the rest of the year 2013 off for financial reasons) constitute "a bunch of hands"? That was meant to be a serious question not a smartaleck one. If it does, then I guess I'm just a slow learner, or I'm going about learning the wrong way.

I'm done with PLO, probably permanently.

I got back into NL recently because JuicyStakes has an awesome rakeback and deposit bonus program - I thought I could make an easy couple hundred bucks (don't laugh - I did it on Lock back in 2012 but waited too long to cash it out if you know what I mean....), cash it out and use it to fund at least one session of live 4/8LHE. Unfortunately I didn't find out until it was too late that JuicyStakes charges $100 for a check withdrawl. That's neither a misprint nor a joke.

I do enjoy uNL, don't get me wrong, but once I've played enough to earn my entire deposit bonus, we'll see how much longer it takes for me to stick exclusively to LHE.



To both of you - I always appreciate your advice. After I get some sleep I'll lock myself in a room and consider your most recent posts.

Thanks
DTXCF

Absolutely, I have no excuse not to use equilab unless you can count laziness. I used to occasionally use pokerstove back in the day, but never made it a habit. More or less, I'd fire it up, dink around a little bit and feel good about simply using it.

The only downside of equilab is that if you're a Apple Mac person, you need to have access to Windows as far as I know. So you need to install Windows (via Apple's Boot Camp) or use virtualization on a Mac.

32k hands is a good start. You're probably much better now than you were at the start, so your true winrate is probably much better than that sample suggests. I think the next 10k hands could be great for your progression with preflop play, bluffing, value betting, and hand reading.

Have you read Lawdudes post on preflop play?

Have you read CaptainR's post on bluffing?

I can't think of any definitive guides to value betting. I think posting in other people's threads and working with equilab will help with this a lot.

I can't think of any definitive guides to hand reading for limit holdem, but TheDefiniteArticle wrote a great hand reading article in BQ.

Besides that stuff, I bet we all could use a little work on our mental game, but I'm not the one to help with that. I can say though that no matter how much you study, the mental game could always use work and I'm not just talking about blatant tilt. Things like seat selection, game selection, playing time, bankroll utility, and missing out on other parts of life because of poker can all be severe mental game mistakes.

assuming you are being serious here, yes, this is a really big deal important concept. it'd be very useful for you to internalize/deal with this

you are basically asking if there is a luck element in poker, and the answer is yes, yes there is.

Just like Bob said above you w/r/t mental game stuff.

Inevitably, there will be a periods of time when your draws "just don't get there" or your strong non-nut hands lose.

You have to come to terms that your longrun edge is relatively small like low house edge games. You realize an ultimate winrate over many trials assuming you can somewhat realistically assess beatable game conditions.

All of this is very easy to comprehend; the hard part is to compose yourself and not give into your emotions. Easier said than done.

And without the bad luck of good decisions, why would losing, breakeven, or mediore players come back for more? No good luck for them likely means no fun at all.

On the flip side, it's interesting to see how so many players run good in the beginning and have positive associations with poker (and overconfidence). Seems like "classical conditioning" in psychology tricking people into thinking the luck factor isn't as much of a factor as it really is.

For the record, these topics (running bad, running good, emotional control etc.) *are* actually discussed in the book!

I was on tilt last Saturday night. I had several hands in a row (felt like 10 but in reality was probably only 4 or 5) where an OESD, fourflush and even one OESFD didn't improve, finally when one flush draw *did* come in on the river it paired the board and gave the villain a boat. Then I flop a set on a board where 2 villains flopped straights, then I flop two sets on MONOTONE boards where the 4th to the flush comes in and the board doesn't pair. AA and KK failing to hold up more often than not even in only 2- or 3-way pots yada yada yada you get the idea.

I *do* remember *one* hand where I flopped a set of aces and they actually held up, and one hand where I flopped a gutshot that came in on the turn. I remember a hand where I flopped trips after seeing a free flop from the BB and they held up. I had a hand where I raised JJ pre, flopped a two-toned ace high board, had 2 villans call me all the way to the river and miraculously neither of them had an ace. There are probably other hands that I won that I don't remember (memory bias) - maybe I should make a commitment to remembering those.

It may seem like I'm just venting here, and I probably am, but the point is learning how to get tilt under control is important, and I appreciate any and all suggestions.

The only hands that I make it a point to remember are those that reveal my opponents' leaks and strengths and those that include possible mistakes of my own. The rest get thrown into the "whatever" bin tucked away in the depths of my mind where they can't cloud my judgement.

There are mind tricks that you can play on yourself to help this process. If you're not actively storing thoughts in your mind, then how are you to recover them when you need them? This is going to sound crazy :

I think you could benefit from a thought palace, where you can store your thoughts for easy retrieval when you need them. Imagine your palace. Maybe the front walkway is lined by birch trees. Maybe the front steps are pristine white marble. Step inside your thought palace. You are now in a safe place where you can store any and all thoughts you might have. Have a look around. It's yours and nobody else's. Maybe there's a stairway leading to your poker study. At the moment, there are many thoughts that you've haphazardly stored in your poker study. Bad beats and misplayed hands abound in your poker study. It's time to clean up and organize your study. Put the bad beats on a shelf and forget about them for now. Look at your big wins. Remember these big wins, and them place them in a visible spot. Maybe there's a big comfy $4k chair. Have a seat. Breathe in the air. You're now very comfortable. Relax and enjoy yourself. It's yours and nobody else's.

Now ask yourself: why do I play poker? Make a list of your motivations in large novelty sized writing on the wall, perhaps above the fantastic fireplace you've imagined, where you can see your motivations from your glorious chair.

Ok, now it's time to imagine the rest of your thought palace. Without knowing more about you, I can't say what the rest of your palace might look like. Perhaps there's a room where you can remember that time your favorite sports team came back from way behind. Maybe there's a room where you can remember the sweet girlfriends you once had. Maybe there's a room where you can store the memories of not so sweet girlfriends. Maybe there's a garden out back where you can store your childhood memories. It's yours and nobody else's.

Now snap out of it.

/mumbo jumbo

I consider tilt blocking to be even more simple than that.

You can either get mad about things you can't control, or you can shake them off.

I know I get way more mad at myself when I miss an obvious bet/raise (whether I win the pot or not), then when I get coolered. Who cares if they sometimes hit a monster on you? Think of all the times they've cold called your PFR w/ A4s, called two streets hoping to spike top pair, and folding the river UI? It's still chips being shipped to you.

Board: Empty

Range 1: 99-77,AJo,KQo,ATs,KJs-KTs,QJs-QTs,JTs
Range 2:88-22,ATo,KJo,A9s-A2s,KTs-K9s,QJs-Q9s,JTs-J9s,T9s,98s




if we compare the 2 as they relate to pair strength we get something like

Board: Empty

Range 2: 88-22 loose games
Range 1: 99-77 tight games

Equity 2: 22.366% Win 1: 21.057% Tie 1: 2.618%
Equity 1: 77.634% Win 2: 76.325% Tie 2: 2.618%

so if you are playing range 2 against someone limping range 1 you are looking to flop some kind of flush draw 17:6 combos or ace 11:4 combos (ace or flush % range2 is pretty strong vs range 1) or flop a small set. (I might even add in some 1 gap SCs and another SC to capture some low straight flops as well. as sets MP limp range 2)

so you are looking for gaped 2 suited flops with 1 2 or more gaped to a single high card and then catch good on the turn (not a set card or a discounting over-card)

so you get a flop/turn like Qc8d6d you will be behind their range and will fold off a fair part for no more risk. but if you turn good to the part you hold say Td many opponents will pay off with their most of their range 1 hands. sure they will fill up sometimes but usually you will be rewarded well for your prudent flop speculative hands.

on the other hand if you turn mediocrity like the 3s your still doing good or even a range hit for him like the Jc Jh or Kc you still not going away unless something really bad happens not even the Q pair is hurting you that much Vs his flop range.

the argument for sets is probably more powerful you hit or split thats it. obviously a dryer board with perhaps two playing zone cards works well


so the key is to flop good and then follow up and you are in position to do it.

however if the ranges are swapped your not doing as good .

thats why I stay away from the loose limping ranges in ep in either game type.

you need the benefit of position and (non)/entanglement to get the ev you need to butt heads with a better range.

why it is recommended in games filled with Bad player who play junk and pay off is that you get to make a ton when you flop good and improve.

so really forget about getting frisky early OOP with this loose range ep stuff unless you really crush the flop and the schools are running.

getting late have to get some shut eye now sorry about any mistakes but I think you get the general idea.

Hi Wally:

I haven't read much of this thread, so what I'm about to say may have already been covered. So why does raising with a hand like eight-seven suited make sense after a bunch of people have limped in. First, this play was initially discussed in Hold 'em Poker for Advanced Players, and on page 33 it says:

So there's your answer. These raises can make sense if by bloating the pot you encourage opponents to call with very weak hands when you get a flop you like. An example would be you flop a flush draw and now someone calls the flop bet with something like ace high but no card of the appropriate suite.

On the other hand, if they play bad enough that they're going to call anyway, then this play is not necessary.

Best wishes,
Mason

Are you a fan of 0 to slightly +ev spew?

Think it was 15/30 at the time, but playing at Bellagio with Captain Ron and he convinced every reg at the tables that he was horrible through spots like this. He never played any hand badly, but by choosing to play close spots in ways they wouldn't, some of them were sure he was three betting their nitty utg opens with a napkin and a coaster.

It depends on your assumption of villain ranges and how much you think you can realize the profit shown in stove, but I think you can argue that the raise is just for value.

Personally, I think blindly raising every time this comes up is wrong, however, I am pretty open to finding reasons for doing it. The harder people make my life post flop, the less I want to build a pot for them. The stuff you observe at the table should swing close spots.

Here's one where I decided that I'd rather play a 5+ way pot for a limp than raise preflop:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/17...s-fit-1367780/

I've been wondering about this. The % that equilab gives, if I understand, assumes you make it to showdown. But if you can't at least call every street, your actual win percentage is less than this equilab value.

So how do you know how to adjust it so you can determine whether a value bet is in order? Experience?

Great thread, btw. TLRA. And worth it.

Getting opponents to think you're a mad man is one of the most +EV things you can do, IMO. Making a thin river three bet and being wrong costs you a bet in the short run, but in the long run, you're way more likely to be paid on monsters. Heck, you might even get more action! I was getting bet/3 bet by A-hi frequently this weekend, for example.

I've been meaning to look at that book again, read it once around 2006. So that passage rings a faint bell.

Thanks for the explanation.

This ain't mumbo jumbo. It is a technique for remembering things that goes back like two millennia. According to some local authorities on such things, that's not very long after the world was created. People were still riding around on dinosaurs. Certainly a long time before every event in every person's life was tweeted, thus eliminating the need for memory or a brain. I've heard it called the "Loci method".

Great post, imo.

At 10-20 I still run into tons of players that pay far more attention to their own cards than they do to opponents image. In other words, they are calling stations that will give me plenty of action no matter how nitty I play. They play the same way as a lot of the 4/8 players.

Also, even if I play a lag game, I'm still going to play much tighter than many of the other players and they will still think I'm nitty much of the time (if they're even paying attention). Sometimes they will think I'm a crazier player than I really am, but these players will make tons of loose calls that I would never make. They constantly cold call with marginal hands and play garbage in every position. They go on tilt and decide to play even more hands, or they go card dead and some hands they usually won't play will look more appealing to them. They see Q7o utg and think its a good hand. They see that I'm raising, look down at 64o in EP and call because last time they played it, they flopped two pair and won a nice pot.

The regulars (at least the ones that pay attention) know I'm tight and I don't think it has hurt me much. A tight image might even help me in a lot of situations (blind stealing, isolation plays, bluffing after the flop, etc.) and I wonder if it's better to be thought of as tight. I general though, I don't think my image changes much in my games. My opponents rarely adjust to it correctly (and rarely adjust to it at all).

Maybe this will change at 15/30 or 20/40 or whatever I'll play in the future.

Yes. Even if you don't play in the sort of no-fold-em games this book was primarily intended for,

1. Some of the advice about tighter games is still relevant to what you might now consider looser games (3-4 taking most flops).
2. Thinking about what's different in your games will improve your theoretical understanding and ability to adjust to specific opponent tendencies.

This thread is a great example of the latter point. Working to understand why 33 UTG is profitable in some games but not others is extremely helpful.

Super-loose / somewhat passive games are where this matters the least. Opponents are much less likely to bluff into a huge field, much more likely to call down in huge pots, etc. So just having both big pairs and big unpaired cards in your range, plus big SCs like JTs/QTs, is enough breadth of range in a game like this. Plus if they're bad, they're probably not doing much hand reading anyway.

This is true, but only if you haven't put in so many bets preflop that you've destroyed your implied odds. If you put in 4 bets in a 5-way pot with 8 7 vs. a typical 3-bettor, you probably have less than your fair share of equity. So great, now you have to make your hand to win this huge pot you've dreamed of. You're a substantial underdog to make two pair or better, so the extra bets when you win a huge pot (from loose players who might call in an 8 big bet pot almost as often as a 15 big bet pot) probably don't compensate the extra bets you put in pre.

In fairness, Sklansky and Malmuth say you can sometimes 3-bet JTs with an early raiser, a field of 2 or 3 cold callers, and position. Even this seems edgy to me against most raisers, and it's substantially different because:

1. JTs has much better high card strength than 87s. Its top pairs are more frequent and more durable. Its two pairs are less vulnerable to counterfeit or two higher pair. Its straights are less vulnerable to counterfeit, and any two-card straight it makes is the nut straight.
2. A raiser has a much wider range than a 3-bettor.

Even so, I would only do this against somewhat loose raisers, not a rock who's marked with AK+/JJ+. I would not do it in a game where I expect my 3! to get 4! just because my opponents think gamboooooling is fun.

4-betting 87s preflop seems quite leaky.

[/QUOTE]

That's a very good way to look at it.

Another good way is, when you calculate odds, there's a numerator (number of bets in the pot you expect to win, when you hit) and a denominator(how much you have to pay and don't get back if you miss). If you make the denominator 2x or 1.33x what it would otherwise be, you need the pot to be 2x or 1.33 x as much (not counting your own contribution) to hit. Otherwise, your implied odds have decreased.

Do you really think "tying people to the pot" makes the pots 33% bigger? In an already loose game?!

Exactly. That.

Good heavens, so you're building huge pots to get opponents to make suspect decisions post, except that your own decision making is suspect.

Look, once you've made the pot 20 small bets, you need to be playing VERY aggressively on the flop and turn. Anything you do to significantly increase your chance of winning a 20-bet pot is worth a couple of bets. If you drive out the naked T, the board comes running spades, and you win, that's great. If you drive out a gutshot and the board comes running eights and you win, that's great. If you spike your gutshot on the turn, but the river is a seven, and you drove out another eight, that's great. If the river is a king, so that you drove out a queen that could have beaten you, that's even better. If the bettor has a bigger flush draw, you somehow drive out overcards and low pairs (which is rare), and you win by pairing, that's great. If you make a straight, but the board makes a backdoor flush of the other suit, and you drove out a backdoor flush draw, that's great.

This are all rare events but collectively, in a 20 bet pot, they make it imperative to play aggressively. The only part I'm not sure of is when it's better to wait for the turn and face everyone with two big bets (but fewer backdoor draws to drive out).

Anyway, occasionally you'll run into flush over flush or straight over straight, but the time to worry about that is not in 20 bet pots. For crying out loud, as bad as capping preflop is, it's even worse if you're going to play timidly in this huge pot you engineered.

And btw this is the single most important theoretical concept I took from SSHE. It's also in HEPFAP, but easier to miss. It took me a long time to understand why, in the example to introduce the postflop section, failing to raise middle pair with the Q7 was worse than the preflop cold call.

Now if you're playing for a lot of 6 and 7 high flushes, what you're saying starts to matter. In general the villains won't fold draws that you want them to. As you ramp up your "do anything to protect the pot" game, you end up with a parlay. Yes, it is worth it to spend some good amount of money to get someone to fold a hand that might beat you. However, they have to have a hand that can win and they would have had to call if you hadn't gone crazy and they have to now fold because you have. Singleton T might be that hand vs. your low SC. However, if they won't fold either way you get into spots where you put in a ton of money with the 2nd best hand and the 3rd best draw. If they'd have folded anyway, you allowed the best hand to b/3b to accomplish nothing. The parlay isn't a trivial thing.

In general the best hand and the best draw chop up the lion's share of the equity. Sure, our 3rd pair good kicker wins to drive out 3rd pair better kicker. However, the flush draw hand and the top pair (or set) hand love the fact that we're driving the pot. If you're a huge equity dog, this becomes charity for them.

It could be an important concept, but it can't come up very often. If you're finding a lot of spots to apply it and you're often not the one with the best draw or the best hand, you're spewing money. Now, NFD cleaning up its overcard outs is full of win. Move much past that and you're redistributing chips.