Greetings and salutations denizens, degens and ne'er-do-wells of the Low Stakes Live forum.

For those of you who don't know me very well, I'm an online small stakes (.50/$1 and $1/2) grinder and coach. KurtSF and I are co-mods in micro full ring.

This thread was our joint inspiration, and I am posting it here at his specific request.

I've been playing online for 5 years with increasing seriousness for the past five years. At the beginning of this year I started earning my entire income from poker and poker coaching; so, in that regard, I have "gone pro." Although I have over a million hands online, I have very few hands live--probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 hours of live time between 2005 and 2007, and none since.

I prefer live poker to online; I play online out of necessity, is all. At the moment, I am in Vegas for a three week stint grinding live poker. It is sort of an audition for me; if I think I have a significant edge in the games when they are at their worst here (the worst month of the year for Vegas tourism in the worst economy in memory) then my wife and I are seriously considering moving out here for me to play professionally.

(I drove out here, and for those of you who might be interested in the non-poker aspects of my trip and some cool grand canyon pics, take a look at my 2+2 profile for a clue as to where to read more).

The basic idea behind this thread is that I will be posting my impressions of live poker and some interesting hands along the way. Kurt, I think, wants this thread to become a serious discussion of the differences between the online and the live games, necessary adjustments, and that sort of thing. I'll post some hand histories in here, but some of the genuinely tough spots that come up will get their own thread, most likely.

My plan for while I am out here is basically to ease in. I have not played live at all in 3 years, so I am starting at $1/2 just to determine the existing state of the game, and so that i can relearn the basics of live play at low stakes (such as the fact that there is no damn auto post blinds box I can check--WTF???).

If all goes well at $1/2, I plan to move to $2/5 pretty quickly. If I don't bust my roll there, I may try some $5/10 toward the end of my stay. So one of the things I will also be doing in this thread is talking about the adjustments I make that vary with the stakes I am playing at that moment. Hopefully other people will have thoughts on the subjects I address that they will want to share.

*waves hello*

looking forward to this thread! Especially since I won't be playing for a while due to impending major life changes. I'll just have to live vicariously through this thread

Where do you plan on playing?

Day One: Friday, August 20. 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. 1/2 at the Venetian

I was sitting at the table for maybe an orbit before I realized that times have changed since 2007 when I was last here. The worst player at the table had a clue as to what was going on, and probably would have been able to hold his own in any NL $10 or maybe $25 game online.

I don't doubt that the time of day was a major factor; the time between lunch and dinner is probably a pretty bad time to be playing in general, and this was only somewhat offset by the fact that it was Friday.

My table played solid TAg style. There were only one or two players who were trying to open limp, and I think someone isolated those guys close to 100% of the time. It was pretty crazy. Everybody else seemed to be playing a style close to online HUD stats of 15/12, some a bit tighter, some a bit looser, but 8 of 10 players at the table were in that range.

This made it easy for me to adjust--I didn't. I played my standard online game, because this game was playing very much like a micro stakes online cash game. So I basically played my standard game. theoretically i had planned to open a wider than usual game range, the same as I would if I were to play a session at $25 online. But I ran card dead and never got the chance to realize any benefit from the notionally wider range I was prepared to play.

I made the following 4 observations about the game:

1. The average player overvalued top pair.

2. The average player valued his hand more in absolute terms than in relative terms.

3. The average player sized his post flop bets extremely poorly. I'd estimate that at least 80% of post flop bets I saw were sized incorrectly. (As an aside, I'd estimate that at least half of all preflop raises looked poorly sized).

4. I played about 100 hands, and none of them was 3 bet. I began suspecting that 3 betting ranges are much tighter live.

All in all, this looked like the toughest 1/2 game you're likely to find in a Vegas Strip casino.

I didn't play any interesting hands, but I will tell the story of this hand just so you live guys can get a laugh at the expense of an online grinder's hubris.

100 bb effective stacks
Folded to me in the hijack and I have A9

I bet $7

button calls, everybody else folds.

The button is a 50-ish woman who seems solid but prone to chasing draws.

Flop (~$17): A 4 4

I bet $11, button calls.

Turn: (~$39) 7

I bet $25, button calls.

River: (~$89) 2

I check thinking check/fold. Button bets $25. I was planning to fold, but when I saw the $25 bet into ~$89 I thought, "Oh, ok, she has an ace and my check made her think I don't, so she is just putting out something I might call with an underpair to the ace. She's fishy enough to value bet a crappy ace here, so I'll call."

I call and the button shows AK and ships the pot for three streets of value against the hot shot internet pro. NH, ma'am.

Day 2 to follow. Please comment on anything that struck your interest.

Thus far I have played at the V twice and The Palms once. TR on The Palms will come next, as soon as I can get to it and as soon as any discussion that starts on these observations starts to slow down.

1. yes.
2. yes.
3. omg YES. This gets better the higher you play, but in 1/2, most people look at bet sizing in terms of the amount of money, rather than the size of the pot. This is the biggest adjustment online players have to make. I know I did. Not that I played online all that much, but i read and played enough to understand the 3x standard. Honestly, I can spot an internet player a mile off because they are the ones raising their aces preflop to $6. All you're going to get there is 7 callers. It's best to watch the table and get a feel for the "standard" raise, but usually it's 8x-10x or more preflop. Also, larger preflop bets usually mean JJ or AK...because people don't know how how to play these postflop, and they prefer to take it down pre.

As for postflop bets/raises, same thoughts apply. the pot can be 15 bucks, and everyone will float your $10 bet no problem because hey, it's only 10 bucks! Takes some adjustment.

4. yes. mostly means AA, KK, or AK. maybe QQ or JJ.

This is a great idea for a thread. As a winning recreational player who has entertained the notion of going pro (and possibly moving to Las Vegas) I'm curious to see how this turns out.

Bad time to play. The recreational players aren't rolling in until 10 pm. However, you're right in that the players are tougher in 2010 than they were in 2007. The fish are there, just like at 10nl and 25nl spewing chips, but the other players are more able to exploit them so they don't last long.

[PHP][/PHP]
I understand your intention of grinding up the roll-however if you are buying in full at Venetian for 300 - you could make a lot more money grinding 2/5 w the same buy in and good table selection- just saying

I've sat at 1/2 at the v w total nits while missing out on jacked up 2/5 games w rich Florida business dudes

Now everybody flame me for poor br mgmt

Couple notes from someone who has "moved to Vegas and gone pro":

Play later in the evening, and move up to 2/5 ASAP. Even though rake is still per-pot and not timed, this is the easiest game in Vegas casinos.

Remember: the key to beating live games is to play against bad players. There are worse players with more money at 2/5, which makes it much easier to beat.

Optimize your play time, and don't grind long hours during mid-day.

With 2/5, get used to PF raises of 15-35, and 3-bet of 60-110.

Play at a table where everyone looks like they're having fun, drinking, and gambling. Don't play where everyone is quiet and serious.

If you play with fun, gambling businessmen looking for entertainment, you can make money faster than it can be printed. But never criticize them if they bad beat you, or pretend that you're anything other than an "amigo" there to have fun, as well.

Good luck!

Mpethy, thanks I'm looking forward to this thread, especially given your track record in Micro FR and your clear analytical nature. As for 1/2 at the V, the locals will know better than I, but from my experience, think about adjusting your sleep pattern, because when I’ve been there I’ve played in some very juicy games from 11:00 pm to 4-5 in the morning, alcohol is a wonderful thing. Also look for the players only drinking the Fugi water, chances are they’re not the fish. Well at least that’s my $0.02.

I'm going to delay the discussion of the session I put in at The Palms for a moment or two, and hope that I don't forget the adjustments I made in that game, because I did adjust pretty significantly. I just got back to the house after playing this hand in a session, and I wanted to share it because it is very interesting.

Background. An older gentleman in his late 50s or early 60s sat at my table after I had been there for about 20 minutes, and he started playing.

About 20 minutes later, when another seat opened at my table, a woman in her late 50s or early 60s sat at our table. She begins playing, and about 20 minutes after she sits she gets a visit from a friend who asks what her about some social event. The friend nods in the direction of the elderly man who joined the table 20 minutes ahead of her, and says, "we expect you and your husband to be there."

I'm not suspicious by nature, but the fact that they were married and had not acknowledged each other's presence nor spoken to one another set off alarm bells in my head. Since I was squeezed between them, I started thinking about a table change just to be on the safe side.

The table was amazingly loose passive, and peer pressure was actually being applied to people who raised. The result was that 7 of the 10 players at the table were to a greater or lesser extent cooperating in an effort to keep as many pots as possible limped pots. I was not participating, but since I had been dealt exactly 2 playable hands after my first hour and a half there, it was sort of a moot point.

Along comes the first two decent cards I have seen in an hour QJo UTG. In any normal situation, this hand is a turbo muck for me, but this was the perfect table for me to limp it and have a good chance of getting nothing other than callers. So I open limp for the firs time in 4 years (No exaggeration).

Two people limp behind me. The action gets around to the elderly man, and he leans back in his chair and is thinking and twisting his wedding ring contemplatively. There are 3 limpers before him, and he raises to 8. folded to his wife in the BB. She sits and thinks for a moment, and spins her wedding ring just like her husband did. Then she flat calls, and all 3 limpers call.

$40-ish in the pot.

I like the flop: KT 6

Wife leads for $10. I call, one fold, one call and it's the husband's turn to act. Husband min raises to $20. Wife calls, I call, the other caller folds (yeah, seriously).

$100-ish in the pot

Turn is 4

Wife leads for twenty. I cut out $20 and pause before I bet, because i am expecting a raise from the husband and math is hard and I need a minute to calculate odds, etc. etc. As i cut out the chips, though, husband tosses a $100 bill across the betting line out of turn.

I say to the dealer, "that is a call, right?" And the dealer says, "Yes, that is correct."

The man says, "I said raise to you."

The dealer says, "I did not hear that. If you said it, I am sorry, but it is a call."

I say, "OK, I call," and stick my $20 in.

The man says, "No, I said raise. I wanted to raise to $100."

The dealer says, "well, ok."

I said, "No. Your ruling of his bet as a call influenced my decision and I acted after it. Call the floor, please."

The floor comes over and gets the story, and asks all the players at the table of he said raise. Only his wife says he announced a raise; everybody else says either he said nothing or they didn't hear him announce it if he did. I said I didn't hear him say anything, but couldn't say he didn't. This is the majority opinion--5 players say that they didn't hear him say raise, and the two to his left said he said nothing and just tossed the bill across.

The floor rules the action a call.

River is the A There is about $160 in the pot. The wife leads for $45. I shove, the husband folds and the wife tank/calls and shows AKo.

Sidenote: The husband went nuclear on me with some nasty names. There is a lot more to tell, but I want to focus on the adjustments implied just by the hand, so I'll leave the story at that.

Also: I have left out the name of the room intentionally, and will not disclose it.

hand looks good

get the hell out of that game. if alarm bells go off, you get out. thats how you handle live games (or hell, even online games). esp when they are doing things like playing with chips funny, playing with rings, doing odd things with their hands, etc....just leave

as for the hand, i like it all (veeeeeeeeery good floor call). nhnh

Two reasons I was debating leaving the game rather than leaving it fast:

1. Before this hand, it was just an alarm bell based on the fact that they had ignored one another.

2. I believe that spotting a team of only two players who are colluding in a ten handed full ring game gives you a significant edge, both against the table in general and against the team specifically:

a. Knowing they are colluding puts you ahead in the battle of information.
b. My skill edge over players who would waste their time cheating 1/2 is probably huge, and probably slightly huger when I recognize the collusion. Their edge from knowing just one other player's hand is not nearly enough to overcome the skill edge of a player who knows the collusion is occurring and can avoid it except when he wants to exploit their attempt to play as a team.

I think this hand is a pretty good example of how to exploit cheaters who are bad players.

a few things:

1.) you aren't fully sure they are colluding...meaning you could make decisions based on inverse information
2.) while i agree that your edge is big against ppl dumb enough to collude a 200NL live game...i still hate playing in dirty games
3.) getting involved in sandwiched pots against a good team is going to be incredibly tough to overcome assuming they can adjust (this assumes they are colluding, ldo)
4.) this exact hand is only proof that the old guy is an idiot and messed up his clean up raise, imo

my big issue is that you could easily level yourself in this environment, and with spread seating, i am pretty likely to leave (if they were sitting right next to eachother i dont hate staying as much). just my 2cents as someone who has been in crooked games before and is now totally paranoid, lol

Look at the action in that hand. If they were not colluding I'll perform an unnatural sex act on the farm animal of your choice.

Forget about the ring twisting signal; look at the action. They were either incredibly bad or incredibly bad and working together.

Split's right about this Mpethy. Only his premature play prevented you from getting squeezed out of the hand.

FWIW, playing against colluders has been discussed many times in B&M. For example, http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/27...lusion-594670/.

Finally, you have to decide whether you'll condone cheating or not. Yes, this time you caught it. How would you feel if you were down quite a bit at a table, a person leaves, and you hear, "Dealer, bring new decks, the card marker is gone?"

IMO, if you condone cheating by not reporting it to take advantage of it, you lose the right to complain about being cheated in the future.

Sorry, but you are both wrong. Claiming that sitting trying to exploit cheaters you have identified equates to condoning cheating is 100% absurd. It is a logically indefensible argument. You are actively trying to punish it.

I don't want this to sound like a brag, but you guys are missing the fact that I successfully exploited their flop play, and I was able to successfully exploit a mistake that they made on the turn. It doesn't matter that the mistake was the guy acting out of turn. If they had not made that mistake, they would have made another one. In fact, you guys are both overlooking the mistakes they made BEFORE the guy acted out of turn. Look at the bet sizing; their bet sizing was terrible and gave me not just correct, but fantastic odds to call at every opportunity I had to act on the flop.

Phrased differently--I would have called bigger bets; by not trapping me for more, earlier, they turned an exploitive play into an exploited play on the flop, and then compounded the mistake on the turn.

I don't need to have won this hand to have successfully exploited them. All I had to do was make correct decisions based on the odds they were giving me, and I would have profited against them. the fact that they were betting so poorly merely allowed me to call with higher implied odds.

In the long run, if you pay attention to how to exploit this situation, you will be provided with the opportunity to trap the cheaters. Suppose I had caught my straight on the turn--then, when I flatted the lady's small bet, it would have been with the intention of trapping their money in. They gave me fantastic odds to catch that turn card.

When exactly would it have satisfied you for me to have reported them? All I knew before the cards were dealt was that they had acted suspiciously. Hell, *Split* doesn't even apparently think this is a clear whip saw play (although I think it is blindingly obvious that it was, albeit very poorly executed). I had no reason to report them until after I deduced that the ring twisting was a signal that they had hands to whipsaw with by seeing the signal preflop,and then having actually being whipsawed on the flop, and then having them try it again on the turn. To clarify, it was the flop min raise that triggered the "ah-ha--whip saw," thought I had when he did it. How to exploit that spot was what I was thinking about when he acted out of order on the turn.

As for your moralizing about my duty to report cheaters--I disagree that any player ever has a duty to report cheaters to the room, but it is irrelevant. I did four things at the conclusion of the hand in the following order: First, I requested a table change. Not because of the cheating, but because the man had become verbally abusive toward me, and I didn't want to ruin my night or anybody else's. Second, I called my host here in town who is an experienced player and an attorney, and, after about 20 minutes' discussion, in which he agreed 100% that they had played the hand as a team, we came up with the following plan of action: Third, I reported the hand to the floor and described exactly what happened starting with their separate arrivals at the table, my suspicions and the fact that I was inexperienced live and could have been wrong and hoped against hope that I was. Last, I gave the floor the chips from the other players who had been trapped and asked the floor to return it to the players, and I kept only the cheaters' money and the blinds as my profit from the hand.

Venice, if you can find fault with these actions, then all I can say to you is tell your virgin mother I said hi.

The reason I am not disclosing the name of the room is because I reported them and the room apparently took no action against them. They were still playing when I left two hours later. The room might have had them under observation or something like that, so I am not disclosing the room against the possibility that the room took some action I was unaware of.

I'm not at all interested in a discussion of the ethics surrounding whether I had a duty to report these cheaters. The fact of the matter is: Their bet sizing was terrible and exploitable, regardless of whether they were working as a team or not. Their bet sizing requires us to make adjustments, both in our preflop range and throughout each hand. calling the flop bet was a no-brainer because of the pot odds. having seen the guy raise her small bet on the flop, when she made an idiot-sized bet on the turn, I reasonably expected him to raise it again. This, in turn, raises interesting possibilities--if they weren't working together, maybe there was merit in raising to try to isolate her.

What is a guy's range to min-raise his wife in a 4 or 5 way pot when that offers the callers eight zillion to one to call? is it more profitable to call knowing you will sometimes be squeezed out if he pulls the trigger again? If they are working together, what hands are in his whip-sawing range? can i defeat the whipsaw by raising to get heads up with her? Is the correct adjustment to fold here and wait for a made hand and then walk into their ambush?

There are a lot of questions in this hand that revolve around adjusting based on whether your read is that they are working as a team or are just a husband and wife who really suck at poker. And it influences later actions including whether and how to attempt to exploit them in later hands, as well as this one. At such a loose passive table, if they were cheating, I would become a 35/10 or so and start limping every high implied odds hand I saw hoping to catch a well-disguised monster in the middle of their whip saw play.

I started this thread in an effort to talk about the various adjustments an online player has to make when transitioning to live play. One of those adjustments that has come up in my time here happens to be how to adjust to a collusion team you believe you have identified. Leaving the table is a sensible option if you think the cheating reduces or eliminates your edge. But what if it doesn't? or what if you only suspect them and have the god seat on a fish and don't want to play? what adjustments do you make during this hand, and what adjustments do you make after it? i think these are all interesting questions on which I intend to offer my opinions during a discussion about the strategy of the situation, not about absurd ethical positions related to the situation.

I always catch the elderly couple collusion stuff, except they dont think its collusion they'd just "rather not take each others money." I believe the term would be to soft play. Whether they know it can be perceived as cheating when they act the way they did. If they acknowledged each other then its a different story and different set of ethics (some would say).

Regardless.... I dont mind this couple what so ever. The hand that mpethy posted says it all. Look at the horrible bet sizing. These guys end up trapping themselves with gramps getting pissed and going on geriatric tilt. I think I would be more worried if it was one of two things 1) Higher stakes and 2) The players were better and they worked a lot better together (which is going to be found in higher stakes mostly).

Sounds like this was some innocent soft play. Innocent as in their minds they probably think its ok for a husband and wife to "collude" like this because the money all goes to one place anyways. If they were intentionally doing it though I'd probably just out them at the table. I'd say something of the sort, "Hey are you guys married, I was just curious because there was a lot of similarity in the way you spin your rings. Couples generally pick up the same habits." Or something like that to draw attention to them. That's just me though, I am not afraid to hurt some feelings.

My mom has been dead for 13 years. If there is an afterlife and I see her, I'll give her your regards.

Have a nice trip.

facepalm.jpg

This is all spot on.

Definitely try to look like you are having a good time. Not serious. Order drinks out of earshot so that you appear to be getting cocktails. Randomize your opening bet size a little bit. Nothing says internet player more than 3x everytime.

Bets are relative to dollars not the pot. To paraphrase Bart on Cash Plays, the pot was 2K but he was putting in $500 real american dollars - he liked his hand.

Wasn't that a terrible spot to collude anyway? She had TPTK, and she needed to play correctly was bet enough to give the wrong odds to call. And I agree that they totally botched up the squeeze. Why didn't she reraise the flop to take it down? Bad play and bad cheaters.
FWIW, I would have reported it the same way and changed tables too.

We need to get back on track... hopefully we can end this discussion now.

Looking forward to reading the rest of TR.

Mpethy, I'd say that if your roll is big enough (which it probably is) I would completely skip 1/2. I know you are using that as a feeler level to get in the zone or w/e, but you can do the same at 2/5. 2/5 is 1/2 on steroids. There will be a few more good players, but I actually think it will be a better game for you as you are suited for it.

This wasn't soft play. This was the ol' squeeze play.

No kidding...but in their minds they may not be thinking that. Not everyone posts on 2p2 and/or knows the difference between right or wrong in poker. But neither here nor there. Post more TR IMO.