Alright, its
MULTI-QUOTE TIME!!!!!!!!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaUlater
Do you keep a well documented record of your sessions?
Try running a report to see how you fare if you have a stop-loss.
Its a difficult thing to keep track obv, particularly if you have uneven top ups such as me (I buy in for 500 in a 500 game, and will intermitently buy another 300 when Im down to 400, add on 100, and slowly add on the other until I am no longer under the max BI level)
You cant just shave off the additional amounts you have lost on top of the your stop loss (I.E, if you lose 5BI, but have a stop loss of 3BI, you cant just shave off 2BI) because there will be times that you get down 3BI, but claw it back to either a win or a smaller loss.
If you have absolutely zero data points where you actually never come back from 3BI, then it should be relatively obvious that you either have a very small sample size, or you should have a stop loss because you are incapable of getting back to your best when stuck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaUlater
I also find it discouraging that you guys would actually find this to be acceptable as start of a strategy post:
Concurred, but not my job, plus I dont actually post in the threads much anyway, since by the time I have a look for the most part the thread is either "solved" or is a stupid pissing war when a decision is either incredibly close and neutral either way, or someone is blatantly wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack492505
| Hand | Pot equity | Wins | Ties |
|---|
| AJo | 46.60% | 64,477,608 | 9,225,456 |
| QJs | 29.05% | 42,172,008 | 1,897,092 |
| A9s | 24.35% | 32,166,360 | 7,983,876 |
Don't feel like going back and looking at the $ amounts to calculate equity out. But getting your money in 3ways with nearly 50% equity is so ******edly +EV.
Obviously we are going to be up against a range with some much stronger hands in it so we won't always be in such perfect shape. So without more information I can't really say if its a good play. It seems like it probably will be. But you certainly can't categorically call it a bad play given the information you have.
Not wanting to get a lot of money in PF because they play poorly postflop is really just saying "They are giving away money postflop, so we shouldn't take the free money preflop".
In a lot of scenarios you are correct, we don't want to 3/4 bet super light pre-flop because it tigthens their ranges to the point that we aren't able to exploit them postflop. But if they are calling that light (and still calling with hands they are going to make mistakes with post-flop, like A9) that may no longer be the case.
I disagree with your simulation, because you are using purely the hand they have, and not their range.
Blind squirrels occasionally find a nut, LAGs occasionally find Aces.
I cant at the moment, but if someone can run a simulation with A9s and QJs as the BOTTOM of their range (it might not be the bottom, but that isnt the point) and see whether AJs still has the requisite equity to get the money in will tell the difference.
A lot of people use the "He might have had ATs" as justification for getting it in with AJ, but if the range is ATs+, TT+ then you are going to get slaughtered long run.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaUlater
Pokah, you're like a LLSNL wikipedia; can you reference where Bart Hanson suggested that it isn't the most optimal way of crushing LLSNL by playing pre-flop range war, or something in line with that?
He has mentioned it in a few of his podcasts, but I dont think that there was one podcast purely dedicated to the subject (actually, I think the David Tuchman (sp) episode had a decent bit about 3betting, but that was more about what hands, rather then what spots)
My view, is that 3betting giving up FAT value is a big mistake, and becomes MORE of a mistake the deeper you are, because it can get more difficult to get value with hands such as AQ and against wider ranges, ATs and KQo.
The real mistake is 3betting a hand like 88 under the guise that you have an equity edge. The difference is that it is a lot easier to "cooler" someone with 88 then AJo in a single raised pot in a spot where it is easy to get the money in.
For example. Someone raises, you call with 88/AJ
Flop: A84
With 88, given the huge amount of Ax hands in his range, its going to be relatively easy to shovel in a lot of money for the most part, and since we lost to 3 combos of AA compared to the bazillion combos of Ax we can confidently get the money in almost all the time.
When we have AJ, not only do we have a weaker hand on the absolute scale, we have a far weaker hand relatively, and will be getting more worried as the money begins to get in if we flatted preflop.
With hands like AJ, we cant flat because "our villians will put in a heap of money postflop badly" we have to realise its REALLY hard to cooler someone. If we have an ace, and they have an ace, an ace is only going to pop up on the flop around 1 in 8 times (same odds of hitting a set) Then they ARENT going to have an ace sometimes, and sometimes they are going to have a better hand, and a lot of times we miss.
So we shouldnt be flatting hands like AJ with the aim of cold-decking them postflop because cold-decking people is really hard. Calling with the intention of not only flopping the best hand sometimes, occasionally cold-decking, and taking it away on certain boards can be fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaUlater
PB, I am asking for reference, so I can go over it myself.
Actually nevermind. Weekend is hard for me to argue anything when wife is always nagging about how I am on this thing all day.
LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokahBlows
Limon said it in the podcast. He said "You don't have to bloat the pot pre when you can bloat the pot postflop when the fish can't let go of a hand".
Again, as mentioned before, its really hard to cold-deck the fish, or anyone.
There are very few board where, for example, AJ will completely crush KT and both hands will put in money.
BEFORE ANYONE SAYS "herp derp, KQT, we felt the fish hahahaha" I cant speak for everyone else, but flopping broadway is difficult, even moreso when they hold two blockers.
Also, people will ignore the times where it comes AQJ, they get it in, lose, mark it down as variance without realising that what they are doing might be a mistake
Hand from last night that kinda proves a point.
Few limps, I raise button, called in two spots
FLOP: A48 with a heart draw
Checks to me, I think for a bit and take a freebie
TURN: 5h
Checks to me, I bet 1/2 pot. Get called in one spot
River brick
Checks to me, I bet almost full pot. Villian thinks for a bit and calls.
I show 9h7h for a flush. Villian angrily mucks and claims a straight
Now, if he has a straight its a hell of an ******* card (I dont actually fully believe him, but w/e, for the sake of the story) he should rather then bemoaning his badluck, start thinking about calling OOP to raises against "competant*" players with 7 high.
*I have no idea what he actually thinks of me, but he has told me once I play "ok" so yeah, whether that is ok lol kids, or ok your actually not bad IDK...
Quote:
Originally Posted by masaraksh
I know I'm going to get ALOT of crap for this but here it goes...
Against a lot of live players I think its fine to keep pots smaller pre. In general people play best pre-flop, worse on the flop, worse on turn, and worst on river. You can make a TON more by value betting correctly post flop, making folds that donks wouldn't make, and bluffing in the right types of spots.
I'm not saying that I always flat AK "because its not a made hand", all I'm saying is that I don't have some sort of "standard" line where I ALWAYS 3bet it.
Agree with not having a default 3bet range, and yes, I flat AKo and AKs sometimes, and AA sometimes too.
But I stand by my comments that for the most part 3betting for fat value > keeping pots small, as outlined above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack492505
That will often be correct in most LLSNL games. But when PF 4-bet calling ranges of a $500 4bet are so wide, it breaks down.
If the fish can't let go of a hand at either point, you may as well bloat the pot when they already have a hand rather than taking a chance that they don't flop a hand.
When people say things in podcasts they necessarily speak in extreme generalities. So the advice doesn't necessarily apply in specific instances. Like here.
Spot on
SeaULater, if you had AA, or even AK, against the A9 and QJ, would you still be an advocate of waiting till post flop when your 'edge' is larger?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack492505
That's fine, but we aren't talking about "a lot of live players." The discussion got started by 2 posts that mentioned HUGE fish that were putting huge amounts of money in before the flop with very wide ranges. In those scenarios its important to "think outside the box" and realize you aren't in the same situation you usually are in.
Concurred
There arent many people where I would backraise K3o for value from the SB after a BB raise, but I have done it before (once).
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokahBlows
Well limon played with bart and he was 3betting light relentlessly like AJo,KQ,99. Limon was laughing at him. Said the fish don't like to be 3bet pre, they want to see flops, that's what they go to the casino for. Why push out the fish when you can raise it post and they will never fold when you have great equity.
I believe him, he plays 10/20. Live poker is totally different from online. Online guys actually have fundamentals. Live players don't have any fundamentals. So they can actually get lucky.
Phil Galfond said he would run 30/10 in lowstakes. Keep the pots small pre and own postflop.
Lately I have been playing a lot of limped pots. My range right now is PFR:99+,AJo+,KJo+,K9s+,Q10s+, my limping range:A5o,A7o+,K9o+,Q9o+,J9o+,109o+,K5s+,Q7s+,J8s+ ,108s+,A2s+ and 55-88.
I have been doing pretty good. But the verdict is still out. By the end of the year I will have enough hours to see if it works with a large enough sample.
It depends on the ranges of the person opening (Bart stuff)
About your limping range, why arent you limping 44-22 since you are going to be playing those hands almost identically to 55-88
Also, IMO your limping too wide and as a general rule, you shouldnt have a cookie cutter raising and limping range for low stakes. Just because you could doesnt mean you should.
Quote:
Different fish require different strategies, and people who open wide and call 3-bets with suited connectors should be 3-bet relentlessly with value hands to exploit their leaks.
Just because people give good strategies for beating the standard loose passive fish has no correlation to how you exploit specific players in specific situations AINEC.
+1
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaUlater
How you plan on making KTs fold if you are all in pre with AJo?
All in pre I dont want them to fold.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokahBlows
You are failing to realize when you 3bet in low stakes the pot will not be hu, it will be multiway. So bloating the pot pre and playing 3bet pots multiway is a losing proposition since they will be calling with almost any decent pair otf.
If you could iso and get the 3bet to Head's up everytime then I like the plan.
As mpethy mentioned, 3bet pots are rarely multiway. Your either in an AMAZING game, in which case I would just shortstack and 3bet jam a tonne of hands like its my birthday and rub money on my titties
More likely, people are only 3betting QQ+, and because they have the best hand in their eyes, are 3betting too small allowing other hands for better or worse to call, and then starting the cavacade of callers.
A big problem with the 3bet threads on this forum I found was that very rarely was there ever a comparison between raising ranges/3bet calling ranges/4bet ranges of our opponents.
Since its one of the biggest factors into when and why to 3bet, I found it quite puzzling.
Quote:
For ****s sakes wtf does bloating the pot pre even mean.
If I have AK and I know people are going to be calling with worse hands I want to shovel in as much PF as I possibly can and then stack off when I get my TPTK.
+1 again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpethybridge
I'd say more than 50% of my 3 bet pots go HU to the flop.
But it's really not that big of a deal. If it goes multi-way you just remove a lot if air from your c-betting range. In the meantime, you put the money in ahead of their ranges, and can expect to show a profit in the long run as long as you don't shovel money in with ace high on a low board trying to win a dick waving contest by getting overpairs to fold.
Yeah, people tend to think ZOMG I CANT 3BET AK, because if I get called in two spots with still relatively deep SPRs, I have to c/f J high boards.
Which isnt the issue, the issue is there calling ranges preflop and how they will play certain flops, not the fact that yes, AK misses more often then it hits a pair.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigSkip
Poker related - do any of you ever play in games with oversized straddles? I play in one game with a $10 rock, so the game is often 1/3/10. It is a Mississippi straddle, with straddles allowed up to 10bbs. Stacks can vary, but most villains sit on 100 BB.
I have experimented with aggressively going after those that are limping the straddles, especially when the straddled is not the type to defend out of principle. I have shifted to a more conservative style as the current line up is limp calling with a wide range. Raising to $50 can pull in 4 callers, so I end up playing a tight range.
Just curious if anyone else is familiar with similar game structures.
We used to.
What is the minimum BI? If massive straddles are on, and the game is relatively small, I would look to short-stack and jam light for the most part, as their ranges get progressively wider.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokahBlows
I hate low stakes. Can't wait till I can sit at a table full of pros. Or at least 4/5 pros with some huge whales like 10/20+.
Move up to where they respect your raises IMO...
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack492505
LLSNL is an easy, relatively low-variance game. If you aren't winning as much as you think you "should" be its probably because you're not as good as you think you are.
If I had a dollar for every time I heard a poker player say "I would be playing so much higher if I didn't run bad/ the structure was different/ etc." I would be rich.
Stop focusing on excuses and start focusing on improving. If you honestly think you play "optimally" you're out of touch with reality. We can all get better. And it starts with accepting that all of us play poker in a flawed way and need to improve.
Yeah, this basically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokahBlows
@BigSkip I would start with the rake/drop first. Then the buyin make it 150bb cap. So the fish will still play.
I love how random players believe that they singlehandedly know more about running a room/casino then a group of people with access to much more data on the subject.
The fish will play 10% capped at $15 here, so why should the government monopoly make it 5% capped at $5?
--------------------------
FWIW I ran KK into AA against the only other stack playing 100BB plus at that time yesterday, as well as losing on a Q76 board to TT putting in 100BB on the flop, and to JT on J65 for a bit less then a grand as well (That was my fault for getting involved with 56 lol, though it was a good table for it).
I only lost just over one BI though.
Also, flying into the top 10 of "first world problems" I won a prize to watch the FA Cup final in England (Im from Australia) and my team, Manchester United, are not in the final. Instead, its two of my most hated teams, Liverpool and Chelsea.
Sucks to be me...
