Played a live 1/2NL game. I saw improvement in my game, based on my reading[s].


The fish is the one who never lays down a hand.
"Small hand, small pot. Big hand, big pot"
Your calling hand must be a lot stronger than your raising hand.

These recently learned sayings helped me last night. Last few times I played, I busted out my entire decent night on when making a bad call. This time, I did not go into a big hand with just a pair.
I had A8, flopped the A. villain goes all in before me. This time, I folded. He had a straight. Good lay down!!
Also, in small stakes, I've learned when villain goes all in, they usually have something big. People rarely bluff all-in, b/c otherwise, they're going home.


My winning hands centered about pocket pairs.
I played them decently, and they paid off most times!

• Pocket 6. I just called the blinds....Every checks the flop, I raise 10. One caller. Junk turn. Raised $20. He folds.
  
• Pocket JJ...I raise $15 pre-flop. Everyone checks. Eventually, heads' up and pot is about $100. I raise $50. He folded his Ace pair. (People WAY overestimate what you have)
  
• Pocket 4s There is a $10 raise before me. I hit the set. Villains raises again. Keep calling. Checks the river, I bet $20 into $50 pot. He calls, and I show trip 4's.
  
• A8...I flop Ace. Villain shoves. I fold. Villain had straight. I showed my A8 to the table. I had a very tight image that I was able to exploit later.
  
• Pocket 8s. I raise $12. Two callers. I c-bet $20. Take the pot.
  

I played off-suit connectors a few times. But, if anyone raised, I folded them, but if it was $2 to see the flop, I did this. If the call was $7+, then I folded. Is this the right idea?

Position. I have also become more naturally aware of late position and OTB position. I won a few hands just based on raising when everyone folded to me.

I do not understand why people "Mississippi" or "straddle". Why raise before you see your cards, and everyone knows it. You're just making a fake bigger blind for yourself. Raising after seeing your cards conveys strength. I guess people do this to look loose and aggressive, or b/c they know some arcane rule, to look experienced?

I saw lots of players keep re-buying in for $100 (50BB). I bought in for 100BB and never went much below it. I never went all-in, but was able to raise $50 to get one guy to fold.
In a room of $100 stacks, a $50 raise can often clear the table. Even if the pot is like $300. This is where the leaks are. People not playing proper pot odds when the pot is big (unless they have the nuts)

I noticed one guy always raising aggressively when he had a draw. Last night, he lost many times, b/c he wasn't hitting his draws.
What are your thoughts on this style of play? He is playing fold/bluff equity, but when it doesn't work, he was better off seeing free cards, and only betting when he made his hand.

In all, it was a good night, and I more than doubled my buy-in. Walked before I gave it all back. Felt good to have a winning night, and to avoid a few bad hands.

unfortunately i don´t know how to gif properly...

Was this what you were looking for?

I swear I just saw this same post in BQ...

Congrats on a good night!

ITT: Opening on the flop is called raising and everyone checks after OP raises to 15 with JJ

I don't like playing off-suit junk, even for a limp, except occasionally on the button. Fold them everywhere else, even in the small blind for $1.

The guy betting his draws hard is losing more when his draws don't come in, but he's winning more with his sets because people may put him on a draw and overplay one pair hands. Think of it as investing for the future.

You bet $20 into a $50 pot on the river when you flopped a set? You have a long way to go.

This is some of the best advice and what's sick about it is lots of players know it, but relatively few actually follow it.

Against a field of unknowns, out of fear of "being weak-tight" and "getting exploited", for small pots, by the relatively small portion of poker players that is actually capable of deliberately exploiting tight folds, they donate racks to players who only bet and raise with strong hands.

It can be good depending on the table. The trick is to remember that semibluffing is still bluffing and should be used on different types of players with varying frequencies.

x2, that was my first thought.

OP - stop showing your cards. Everyone checked when you raised to 15 because they know your raising to 15 range is JJ+/AK. Sounds like you are playing super tight and everyone knows it. Keep reading and then come back to this thread in two years to see how much your game has changed (hopefully).

+1

Was he betting like 5-10 bucks? Pot is only $50? We aren't raising our sets? Where's our value?

The point of betting is to get value. Calling will keep them in the hand, ya, but you have a SOLID hand and chances are this villain is willing to call more than just $20. We need to capitalize on our big hands, pot control with our decent hands.

Don't limp with suited connectors unless we are on BTN and even then I'm not thrilled on limping with rags

I might have bet $20 into a $40 pot.
I think I am pretty used to betting 50% of the pot as a standard bet.
It seems like 100% of the pot is a huge over bet that will get all folds.

I need to learn more about amount of bet relative to the pot.
Right now, I generally bet 50% most every time I bet.

This is not the most optimal approach, especially against fish. The only reason to have a standard bet size is when you're up against good observant players who can exploit your different bet sizing and thus creates a need for balance and to hide our hand strength. Otherwise our bet sizing should be exploitable and have specific reasons behind them, like c-betting 1/2 pot as a bluff vs c-betting full pot with a value hand, betting small to induce against a maniac or betting small to manipulate a calling range and get thin value when worse hands won't call a bigger bet, ect.

Not sure how I feel about these generalizations.

Getting villains to fold TP is not really how we try to make our money in 1/3 or 2/5. Pretty much turning your JJ into a bluff as well. Unless you made a read-specific decision I wouldn't be raising second pair against a passive player.

It's a cash game. People do shove as a bluff because it doesn't mean they have to go home. For me, it means that I have to reach into my pocket and take out my top-up chips. Your generalization is right when you're talking about passive players but for the wrong reasons.

There are optimal conditions for straddling, although most of the people aren't doing it. If a table is extremely weak-tight, straddling just simply collects all the dead money for you to raise off of their hands.

Final thing: winning image. If you feel the conditions are good, and you have a winning image, you'll find it much more beneficial to stay on during good sessions rather than 'walking before giving it back'.