not the case. try "we the living" very applicable to today

nah, your last hhs were spew. i was talking about your analysis that you are too aggressive and weren't adjusting properly b/w online and live

Just food for thought....

You've made $1839 on this stake.

You would have made $1827 +tips working your minimum wage job.

If you want to capitalize on this golden opportunity that DL has given you, you should grab a part time gig even for a couple weeks, and dump all the money you earn into your own roll.

You've run as hot as possible and you're at break even with your cost of living. There is no room to save for your own roll.

I think 98s is a pretty standard open from MP (UTG+2).

I adjust based on table and relative position, who is in the blinds, etc., but I open something like this in MP:

22+, A9s+, A5s-A3s, KTs+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 98s, 87s, 76s, 65s, AJo+, KQo

This range works well for me. The problem is a lot of these hands are just marginally +EV even if you rarely make mistakes postflop, so if your postflop game has significant leaks (and no offense but yours does as evidenced by so many hand histories), these SC AXs hands become losers and drag your winrate down. If you're barreling these hands too much it also injects a lot of variance.

So to answer your question it can be +EV to open but given your tendency to bluff like crazy with any kind of draw, you specifically should not open 98s until you get the postflop game under control.

As has been said before, start with an overly tight range and slowly add hands as postflop skill increases. Maybe try something (from MP) like 55+, ATs+, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, AJo+, KQo, and only bluff when you have high equity when called and good fold equity. Slowly add more hands until you arrive closer to what I use (or even wider).

You may think you have a good postflop game. I think you understand how to play in a vacuum. Your strategy posts in LLSNL typically show more understanding than your posts here. But in practice you make a lot of mistakes and then don't recognize them as mistakes because maybe in some table configuration it's fine. But you're playing against specific people. It's more important at 1/3 to be able to quickly classify someone's play, read them, and adopt exploitative counter strategies than to understand how to play in tough aggressive games.

And the counter strategies are simple. Most players are LP. Bet for value.

When heads up vs. the nits is when you try bluffing.

When up against bad LAGs and maniacs play more stationy. Etc.

In massively multiway pots make the effective nuts and stack off. Be super cautious with 1 pair hands and generally x/f anything worse than TP or a nut draw.

Ed Miller has a book called "Playing the Player" that really goes into a lot of detail on how to adjust vs. different types of players. It's a purely exploitative approach and what you should be doing at this level. I think it would help you.

Most people say get the fundamentals down first and I mostly agree but...

1/3 recs also give off tons of really obvious tells of hand strength/weakness/indifference if you know what you're looking for. Zach Elwoods 1st and 3rd books could help you there. The 2nd one is on verbal tells which is useful if your casino allows table talk, but I'd read the others first. If you have good fundamentals and can read people well you can have a massive winrate in low stakes games.

You are conflating egoism with egotism. Egoism is a philosophy or psychological interpretation (ethical egoism and psychological egoism). Egotism is the drive to produce favorable views of oneself.

The way everyone but you ITT has used the word "ego" is to mean egotistical. Arrogant. Conceited.

It has nothing to do with my philosophical views. I understood this difference even when I was a raving Objectivist and I was 13. Come on dude. Learn 2 English.

Shai, while your ranges and strategy posts are strong, they will undoubtedly help a random lurker more than OP.
We know OP:
Barrels too often
Doesn't understand board textures too well
Loses a ton with mediocre hands OOP
Does not have strong hand reading abilities (is probably above average for 1/3, but is way behind for where he wants to be/thinks he is)

So, he should probably cut 15-20% of that range down until he books some *consistent* wins. Your updated MP range is probably his current utg range, although he has posted it upthread I don't believe he folds KQ utg for example.

In live low stakes games the following are true the vast, vast majority of the time:
Villains are not playing back at you
People only raise, and especially 3b/4b very, very strong hands.

With that in mind, there is no reason to go crazy and get 3b or a large percentage of stacks in with AJ, KQ, 88 when we are faced with raises from players we do not believe to be opening light. These are not good spots! You had a session last week where you won 2k! You ran really, really good, but it's a very nice win. But, you've blown more than that on the 3-4 sessions before and after that when the deck didn't hit you.

Exactly.

I don't think of this PGC as a learning tool for 6b anymore as he's mostly trying to ignore/avoid majority of advice.
But it's a great well of knowledge for many other readers who are trying to build up a bankroll themselves and/or are fighting with BR/ego/etc issues.

So even though many good posters ITT can have a feeling that the time spent writing their responses and advice here has been useless, the fact is many people benefit from it and it's great to have the possibility to absorb so much wisdom from here.

I'm pretty sure I've said multiple times in this thread that you don't need to play 1/3 live as if you're playing 200nl or similar online but he says nobody tells him this?

Everyone has been accusing me of being "too loose" and "putting too much money in with marginal hands" but very few people have said I'm too aggressive.

Umm no I wouldn't?

I definitely wasn't making $1827 in a month working part-time at my previous fast food job. Firstly, it was only $20/hr, and secondly, they'd never give me more than about 25hrs per week if I was lucky (usually less).

He means in the same amount of hours as you've played. Realistically speaking, you could find any number of jobs where you can work day shifts and wouldn't affect your volume.

I calculated it at Melbourne's minimum wage of $18.93/hr. So working the same amount if hours at $20/hr you would have made more than my original figure.

I'm not suggesting you quit poker. I'm simply pointing out the fact that you quit working because you didn't want to work for minimum wage, yet you're now working for DL for less than minimum wage.

You're simply not making enough money doing what you're doing to put yourself in the position that you want to be in. You need an additional steady source of income to cover your living expenses while you grind up your roll on stake.

People have stated that countless times during the course of this long thread. Too much aggression, forced aggression, aggression on autopilot and so forth you name it and it have been covered during this thread.You have to be joking, are you able to take responsibility for anything at all, or do people here have to spoonfeed you with the smallest of corrections hundreds of times for you to get a grip?

What do u think "quit 3 betting garbage" means then

You've picked up the wrong lesson in this. When your 200nl coach says raise or fold, he's correct. When you change your strategy, it isn't to take all those hands you don't want to 3bet and 4 bet and call with them. It is to fold them. I'm confident that DLuo will tell you the same thing.

There's no absolutes in poker. However, you should be calling only when you're on a draw with the proper implied odds (which is not equal to stack size/bet) or you are slow playing a monster as a default. I'm convinced the most money in poker is lost because people call with a hand that might be a winner.

Did you think people meant x/r'ing 66 was being too loose or aggressive? Did you think people saying info raising TT was too loose or being too aggressive? So many more examples.

this.

and the only reason you conceded that maybe you play some situations bad is because your backer finally told you to stop playing bad which makes it come off so disingenuously and I expect less hands from you so you don't show how terrible you play to DL.

Certainly my biggest leak.

Very possible indeed. I am not an experienced backer, but i have a couple of good poker friends and i know their game is on point- i have staked them in limited periods of time when they have been short on cash due to family expences/unplanned life expences. If they would have played as reckless as 6bet does with my money, and if i saw the same amount of insane spewy hand histories he is writing up in this thread i would have snap stopped to stake them.

It's okay Petrucci. You have every right to pass up on a profitable investment if you choose.

I'll let the people who have faith in me back me, and the people who don't get zero share of my profits.

Lol, its nothing on the table at all that suggest backing you is a +EV investment. Zero evidence whatsoever. All that excist is alot of empty words/statements from you saying that you can beat the games. Infact, its more evidence so far suggesting its a losing investment long term to stake you. For example that you busted your own 10K roll due to alot of bad choices and -EV plays. The fact that you dont seem to learn from your mistakes, and keeps making -EV lines, losing plays and losing stackoffs over and over again should be very alarming.

You being up money on a totally meaningless samplesize of 100 hours where you have ran very hot doesent tell us shyt about youre actual edge/winrate in the games.

Over 100 hours of responsible poker

I've now put in 102.5 hours of play under DLuo's stake and made a grand total profit of $3874 during that time. I have not had a sip of alcohol whilst playing, nor have I put any volume in after midnight, nor have I jumped stakes. I'm proud of myself for achieving this, and I intend to continue showing this level of discipline in the future.

Previously, I used to play whilst drunk, jump stakes, play during degen hours, etc. It's a pretty big achievement for me to stick to 1/3 NL and stick to a very strict set of rules for such a long time. So I'm happy about that.

This specific session didn't go great though: I lost $304 after 6hrs of playing. I would've booked a win if not for the very last hand when I paid off someone in a spot I shouldn't have. Some hands were:

Hand 1: Had to give up here

$400 effective
UTG opens $12
3 callers
Hero 3bets $75 SB with Ad Qh
Only BTN calls $75

Flop ($174) Jd 6d 5s

Hero bets $50
BTN calls $50

My plan is to jam the other $275 in on any diamond, T, Q, K or A. Otherwise, I'll just go into x/f mode.

Turn ($274) Jd 6d 5s 4c

Both check

River ($274) Jd 6d 5s 4c 8h

Both check



Hand 2: Zeebo's Theorem is wrong

$260 effective
5 limpers
Hero raises $35 BB with TT
Only UTG calls $35

Flop ($71) 643r

Hero bets $30
UTG calls $30

I'm jizzing here because there are so many awful flops for TT, but this isn't one of them.

Turn ($131) 6433

Hero checks
UTG checks

Beautiful turn card. Alas, I couldn't get the x/r in.

River ($131) 64333

Hero jams $220



Beautiful river card too. If Zeebo's Theorem is true, then I should always be overbetting my TT+ here.

Hand 3: I tried to play passive

MP is a MAWG with a $200 stack
MP raises $15
BTN calls $15
Hero calls $15 BB with AJcc

Was so tempted to squeeze here, but I decided not to.

Flop ($42, 3ways) Ad 8c 5d

Hero checks
MP bets $30
BTN folds
Hero calls $30

Turn ($96) Ad 8c 5d Qh

Hero checks
MP bets $65
Hero calls $65

I was debating all 3 options here. Not sure if calling is correct.

River ($221) Ad 8c 5d Qh Ts

Hero checks
MP jams $90
Hero folds

One of the worst possible river cards for me. If he somehow has busted diamonds here, then good on him I suppose.

Hand 4: Paying off a passive nitfish

Some context: villain is a 20s WG who appears super passive and fishy. He 3bet me an hour ago and picked a really tiny fishy sizing. He showed down QQ. Then he literally 3bet me the previous hand BB vs BTN and I instafolded because I knew he was nutted. Now he's about to 3bet me for the third time in 1 hour...

$380 effective
2 limpers
Hero raises $21 CO with AKo
Villain 3bets $51 SB
Hero 4bet jams $380
Villain thinks for about 10 seconds then...

Why does DLuo get the first $500? What the **** is that about?

What would be the merit to 3b squeezing AJcc there?

I've recorded every live session I've played this year and I'm 14k up. I didn't bust my roll at the poker tables. I busted it travelling to Sydney, paying rent, paying hotels, paying restaurants, buying drinks at bars, buying an iPhone, etc. If you don't believe me then fine.

It's complicated. I'd rather not disclose the reasons why we came to this agreement.

For value and to deny equity. Also allows me to fold to a 4bet jam, which would cost me less.

They're not -EV lines just very 'high variance'. OP may not show a profit with them straight away but give it time and he will be printing money.

I don't "get the first $500", it was a tiered payout model where if 6b ultimately finished the stake (+10k) we would split profits at $4500 & $5500. We realised there was a misunderstanding between the two of us, and met in the middle where it would be split $4750 & $5250. To simplify things, 6b was okay with just adding the +$250 to my split at the first payout point, so going forward everything was split 50/50.

Not sure why that should be a problem or concern to anyone. Each stake is agreed between the two parties involved, and both of us were happy with the conditions. Also if you think its "unfair", aren't you also one of the many people to say I'm torching my money because 6b is a bad investment etc etc. So somehow it's also unfair that I'm charging a "premium" for taking on a risky investment?