It actually wasnt Mike that I felted twice back to back. It was the guy in between Mike and I that was caught in the middle of the war.

Ive never seen a transformation in a guy like him before. Not just in poker. I mean anywhere. This guy used to play something like 30/25. He used to rifle chips incessantly and loudly nonstop. He used to raise things like QT and then pound pot sized bets on every street with TP, with a draw, with whatever. He would berate you no matter what happened in the hand. He was constantly correcting the dealer ect. There were times when 4-5 players at the table would be on the transfer list every time he sat down. He was THAT annoying.

Now he plays like a super nit. He probably plays more like 12/8. He almost never speaks. He doesn't shuffle chips like he used to. He does it a little bit when facing a bet but not constantly and not loudly. Just about the only resemblance to his former self is his black V neck T-shirt and skinny jeans (and hes not even close to skinny). Im gonna say he must be on ritalin or some other calming drug.

Im now break even over 106 hours

Since the June 21st date I keep quoting, Im at $29.70/hr over 205 hours. Not bad considering I'm having my second deepest and second longest losing streak ever.

I tied my worst streak of losing 4 days in a row but broke it with a win yesterday.

Lol @ 4 losing days in a row. :')

4 days of losing is absolutely nothing, think of the sample size.

I noticed the transformation also. He still sucks though

You don't need FE in this spot. THis is a pure value CR with stacks as shallow as they are. I think you are misapplying concepts here.

Huh?

I can get on board with the fact that I dont necessarily need FE because Im probably not folding anywhere during the hand anyway, but how can a crai be for value when Im behind?

First hand 0f the day today. I limp 8c6c in EP. I think we can count this towards the "questionable limp" category.

5 to the flop

Flop ($25) Tc9c7s. Blinds check. I check. Next guy bets $20. I call HU
Turn ($65) 5d. I check. He shoves $370 all in. WTF? I call obviously. He instantly tables J8.
River ($805) 7c Booyah! Straight flush baby!

It looks like the poker god has taken his foot off of my neck.

You have 12 clean outs otf. With abt realistic range assignment you are flipping or an equity favorite in a 3 way pot with like 190 in the pot and action on you. I don't want villains to find some absurd fold later in the hand so let's put it in otf imo.

Anyway this is not really a spot where we Care about fold equity was my point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How do you know I have 12 clean outs? I could be chopping with MP and/or MP if a J hits. The BB could easily have KK/QQ/TT which would give me only 7 flush outs (5 since MP actually had a FD also) and I still could be chopping with MP if a J hits.

If MP has a FD, like he ended up having, I lose 2 flush outs but I also want to keep him in the hand and crai might make him fold.

So while I dont think a crai is bad, I also dont think its a slam dunk either.

You are correct Qc is not clean ( and technically Jc is not"clean" either though I'll take my chances.

I mean you can discount flush outs if you want and that's fine. But that all goes into your equity based on ranges. Sure sets are part of their ranges but so are a lot of other weaker hands.

I'm on my phone but I'll run numbers later against a reasonable set of ranges


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mike's call is correct instead of XRAI. He has no FE and the sucker hand (3rd player) is dead money. So XRAI actually loses Mike money if he hits.

XRAI KOes a possible 2nd best hand drawing dead or almost dead if Mike hits. If 3rd player folds it makes no difference on Mike's outs because his hand is unknown in this spot. Maybe FD, maybe SD, maybe 2 pair, maybe TPGK + draw.

If Mike was drawing to the non-nuts and a XRAI would make the 3rd player fold then you can consider it. Here you remove the 3rd better hand increasing your equity in the hand while realizing your equity heads up.

But Mike loses nothing from the nut draw by pushing the other player out.

Qc is on the board. The flop was KcQcTd. BB ended up having KQ. MP had 2 clubs but didnt show which ones.

In no way is he ever flipping or an equity favorite against these 2 ranges here. Now he def could/is prob a huge favorite vs the limp caller's range. But he's def not a favorite 3 ways with a guy raising out of the bb and betting this flop.

Calling it a "value raise" is beyond Lol.

The point is with an spr of .5 and the nfd you are never folding and you always have 30% equity so just stick it in. I cannot belive we are debating what to do with the nfd when the pot is $200 and the pfr has $80 bucks left and limp caller has $100.

Clean outs and ranges dont matter when we have 30% equity 3 ways with an spr of .5 and $200 in the pot already.

Because we are losing, know we are losing, and will get paid off if we hit... that's why.

There is no reason to risk the stack when a partial will get the same results.

He calls flop and turn with odds. He misses river he saves money. He hits river he gets paid anyways. No brainer.

If you have no fold equity vs a guy who can't fold but always pays in the spot it is unwise to toss in the extra money. This isn't even counting the 3rd players basically dead money hand.

Only in spots with zero FE in which if we call flop we have to fold turn but shoving flop makes us realize our equity better and if we hit the opponent folds is a spot where we can shove the flop.

For example say we have a 12 out draw vs a players TPTK We are about 46% equity. There is already $100 in the pot. The better bets $50 and has $250 left after the bet. If we just call he will overshove all turns making it unprofitable to call. $250 into $200. Yet if we call and hit he doesn't pay off or pays off maybe one small bet. In this spot shoving the flop is correct for his stack.

We risk $300 to win $150 + his $250 call = $500 or $300 to win $500 realizing our full 46%. Calling is a -EV play because he never pays off. But he will stack off on the flop correctly deducing we have a FD.

This is with 100% information like we saw his cards. In reality, with a few exceptions, I think there is always some chance a person folds to a shove like this even if it is 1%. But most of the time it doesn't justify it.

Lol this debate is absurd


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I actually thought we would have closer to 40% equity...nevertheless not getting this in on the flop when they have $80 and $100 behind makes no sense to me. I mean if you are never folding then whatever but there is no reason to give the limp caller a chance to make a dumb fold later IMO

ProPokerTools Hold'em Simulation

2,663,850 trials (Exhaustive)

board: KQT

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
Ac3c	35.63%	902,470	99,409
KQ, AK, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, AA, KsJs, KdJd, KhJh	48.03%	1,208,755	147,397
KJ, QJ, JT, cc, KT, QT	16.34%	405,228	66,100

Today I probably had the most frustrating session Ive ever had where I didnt lose. It was the most card dead Ive ever been at a massive action table. I won 2 hands all day that were over $30. I ended the 5 hour session up $100. There were like 3-4 $500-$1000 pots every orbit. It was insanity.

The only semi interesting hand from today:

EP limps. I raise to $25 Tc9c. LP, BB and EP call. We all have around $400-$500

Flop ($100) 8c6c6s. They check. I bet $65. Only EP calls.
Turn ($230) 3h. He checks. I bet $120. He tank/calls
River ($470) 4c. He checks. I shove. He calls off $180 and mucks.

After that hand I just blinded down and lost $20 here and there for hours.

There was a hand with a $250 bet on the river on a board that showed TcTd3c2c7s. A guy called the $250 and lost to 36.

There was a hand where a guy bet $150 on the river on a board that showed Qs8d4d8hQd. A guy called and lost to a flush. I guess he called with A high on a double paired board? Or maybe something like TT?

There was big pot after big pot but I was a spectator. It was kind of like watching some guys play some really cool video games but they never let you have a turn for hours.

In over 600 sessions, I win or lose more than $500 29% of the time. However, in the last 26 sessions, that number is 62%. More than double the overall number

In over 600 sessions, my StnDev is $262/hr
In the last 26 sessions, its $360/hr. That's 38% higher.

26 sessions is not the biggest sample size, but its big enough for me to start making some adjustments. Ive been in an overly large number of tough spots lately, but sometimes a person puts themselves into tough spots and I think Ive been doing that too much lately. Its time to lower my aggression level preflop and be more careful post flop in certain treacherous situations.

I think in general most good players and most good 2+2ers are way too aggro. When Im playing my best I limp a lot more than most 2+2ers would think is correct. However I always tend to start slowly but surely start raising more and more hands preflop and at some point I pass the point of good aggression and pass into the land of bad aggression or over aggression. I think Im at that point now. Time for a reboot.

I just want to say thank you for reminding us how hard this is sometimes. It's nice & exciting to hear "i played 86 sooted and rivered a straight flush", but when that doesn't happen to us we may think we're doing it wrong.

It is important to see these:

*There was big pot after big pot but I was a spectator.

*It was the most card dead Ive ever been at a massive action table.

*I won 2 hands all day that were over $30.

*I'm now break even over 106 hours.

*I go 3 hours and win 1 hand.

*I got KK 3 times today. I lost every time.

This way we are constantly reminded that it's not just raise every hand & win. Winning is boring, folding over & over, and keeping your wits about you even while others are losing theirs.

So, thanks.

Ive heard lots of people say that playing winning poker is boring. I actually dont find it boring. Playing like a nit is boring for sure. The tighter you are the more boring poker is. If you play too tight its boring and not all that profitable. If you play too loose, its exciting but you will most likely lose.

The key is to find the middle ground. A little looser than the guys everyone knows are tight but not too loose. That's the sweet spot and the most profitable spot if you play well post flop. But as you get better you start thinking you can out play everyone and you start playing more and more hands. That goes on for a while and before you know it you are so loose that you are one of the fish now. You still play better than most post flop so it doesnt kill you but you go past the tipping point of the most profitable style. That leads to a lower win rate and more volatility.

So I went back to basics today. All last year I bought in for $300. Ive heard from tons of people who think you have to buy in for $500 or you are a fish or that youre leaving money on the table. That's not true at all.

Of course if you get all in AA vs KK you want to have as much money on the table as possible, but that's rare. Whats a lot less rare is how light people will stack off when they are only risking $300 instead of $500.

Also, there are different strategies for playing a $300 stack, a $500 stack and a $800 stack, but most non pros dont know the difference and they assume Ill make the same play with $600 as I did when I had $300.

Anyway, I bought for $300 today and left with a $750 profit. I played 3 big pots and won them all. I lost quite a few small pots after missing a lot of flops with AQ/AK and things like that.

1) 2 EP limps. HJ limps. I raise to $30 AsKs with $355 total stack. One EP limper calls and then the HJ reraises to $225. I shove and he calls HU

Final board is 3s2s7c3d7s. I table my hand and the dealer says "A high". The HJ says "I beat A high" just as Im telling the dealer I have a flush. HJ never showed but later claimed he had QQ. I chuckled at that and he got pissed. The odds of him overlimping QQ in the HJ and then making that "I beat A high" comment is like zero. He wouldve acted differently with QQ. My guess is he had 44-88.

2) I open to $20 AsAc from the HJ. The button and SB both call.
Flop ($65) 5s2s2h. SB checks. I bet $45. The button raises to $175 with another $50 behind. SB folds. I shove.
Turn ($515) 7s
River Tc. He waited for me to show so Im pretty sure he didnt have a FD. I showed and he mucked. Based on my read from playing tons of hours with this guy, he had TT-KK.

3) 2 limps. I raise to $25 AsQd. The SB and one MP limper call.

Hero ($700)
SB ($500)
MP ($570)

SB seems pretty solid. MP is a whale. Hes really bad but also unpredictable and hard to put on a hand.

Flop ($80) QcJs7h. SB checks. MP leads $55. I call. SB is about to fold but then calls

Turn ($245) Ah. SB checks. MP bets $150. I was pretty weary that the SB could have KT but Im not folding so I just called. SB folded.

River ($545) 4c. MP bet $100 with $240 behind. I probably shouldve shoved all in, but even though I was afraid SB had KT, it was still on my mind even after SB folded. I doubt MP has KT there very often. I just called though. MP had J7.

Nice hands. I think you can prob shove river in last hand too, but it's whatever. I don't think the nuts or 77 bets only 100.

Re the buyin thing, as someone who comes from an online background, I can't fathom the idea of buying in short. When people are opening 5x as a standard, I think you benefit from being deeper. Also when you get the absolute drooler come along who is 500+ deep, not having 500+ seems pretty bad but ofc you can just top up when that guy arrives. But yeah, what I notice about the short stacks is that they tend to pot commit themselves with weak hands vs deeper stacks. Like they'll stack off otf with top pair when the deeper uncapped player has stronger top pairs and overpairs? But that's probably not an issue for you and there's a diff between a 150 stack and a 300 stack. I guess if it decreases the volatility of your sessions and reduces stdev, it's probably fine... Just don't see how it could be higher EV than being in for the max.