This can be my delayed Pooh-Bah post -
07-18-2009
, 08:36 PM
07-18-2009
, 08:38 PM
Full Tilt Poker Game #13428383290: Table HyperAggrDonk (6 max) - $40/$80 - No Limit Hold'em - 12:50:50 ET - 2009/07/16
Seat 1: Big Tuna JKo ($10,559.25)
Seat 2: Jas11 ($10,437.25)
Seat 4: Alexonmoon ($8,000)
Seat 6: kailimara ($8,279)
Jas11 posts the small blind of $40
Alexonmoon posts the big blind of $80
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Big Tuna JKo [6d 7d]
kailimara raises to $240
Big Tuna JKo has 15 seconds left to act
Big Tuna JKo raises to $720
Jas11 has 15 seconds left to act
Jas11 has requested TIME
Jas11 raises to $1,920
Alexonmoon folds
Alexonmoon adds $80
kailimara folds
Big Tuna JKo has 15 seconds left to act
Big Tuna JKo has requested TIME
Big Tuna JKo calls $1,200
*** FLOP *** [Td 8d Qd]
Jas11 has 15 seconds left to act
Jas11 has requested TIME
Jas11 bets $1,760
Big Tuna JKo has 15 seconds left to act
Big Tuna JKo has requested TIME
Big Tuna JKo raises to $3,600
Jas11 has 15 seconds left to act
Jas11 has requested TIME
Jas11 raises to $8,517.25, and is all in
Big Tuna JKo calls $4,917.25
Jas11 shows [Kd Ks]
Big Tuna JKo shows [6d 7d]
*** TURN *** [Td 8d Qd] [4d]
*** RIVER *** [Td 8d Qd 4d] [Ts]
Jas11 shows a flush, King high
Big Tuna JKo shows a flush, Queen high
Jas11 wins the pot ($21,192.50) with a flush, King high
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $21,194.50 | Rake $2
Board: [Td 8d Qd 4d Ts]
Seat 1: Big Tuna JKo (button) showed [6d 7d] and lost with a flush, Queen high
Seat 2: Jas11 (small blind) showed [Kd Ks] and won ($21,192.50) with a flush, King high
Seat 4: Alexonmoon (big blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 6: kailimara folded before the Flop
I think that it really depends on how quickly you want to move up through the higher stakes, how good your winrate is, and how easily you can replace your bankroll. Probably somewhere from 30-75+ buy-ins. I had a 35BI downswing in the $220s at one point that I am fairly sure had nothing to do with my play (I did well in other stakes during it, both higher and lower).
I wrote an article on bankroll management, I'll copy/paste it here:
Quote:
There are a few different factors that need to be considered when managing your bankroll:
What kind of winrate do you expect to have? Do you know you are crushing the games, or are you just trying them out?: This is important because a lower winrate will increase the amount of variance you experience, and will also increase your risk of ruin (your risk of busting your roll). Keep in mind that bankroll management guides are usually designed for the highest level you should be playing with your bankroll. Having a huge bankroll doesn't necessarily mean that you should be playing the highest stakes. Bill Gates is rolled for any level of HUSNG, but it still isn't in his best interest to start out playing the $5500s.
How easily can you replace your bankroll? There is a big difference between busting a roll that is made up of the change in your couch compared to busting your roll that you need for food or to pay the bills. Most people aren't going to be eating out of dumpsters if they bust their roll, but if you are then you want your risk of ruin to be as close to 0 as possible.
How important is it for you to move up quickly? You can move up in stakes more quickly if you use riskier bankroll management, but riskier bankroll management also increases the chance of busting your roll.
Most bankroll management guides I have seen suggest a certain amount of buy-ins for level, generally around ~30. I disagree with this method because your bankroll becomes progressively harder to replace as you move up in stakes.
Instead, for bankroll management for the average player I would suggest something like:
$5s - 15BI ($75)
$10s - 20BI ($200)
$20s - 25BI ($500)
$30s - 30BI ($900)
$50s - 35BI ($1750)
Increasing the amount of buy ins with each level will reduce your risk of ruin as your bankroll becomes harder to replace. Another important consideration is that your winrate will probably decrease as you move up in stakes. As you experience more variance, you may become prone to tilting or wrongly doubting some aspects of your game. These mental changes cause a lot of players to struggle as they move up in stakes, so it is important to consider that your winrate may not be the same at every level.
The bankroll guide above can be adjusted to a smaller amount of buy-ins if the bankroll is easily replaceable or if the player is very confident that they are crushing the games and just want to move up quickly. If you are dependent upon maintaining your bankroll to pay your bills then it would be in your best interest to have more than 35BI at every level.
Keep in mind that if you get off to a bad start at the next level but refuse to move back down you will run the risk of damaging or destroying the bankroll that you have built. Sometimes moving down a level can be more important than moving up.
----
How many tables should I play? If you are looking to improve your game then I think that single tabling is by far your best option. If you play multiple tables it can be difficult to truly analyze your moves. If you are confident that you are beating the levels you are playing, then increasing the number of tables you can play well will usually increase your hourly profit. Just keep in mind that extra tables might reduce the speed at which you improve your game. For example, if you are beating the $5s then it might increase your hourly to play 2 or 3 tables, but in a year you could end up multitabling the $10s instead of 1-2 tabling the $100s. The answer to this question will vary immensely from person to person. You need to use your best judgement.
Should I be playing turbos or non-turbos? I've seen arguments that favor both sides of this. After studying the statistics for a lot of different winning players, I've found that they are both very profitable and it really doesn't seem to make a ton of difference. The non-turbos will generally increase your ROI but take longer for each game. In terms of hourly wage (which is what most people would consider to be the most important factor) they seem to be very close.
What is a stop loss? Should I have one? Some players set a "stop loss" for themselves where if they lose a certain amount of games they will stop playing for the session or for the day. This is an effective method of allowing yourself to cool off so you don't tilt and lose more buy-ins. This may be worthwhile if you are very prone to tilting, but I am not a big fan of stop losses. If you have a significant edge on your opponent then it will always be +EV for you to play against him/her. If you are tilting then you probably no longer have an edge. Tilt control is extremely important to have for any poker player, but preventing yourself from playing against someone you have an edge against just because you lost a few buy-ins can do as much harm as it can good.
How many tournaments should I play per session? This is completely dependent upon your goals as a player and how well you can focus. As long as you have enough of an edge on your opponent to beat the rake it will be in your best interest (financially) to play as many games as possible.
What should my Poker Tracker layout look like? I don't use Poker Tracker so I can't answer this one. Someone else can feel free to step in and answer it though.
What kind of winrate do you expect to have? Do you know you are crushing the games, or are you just trying them out?: This is important because a lower winrate will increase the amount of variance you experience, and will also increase your risk of ruin (your risk of busting your roll). Keep in mind that bankroll management guides are usually designed for the highest level you should be playing with your bankroll. Having a huge bankroll doesn't necessarily mean that you should be playing the highest stakes. Bill Gates is rolled for any level of HUSNG, but it still isn't in his best interest to start out playing the $5500s.
How easily can you replace your bankroll? There is a big difference between busting a roll that is made up of the change in your couch compared to busting your roll that you need for food or to pay the bills. Most people aren't going to be eating out of dumpsters if they bust their roll, but if you are then you want your risk of ruin to be as close to 0 as possible.
How important is it for you to move up quickly? You can move up in stakes more quickly if you use riskier bankroll management, but riskier bankroll management also increases the chance of busting your roll.
Most bankroll management guides I have seen suggest a certain amount of buy-ins for level, generally around ~30. I disagree with this method because your bankroll becomes progressively harder to replace as you move up in stakes.
Instead, for bankroll management for the average player I would suggest something like:
$5s - 15BI ($75)
$10s - 20BI ($200)
$20s - 25BI ($500)
$30s - 30BI ($900)
$50s - 35BI ($1750)
Increasing the amount of buy ins with each level will reduce your risk of ruin as your bankroll becomes harder to replace. Another important consideration is that your winrate will probably decrease as you move up in stakes. As you experience more variance, you may become prone to tilting or wrongly doubting some aspects of your game. These mental changes cause a lot of players to struggle as they move up in stakes, so it is important to consider that your winrate may not be the same at every level.
The bankroll guide above can be adjusted to a smaller amount of buy-ins if the bankroll is easily replaceable or if the player is very confident that they are crushing the games and just want to move up quickly. If you are dependent upon maintaining your bankroll to pay your bills then it would be in your best interest to have more than 35BI at every level.
Keep in mind that if you get off to a bad start at the next level but refuse to move back down you will run the risk of damaging or destroying the bankroll that you have built. Sometimes moving down a level can be more important than moving up.
----
How many tables should I play? If you are looking to improve your game then I think that single tabling is by far your best option. If you play multiple tables it can be difficult to truly analyze your moves. If you are confident that you are beating the levels you are playing, then increasing the number of tables you can play well will usually increase your hourly profit. Just keep in mind that extra tables might reduce the speed at which you improve your game. For example, if you are beating the $5s then it might increase your hourly to play 2 or 3 tables, but in a year you could end up multitabling the $10s instead of 1-2 tabling the $100s. The answer to this question will vary immensely from person to person. You need to use your best judgement.
Should I be playing turbos or non-turbos? I've seen arguments that favor both sides of this. After studying the statistics for a lot of different winning players, I've found that they are both very profitable and it really doesn't seem to make a ton of difference. The non-turbos will generally increase your ROI but take longer for each game. In terms of hourly wage (which is what most people would consider to be the most important factor) they seem to be very close.
What is a stop loss? Should I have one? Some players set a "stop loss" for themselves where if they lose a certain amount of games they will stop playing for the session or for the day. This is an effective method of allowing yourself to cool off so you don't tilt and lose more buy-ins. This may be worthwhile if you are very prone to tilting, but I am not a big fan of stop losses. If you have a significant edge on your opponent then it will always be +EV for you to play against him/her. If you are tilting then you probably no longer have an edge. Tilt control is extremely important to have for any poker player, but preventing yourself from playing against someone you have an edge against just because you lost a few buy-ins can do as much harm as it can good.
How many tournaments should I play per session? This is completely dependent upon your goals as a player and how well you can focus. As long as you have enough of an edge on your opponent to beat the rake it will be in your best interest (financially) to play as many games as possible.
What should my Poker Tracker layout look like? I don't use Poker Tracker so I can't answer this one. Someone else can feel free to step in and answer it though.
07-18-2009
, 11:04 PM
As far as the worst goes, there are a lot of really bad players. I had one guy 3bet me with Ax4x (no spade) to 300 in a $1100+30, flop comes K
85, I check, he bets 300, I jam for 1200... he times down and calls... his hand is like 33% or something if I haven't even looked at my cards. For what its worth, I had K
J and was terrified because it was a fairly big shot for me and he had already made a big sick out on me the game before. It held. That was one of the worst hands of seen. This one is probably worse:http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/54...e-45-a-390942/
As far as who I won't play, I try to play against the players I have the biggest edge against. I played a guy a while back who would time down for about 7 seconds every time he had air (and would act immediately with real hands). I beat him about 8 games in a row then never saw him again. I'll play against other regs if I think I have a big edge. If I'm having trouble getting action then I'll play against regs that I have a smaller edge against. I stopped playing against Christian Kruel because I thought my edge was too small to be worth my time. His stats are blocked now so I can't check them for HU, but he was -5% ROI or so with like $220 average stakes last time I checked. He has an aggressive but not completely brainless style. I think I have an edge on him but I never really seemed to really get to the point where I was playing a level past him. I think that he is the worst player that I won't go out of my way to play against.
07-19-2009
, 03:30 AM
I could be wrong as to what is going on in there, I just never found much worth reading when I skimmed over it in the beginning.
07-19-2009
, 12:56 PM
07-21-2009
, 02:12 AM