I decided to reformat my blog, so that each blog is a new post and not an entirely new topic. I will cut and paste #1, and am about to post #2 - 'Increasing Your Winrate - Cutting Down on Unnecessary Plays'
Today's online poker situation is somewhat tenuous. Those who know me know that I have been a pretty steady proponent of Bovada for the balance of OK game selection and good cashouts. I've been a fan of Bovada's MTT's for a couple years now, and have been beating them for what I consider small but significant money for some time. I never really ventured into the cash games besides the occasional mess around game. The reason was always pretty simple. Online cash game players are pretty good. Even moreso after Black Friday 1/2 and above. Anyone with that amount of money to "risk" online clearly thinks they have high EV in the game. Or I guess they're really good at sportsbetting or the casino. That seemed a good enough reason for me to focus on MTT's where I considered myself to be a stronger player. However, more recently, having become somewhat bored with Bovada's tournament schedule (especially during the day and late at night) I've found myself playing more and more cash games.
For reference, I've been playing 1/2 up to 5/10 mostly 6max, but a bit of HU. At first I found myself playing a very boring game, where I was making a lot of plays that I said "were standard". Seemingly that was OK. This is online poker - the land of the standard play and +EV. It wasn't so much that I was misapplying "standard play" like maybe I would do live in a 2/5 game, but rather when playing against a table of other players who are also "playing standard" it was hard to really make money. Thus I started taking more non-standard lines: turning my game inside out. Anything that seemed pretty straight forward - I would allow an OPP to react, but I would be waiting to re-react. This is basic game theory leveling, and is what I consider to be the trademark of my game.
Here is a hand that I think really embodies the search for thin value, and involves reacting to what a "standard" aggressive play might be. The following hand comes from a 5/10 NL 6max game on Bovada. I was at this particular table because there seemed like a couple soft players (ie shortstacks), but I found myself involved with one of the 1K stacks. At this point I had only been at the table for 15 minutes, not really long enough to ascribe much of a read on our opp, except that he seemed aggressive. Could have been super good aggressive, or bad aggressive just someone who knows to bet but no idea why. Nevertheless, the information we have - that he is a 1K stack (likely a regular b/c how many of your self described amateurs or low stakes players are sitting 5/10 with 1K post BF?), and that he is aggressive will allow us to get into his head later on in the hand.
The hand is pretty straight forward, and admittedly I play it somewhat slow. Effective stacks $1050. Folds to Button (opp) who opens to 30. SB folds, I'm in the BB with AQ off, and I 3 bet to $100. Opp calls. Flop is QJ10 with 2 hearts the Q and the J of hearts. I check, and he checks behind. The turn is an off suit 2. I lead out for $120 and he calls. The river is an offsuit 3. I lead out for $250, and the button jams for $830 total (around 575 or 580 more to us).
I think everything up until the river is pretty mundane. I'll visit each street briefly. Button opens 3X, AQ is clearly WAY ahead so we can safely 3bet even oop. I check the flop (and for that matter opp checks back the flop) because we are both wary of getting check raised. This board is so coordinated that if I bet out, 100 BB deep I'm going to be forced to get it in. And I get it in versus a range of ONLY 2 pair+ and 40-45% equity combo draws - so even with AQ I'm in bad shape. Once he checks is back it's pretty clear to me that I have the best hand. I bet the turn for value, he calls. Again, if he was ahead he is probably going to raise this turn if hasn't already raised the flop. The river is where this hand actually gets interesting.
First off, I bet the river because there are A TON of hands that will check back, but will call my bet. Think KQ, AJ, KJ, Q9s, you get my point. While these are a somewhat narrow part of his range, he has narrowed his range by his play up until this point. I fully expected him to call (with KQ), and that I would find some nice thin value. However, when he shoved the river I was really really surprised. It was at this point that I started to get into the mind of our opponent. Our opponent, being at least a decent and aggressive player can also see that our hand is not that strong. We have 3 bet, but then checked. Hell in the eyes of our opp, we could even be bluffing in this spot. He picks up on our small weakness, and decides to jam. His holding is irrelevant at this point. The pressure is back on us, and anyone who has playing 2/4+ online recently knows that regs like to apply pressure in spots where its tough to call off. This would seemingly fit the bill. The flop is SO coordinated that no value hand is going to slow play even in position. So when our opp decides to apply a lot of pressure on later streets (streets that are total blanks) it is not a consistent story. AND, since our read on the situation is that we both are kind of weak (50% pot bet for thin value with thin hand) it stands to reason that maybe our opp has also read the same thing. Therefore, when he jams the next level play is to make the thin/hero call based on the above analysis.
It is my belief that a hero call like this is right/wrong based off the analysis and not results, but in this case I was right. Opp was bluffing with A10 and applying pressure when he did not think we could call. I rather like opp's line. I think it would work against most players, and even me some of the time. A short word on check/calling this river. By check calling you miss all the value from those AJ, KJ, Q9s range hands because they will surely check behind. You also let aggressive players off the hook for max value with their missed draws since while they might bluff with a missed draw (a bluff you will pick off by c/c) - a thinking aggressive player might also be willing to bluff/jam a missed draw and you can pick them off for more money. Remember, at the higher stakes, with a higher proportion of thinking players you have to be willing to think outside the box to make money! Good luck at the tables.
Queen10off's Blog 2: Increasing Your Winrate - Cutting Down on Unnecessary Plays
Today I want to discuss something that's been on my mind for several weeks now, and that is the concept of making unnecessary plays in low limit cash games. What is an "unnecessary play" you might ask? This is a difficult question to answer, because one of the most important ways to increase your hourly is to make cool, plays "outside the box". An unnecessary play is that good idea taken too far. A three barrel bluff, a huge hero call, a huge all-in move on later streets as a pure bluff/semi-bluff, a large raise or 3bet/4bet with a subpar hand because you are bored. Or any play resulting from a lack of self control.
Now the reason this is a difficult subject to discuss, is because taken in isolation every single "unnecessary play" I listed above is probably a good tool to have in your arsenal. The unnecessary part comes when the situation is not right, but you still push on and decide to pull a play deep from your playbook. Why? There is no why - plain and simple the move was unnecessary. It might work, or it might blow up in your face and you get stacked; but the play was still unnecessary. Situations where you would three barrel, or make a big hero call are aplenty in poker, but it is when you get an unfavorable river card and you still continue with the bluff that the play becomes unnecessary - and in the long run simply burning money.
Another quite common way people spew off money unnecessarily occurs at the beginning or end of a session. Many players like to gamble or take a big risk at either the beginning, the end, or both bookends of a session. This is silly. In cash games, our session is our life. We cash out, and we buy back in, but cash games are eternal as is the session that we are playing. There is no concept of "oh I've played 4 hours pretty nitty and I'm about to leave, let me just bluff at this hand to try to take one down before I go." Maybe this bluff is a good idea, but you haven't included any information about your opponents, your number of opponents, your position, the flop texture, and the likelihood of a bluff to get through. Perhaps, even though you say you've been tight, you've just gotten caught in a bluff 30 minutes ago. Does this, or any of the other factors affect the promise of this spot to make a higher variance play? Of course! So in order for you to decide whether a bluff into the 4 way pot, out of position, and on a J98ss board is a good idea, you will obviously need these variables. What if it's a 3 way pot, you're on the button and the flop is J52 rainbow?
I'm going to share a hand that I played that relates to this subject. This hand is a psycho bluff, one that I actually think is really clever; however it also falls squarely into the unnecessary category. I have just moved to a new 2/5 table late in the AM. I am way up on the night sitting with probably $3500. My opp in the new game was a younger kid (early 20s, like me). This opp had literally just doubled up as I was moving my chips over, and was now sitting about $1200 deep. My initial read on him was that he was not an online pro, that he was a normal real world kid, and that he might be playing a bit on scared money with $1200 bucks, and having just doubled up within the last 15 minutes. This read was very unsubstantiated. (BTW since I've already given away that I'm going to be making a psycho bluff in this hand, and I've already dropped like 3-5+ clues that this situation is a shitty one to bluff in, what are they?)
There are probably 6 limps for $5 including the kid utg+1, and I look at AK in the BB. I make it $35 to go. The kid from utg+1 limp rereaises to 100 straight. Every in between folds and it's back to me. For some reason I convince myself that since I have AK as blockers, and since the sizing was kind of small, that the kid could have something other than a super premium here. Maybe 99 or TT or AQ trying to not see 5 callers behind him if he is the first to flat my 35. At the very best he's making a somewhat silly play with QQ. Again, this is all unsubstantiated. It's kind of a read, but I think I'm making way too many real specific assumptions. I 5 bet to $250 thinking he cannot call. He calls. The flop comes T75 all diamonds. I do not have a diamond. I lead 300 continuing my aces story. He thinks for about 90 seconds and calls. The turn pairs the 7, and I don't waste too much time putting him all in for his last $650. I reason that if he has any of those real overpairs without a diamond, I can probably win. Even if he does have something reasonable with a diamond QdQ, JdJ I've told a really really believable "I have aces" story. Opp tanks for several minutes, and after about 3 minutes flashes me KdK. He continues to think through the hand kind of out loud (he was only 2 seats away), really considering me on aces. About 6 minutes in someone calls the clock, and he times to about 8-10 seconds and calls. I don't hit.
So this hand exists somewhere between 'psycho bluff that I kind of like gone wrong' and the wholly unnecessary. I make like 5 assumptions above, and literally all of them turn out to be wrong in this case. In fact, the hand plays remarkably obvious, especially with regard to what opp has, and I lose probably $1000 more than I should have. The reason I keep saying that I kind of like it is because this opp turned out to be a solid online HUSNG pro, and he took 6+ minutes to call it off with KdK on a ddd board. Clearly I told a decently convincing story, and after when we became friends he confirmed this saying that with kings AND the diamond he couldn't fold. If he had had one or the other he said could have found a fold. OK cool whatever.
Regardless, I believe this hand was entirely unnecessary and should just never have taken place. If I had picked up on the 5+ cues above that this a shitty bluffing spot then I could have saved myself said $1000. In order to pick a perfect spot for this type of psycho bluff to work, literally all the planets need to line up and all the variables must be perfect. They are not here. In no particular order: I have just moved to the table, not only do I have no read on opp or history with opp, opps will have no read on me and I could be viewed as more of a loose cannon than I actually am. Opp I tried to bluff was young and wearing a hoodie; for some reason I still thought he was scared money. He was not. Not only do I make a cold read that is unsubstantiated, it goes counter to several of the things I said I follow in my blogs on cold reading and using little bits of information. I was up huge on the night (about $2500 probably). While some people like to push high variance plays when they're winning, I would probably not choose this session to do that because I am already up so much that it seems just greedy. Opp limp/rereaised which is usually a red flag for KK or AA only. For some reason I ignore this and give opp the one hand he can have that I do well against. And last, once he calls the flop I should probably realize that he has a real hand, and give up on the turn. I'm sure there are more too...
Lastly, as the title indicates, I believe that cutting down on unnecessary plays can drastically increase your winrate. How you might ask, since the only thing I've discussed in this blog is not making plays that make you money? It is an addition but not subtracting. By not leaking off some of your wins, aka losing money that have already won and put in your stack as profit, you can increase your winrate. You can cash out a higher % of the actual profit you have made in your session. You will not leak off $200 right before you stand up and cash out. Instead of firing 3 barrels, you will fire 1 barrel and give up. Instead of hero-ing, you will wait an hour for a spot that you can clearly value-town the same guy. All of this is SUPER prevalent in 1/2 and 2/5, where players are less willing to acquiesce to the play you have made, and where players really aren't willing to fold top pair. The more you cut down on these unnecessary spews, the fewer little losing hands you will have in your session, the higher your winrate will be at the end of the day!
when you take articles out of magazines.does it feel more original.or less original. some of the info is solid.most of thr play is substandard. glad it worked for you .you rule for a minute.have fun,later.
when you take articles out of magazines.does it feel more original.or less original. some of the info is solid.most of thr play is substandard. glad it worked for you .you rule for a minute.have fun,later.
I'd love for you to elaborate on this as this isn't the normal tone of an AVP response. I personally know Jay and can say that I think he plays extremely well. I haven't read this blog yet but had to comment on your post here as it seems quite condescending. Would love to hear your thoughts as to why you made those off the wall comment.
when you take articles out of magazines.does it feel more original.or less original. some of the info is solid.most of thr play is substandard. glad it worked for you .you rule for a minute.have fun,later.
Yea I don't really get what you're saying here either. I would agree that most of the play in mainstream poker media is substandard with some solid bits of info. Both of these blogs are clearly about non-standard hands that I believe challenge the standard conventions. I also think they have takeaways either good or bad as discussed. What were your thoughts?
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 3:30 pm Posts: 334 Location: Las Vegas, NV
Good read, and info! I've been runnin some of my past hands through my head and trying to fix these leaks you describe. I do tend to get gambly near the end of a session, and it has cost me dearly, at times. Thanks for giving me something to think about.
_________________ Yo Soy Mas Guapo Que Burro Con Sombrero
lol.on purpose.if you can extrapolate the information from the posts ,which surpass the bottom line of the article; there is much knowledge to be gained.staying diametrically apposed to all of the other players; consistently, enhances your ability to profit from any poker format. intrerpret,react; attact. hole up out of position in most arenas, and always have a flexible plan when joining any game. have fun.later.
Ok. Fair enough. I thought he was accusing Jay of plagiarism which makes no sense because I was there when the hand in question happened and a lot of the blog is info from him and I talking about it. Now that that's been cleared up, while I still form fully understand what wild manner is saying I respect his opinion
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 3 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
but as to wildmanner all his posts are like that kind of run on nonsensical almost like a bot posts