Post Session Review: 7/19/24

Pre-Session Goals:
1) No Angry Outbursts (tilt control) -- success
2) Check Stack Depths of all opponent's before making final preflop decision -- success

In terms of process, this was a great session. Despite taking some bad beats and going down big about halfway through the session, I maintained my composure and focus. I didn't slide back from my A-Game.

In terms of results, this was a pretty brutal session. I don't know if other people are like me, but I often have very swingy sessions. It isn't uncommon for me to have a +5 buy-in day... or a -5 buy-in day. Today, well, today was a -7 buy-in day, unfortunately.

As crazy as this sounds, I don't feel I played poorly. It just felt like I got screwed, hard, by variance today. I lost preflop all-ins with KK vs AA and QQ vs KK in late position. I 3b BTN from the SB with AKs and they shoved with ~150bb stacks. I had to call and I lost the flip to QQ. I lost another 150bb pot with JT on a QQ89K runout. I called three barrels and they had quad queens.

Because I play at night, when I figure most recreationals are off of work and the games are best, I save in-depth hand reviews for the next morning. I don't want to stay up studying hands and mess up my sleep routine. Anyways, I always upload my 2000 hand sample to GTO Wizard and then I look at every single pot that made it to post-flop to see where were there errors. Tomorrow morning, after my review, I'll post any insights or takeaways from that study session. Again though, at a quick glance, GTO Wizard seems to agree that I only made a significant error in one all-in pot today. It can be frustrating to lose so big when you feel you're "doing everything right", but, hey, that's poker. I have to try to keep getting better.

These are very typical numbers for me. I usually settle right around 95-96% "correct" moves with an average EV loss of 0.03. If anyone else uses this tool, it'd be interesting to hear if that's complete shit or not. I feel extremely lucky that, compared to past generations, I can always quickly find out if I played something correctly or not. The GTOW Analyzer is an awesome tool.

Anyways, that's all for tonight. I'll be back tomorrow morning with my session review insights and analysis of at least one key hand.

Good luck this weekend at the tables, y'all.

Have a good one!

~Orca

Hand Analysis of 7/19/24 5NL Session on ACR:

Well, the GTOW analysis basically confirmed my suspicions: I played well and got owned by variance in this one. In the 2000 hand sample, I only had ten total hands where I lost more than 1 EV with mistakes. I only had one hand where I lost more than 2 EV and it is the following hand:

1) Preflop
a) BTN opens 2.5bb with 7h6h
b) I 3bet from BB to 13bb with Kd6d
c) BTN calls

2) Flop comes JhTh6c.
a) I bet 50% pot.
i) This was my first mistake. GTO Wizard uses this size only 3.6% of the time. It prefers to bet 75% here.
b) BTN calls bringing the pot to ~52bb.

3) Turn comes 9d making the board: Jh Th 6c 9d.

a) I check.
i) This is a -0.8 EV mistake. I should never check here with bottom pair, an over, and a gut shot on a board where a good deal of range is draws.
ii) If you bet 75% on the flop, GTO Wizard prefers to jam here for 101% pot 93% of the time. If I take that line, Villain very likely folds 76s.
iii) As played with a 50% flop bet, GTOW follows up with a 50% turn bet 100% of the time.
b) Villain bets 75% pot with his bottom pair and flush draw.
c) I call bringing the pot to ~129bb
i) Calling is a -17.5 EV mistake. GTOW folds almost 100% of the time with something 0.2% call and 0.8% jam. Yikes! Obviously, in retrospect, I should never be checking back this hand in this situation to begin with. Calling is almost besides the point because I should never have been in that spot to begin with.

4) River comes Ah making the board: Jh Th 6c 9d Ah
a) I lead jam all-in 35bb for 26% pot.
i) If you take the 50/50 line then GTOW prefers to mix between 15% check, 45% bet 10%, and 40% jam.
ii) As played, because I am literally never supposed to have Kd6d in this spot, there isn't any EV analysis for the line taken. GTOW is never jamming other 6s here unless they are two pair (J6s and 96s). We can surmise I wasn't supposed to jam here. My thinking for this jam was along the following lines; first, the A is a major scare card for any top pair hands he's played this way and, secondly, I could've taken this exact line with a flush. GTOW prefers this line with many of the flushes in my range. If he doesn't have a flush of his own here, he's going to fold many holdings, I think.
b) Villain calls and wins the pot with his flush.

My major takeaways for this session are as follows:
1) I need to brush up on BB vs SB/BTN 3bet pots. Ranges are wider and I'm not as confident as I need to be with my cbetting and turn barrel frequencies. In retrospect, it is obvious I should never be missing a barrel here with a gutshot, pair, and an over in a spot where ranges are as wide as they are BB vs BTN. I made one or two other much smaller mistakes with missing cbets in BB vs SB pots which is why I'm lumping those two things together. I'll do some drilling in these spots during my training session later today.

2) This has nothing to do with what I've discussed so far, but it is nonetheless an ongoing theme in my play: as I've gotten more and more proficient with 100bb deep play, I've started to accumulate bigger stacks on many of the tables I'm at... at least at some point. Because 95-99% of my GTOW drilling, training, and studying is for 100bb deep play, there is a strong tendency for me to play 150-200bb situations almost exactly how I'd play 100bb situations except that I size up the bets. That doesn't work. Ranges are wider and can contain more nutty, trapped hands in 150-200bb spots. I can't be as willing to get it in with top pairs. I need to spend more time studying 150-200bb spots so that I stop building stacks and then spewing them off calling down too lightly in deep stacked 3b/4b pots.

I'll be back tonight with a quick session overview of tonight's results. Tomorrow, I'll do another deeper review and analysis. That's generally what my process is each and every day that I play.

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/19/24 Training Review

As part of my daily studying and training, after I review the previous hands session with the GTOW Analyzer, I watch a few training videos and then spend time drilling using the GTOW Trainer.

I'm new to RIO so I'm still in the "Getting Started Section". Today I watched:

1) A Systematic Process for Strategy Development
This one was solid. I'm already doing everything suggested in the video so that was both validating and a nice confirmation that I'm on the right track.

2) Designing Preflop Ranges
This video was released in 2014 before the advent of PioSolver. I am trying to push myself to understand the underlying math behind GTO concepts because I know that the process to building balanced ranges manually is crucial to understanding how to exploit and make adjustments versus non-GTO opponents. This is still a VERY weak area of mine and I will do more to address this in the future. Currently, I'm still focusing more on just getting an intuitive sense of what the equilibrium strategy looks like, but I fully plan to invest more time and resources to understanding Poker Math in the future.

3) Top 5 Tips for Microstakes Players
Watching this video made me realize that I made a huge mistake a few months ago. I started doing all of my GTOW Training using 500NL rake because the preflop ranges seemed to much better match how my opponents were actually playing. I foolishly, and arrogantly, assumed that the competition at 5NL would be so weak that a good reg could still easily beat the stake playing "wider than they are supposed to". While that may be the case for some, it clearly isn't for me. I disliked the preflop all-in variance introduced by using the 50NL preflop ranges and decision tree, but it is also VERY clear that my win rate dramatically decreased when I switched to the 500NL ranges a few months ago.

Long story short: I'm switching back to ensuring all my training is done on the 50NL ranges/game tree going forward. I am also going to start opening to 2.5x to further tighten my ranges and limit how much I pay in rake. I'm going to use the GTOW "smaller" 3bet size as well to increase my 3bet frequency, end more hands preflop, and play bigger pots against identified recreationals. This isn't a huge difference but it does decrease the 3bet size by 1-2bb and this results in an increase of 1-2% 3bet frequency depending on the spot.

I think these changes should yield IMMEDIATE dividends. In the comments on the video, someone mentioned that the impact of rake can often be 10bb+ at these stakes. I knew that, but, for some reason, I had pushed it out of my mind. It always bothered me that I seemed to be one of the best players at every 5NL table I sit at and yet I'm an overwhelmingly losing player at the stake. I think this is one of the biggest reasons why. My current strategy can't beat this rake. I think this could be a game changer for my win rate.

As far as GTOW Training, I only managed a few hundred hands against the trainer today. I usually play north of a thousand per day. One of my dogs required a trip to the vet due to a nasty, nasty hot spot she's developed. I'm glad it is taken care of, but I do normally do more training than that. Today's training was focused entirely on retraining myself to use the 50NL preflop ranges. I also ran a few dozen full hands practicing BB vs BTN 3bets as I said I would in the last post, but it was mostly just drilling preflop spots.

That's all for today's training/study review. I'll be back tonight with a very short overview of how my session goes.

7/20/24 Results for 5NL on ACR

Orcamania ran wild today, lmao.

I got all seven of those buy-ins back and a little bit more. I won a 50bb pot as my last hand of the day and I clicked out of the window before PT4 could log the hand.

My pre-session goals were only two-fold:

Session Goal 1) No angry outbursts. Control tilt.
This is super easy to do when you're up five buy-ins the entire session. Nevertheless, success.

Session Goal 2) Switch back to GTOW 50NL ranges.
I know not to get too excited over one session because, well, variance. However, this was absolutely a game changer. The amount of marginal, difficult to defend 3bet pots that I was in was practically zero today. Playing tighter is simply much easier. Even reducing my VPIP by just ~2 points resulted in so many less hands that six tabling felt too slow. There were times were I was literally fiddling around with my actual, human-flesh hands because I wasn't in any action on any of the six boards. I watched interesting hands on the other tables, but it was just so much easier to play this way. Let's see if it wasn't just variance giving me a gift. That said, I really do believe switching back to the tighter 50NL ranges versus the 500NL ranges I was using is a long-term game-changer. Again, I definitely don't want to get my hopes up off of one session, but I've never been more bullish on my ability to beat 5NL in the near future as I am right now.

I'll be back tomorrow morning with results of my GTOW Analyzer review of the full 2000 hand session. I'll go into more depth on at least one hand that I feel has the most value to my improvement going forward.

Hand Analysis of 7/20/24 5NL Session on ACR:

I made more mistakes in this session than the last but there are really only a few worth talking about.

Here's hand one:

Preflop: Hero defends A8s in the BB against CO 2.5x open.
Flop: 752r, Check / Check
Turn: 7526fd spades, Hero overbets 175% pot, Villain raises 50% pot, Hero Calls:
River: 75269, spade flush completes. Hero Checks. Villains Jams. Hero Calls.
Villain wins with K high flush draw, Hero loses with 9 high straight

The first mistake I made here was overbetting the turn. I don't think this is an egregious mistake as it only cost me .03 EV, but the reality is that this overbet doesn't make sense against CO's wider SRP range. CO has the straights here as do I. The solver checks here 55% of the time and prefers 50% pot when it does bet.

The BIG mistake was calling the turn raise. Villain took a really long time to think about it and used his entire time bank. I know I shouldn't put a lot of stock into timing tells because players can be playing multiple boards online and the timing may have nothing to do with what is going on on the current board. However, I was playing every single open table at 5NL (lol) and I knew this particular player was a recreational playing only one table. Nevertheless, this is not a call.

Even though I was ahead at the time of the call, what is Villain actually raising with here? According to the solver, he's only raising completed straights and combo draws so I'm basically just drawing dead against GTO. I thought the raising range of the actual player was much wider here. Technically, I was correct as he raised with me an unpaired KTss flush draw.

I made the river call because I thought there was a good chance Villain was jamming a set, two pair, or a paired hand with a good spade blocker. I thought Villain could also have the same straight. I didn't give him much credit for having a naked flush draw when he raised that turn. Wrong.

Against the recreational 5NL players, you have to be very careful calling jams as the population rarely has enough bluffs in any spot -- especially a spot where multiple draws have completed. While the solver absolutely hates the river call (-10 EV, yikes), I feel my biggest mistake was calling that turn raise. Even though in this one case he was actually much weaker than he should be with that raise, I'm going to get owned calling that in these spots quite often. I've called ~3 of these in the past two or three sessions and every single one was incorrect. That, ladies and gents, is what we call a leak. So, my biggest take away from this one is to make sure I'm folding my draws when a turn overbet gets raised... unless my equity is just massive. This wasn't one of those cases. This was an unpaired open ender on a flush draw board where the straight had already completed and villain had the straight in his range. The turn was a 100% fold.

Hand Two:

Preflop: Villain raises to 3bb from SB with 65s, Hero 3bets to 10bb with J9o, Villain Calls. Effective stacks are 275bb.
Flop: Q98r, Villain Checks, Hero Checks
Turn: Q986fd clubs, Villian Bets 75% pot, Hero Calls
River: Q986Q, Villain Bets 100% Pot, Hero Calls
Hero wins 190bb pot with two pair 9s and Qs

This was a really tough spot for me. I ended up using my entire time bank on the river decision. I have done no with work with 300bb deep solver solutions. Zero.

With this board, the JT straight is complete which I'm blocking. Villain should not have 75s in his range, but he does have T7s. So, there are a couple of missed gutshots with straight blockers that he could be bluffing with such as AT and KT. However, I'm also blocking the missed club flush draw as I'm holding the Jc. I think that's largely a negative as I'd want him to be bluffing with a missed club flush here.

What is villain bluffing with here? What is villain representing?

I think he's largely representing a Q. The thing is that betting pattern just didn't make sense to me. The weakest queens he has in his range are mostly Q8 and Q9 which are both full houses. I think you'd want to bet those larger to get maximum value from straights and any Q holdings your opponent has. QT is a real possibility. KQo and AQo are also possible but 100%+ bets are just going to generate folds from everything other than a weak queen or hands that are better. As a human, I probably don't check back a queen on the flop very often here. If he has a queen, I think most human players are probably sizing down trying to get value from pocket JJ/TT or a 9. Against humans, an overbet with AQo or KQo is likely only getting called down by straights, boats, and similarly strong Qs. I don't know if you get called enough by weaker hands.

Ultimately, my instinct was that Villain just threw a pot sized bet in there because he didn't know what else to do. It felt like an attempt to buy the pot. Assuming 200bb stacks (though we are 300bb deep), the solver mainly uses 150% sizing here at 45% frequency and it uses 85% only 6% of the time. That seems to lend some credence to my line of thinking in terms of the bet sizing just not making sense.

The solver definitely disagrees with my call, though. With an EV loss of 0.27, the solver only calls an 85% pot bet here with my J9o 0.8% of the time. In reality, that probably means it never calls and that ~1% is just an artifact of the solution being imperfect due to the amount of time it was left to run. Considering the size was pot instead of 85%, it looks like this is a fold in solver land.

I'm still not really sure if I played this correctly even after analyzing it. In the future, I would fold here. In the end, we are super deep, it is blind vs blind, and he's representing a queen when there are only two left in the deck. I have the highest pair on the board outside of the paired queens. The player was a "good reg" compared to other 5NL players. I gave him credit for having creative bluffs here. I went ahead and made the call. In this case, I happened to guess right.

Study Session Takeaways:
1) Improve Turn Play with Draws
Less aggression on the turn with weak draws, MORE aggression with combo draws! The frequency of raising a turn barrel when you pick up a combo draw on the turn is often like 75%+ or higher. I need to do a better job of raising those more consistently rather than calling and hoping to hit my draw. I can stand to reduce the frequency of turn overbetting with straight draws and gutshots -- ESPECIALLY on boards where those hands might not end up being the nuts even if they hit.

2) Keep practicing the tighter 50NL preflop ranges!
Again, this was a game changer. I need to make sure this change sticks.

3) More work is needed with deep stacks (150bb/200bb+)
I need daily reps in the GTOW Trainer at these depths. My 100bb play is far beyond my skill at 150/200bb that it is becoming a problem. I cannot spew off the stacks I build making 100bb plays at 200bb depths. The spots don't work the same. I need more drilling here. A deeper understanding of how the SPR influences aggression is needed. This is an easy fix. I just need a few dozen hours looking at the solves and using the trainer. Nevertheless, the time must be put in.

4) In 3bet pots, size down the bets on double and triple broadway textures
These are very dangerous boards even when you have a strong top pair or a two pair that doesn't involve the high card. There are many straights and better two pairs and this is especially true when early positions are involved. 20% is usually the cbet size and the 50-75% turn bets are much, much less frequent. I know this but I seem to forget in game so it bears repeating over and over again.

Well, that's that for the morning-after session review. Next up on my agenda is the gym followed by some RIO videos and GTOW Trainer reps.

Have a good one,
~Orca

Nice journal. Keep at it! Good luck with the grind.

7/21/24 Study Notes:

Today's RIO Videos...

1) A Rational Preflop Guide
This video was created before solvers completely solved preflop. However, believe it or not, these are the type of videos that greatly influenced my decision to sign-up at RIO. I have done almost nothing but mass-consume solves by playing against the GTOW Trainer. This has left me with an incredibly strong intuitive sense of what the equilibrium play should look like in any given spot compared to other players who have been playing for less than a year (especially for 100bb stacks). I’ve likely already put in more than 1000 hours of solver training. If it isn’t quite that high, it is pretty close. That said, what I absolutely suck at is understanding the baseline theory, exploitation, and making adjustments to player types. I don’t need anyone walking me through solves. While it is sometimes useful to dive into a specific spot very deeply, I’ve done a lot of that. I’ve already formulated a lot my own heuristics that I think are working quite effectively. What I haven’t done, like at all, is attempt to exploit other players. I don’t even use a HUD beyond having a RNG on my screen. Yeah, I know. I need to fix that. And it is on my list. Point being: I am highly intrigued by any video that is more conceptual in nature so that I can begin to understand how better to deviate from equilibrium when trying to make exploits.

2) Constructing BB Defense Ranges
I have very similar thoughts on this as I did on the video above. I already know WHAT to do in most cases because solver trainers are extremely effective in drilling proper ranges at this point. Understanding WHY is the weak link for me right now and any work I can do to improve the depth of my understanding is going to allow for profitable deviations where applicable. Again, that’s a huge focus of my study right now.

3) Three Types of Three Bet Ranges
I found this video very useful for understanding the point of all the different kinds of holdings in your three-bet range. Most poignantly: it is key to remember that if fold equity is lower than it should be at equilibrium because you’re facing a sticky player, you may want to consider making your 3bet range versus them more linear. Versus players who fold too often to three bets, you can consider expanding the numbers of hands that are used as three-bets especially particularly weak hands that don’t really want to see a flop.

Right now, I'm capping myself at three videos per day. I typically watch these at 1.25-1.5x speed depending on the speaker (their natural pace, the quality of their sound equipment, and whether or not English is the first language). I find it has zero impact on my comprehension and it sometimes even increases it because I can get a little bored when people don't talk as fast as I'm used to.

7/21/24 GTOW Trainer Notes"
Settings: Hands Played at Setting
Full Hand, 100bb, 2.5x Open, Smaller 3 Bet: 420 hands
Full Hand, 150bb or 200b, GTO Open and 3 Bet: 420 hands

Study Time Evaluation

I spent roughly 5.5 hours studying today. I'll end up playing for 4 hours with a ~30 minute warm-up (Primed Mind Audio + ~50 Full Hands in GTOW Trainer). The breakdown of the ten hours I've invested into Poker today are as follows:

Prior Session Review: 3 hours
Video Training Content: 1.5 hours
GTOW Trainer: 1.5 hours
Warm-Up + Session: 4.5 hours

I really don't think that's optimal. I think it should look more like this:

Prior Session Review: 1.5 hours
Video Training Content: 1.0 hours
GTOW Trainer: 2.0-2.5 hours
Warm-Up + Session: 4.5-5.0 hours

Here's what I'll do going forward:
1) Limit video consumption to two videos per day instead of 3. Simple.
2) Limit prior session review to something like my ~100 biggest pots and my ~100 biggest EV mistakes rather than reviewing every single post flop hand. I'll also limit my write-up time to include only one in-depth hand analysis per day.

I'm going to take a short break to let my mind recharge from studying and then it is onto tonight's session.

Until then...

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/21/24 5NL Session on ACR

Well, today brought things screeching back to earth: -426bb in 2007 hands.

Pre-Session Goals:
1) No Angry Outbursts -- FAIL
At the peak of my frustration, I had a full blown monkey tilt moment and hurled a mini-rubix cube against the wall and shattered it into pieces. Sadly, humpty dumpty definitely could not be put back together again by his men.

While I can laugh about stuff like this after the fact, it isn't cute and I'm not proud of it. I play significantly worse when I get this mad and I believe it is a huge contributor to why my losing sessions often spin out of control and I end up losing 5-10 buyins instead of 2-3.

However, my biggest motivator for stopping this nonsense is that it terrifies my dogs. I am never angry in normal life so when one of my dogs sees me like this, he literally cowers in a corner and long, icicle-like slobber formations start drooling out of his mouth. It's a bit heartbreaking and it is entirely shameful that I subject him to that kind of fear. So, again, beyond the obvious negative impacts on my play, this is just not acceptable. I cannot tolerate this behavior from myself.

I didn't expect a week of meditation to fix all my tilt issues but I need to consider some other techniques. I've heard of other players taking hourly breaks to help prevent tilt buildup and I think this could be an effective strategy for me. I need to look into how long you can sit out on an ACR table without losing your seat. I'd guess that it is in the 5 minute region or so? That seems reasonable for an anti-tilt break.

2) Check All Stack Depths before finalizing preflop decisions -- JURY'S OUT
I don't remember doing a good job of this so I probably didn't. I'll have to see what comes up in tomorrow morning's session review.

3) Stick to tighter 50NL GTOW Ranges -- SUCCESS
Despite today's results, I'm still feeling extremely confident that this will have a major impact on my winrate.

Final Thoughts:
Overall, I'm not going to lie, this one really stung for some reason. Normally, a bad session rolls of my shoulders like nothing. Hell, you have to build up SOME level of resistance to it when you're down close to 100 buy-ins life-time at 5-freaking-NL. That said, I think deep down that I thought I was about to start a magical run where I finally broke out of 5NL in the next couple of weeks. When that expectation was dashed pretty quickly, and the bad beats started piling up, some of the negative emotions that I haven't dealt with at all in the past week or two started to come back, too. This all just means there is more internal, mental game work to do and that I need to do a better job of framing my expectations within the reality of variance.

Nevertheless, this guy needs to make an appearance here:

lol. I'll probably find some degree of relief when I look over the session tomorrow and see what correctable errors there were. Compared to that -7 Buy-In session two days ago, I played much worse today. I know that for a fact. However, I still ran into the nuts a lot. I got stacked nine times today. NINE. Nine. nine...

Nothing to do but keep getting better and keep moving forward!

Have a good one,
~Orca

As a brief aside, before I get into the review, I do want to mention that I rarely sit down and read physical books. I make use of a concept that I stol--, err, "learned" from Tony Robbins called No Extra Time (NET). Almost all humans in the western world, spend anywhere from 1-5 hours per day doing chores that are essentially mindless: driving, showering, brushing your teeth, walking the dog, cooking, cleaning, or, and saving the best for last, taking a dump. If you make the habit of listening to a book or a podcast instead of twiddling your thumbs during these periods, it can often be the difference between "reading" 0-2 books per year and listening to 50-100+. After a while, you can even get used to listening to books at 1.25-2.5x speed and that can often sky rocket you into exclusively club of individuals who "read" hundreds of books per year.

I've had an Audible subscription (Amazon's Audiobook Store) for more than ten years and I find NET an invaluable practice for becoming a more learned individual. The subscription costs anywhere from $20-$40 and you'll get multiple credits each month that you can exchange for a book of your choosing. There are many, many books that come free with your membership as well. If you're not already a member, I'd highly recommend signing up. I am obviously not paid to endorse Audible and you'll find no affiliate link in this post. This is a genuine recommendation.

Poker Book Review #1:

Poker with Presence by Jason Su

Going forward, in these posts, I'm going to endeavor to write with brevity.

If you're already presold on the usefulness of mindfulness for Poker, this will be an excellent read for you -- particularly if you're a live player. The book offers concrete, actionable exercises that you can use while actually sitting at the table. Even as someone who first learned of Eastern philosophy and meditation almost fifteen years ago, there were exercises presented that I hadn't heard of such as "creative joint play".

In general, I consider the exercises and advice presented in the book far more applicable to live poker than online poker. For one, the amount of decisions you have to make per minute is so significantly higher when playing online that the pace becomes extremely dissimilar to what Su calls "presencing". If you've ever meditated, whether that be sitting, walking, eating, object concentration, or any other form, the only thing with great potential for rapidity is your rate of thinking. When playing online poker, you're doing something far more akin to playing StarCraft than you are doing something akin to watching your breathing.

Secondly, the amount of information you can pick up via tells in a live setting is obviously fundamentally different than online where you're essentially limited to timing tells. You cannot
"see" your opponent when playing online. In some cases, I still personally find timing tells, or manipulating my own timing to project that my decision is more difficult or easier than it really is, to be useful. However, there can really be no argument that "reading your opponent" via body language is a skill far more applicable to the live game. I have absolutely zero doubt that being more present, more mindful, vastly increases your ability to pick up on, and use, these tells effectively.

All in all, if you play any amount of live poker, and you've already been presold on the value of mindfulness and meditation to your poker game, I think this is an excellent read/listen and well worth the two-hour investment of your time. If you've yet to be sold on the value of mindfulness, and it sounds like spiritual woo-woo nonsense, I'd recommend starting with Painless Poker by Tommy Angelo instead. If you play exclusively online, I don't think you'll get a big payoff from reading this book.

Next up on my reading list:

This one has a 12-hour run-time so I won't be back with a review on it for a good week or so. I don't listen to Poker books at faster than 1x speed due to the technical nature of the content.

Until next time...

Have a good one,
~Orca

Post Session Review #3: 7/21/24 5NL on ACR

One quick note: GTOW Analyzer automatically defaults to using 500NL Rake ranges when I play 5NL. I have no idea why, but on hands that it flags, or that I flag, I have to manually open the solve and switch to 50NL rake solutions. So... these analyses aren't 100% correct. Obviously, I think the tool is still super useful.

As anticipated, I did make some horrific blunders. The reason for that average -0.63 EV loss on Table Vidalia is that I did not call down top set on a straight-complete board.

Puts on Helmouth Mask

I had a read, man. White magic, baby.

Uh, yeah. Gotta call that down. I don't see the point in actually analyzing this; it's just a plain 'ole blunder. I had run into the nuts multiple times in this session and I made a scared fold. Pretty simple.

However, THIS is...

The Hand of The Day:

Preflop: Hero is in the HJ and opens to 2.5x, Villain is the BB and calls with AQs.

Here comes the flop:

I flop the nut straight and a straight flush draw. I bet 33% pot which the solver agrees is the primary size to take. Villain calls with two overs and a gutshot to the nut straight.

Here comes the turn:

The turn brings the K of hearts which now means I have the second nut straight and villain now has the nut straight...

Villain leads 50% pot and alarm bells start going off in my head. This is a recreational player. They only open to 4-5x when RFI'ing, for example. Leading for 50% pot here isn't really a thing in the solver.

What is a recreational player actually bluffing with? Probably nothing. He MIGHT do this with a A or J that has a gutshot and some additional equity to back it up. However, the vast majority of the time he does this, it is because he just made a hand that connected with that K. So what connects with that K?

AQ straights. He should have some of those because this is HJ vs BB and he should be protecting his range. The solver flats AQo 75% of the time here and it even flats AQs 40% of the time. In game, I heavily discounted the suited options assuming that most humans, especially recreationals, aren't going to be able to resist 3betting that holding most of the time (wrong, lol).

What else can he have? Strong K two pairs are a very likely option. I'm well ahead of those. I don't think he does this with many flush draws because he could've just raised the flop if he wanted to play those aggressively. This can potentially be a panick lead with a set that is now looking at an extremely wet board. Again though, I think many of those raise the flop or try to check raise the turn. A 50% donk here from a recreational screams "I have a hand that doesn't want to miss value".

I raise 100% pot which the solver never does. My thinking here was that there were many river cards that could scare off a two-pair holding and I should try to get value now when he's still likely willing to play for stacks. However, this sizing could easily scare those hands off and cause me to miss value especially if the river is a blank and I've just folded him out on the turn. The biggest problem, though, is that I'm essentially just hoping that this isn't AQ.

Villain raises me right back 50% pot. At this point, as played, the vast majority of his range is just going to be AQ. I have too much equity to fold and I should just call to see the river.

The solver only takes something similar to villain's line with the nut straight, combo draws using the Q of diamonds (which I have), and nut flush draws. If I think the nut flush draws are unlikely from this rec, and I had already decided they were, his range is compromised almost entirely of AQ and hands that he's badly, badly overplaying.

Do I call and see the river? No. I cross my fingers, pray, and throw in a "hope shove" (a -15 EV shove). Wrong answer.

Final Result: get stacked by the nut straight.

Now, one thing I do need to note here, is that the river came back 2c. If Villain shoves there, I'm still supposed to make a 0.77 EV bluff catch. Still, that's not the point.

I think the main thing I can learn from hands like this is to not overplay my holdings against recreational players who almost always lack enough bluffs. I could have pot controlled the turn and just called. If he shoves for ~300% pot on the river, I'm supposed to call 75% of the time and fold 25% of the time. Against 5NL recs, you just fold those spots. You exploitatively fold every single one that isn't a pure call (unless you've profiled a maniac). They just don't have enough bluffs. This is the single weakest part of my game: making exploitatively adjustments versus recreationals. In particular, I NEED to be better about finding the effing fold button in river spots that are supposed to be mixed actions at equilibrium.

Everyone repeat after me:

The 5NL Player pool... does not have enough river bluffs. The 5NL
player pool... does NOT!!! have enough river bluffs.

Review Session #3 Takeaways:

1) Three-Straight Boards: eg JT9
If there are three cards to a straight, eg JT9, and you have the low card to complete an open an ender, eg 8, you have to treat this more like a gutshot than an open ender in terms of value. The reason for this is because it is very possible that half of your outs dead. If the Q comes, you have the straight, but a K holding for villain isn’t unlikely. The reverse-implied odds are quite bad in these scenarios. Don’t raise these like a normal open-ender.

2) Stop using 33% on the River when IP
Enough said. For God’s Sake, I don’t know how many reminders I need for this. The solver will almost always use 50-85% in SRPs when betting for thin value IP on the river.

*3) Exploitatively Fold MORE OFTEN to River All-Ins
The 5NL player pools does not have enough bluffs in these spots. If the hand is a mixed action hand in the solver, it is likely a pure fold unless you're up against a very good reg.

That's all for today. I'm off to the gym and then it is back to the grind of studying RIO videos and putting in the reps on the GTOW Trainer.

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/21/24 RIO Video Study #3:

1) What Would You Do?
This is an interesting video format. I think the actual examples may be a little out of date considering this video is about ten years old, but the game itself is highly valuable. Most of my training is just exactly this: a) fire up the GTOW Trainer and b) play what would you do with instant feedback.

2) Math You Should Know: Variance
Good refresher on variance!

7/21/24 GTOW Training Overview:

1) 2.5x Open, Smaller 3 Bet Size, 100bb depth: ~500 full hands
2) GTO Open, GTO 3 Bet Size, 150bb depth: ~450 full hands
3) GTO Open, GTO 3 Bet Size, 200bb depth: ~400 full hands
These numbers include folds

I am much happier with the distribution of my study time today as it went something like this:
1) Morning-After Session Review: ~2.5 hours
2) RIO Video Study: ~1 hour
3) GTOW Trainer: ~2 hours

I am still, perhaps, spending a bit too much time on my morning session review because of the added time doing a write-up. I will be much tighter with my focus for each hand that I go into greater depth on moving forward. As a reminder to myself, I also need to keep that to one, singular hand. Each in-depth hand review, can easily balloon into the 30-45 minute territory and that probably isn't an efficient use of study time.

I need a short break to recharge my mental batteries and then I'll begin my evening session against the 5NL ACR player pool.

Until next time...

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/22/24 5NL Session on ACR Results:

+365bb in 2005 hands. A little bit of a bounce back for ya boi!

Pre-Session Goals:
1) No Angry Outbursts -- SUCCESS
I was just absolutely in the zone for the first three hours of this session. I felt it waning towards the end as my energy began to slip. Not surprisingly, I was down about a buy-in across that last hour, too. If I can find a way to get into the zone and maintain it for full sessions, I'll be so much better off as a player. I plan to continue to invest in a daily meditation practice, as well as continue to use the Primed Mind pre-session audios, to help improve my ability to get into, and maintain, peak performance.

2) Check Stack Depths before finalizing preflop decisions! -- SUCCESS
Having to shove to AKo so often due to the rake is bad enough, but it is even worse when you do it in a spot you're not supposed to and lose the flip. I'm glad I've mostly put that behind me. I did have one spot where someone shoved for 250bb that I folded KNOWING the charts would've had me call. I just couldn't do it. I didn't miss my other opportunities. The biggest source of variance in my sessions in this rake environment is whether or not I win those damn AK preflop shoves.

3) Stick to Tighter 50NL Ranges -- SUCCESS
This is just such a game changer. I'm playing far fewer hands and I rarely get into the marginal and/or super tough spots that I was getting into all the time with the 500NL ranges. It makes me wonder how extreme the ranges would be if they were actually solved for 10NL rake. Uh, tight is right or something like that, yeah?

Final Thoughts on the Session:
This was a great session. I've won more before, but I'm not sure I've ever played a session where I didn't make a single mistake for three hours straight. That is what this session felt like. I'm sure I'll check the GTOW Analyzer and find plenty of EV losses, but I really don't think I'll find a bunch of big ones. I might not find any from the first three hours. I truly felt like I was nailing EVERYTHING. I can't recall a spot I was even unsure about in those first three hours.

That brings me to another point that I've been considering: I want to up the number of tables I'm playing. I still think 10-12 is out of reach for me, but, with the reduced VPIP I'm playing with, six is honestly quite slow at times. I feel like things are moving in slow motion. Even my GTOW 4-table training is faster pace. I average 600-700 hands per hour while training and I'm only doing ~500 while playing. Bringing the number of tables up to eight would bring me right into that 600-700 hands per hour range that I train at. I've COMFORTABLY played eight tables with very few pace-driven mistakes in the past. With this VPIP, I think it's even more realistic. I really think it is doable.

If I made the jump to eight tables, this would allow me to push for 2500 hands per session without playing a single extra minute. In fact, I could probably play slightly less time overall. I really need to give this some serious consideration. A 25% increase in volume without a significant loss of win rate could drastically change the pace at which I progress through the stakes in the long run. I'm leaning towards increasing to eight tables, but I think I need to give myself a few more sessions at six to fully engrain the tighter ranges and make sure this isn't just all in my head due to the minor upswing I'm experiencing.

It will take as long as it takes, and I'm committed to pay whatever the price is, but I have high hopes to be BEAT 5NL in the next two months. Let's GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

I'll be back tomorrow morning with a post on my session review takeaways.

Have a good one,
~Orca

Hey, very nice blog, I will definitely follow your journey. GLGL

7/23/24 Morning-After Session Review #4:

As I thought, I was on fire during the first 75% of yesterday's session. Almost all of the major mistakes came in the last hour.

Let's get right into it...

Hand of the Day #4:

Brief reminder: the default "solve" is for 500NL and GTO open/3bet sizes. 50NL rake with 2.5x opens and "smaller" 3bets are much closer to what I actually experience when I play (and what I now personally use) so I manually switch over to those after I open any solve I want to look at in further depth.

Preflop: Hero Opens on the BTN for 2.5bb with AsAd and Villain calls in the BB with 3c2c. Effective stack size is 100bb.

Flop: Flop comes down AcTs5d. Villain checks. Hero cbets 33% pot. Villain raises 50% pot. Hero calls.

GTOW overwhelmingly uses the 33% pot cbet here:

After the 50% pot check-raise by Villain, GTOW overwhelmingly calls:

So far, so good.

Turn: Ac Ts 5d 7d, Villain checks. Hero bets 75% pot. Villain calls.

GTOW pretty much never uses that 75% sizing. My thinking at the time was that I have the literal nuts and there are plenty of draws on the board that are going to have the odds to call a 75% pot-sized bet. However, in retrospect, against a good player, this bet size probably folds out all the straight draws that don't connect to the flush (and I am blocking all the nut flush draws). This might also fold out weaker aces or other pairs they've decided to throw in a check-raise with. They may even call the 33% bet with relative air thinking it is a bluff-stab. Anyways, regardless, villain calls.

River: Ac Ts 5d 7d 4d. Villain checks. Hero bets 75% pot. Villain shoves all-in. Hero calls. Villains win with 5 high straight.

Let's start with the river sizing:

The solver ALWAYS shoves my holding. The 85% sizing is used with the other AA holdings. The reason why I did not shove in this spot is because I thought I could coax a call out of: two pairs, Ace holdings with a flush blocker, and sets. When Villain check-raises that flop and then checks the turn when a diamond comes, I just don't think a 5NL human has a lot of flushes. Most players will eagerly barrel almost 100% of the time if they've picked up a flush draw in that spot.

However, in hindsight, I really like this shove. I am ahead of so much of his value range that could call that I likely win against most holdings. I lose versus the 86 and 32 straights. I lose to double broadway flushes that might've gotten to this point with this line (though, again, I think those barrel the turn especially because villain wasn't even a reg). A shove with the nut flush blocker in this spot can sometimes fold out the straights and maybe even some of the flushes that have managed to stick around. I am ahead of most of the value range AND I can fold out a few better hands. I have to stuff this in the future. For sure.

When Villain shoves on me, I have to make that call:

Now, as we all know, 5NL villains don't have very many river-raise-shove bluffs. In this case, it doesn't matter. I'm beating a lot of the value. He can have two pair with a diamond, he can have sets with a diamond, and, hell, maybe he actually could have a completely random bluff here. Even without bluffs, I have to call. I'm ahead of too much value. In the end, he has a hand that probably shouldn't ever make it to this river in this fashion: 3c2c. Calling the 75% turn bet doesn't make a lot of sense with a naked gutshot. Sometimes fishies gonna fishy and that is why the game is profitable. You gotta be happy that players like this are at the table even if it does suck when they suck out.

Review Session #4 Takeaways:

1) Attacking SB in SRP.
My sizings are often incorrect. This is a unique spot, in terms of sizings, because the SB’s range (should be) is so specific. There’s a lot of suited Ax and tons of pocket pairs. It (should be) is a strong, fairly tight SRP range. You’re often doing things like putting in 75% or 125% cbets on paired boards, which you just don’t do against BB (those same paired boards are often basically range bets for 33%). Frequencies are way lower than versus BB in SRP and the sizings are just different. I think this spot comes up more than it should in real game play because 5NL players call too loosely in the SB. However, I’d still like to learn to play this better at equilibrium even if, in practice, most players at this level aren’t using the correct SB ranges. When I advance to larger stakes, they’ll absolutely play the proper ranges here. I know I already do and I’m not even a good player (yet). I probably need a few dedicated training sessions where I just focus on attacking SB – especially from late position where there is no longer a huge range advantage. CO/BTN vs SB in SRP is very different than UTG/HJ vs SB or any position vs BB. Self-note (they’re all self-notes in the end, lol): you’ve made similar comments about attacking the SB in previous unpublished session reviews! This keeps coming up.

2) Barreling Air in SRP
When you fire a c-bet with air, usually due to a texture-based range advantage, the turn barrel frequency is higher than you think. For example, HJ vs BB: Qh8s3s – the solver prefers a 125% cbet with Ah7h. Turn comes Kc. After a 125% cbet, the global turn barrel frequency is 85%. With Ah7h, you have a 100% barrel frequency using mostly 50%. I am missing these air barrels a lot because they aren’t always intuitive. However, the beginnings of a heuristic are forming for me. When the turn brings a second card that is overwhelmingly good for your range, you’re barreling almost any two that have made it to that point. TL;DR: look for turns that bring or strengthen a significant range advantage as they generally demand very high global barrel frequencies regardless of your holding. If your range picks up significant equity, even if your holding doesn't, this is often enough to justify a barrel.

3) Not enough river raises!
The average 5NL player does not bluff-raise the river. Seriously, they just don’t do ANYWHERE near often enough. And guess what? I’m clearly one of those folks, too. I am nowhere NEAR equilibrium with my river raises. I need to start finding these more. The reason I often miss these is because they’re usually made hands that block the nuts. You’re very tempted to call, but there is tremendous opportunity to raise these hands.

Good example:

Villain puts in a very small value bet on the river. Calling is +0.2EV but raising is +0.24EV. The difference is negligible, but you HAVE to find these bluffs sometimes. QdTc blocks both the flush draw and the nut straight (T9). Villain might find the call with his AA holding that doesn’t have a relevant flush blocker, but he probably doesn’t -- particularly if he's internalized how infrequently river raises are bluffs at these stakes (and most players have!).

The most common example of this, which I seem to lack the intestinal fortitude to follow through with most of the time, is when you have a pocket pair that heavily blocks the nuts. Eg: KTxx9 and you hold QQ. In a SRP, with a river raise, you’ll often fold out some K holdings. It seems awkward to raise second pair there, but you have to represent the nuts and find it sometimes if you want to play at equilibrium. Otherwise, a good player can easily catch on and fold to all your river raises.

4) Fold marginal holdings to improperly sized 3b/4b
I don’t think this requires much of an explanation. If I have a mixed action hand against a 4bet, and someone raises to 30-40bb, just get out of the way. Sure, that can be a desperation sizing to get a bluff through, but you’re better off catching those with a high pocket pair. I think I should just let go of the drawing-type hands against 5NL recs. There are better ways to make money. Those hands generally no longer have the right odds to call.

Example:

This sizing is very often QQ+ and AKo/AKs. Even when it isn't, because you're up against someone who just always puts in these huge, incorrectly-sized 4 bets, you've got an SRP of less than 1 and there isn't much room to maneuver with ATs. Many "draws" just don't play well here. Calling when Villain makes it 22bb is one thing, when villain makes it 35bb, as they did here, this just becomes a waste of 25b, IMO.

Alright, that's all for this one friends! As per usual, I have to gym (yes, as a verb, lol) and then I'll get on with the afternoon studying.

Have a good one,
~Orca

I don't really like the way you review your hands, or the lessons you
learn from it. There isn't enough going deep and learning concepts
imo. For sure looking into hands and reviewing will improve you, just
focus on concepts and broader theory.

You're definitely spot-on in your assessment of my study habits. I tend to focus on breadth rather than depth. This isn't because I think breadth is better; it is because I suck at the theory. My biggest weakness is understanding the "why" behind what the solver does. My biggest strength is understanding "what" the solver might do. I have brute-forced my way into this situation just by looking at thousands and thousands of solves in the trainer. I know you are correct and that is the main reason I have signed up at RIO. I'm hoping that consuming more content from some of the coaches will help me do a better job at figuring out the why behind the what when I'm looking at all these solves.

Let's take the AA hand on AT5:

We cbet small. Did you think about your range or just this hand? The
flop bet is solid but is your strategy here overall? Why is 33% good?
Was that also the reason you used.

We face a checkraise and we call. You just check if your call is good
and end it there. What is BB raising in the solver and why is solver
calling over raising? Then try and estimate how your opponents are
checkraising. Are they really checkraising the way GTOWizard is? And
if not, what adjustments would we need to make?

Again, you're absolutely right. When looking at this solve, I only checked to see if I played this one hand correctly. I didn't take a step back and see how the entire range is played (on either side). I have never done any nodelocking and, as of yet, I don't know how on GTOW. My intuition tells me that human players are absolutely not playing the same check-raising strategy as the solver. As you mention later in the post, their strategy is almost certainly more equity driven and focuses on value hands and semi-bluffs.

Turn: You notice GTOWizard uses a small size and you used 75%. So you
mark this as wrong move. There's not enough digging on why this is the
case. You make some statements about bigger size creating more folds
etc. Is that truly the case? Can we find proof for this? If this is,
then we would see this on other boards etc... .

Basicly, test your theories to make it a real concept you can use in
future hands.

Noted. I am going to attempt to do go much deeper on the individual hands I select for thorough review in this journal going forward. I don't have a lot of confidence that I'll come up with accurate conclusions, but I completely agree that I need to try harder to go deeper.

It is because your opponents check raising range is consider mainly
polarized. A polarized range cbets turn a lot. And when it checks that
checking range has a lot of give up hands, some traps and some hands
that might want to get to showdown. A small size tends to be the
betsize against that type of range as there's a massive overfold. Our
strong hands still get enough value from their stronger hands this
way.

You would need to look at other spots where solver checkraises
polarized and then see how turn acts after a turn.

Well, now that you've explained it, that makes perfect sense, lol. I will readily admit that I've seen this pattern A LOT in the solver: villain check-raises flop, villain checks back turn, and hero stabs 33%. I've seen it over and over. I had no idea why but I've got a better grasp on it now. Thanks!

After doing this form of analysis you will learn more imo.

Consider it done. I'll do my best. Thanks so much for the feedback!

RIO Video Study Session #4:

1) Intro to Bet Sizing
This is a great introduction to the theory behind bet sizing. Toy games can often make the basic concepts clear.

2) The Death of EV
The biggest takeaway from this video, and it something that is now remarkably easy to do with solvers, is that you don’t want to just think about making a +EV play. The value of each play is going to come down to the relative difference in EV between all available decisions. It is entirely conceivable to come across a spot where it is +1 EV to shove and +10 EV to check (I've seen even bigger discrepancies between actions / bet sizes in some solves). You shouldn’t be satisfied with just making +EV plays; you want to make the BEST play possible. There are many situations where the BEST play is folding or checking. You have to go well beyond just making +EV plays to maximize your… EV.

GTOW Training Session #4:
1) 2.5x Open, Smaller 3 Bet Size, 100bb depth: 420 full hands
2) GTO Open, GTO 3 Bet Size, 150bb depth: 420 full hands
3) GTO Open, GTO 3 Bet Size, 200bb depth: 420 full hands
These numbers include folds

And, uh, I swear I'm not making some veiled pot reference. GTOW Trainer really just offers 420 hands as the longest individual training session, lol.

I'm off to the dog park with my wife and hounds. After that, it is straight into the evening session. As usual, we'll go with six tables and 2000 hands across about four hours of play. I'll give a quick overview later tonight on the final results of the session.

Have a good one!
~Orca

How soft is ACR 5nl? Do you always get at least a recreational in all tables you seat? I believe that making sure you're not wasting precious energy in -EV tables just for the sake of putting volume, and making sure you're playing well vs them and maximally exploiting them, is what will make the bulk of your winrate at these limits. You'll always have regs seated with you to practice no matter what, but tables without recs with the insane micro rake are just a waste of time and effort IMO.

Learning theory is important and essential for moving up and your future in this game, but so is learning to exploit recs. Recs play very different than regs and you have to make a lot of very uncomfortable plays to be able to get the most money vs them and get crushing winrates. Just as getting rid of common human biases, like my old friend risk aversion :)

7/23/24 5NL Session on ACR:

+911bb in 2009 hands!

Pre-Session Goals:
1) No Angry Outbursts -- SUCCESS
The thing that scares my wife and my dogs the most is when I slam my fist on the table after a bad beat. I haven't done that all week. I felt the urge to do so today after one beat in particular this session and I was able to notice the sensation, catch it, and let it pass without reacting angrily. I love this kind of progress and I see it as extremely affirming that I'm accomplishing SOMETHING with the meditation even if it is impossible to directly measure the results.

2) Check Stack Depths before finalizing preflop decision! -- SUCCESS

3) Stick to the tighter 50NL Ranges -- SUCCESS

4) Look for opportunities to bluff-raise the river -- SUCCESS
I successfully jammed the nut flush blocker and got it through to win a big pot. I also check-raised 125% in a spot where I had QQ and it blocked the nut straight (KQ on AJTxx rainbow). I got picked off by... the nut straight, lol. Villain had it anyway, but I was happy that I recognized the spot and found the courage to pull the trigger.

Final Post-Session Thoughts:

I just booked my biggest win EVER at 5NL! I mean, what can I even say? When you win 9 buy-ins in a single session, you obviously ran like God. I don't feel like I even played as well as I did in the last session, but I'm going to save that analysis for tomorrow's review. In particular, I kept getting dealt AA/KK so often that I started developing a bit of FPS (fancy play syndrome) and the lines were unnecessarily creative. I could've just kept bashing peoples' heads in with the value.

I was putting in 50-70 Poker hours per week for months on end and I was actually going BACKWARDS in my 5NL win rate. I've kept at it, regardless. It is so gratifying and validating to start to see the work pay off. I know I can't get too happy with a four session upswing, but this was my best month at 5NL BEFORE I won 15 buy-ins in these last four sessions. I'm not going to get ahead of myself here so I'll just say this: I believe in myself and I believe in hard work. Conquering 5NL is inevitable.

I'm going to enjoy a home-cooked dinner and savor this feeling a bit. I'll be back tomorrow spamming away with my training updates as usual, lol.

Until then...

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/24/24 Morning-After Session Review #5:

According to the 'Wiz, this was actually the best session I've ever played in terms of mistakes. I didn't anticipate that. I thought I made plenty (and of course I did). That said, I've never ever had a session where my average EV loss per hand was only -0.01. That's a new PB.

There were only five hands where I lost more than 1 EV, but the hand I want to look at isn't on that list...

7/24/24 Hand of the Day #5:

Preflop: Hero is on the BTN and opens to 2.5bb. Villain is in the BB and makes the call. Effective stack sizes are 100bb.

Flop: 7c 5c 4s. Villain Checks. Hero bets 50% pot. Villain calls.

Villain can actually lead this texture with any holding at least some percentage of the time. His entire range leads over 50% of the time. As a result, when he elects to check, it doesn't necessarily suggest anything about his holding if he's playing in a balanced way.

Hero responds to a check here mainly with a 33% bet with his range. However, 50% is occasionally used with the higher equity hands: flush draws, straight draws, sets, two pair, etc.

My particular holding, K8o without a club, is checked 66% of the time, bets 1/3rd pot 24% of the time, and bets 1/2 pot 50% of the time. Because the 50% sizing is mainly driven by equity in this spot, my hand isn't a great choice for the bigger sizing because it doesn't contain the club. In fact, I think it is largely checked precisely because there are so many other higher equity holdings.

In my studies, I've repeatedly seen that gut-shots on flush draw boards that don't contain a relevant flush card are often sized down or put into the check back line. This isn't any different and my play is a relatively "low frequency play". Even though the solver does this 8% of the time, which means it is probably an actual action taken at equilibrium, and not just an artifact of an imperfect solve, I think this c-bet was likely a small mistake against the good, aggressive regular that I'm up against. I'm quite sure my RNG wasn't 92+ in any case. IIRC, it was in the 70s.

The first takeaway here is to try to remember not to overplay gut-shots on flush draw boards without a flush card because, generally, the equities don't favor those holdings.

Now, if we look at the impact of the c-bet sizing here...

We can see that the only real difference the sizing change makes in terms of what types of holdings that villain folds comes down to pocket 2s. The fold frequency goes from to 39% to 47%, but this is mainly just due to mixed holdings that were already folding some of the time now folding closer to pure. In other words, the solver is playing with, and against, the sizing difference here in a very linear, equity driven way.

Turn: 7c 5c 4s, Ah. Villain checks. Hero bets 33% pot. Villain calls.

Now, here's where I really effed up and I knew it as soon as I clicked bet:

When villain calls the flop bet, his range has 47% equity. When the Ah hits, and he checks back turn, his range's equity balloons to 59%:

I think this is mainly because, when I bet 50% flop, I am mainly doing this based off of equity. I have a lot of straight draws and flush draws. I mainly check back strong A holdings.

On the other hand, BB is floating a ton of strong aces that just made top pair:

Betting small for 1/3rd pot here only makes sense if I have a range advantage. I absolutely do NOT have the range advantage! BB does!

As a result, I should be betting extremely polarized with my draw heavy range. As you can see, the solver really only uses overbet and massive overbet here:

Far from generating any kind of overfold that might happen with a range advantage, the fold frequency is only 25% against the 33% sizing. When I use this 33% sizing, I'm only getting folds from a few weak pairs, a few gut-shots without clubs, and offsuit double-broadway floats that had a single club.

When the solver's preferred 175% overbet sizing is used, you generate folds from just about everything outside of extreme value and combo draws. The fold frequency becomes 66% and you're really only left with strong made hands, nut flush draws, and combo draws.

If I bet the correct sizing here, I win the hand and save myself half a buy-in.

As played though...

River: 7c 5c 4s Ah, 6c. Villain checks. Hero bets 75% pot. Villain raises 75%. Hero Calls. Villain wins with 9 high straight.

So, I bink my gutshot but the flush completes. I use a standard medium-large bet looking to get value from sets, two pair, and strong aces.

That's all fine and dandy, but villain raises the river. The only "bluffs" that the solver raises or jams with here are: strong Aces with a club, two pair with a club, and straights using the 3 with a club. The rest are completed flushes. And, to be more specific, most of the 50% raises that the solver uses are just non-nutted flushes. There are almost no bluffs at all. The bluffs are jammed.

So... if the solver is only bluffing serious showdown value hands with clubs, what is a 5NL reg bluffing with? Answer: they probably aren't.

Against a GTO opponent, I should call 25% of the time here. Against 5NL Regs, I should obviously never call here. This is a great spot for a "exploitative" fold. If a 5NL reg does find the courage to bluff there, I think they just jam. This betting pattern is almost always going to be value from a 5NL human and I'm just not ahead of enough of his range without a club here... which ties nicely back into the very first take-away from this hand:

Don't overplay your gutshots without a relevant flush card on flush boards.
... and, for god's sakes, fold to the population's river raises with ALL marginal holdings!

Here's hoping I did a better job with the deep analysis on this one!

I haven't finished looking at the rest of the 2000 hand session so I'll be back with an edit if I have any other shorter-form takeaways once I do that.

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/24/24 Morning-After Session Review #5:

For some reason, it double-posted my last post so I'm hoping this fixes it.

Short-Form Session Review Takeaways:

1) CO/BTN vs BB C-Bet Strategy with “weak” Axo holdings
The c-betting strategy for these is so confusingly aggressive to me. I need to look into this more. There’s very often 50-125% cbets with hands that are really nothing more than A high and very little other equity.

Example:

2) Overusing 125% turn overbets in deep 3 bet pots
I think this is self-explanatory. I need to keep studying the 150-200bb deep 3 bet pots as I make tons of mistakes of there. In many 100bb deep pots, you’re almost eager to get it all in with many of your strong holdings due to the SPR. That is definitely not always the case in the deeper stacked 3bet pots. I’m rushing to get it in and folding out hands I can get value from too soon. As I’ve been playing better, I often find myself with 150-300bb stacks on almost every table that I’m on. Getting better here is a huge priority. The spots are just different than 100bb deep. I don’t have any deep analysis on this one; it’s just an observation. My intuition on these spots isn’t good yet.

Example:

3) I have a clear bias towards playing “trappy” lines with good hands
I think this is a really bad habit. Generally, the most common, and most profitable line, taken by the solver with good hands is to just bet every street. There are lower frequency options where you don’t, or even cases where you check 100%, but, most of the time, just bash their head in with the value – especially at 5NL.

Example:

4) Keep challenging yourself to find and make difficult river bluffs and river raises!

Example:

5) Too often using 75% river sizings instead of 150% for value in SRP
Some spots are merge-y/linear for value but others are definitely polarized. You need to do a better job of recognizing the polarized spots and using the bigger size.

Example:

Whew! That was a doozy of a review.

Have a good one,
~Orca

RIO Video Study Session #5:

1) Calling 3 Bets
In this video, the instructor basically just walks through a bunch of calls he made versus 3 bet and explains his rationale for how he played each one. One of the things that I find very interesting, and even inspiring, is how every player before the solver era is able to so quickly count combos and those counts to make decisions in game. That stuff takes me ages to do manually. Granted, I guess I don’t work on it much because I can just consult the solver. It seems like a very, very valuable thing to be able to do when you’re in spots you haven’t seen before and aren’t entirely sure what to do. The older players strike me as much better at reasoning their way through new spots on the fly.

2) Since You’ve Been Gone
My biggest takeaway from this video was that I need to make sure I’m finding enough check-raises in SRP. I don’t think I am. I need to, perhaps, check my database and see what my flop x/r rate is from the BB for example. If you don’t x/r enough, it simply incentivizes Villains to use the small c-bet with their entire range. This is a very common simplification educated players make in the microstakes. The correct response is actually to increase x/r frequency from what it is at equilibrium. If you’re below the x/r frequency at equilibrium to begin with, they are auto-profiting when they cbet you. There’s still so much material that I have to learn about and go through that it can get a little overwhelming trying to figure out what the priority focus should be. So, for now, until I get to some of the database videos, I think I just need to make a mental note about finding proper x/r frequencies especially in SRP against those super small c-bets that are so common.
.
.
.
GTOW Trainer Session #5 Results:

2.5x Open, Smaller 3 Bet, 100bb: 420 full hands (preflop to finish, including folds)
GTO Open, GTO 3b/4b/5b/Squeeze Pots, 150-200bb: 150 post-flop only hands

I always like to do one round of the 420 hands with my actual game settings. I feel like that helps keep the fundamentals polished. However, the thrust of my training today was trying to see as many 3 bet, 4 bet, 5 bet, and squeeze pots as I possibly could with 150/200bb stacks. I'm running into these spots more and more often. I often have no idea what the eff I'm doing. In particular, 150-200bb deep 3 bet pots are something I need the most work on. I'll probably focus the most on that in the coming days.

I'll be back later in the evening after my session to post results.

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/24/24 5NL Session on ACR Results:

Whale, whale, whale... what do we have here? +1033bb in 2003 hands!!!

At this point, I'm confident that I can discount mere positive variance. I'm up TWENTY-FIVE buy-ins in five sessions. I am flabbergasted that this is even possible, but I checked one stat and it started to make sense... In these five sessions, my VPIP has dropped from ~28% to ~23%. Aaaaaaand I think that pretty much explains it all.

Pre-Session Goals:
1) No Angry Outbursts -- SUCCESS
2) Check Stack Depths before finalizing preflop decisions -- SUCCESS
3) Stick to tighter 50NL ranges -- SUCCESS

And then there's this...

My personal rule for considering 5NL "beat" is to win at least 20 buy-ins across at least 50k hands. Even though I've won 25 buy-ins in the last 10k hands, the sample isn't large enough for me to move up... yet. We're getting there, though! If I can survive another 18k hands without losing more than 5 buy-ins, that qualifies. If I can win another 8 buy-ins from here across any amount of hands, that also qualifies. I'm close enough to 10NL that I can taste it. Just gotta keep grinding!

I'll be back tomorrow with training updates.

Have a good ones friends!
~Orca

7/25/24 Morning-After Session Review #6:

My biggest EV losses of this session were just preflop mistakes so I'm not that concerned. In one instance, CO jammed for 17bb and I called from SB with 99. The mistake here is due to the fact BB was still behind me with a 100bb stack. He can jam here and then I'm in an icky spot with 9s. Luckily, he folded. CO flipped over KTo and promptly drilled the T on the flop. This was, apparently, a -26 EV play.

In the other instance, HJ raised to 2.5x, BTN raised to 7.5x, SB cold-called the 7.5x, and I jammed my jacks trying to pick up the dead money. I'm only supposed to make this play with KK, AA, AKs, and AKo. QQ mostly raises. In any case, SB called with AQo and I won the flip.

Hand of the Day #6

I need to endeavor to keep these write-ups a little shorter so I'm just going to Zoom in on the river here.

Preflop: Hero opens in the SB to 3bb with 54dd. Villain calls in the BB with K7cc. Effective stacks are 117bb.

Flop: Ac Qh 7h. Hero bets 75% pot. Villain calls.
This should be an overbet because BB is essentially pure 3-betting AQs and AQo preflop.

Major nut advantages like this generally lead to flop c-bet overbets. I'm sure we've all seen very similar things on many AKx textures from various positions. Again, I want to get to the river here to save time.

Turn: Ac Qh 7h, 3c. Hero bets 125% pot. Villain calls.

Picking up a gutshot, I continue to press my nut advantage with an overbet. The solver generally agrees this is the correct play.

River: Ac Qh 7h 3c, 9d. Hero checks. Villains checks. Villain wins the pot with a pair of 7s.

I am never supposed to check here. This is a majority shove:

The mistake I made here was not ranging Villain correctly. After calling two large barrels, I am mostly putting him on strong holdings. However, this is a blind vs. blind pot and, at equilibrium, BB is calling with many, many draws that just missed (and I am generally unblocking them). Villain is also an uber-aggressive reg with a tendency to call down light in order to try and take pots on later streets with big bluffs.

Let's look at Villain's equilibrium calling range on the turn overbet:

GTOW does not always classify the hands correctly, but, if we look at the equity buckets, 90% of villain's range has less than 60% equity here. That 90% is compromised of weak aces and just about every flush draw imaginable. In fact, Villain only folds 53% of his range to the overbet here. Considering how wide it was to begin with, there's still plenty of hands left that will fold to another barrel.

When facing even a 60% river bet, here's what happens:

Villain calls almost all of his Aces at least some of the time. He folds just about all of the missed flush draws. The hard part of this defense is that he has to jam tons of 7s to keep his value bets balanced. There is just no way the average 5NL reg is finding those jams with 7s.

The real magic here happens when you pull the trigger on the jam, though:

Villain has to defend as wide as A4o, KQo, and even some T7s. How many Villains are realistically doing that? This defense is not even remotely intuitive and it is super clear the average player overfolds this spot (I know I would!).

This should be exploitatively jammed at 100% frequency.

Hand of the Day Takeaway:
In spots where ranges are wide, you have the nut advantage, and most of Villain's range is comprised of missed draws, there is likely to be a profitable river bluff jam with many/any of your holdings that unblock those missed draws.

.
.
.

Morning-After Session Review Short-Form Takeaways:
In this section, I am just including observations and patterns in my play I've noticed that I want to acknowledge. I don't have time to do a write-up for each one and some of them are rather fundamental mistakes anyway.

1) Overbetting Middling Aces on AQ/AK
I check these back far too often compared to equilibrium.

2) Overplaying gutshots on flush draw boards
Even though this was the topic of yesterday's hand history, it's an engrained pattern in my game that I need to break.

3) Missing turning marginal SDV into river bluffs!
This is self-explanatory. Given that the population under bluffs and under bluff-raises the river, these should probably be found MORE than they are at equilibrium and I find them LESS than equilibrium.

Alright folks, that's it for today's post-session review. Next up is going through some RIO videos and then putting the reps in with the GTOW Trainer.

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/25/24 Run It Once Video Study Session #6:

My long-term goal, in the next six to nine months, is to go through every single one of these videos and get each section to "100%".

1) Back to Basics: Understanding Preflop Play
Funnily enough, much of the content in this video essentially explains why I’ve seen so much more success in the microstakes with a tighter opening range, higher 3bet%, and higher 4bet%. The rake probably eats close to 10bb/100 at 5NL. You are absolutely incentivized to take advantage of the “no flop, no drop” rule.

2) Designing Preflop Ranges, Pt. II
My greatest respect goes out to all the old school pioneers who used to do range calculations and range constructions by hand. It seems like a tremendous, time-sucking pain in the butt. That said, I do find it very informative to see the process behind the process. There is always a good bit of value in understanding the why behind the what even for things that are essentially rote.

3) Preflop Questions
This is an MTT-focused video but I think there is still utility in understanding the preflop thought process discussed therein. Here are the questions:
i) Own Position, Stack, and Hand
ii) Preceding Action
iii) Position, Stack, and Tendencies of preceding Villains
iv) Who (and how many) are left to act behind
v) Position, Stack, and Tendencies of proceeding Villains
focus especially on BTN/BB!
vi) What happens if…
vii) What do we do if…
viii) Building ranges

Session Takeaways:
One very basic takeaway from today’s videos is that I need to alter my tendencies to play more pots with the weakest players. I typically have no problem identifying the weakest players even without a HUD. They are often the players who are: a) constantly limping, b) using unusual 3b/4b sizes (like min-raises), c) they often only use pot-sized bets post-flop, and d) they’re playing wayyyyy too many hands. If I have a neutral EV hand, or a mixed action hand, I need to make sure I take the action that is most likely to encourage action with these players. I don’t need to robotically or dogmatically follow my preflop percentages and “rules”.

I'm going to take my hounds on a quick trot and then I need to log a few hours in the GTOW Trainer as per usual.

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/25/24 GTOW Trainer Session #6:

2.5x Open, Smaller 3bet, 100bb Stack: 420 full hands from start
GTO Open, GTO 3 Bet, 150bb Stack: 840 full hands from start

I'm going to focus a lot more on 150bb depths. I'm seeing some big leaks there especially in 3bet pots. At this point, I've still done 99% of my training on 100bb stacks.

Next up is a short break and then onto tonight's session.

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/25/24 Results of 5NL Session on ACR:

Womp, womp, womp. -297bb in 2009 hands.

Variance just kicked my ass today. I don't think I made a ton of mistakes. I even lost a preflop jam to A6o, lol. I'm not worried about this one bit. You can't win ten buy-ins every time you play.

I'll be back tomorrow after I review the session with anything I've learned and any insights I've gleaned.

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/26/24 Hand of the Day #6:

I'm going to jump right into the main hand I want to analyze today.

On the surface, this one looks pretty simple.

Preflop: Hero opens JTdd on the BTN to 2.5bb. Villain calls in the BB with 98ss.
Standard.

Flop: 9h 8c 3d. Villain checks. Hero bets 50% pot. Villain raises 100% pot. Hero calls.
I flop two overs, an open-ender, and a back door flush draw. Villain flops top two-pair. His raise makes sense as does my call.

However, I think the first clear deviation from equilibrium here comes when we look at the solver's 100% pot check-raise range:

The solver is using a good deal of hands that have: a) backdoor flush, b) backdoor straight, and c) an over. Examples include A7cc or KTdd. Are humans doing that? With a very good reg, yes, it is possible. Against the more straight forward, tight-ish reg I'm playing? Probably not. More on that later.

Turn: 9h 8c 3d, 2d. Villain bets 75% pot. Hero calls.
I think, at this point, this all remains standard. Even if villain's check-raise range is much stronger than the solver's, I still have two overs, an open ender, and now a flush draw. Villain continues to try and extract value with his top two-pair.

I can't fold a draw this strong to this turn bet.

River: 9h 8c 3d 2d, 9d. Villain jams all-in. Hero calls. Villain wins with full house.

Okay, so, against the solver, this is a 100% call down:

In game, I badly wanted to fold, but I ultimately gave my reg opponent enough credit to have bluffs in this line. Was that a mistake? I think it likely was.

Look what the solver is shoving here:

It is shoving: a bunch of 3s, almost every single 8, nearly all of the broken lower straights and gut shots regardless of suits, and the broken higher straights/gutshots with a diamond. Of course, it is also shoving sets, 98, and any flush draw that made it this far.

To dig into this any further, I think some nodelocking is essential. I don't think humans are arriving to this river with enough bluffs and I'm really just unsure if I beat enough of the value range to call with a J high flush. I'm going to try and get some answers.

If we go back to the check-raising range, eliminate some of those back-door heavy hands, and just increase the frequency for more obvious hands like two-pair, sets, straight draws, gut shots, etc. a 5NL human range might look more like this:

And when that range arrives to the river, the jams look like this:

Surprisingly, not a lot has changed. The solver is jamming the exact same type of hands here and that still includes many of the lower, broken straight draws without a diamond.

Against that shoving range, my call EV actually goes up:

So the call here is really just contingent on whether or not he finds those bluffs with the non-diamond broken straight draws. To satisfy my curiosity, I decided to make Villain jam every plausible bluff WITH a diamond at 100% and check anything that didn't have a diamond. All value is jammed including sets and A9o with a diamond.

It looks like this:

Against this very, very specific and unbalanced range, JTs is the ONLY flush in your entire range that you fold. The reason being is that blocks too many of the missed draws that jam:

Hand of the Day #6 Takeaways:
Overall, the results of the analysis here shows that it is extremely hard to fold the jack high flush here. Nevertheless, when I see this spot, I can't shake the feeling that the river under-is bluffed with this line. This is just my intuition, and I know that isn't necessarily super valuable, but I think most microstakes villains are just way too value heavy when they check-raise 100% pot and then triple-barrel jam. JT blocks the most likely draw that takes this line from the flop making it just that much more likely villain has two-pair or a set. When the board pairs, the flush completes, and he still SNAP jams, I think I'm dealing with a boat way, way more often than I would be against a GTO opponent.

At higher stakes, I think is probably a bit of a no-brainer call. In the microstakes, these river lines often make for great exploitative bluffs. When they do have bluffs in these spots, they don't find them often enough. People get scared and don't pull the trigger. They are definitely not balanced.

So... again... I'm not sure how many times I'll need to learn this lesson, but the the river is under-bluffed at 5NL.

I'll be back later with a short-form analysis for the rest of the 2000 hand sample.

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/26/24 Morning-After Session Review #6

This was one of the most uneventful reviews I've done so far. As I anticipated, I didn't make more mistakes than usual yesterday; I just got dealt a lot of losses. No one cares about bad beats so let's just get straight into some of the take-aways:

1) STOP Using 33% for value on the River!!

Look, I know there are definitely spots where you want to use 33% on the river for thin value -- especially out of position. However, that definitely does not mean doing it with solid top pairs and even two pair. I make this mistake at least once or twice a session. This time, it got out of control and I found five spots where I placed the wrong size.

2) Stop overplaying Gutters on FD Boards

Apparently I still haven't gotten the memo on this one. When the turn pairs the board and brings a FD, you're no longer drawing to anything particularly great. Some of your outs may be dead. No need to lob in an 18bb bet on that turn. That's a win-rate killer.

3) Worst Play of the Week

When villain x/r's 75% here, the only likely holdings are semi-bluffs and made hands scared of the flush. We're looking at nut flush draws (which I block entirely), 65hh, sets without a heart, two pair without a heart, and maybe JJ-QQ without a heart. I'm blocking virtually all the bluffs and behind in equity to virtually all the rest of that (65hh too, I think).

This should be a snap-fold. However, I snap-shoved. Villain turned over 44 with a heart (wtf?) and I donated 80bb to him for no reason whatsoever.

This didn't happen because my thinking was incorrect; it happened because I didn't think at all. I consider this a mental game failure. I was having my first losing session in two days, I got impatient, and I made an emotional play to try and get a win. Rationally, I would never, ever turn AhKc into a bluff on this texture against this line. It just doesn't make sense. That's what happens when you don't even think about it because you get sucked into an emotion. This is a major reason I continue to meditate and believe it has efficacy for improving poker outcomes.

4) Bet - Bet - Check/Call OOP with made hands in 3b Pots

I thought this one was mildly interesting. This is a pattern I’ve seen in the solver a lot… you’ve double-barreled OOP and then check back the river with a strong made hand fully intending to call any shove. I’ve been working on identifying these spots with more precision as you’ll often take this line with AA and other very strong holdings on certain runouts in 3 bet pots.

So far, the biggest commonalities have to do with the fact that there should be missed draws and you need to beat the likely top pair holdings (which is why overpairs are used with this line as well). In this exact case, my surface level analysis is that most of HJ’s range is suited connectors, flush draws, and weaker jacks. Outside of the suited connectors that made two pair, you give your opponent the opportunity to bluff all-in with these hands on the river. That is why AJss is a 100% shove – it blocks the exact kind of missed draws you’re hoping to entice.

When checked back to, the solver very often bluffs with suited connectors when defending IP. When they turn two-pair, straights, and flushes, they’re obvious value. When the opponent seems to give up, they’re turned into bluffs. They aren’t profitable in the long run without the second part. Checking back a strong made hand on the river in the right spot gives your opponent the rope they need to hang themselves. If you blast that third barrel, they’re folding all of those holdings. The holdings that you’re beating which would have called a jam are still likely to bet on the check as well (KJ for example). It is a nice line to add to 3b pot arsenal if you select the right spots.

Alright, that's all for today's session review. I'm off to watch some RIO videos.

Have a good one!
~Orca

RIO Video Study Session #6:

I'm still working my way through the 400+ NLHE videos:

1) Constructing Your Opening Ranges
It was interesting to see what opening ranges were being used in 2013. It was even more interesting what has changed and what hasn’t. Players back then got way more things right than they got wrong.

2) Preflop Squeezing (Part 1)
I greatly enjoy some of these videos where an intelligent player talks through their thinking process in difficult spots. For me, personally, I’m still at the point where I play extremely intuitively. This is an artifact of how I’ve learned the game so far, which, I think, is very different from how all past players learned. I “brute-forced” my way to correct decision making by looking at thousands upon thousands of solves in the GTOW trainer. I can come up with a reasonable estimate of what the solver might do in way more instances than I can come up with a reasonable explanation of why that is what is done. The main reason why I’m watching these videos is to address the overwhelming gap between my practical poker abilities and my analytical poker reasoning. I simply require a far greater overall understanding of the game and even the littlest comments can sometimes make theory “click for me”. Good stuff here.

3) Folding Ranges and Deck Analysis
This video showed mathematical proof that players mucking before the action folds to you changes the deck distribution substantially enough to affect what ranges should be played. In simpler terms, you need a stronger range on the BTN in a nine-handed game versus a six-handed game versus a four-handed game and so on and so forth. More poignantly, every action taken by a player preceding you, even a fold, conveys valuable information that can affect your strategy.

Next up is my daily GTOW Trainer reps. As per usual, I'll drill about 500 full hands from the start simulating real game play. From there, today, I'm going to focus on BB vs BTN in 3bet pots. I'm c-betting way too wide in this spot.

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/26/24 GTOW Trainer Session #6:

2.5x Open, Smaller 3 Bet, 100bb Stacks: 420 full hands in 38 minutes
2.5x Open, Smaller 3 Bet, 100bb Stacks, BB vs. All in 3bet Pots: 100 post-flop hands

I wanted to time how fast I play against the trainer to get an idea of realistic game play speeds in the future. 420 hands in 38 minutes works out to roughly ~660 hands per hour.

I currently play ~525 hands per hour while six-tabling on ACR. Tonight's session will mark a full week of six-tabling after changing to the tighter GTOW 50NL pre-flop ranges. I feel like I can confidently state that the pace of play is well within my capabilities with six tables. With the math above, it seems very clear to me that I should be able to easily handle a 7th table, and probably even an 8th as well, considering each table deals around ~85-90 hands per hour. I'll spend a week seven-tabling next week and then re-evaluate whether or not eight-tabling seems feasible. If it is, it obviously offers me the ability to increase my volume by 33% without increasing my playing time at all. That could potentially be huge. If I bump my playing time half an hour, I'd go from 2000 hand sessions to 3000 hand sessions which is a monstrous difference. Of course, I'll take things one step at a time and spend at least a week with seven tables to make sure I'm not starting to make careless, pace-related mistakes.

I'll be back this evening with my session results.

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/26/24 Results of 5NL ACR Session #7

-33bb in 2030 hands.

This was easily the most frustrating session I've had since starting this log and it was all my fault. There was absolutely no reason whatsoever to book a loss here.

The whole session hinged around preflop all-ins today.

I got stacked five times in preflop all-ins.

I won two in return.

And I chopped this one:

The reason I'm upset is because two of those losing shoves (TT vs KK and JJ vs QQ) were situations I was supposed to fold. In each spot, I'm supposed to fold 25% of the time according to the simplified ranges I've trained. In each case, I rolled just below 25 in the low 20s. In each case, I said, "eff it! that's close enough..." and shoved anyway. In each case, I lost.

I did this because I was tilted from "scoreboard watching". I do check how many hands I've played, but, invariably, I tend to get a little anxious when I'm losing and checking the hand count becomes an excuse to see where I'm at. Post flop, I tend to stay disciplined but, for some reason, preflop I'll let a little gamble out. That has to stop. Better players don't do that. Experienced players don't do that. Why be excited to call a shove with TT, anyway? That's the bottom of my calling range in most spots. You have to pray for AKo and hope it doesn't hit.

I'm just disappointed that I allowed the tilt to worsen throughout the session. I'm disappointed that it got to the point that it affected my play. I'm disappointed that it got to the point where I had an angry outburst, cursed, and slammed my computer desk with my fist. That last one is the worst part in my eyes.

One of my dogs runs to the front door and wants to leave when I have these outbursts. He hates it. I hate that I scare him.

I vow to do better in this area. I will not allow this to continue to happen. I do not need to "check the score" constantly throughout a session. I know roughly how long I need to play before I'm anywhere close to 2000 hands (~4 hours). There's no point in it. There's more work to be done to conquer these tilt issues!

For now, I guess I'll have to go to sleep tonight knowing that tilt cost me what clearly should've been a winning session. I'll do a full session review tomorrow when I look deeper into the hands. Anyway, until then...

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/27/24 -- Hand of the Day #7:

Preflop: Villain is UTG and opens to 2.5x with 6d6c. Hero is on the BTN and raises to 7.5x with AhAc. Action folds back to Villain. Villain calls.

Flop: Qh Qd 9h. Villain checks. Hero bets 20% pot. Villain calls.

20% and 50% are used occasionally, but 33% is the preferred size here.

There is a fairly substantial difference in the folding range between the two sizings. At 20%, AKo floats without a heart stay in, all 9s stay in, and a much bigger percentage of lower pocket pairs also call.

At 33%, you generate about 10% more folds mostly from the aforementioned hands.

I don't believe betting 20% here represents any kind of real mistake.

Turn: Qh, Qd, 9h, 3s. Villain checks. Hero bets 75% pot. Villain calls.

Betting 20% on the flop does make playing for stacks more difficult by the river. The reason being is that the preferred sizing on a paired board with a flush is going to be 75% with almost my entire range. When you go 20/75, you'll need a 125% overbet to shove river.

When we bet 75%, we fold out just about everything except 9x, TT-JJ, nut flush draws, combo draws, sets, and Qx:

If you consider an overbet to set up an easier river shove, Villain even begins to fold nut flush draws and combo draws. When Villain doesn't fold, Villain begins to shove many draws. Villain starts folding significant chunks of 9x and TT-JJ, too. Considering I am holding the nut flush blocker, and blocking most of his draws, overbetting here likely just folds out hands I am trying to get value from and tends to isolate me against a stronger, Qx heavy range:

River: Villain checks. Hero bets 50% pot. Villain shoves. Hero folds. Villain shows 6d6c. Villain immediately leaves the table (lololol).

My initial instinct was to just check this back. Villain was a certified recreational and I absolutely did not give him credit for anything besides face-up play. Because of that, I bet 50% here trying to give him a wider calling range with 9x holdings and any lower pocket pairs that were still hanging around. I figured most recreationals will struggle to let go of a pocket pair here and they'll almost always just fold their missed draws. Instead, he shoves, I fold and I get owned pretty hard.

The solver shoves 100% of the time here:

That seemed thin to me so I needed to take a closer look at villain's equilibrium calling range:

There's nothing too surprising here, though, after all. Villain is supposed to bluff-catch with 9x and TT-JJ at some frequency. The overbet shove folds out all remaining pocket pairs with a heart and all the broken flush draws. You only beat bluff-catchers.

As played, Villain is supposed to respond to the ~50% pot bet by shoving all of his value and some slivers of missed flush draws (which I HEAVILY block), 9x holdings, and pocket pairs:

Because I'm blocking Villain's most likely bluffs, because villain is a recreational, I quickly put him on a Q and folded. Even against a balanced opponent, the solver tends to agree with this fold:

You defend AA without the heart and, with it, you don't. You're just blocking too many bluffs. He should never arrive to this river with 66 without a heart.

Hand of the Day #7 Takeaways
In a vacuum, I don't think I'd play this differently. I made an exploitative value bet against a recreational, he shoved, and I folded. That's usually just fine. Recreationals are normally extremely face-up in those lines.

However, and I know this could simply be variance, in the EXACT same session, I had two very similar spots that unfolded almost exactly the same way:

In all three cases, the board is double-paired on the river. In all three cases, I make a small-ish bet on the river. In all three cases, villain shoves over the top. In all three cases, I fold. Hell, in one of those hands, I even had AA again. In that hand, villain showed one of his cards and it was 6d. I'm going to assume it was a bluff and that's why he showed. That Villain was also a full blown recreational player, too.

I've been using thin river value bets against recreational players with great success in my last few sessions off a tip I got from The 100 Biggest Mistakes that Poker Players Make by Alexander Fitzgerald. Most of them cannot let go of any pair even when you triple barrel -- especially if you're using medium bet sizes. Obviously, these lines are extremely exploitable if taken against regs.

However, I think I'm going to make a mental note to be careful on this particular texture type even against recreationals. While most recreational villains only shove rivers when they have value, or the most obvious bluffs imaginable, this might be one of those textures that the appeals to the average recreational's psychology in terms of bluffing. Against regs, I typically go bigger or just check these spots (depending on a lot of factors, of course) and I think I'll play the same strategy versus recreationals going forward as well.

That's all for today's HH. Maybe there's something useful in here somewhere about double-paired boards? One can hope.

Have a good one!
~Orca

Morning-After Session Review #7

Improving My SRP River Play
I feel like one of the areas where I have the most room for improvement is SRP river decisions. Mastering these nodes can make an enormous difference to your win rate because: a) they occur very often and b) the EV of a river mistake is amplified by the fact the pots are at their biggest on the last street. As such, in each of these reviews, I really look for opportunities where I missed a chance to size bigger or get in a quality bluff. If you can swing half a dozen decisions like this per session towards a win or a bigger win, your win rate improves enormously.

Missed River Bluffs

A few of these are missed blocker bluffs, but many are just spots where the texture provides a lot of fold equity. In the short form portion of my session reviews, I don't want to go too deep into analysis of any given spot. For now, I just want to acknowledge these missed opportunities on a regular basis to give my mind time to potentially find links and patterns.

Size Bigger on River Value Bets with Trips!

Now, this error is much more specific. The solution is very simple: lean towards betting bigger on the river with trips. They are still likely to call down with strong top pairs.

Major Blunders
I played competitive Chess at some point growing up. The biggest problem with my game was that I would occasionally make careless blunders. My average level of play was typically far higher than my ELO rating would suggest, but, with far too great of a frequency, I'd play way too fast or attempt extremely complex strategies and simply leave a piece hanging. I did this all the time. I'm finding that this tendency toward error is not unique to my Chess game, but rather something that shows up in all facets of my life. I can get ahead of myself, grow overconfident, and overlook small details that lead to major blunders.

In every single session, I do this at least a few times in high leverage spots. This is the biggest leak in my game outside of tilt (although they're highly related of course!). I want to acknowledge these spots to help ensure that I don't, at the very least, make the same exact mistake again.

Blunder #1:

Floating this wide in a 4b pot is simply incorrect even blind versus blind. I ended up bluffing off my entire stack on later streets. Now, that is actually the correct play if you do float and villain checks back turn when the flush hits, but the solver floats less than 1% of the time with this hand. We can surmise that you simply never float this bet with this hand. In retrospect, that's super obvious. Even in a blind versus blind spot, I have nothing more than a backdoor flush draw and an over here. If anything, there are reverse implied odds if the A hits. And, in fact, my opponent had ATo with a diamond. So, had an A hit, I'm getting stacked, anyway. This cost me 80bb and that was more than the difference in winning for the session.

Blunder #2:

Here, I flop a full house in a 3b pot. The flop bet is fine. The turn bet is not. There is no reason to size big here.

I want to keep his range as wide as possible with another small turn bet. This gives him another card to potentially hit something while my hand remains, essentially, invulnerable. I can then size up on the river where I have the best chance of getting a call.

Blunder #3:

I open CO to 2.5x and a recreational min-raises me from the BB. Effective stacks are 184bb.

Now, as we all know, when recreationals do this, they often have the nuts or complete air. I call with the pure intent to hopefully mine a set versus QQ+. The flop comes and I drill my set. Villain bets 20% into a 4bb pot.

Here's where I started messing up. Without thinking, I quickly raised him 50% pot. The check-raise has to be 100% here or you have virtually no chance to play for stacks by the river which is the whole point of set mining here. You make these calls just for the 12% of times you hit the set and get to (hopefully) play for stacks.

I created a custom solution in GTOW to see what the solver output would be. The solver mixes all sizes given including up to 150%. Given that I'm assuming a MUCH more polarized range for villain than the standard BB vs CO 3b range I gave the solver, I still think the bigger sizes are better. The solver mainly uses 100%, which what I would've used in retrospect.

The turn pairs the board and brings a second flush draw. My hand is even less vulnerable now. I bet 75%. That's the second mistake. Again, I need to be betting bigger. Even though you don't typically overbet board pairing turns, this is an exception because of how deep we are and the range that I'm likely facing. Villain can easily perceive me as having a flush draw here. The solver exclusively uses 175% here after you've only check-raised 50% pot.

The river brings an essentially irrelevant card. I shove. He folds. The shove was 266% pot. It's just too big at that point to stomach a call even if he has AA. I probably should bet 75% pot here versus a recreational as they're just not going to be able to fold that top pair when the flushes miss. Maybe they even shove over the top if they decide it is a bluff. The solver still prefers a shove here, but it does mix in some smaller overbets, too:

As it is, he folded and I only won 28bb. That's a horrendous loss of EV. If I would've taken a few extra seconds to think about bet sizing in this spot, we could've gotten to the river in a situation where Villain was far more pot committed. The solver's preferred line here was: check, raise 100%, bet 125%, shove for 106%. Against that line, even the solver has AA as a mixed call at showdown. With that line, Villain has already committed 60bb and is much more likely to call a 100% pot jam than a 270% pot jam. Even if he doesn't, 60bb is a hell of a lot more than 28bb.

Okay, that's it for today's "short form" (lol) session review. I took a lot from this one and I'm feeling good about today's learning. I'm off to watch some RIO videos and take notes.

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/27/24 RIO Video Study Session #7

1) Constructing Preflop Ranges
This one was about the fundamentals of preflop range construction.

2) Deep NLHE: Exploitative Preflop Strategies
This was an interesting look at developing potential 5bet/6bet ranges when 400bb deep. Versus a typical tight, live player, even KK becomes a negative EV shove against a 5bet. At least in 2015, it sounds like there weren’t many players putting in light 5bets at live tables. I really doubt much has changed on that one.
.
.
.
I’m at the point in the NLHE preflop section where virtually all the remaining videos were made after 2020. I’m curious to see how the popularization of PioSolver and GTO Wizard changes the content on this topic. I always keep an open mind and try to squeeze every drop out of every single video that I watch, but I’m definitely interested to see if there are any ideas in the remaining videos that I can apply to actual game play. So far, I have mostly just been strengthening my theoretical knowledge with the RIO videos (which is totally fine as I am super weak in that department).

All that's left for today's training agenda is putting in some reps on the GTOW Trainer. After that, it is on to the evening's 5NL session.

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/27/24 GTOW Trainer Session #7:

I was feeling extremely rundown and exhausted after only managing 6-7 hours of sleep for the past several nights. I haven't mismanaged my schedule; I've just been waking up earlier than I should for no apparent reason. In the past, this has meant I've been overusing caffeine. I'm going to titrate my dosages down and try to get my sleep back into the 7-8 hour range. In lieu of a longer training session, I opted to take a nap instead. I still got a thousand reps in on my default game-type settings of: 100bb deep, 2.5x Open, Smaller 3 Bet, and full hands dealt from start (to simulate real game play). Those reps are still very valuable for reinforcing fundamentals, but, at this point, to really get better, I usually need to pick a specific spot and focus on that. Otherwise, I can easily play a 1000 hands and not have a single new realization. Tomorrow, I'll cut it back down to about ~400 full hands and spend a good hour on a specific spot.

I'll be back later tonight with my session results. Assuming enough tables are going, I'm going to attempt seven-tabling today. I will not check my hand count, but, rather, I'm just going to play for four hours straight and stop based entirely on time rather than hand count. Until then...

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/27/24 ACR 5NL Session #8 Results

+162bb in 2381 hands

Session Overview: A Mixed Bag
In some ways, I'm proud of this session and in other ways it was a big let down. About halfway through the session, I had a mini-meltdown. I called down two recreational players who had shoved over the top of a sizeable river value bet/raise. In both cases, my hands were closer to bluff-catchers than real value: 1) I had a set without suits on a flush board (they shoved a straight without suits) and 2) I had a straight (without suits) on a flush board (they had the nut flush). These happened almost back-to-back and I lost my cool. I got pissed and ended up slamming the damn table. FAIL... /facepalm.

However, from there, I quickly realized how badly I was spiraling and I was able to lean on my meditation training to center myself through breath work. I stayed with the anger until it dissipated relying quite heavily on autopiloting for at least fifteen minutes. Eventually, it dissipated. I recovered my good spirits and I finished strong to book a win.

So, yeah, mixed bag. On the one hand, I'm proud I bounced back. On the other hand, I'm disappointed I had to bounce back from another angry outburst. On the one hand, I booked a win. On the other hand, I could've easily booked a five buy-in win had I not badly misplayed several pots versus recreationals.

Sometimes it feels like I've learned nothing about playing against recreationals, but, when I look more closely, I've clearly come a long way. The issue is that I still have a very long ways to go both in terms of ridding myself of the anger/entitlement tilt I get when I lose and in terms of automatically making the right play versus recreationals even when my emotional state isn't perfect.

First Day 7-Tabling
Oh! And I should note that seven tables presented absolutely no problem for me whatsoever. Well, there was one problem... my 7th table sat empty for at least 25-33% of the session. It was kind of a blessing in some ways, though. Many regs won't sit at a table unless there are X amount of other players there first. I got to play heads up against very bad recreational players. I took a full stack from one of them inside of 50 hands.

Anyway, I'll spend a week seven-tabling before trying to move up to eight. I'd call this first session a great success. I hardly noticed any difference in pace compared to six tables.

See You Tomorrow...
In any case, as per usual, I'll be back tomorrow morning with a thorough review of the session and at least one key hand that I took a major lesson from.

Have a good one,
Orca

7/28/24 Morning-After Session Review #10

In terms of EV loss, this is the worst session I've played since beginning this log. I'm not entirely surprised by that, but I need to do some digging to see what the "cause" is. Sometimes GTOW will mark a hand as like a -100 EV loss due to an error in their code/formulas. Nevertheless, this is really concerning to see especially as it was my first attempt at seven-tabling. If this pattern continues, I would most likely drop back down to six tables.

Though I regret calling that pot sized turn bet, this not a 100 EV mistake. I didn't take any actions the solver doesn't sometimes take. This is just a GTOW error.

With regards to the first paragraph above, as it turns out, there's a ton of EV mistakes in there from the large amount of heads up hands that I had. I don't study heads up. Ever. At all. I mostly just play my usual 6max, blind vs blind ranges which I know are way too tight. I was making "mistakes" on nearly every single heads up hand on every single street. Normally, I have maybe 1-2 dozen preflop mistakes in an entire session. I had around 70 today and almost all of them were from the heads up stuff. In other words, never mind; I'm not worried. This might well serve as the future impetus to do a little heads up study. If I want to play my desired number of tables, it is very clear I have to start some of them myself quite regularly... at least at 5NL. Whenever I look at 2NL or 10NL in the lobby, the player pool is literally 10x the size.

Rather than do a deep-dive analysis with the solver, this session was all about me completely bungling pots with recreationals. There were two themes: 1) expanding my ranges too wide versus a maniac and 2) calling river shoves/overbets that, by now, I KNOW are folds against this population (and at equilibrium, too).

The Maniac
Right in the first 100 hands or so of this session, I ran into a recreational maniac who managed to take two buy-ins off of me. I later got one back from them, but only after learning some painful lessons. This one was first and it paints the picture for later exchanges.

Manic Pot #1

The maniac limps from CO with 94o and I isolate from the SB with K9dd by raising to 3bb. I could stand to go to 4-5x here.

The flop comes 6c 5s 2d. I bet 50% pot. Villain calls.
The turn comes 6c 5s 2d, Kh. I bet 75% pot. Villain min-raises. I call.
The river comes 6c 5s 2d Kh, Ah. Villain essentially shoves all-in. I fold.
Villain shows 94o and throws that poop emoji thing at me for about three minutes non-stop (lololol).

This is not the first time I've played against Villain and this is not the first time I've seen Villain do completely bizarre and wild things. This is how Villain plays regularly. That is not going to deter me from continuing to isolate and maximize the number of pots I play against them.

Maniac Pot #2

Maniac limps UTG with AA. I isolate from the SB to 4x with A7cc. There is a good regular in the BB and I want to discourage him from participating. BB folds. Villain re-raises to 13bb. I call.

In my head, this could be any two cards... However, should I really be playing A7cc out of position against a limp re-raise range even from a maniac? I think not. Against this player, I need to pick and choose spots where I can punish his insane aggression. I'm going to lose a lot of money trying to bink outs with speculative hands. This should be a fold. I call.

The flop comes Jh 7d 6s. Villain bets 100% pot. I call.

Again, in my head, this could be any two cards, but I think I have adjusted my ranges too far at this point.

The turn comes Jh 7d 6s, Qs. Villain shoves for 84% pot. I fold. Villain shows Aces and starts throwing the poop emoji again.

Maniac Pot #3

The maniac limps from UTG with 65o. HJ attempts to isolate by raising to 4bb. CO calls behind. Hero calls behind in the SB with 99.

The flop comes 7d 4c 3h. Villain bets 100% pot. HJ calls. CO folds. I shove all-in for 116% pot. HJ folds. Villain calls. Villain turns over 65o. The runout doesn't provide any major luck and I lose. More poop is thrown at me several times.

Now, honestly, I have no idea what the hell I was thinking here. Villain has continually used pot sized bets whenever he has had something. CO's range is VERY pocket pair heavy when they call behind the HJ's isolation preflop. Everyone is looking to play a pot with the maniac and hit big. When I shove here, I'm more likely to get looked up by a set than I am to get a call from a seven. TT-JJ are also completely possible. This just made no sense on my part.

Maniac Takeaways
While, at some point, I'll need to do extensive nodelocking work and some direct research on exploiting maniacs, the main reason I wanted to highlight this exchange is because the one lesson I can learn RIGHT NOW, with no further study, is to not let bizarre plays throw me off my normal game. If I'm not sure what I'm doing, in terms of exploits, it makes more sense to stick to my training and continue to attempt to play something closer to the equilibrium strategy.

As the session progressed, I played more and more pots with this player and I had great success with just playing an ABC strategy. If I had value, I bet and kept betting. They kept calling with nothing. If I didn't have value, I just didn't bet. They beat me for a number of small pots and I beat them for huge pots with nothing more than top pairs.

So, succinctly, against comically exploitable players, don't freak out; don't overadjust. You'll lose more from attempting to exploit incorrectly than you will from just sticking to what you think equilibrium looks like.

Horrible River Calls

The next theme of the session was making horrible call downs on boards where draws had completed against recreational players. I'm not going to go into any great depth on the analysis here as these are just obviously wrong plays. I want to acknowledge them, re-feel the pain, and internalize the lessons. I don't think I need a deep dive to see why most of these are just bad calls.

Bad Call #1

Now, plenty of recreationals will bluff a scary river, but Villain also bet turn here which is likely exactly how a recreational plays a flush here. When I raise and Villain shoves, there is no way you can call this without a heart. In fact...

The solver mixes folds with K high flushes here. Like I said, just a terrible call. Moving on.

Bad Call #2

This time, I at least block the made flush. Nevertheless, is a recreational really re-raising 100% pot with air here? Even at equilibrium, this is folded 70% of the time. With a completed draw AND a high card to my TT on the board, this is an easy fold versus a fun player. Yes, if I fold 100% of these types of river raises on boards where draws complete, I'm extremely exploitable versus the regs. Does that matter versus the recs? No. It really doesn't. Just fold 100% of the time in these marginal spots. It is a SOLID exploit. How many times have I said it in this log now... 5NL players do NOT bluff the river enough!

Bad Call #3

This was against the exact same villain who had 22 above. It's very similar to the scenario in Bad Call #1. The straight AND the flush get there on this board so value betting is extremely dubious in the first place. Are you really getting a call from two pair, a T (which you block heavily), or a 9 here? If Villain has a worse set, you get the call from that, sure. However, if you want to try an exploitative value bet here, you should be targeting weak pairs that recreationals have trouble letting go of. That means the size should be small.

In reality, the value bet probably just shouldn't be attempted even against a recreational. The run out is too dangerous. Once Villain shoves over the top??? You fold 100% of the time even at equilibrium. I have no idea how many times I have to write that in this log before it sinks in, but I'm writing it at least one more time today...

Session Takeaways:
For the love of God:

5NL Villains do NOT have enough river bluffs!

Fold EVERY SINGLE MARGINAL SPOT! Forget balance here. This crap cost multiple buy-ins in this session.

Beyond the obvious strategy implications, the larger implication here is that I need to continue to strengthen my mental game. Absent the emotion of play, I know these are folds, but I'm still sticking in the calls in game. I still clearly have a hard time letting go of "strong" hands even when they are no longer strong on a particular runout. That is a mental game issue. When you know what the correct move is, and you do something else, that is tilt; that is a mental game problem. It doesn't matter if you weren't angry or visibly emotional, it is still emotionally driven decision making and it is tilt. I'm tilting off stacks here. I must continue to work on my tilt issues.

Alright, I think that's all for today's review my friends. I'll be back later today with notes on the RIO videos I watch and my GTOW Trainer results.

Until then...

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/28/24 RIO Video Study Session #10

1) Folding Ranges and Deck Analysis
This video expands on Stelio’s work to show how big of a difference preceding players folding before you affects what you range you open and how that range performs. The difference is more substantial than you might assume.

2) Range Research: Beating Recreationals Preflop
Though this video as made back in 2018, I think there are quite a few population tendencies among recreationals that haven’t changed much at all. In particular, if you’re going up against a true recreational, you’re not going to have anywhere near the usual 4-bet fold equity and their range is going to be way stronger than a reg who has studied preflop extensively. Additionally, there is good value in expanding a linear 3bet range against loose opponents. They tend not to fold enough there, either. You’ll end up playing bigger pots against hands that have no business being in a 3 bet pot. This is where you can start to include more ATo, KJo, and even KTo. They’ll usually call multiple streets chasing the most random draws while you get value from pairs. Usually, if someone is opening too many hands, they call too many 3 bets, too.

3) 200NL Zooming
a) On four flush boards, from a variety of positions, the 4bettor is going to have more flushes because they’re 4betting more AQo, AKo, etc. whereas the 4bet caller usually only has the suited versions of those hands.
b) Be careful with overusing hand classes with certain bet types. If you’re going to constantly smash in big turn overbets with strong draws, you also have to do this with two pair and strong top pairs to remain balanced. I agree that there is likely a human bias towards sizing down a bit with value and sizing up a bit with the strong draws in these situations. I need to make note of that in my own game, too. I fall into that trap sometimes. I don’t always use my randomizer in these spots.

I still have GTOW Trainers reps to put before tonight's session. I'm going to run 420 hands of simulated full game play. Then, I think I'm going to set up a new river drill that looks something like this:

CO vs BB:
Check, 33% Pot, Call
Check, 75% Pot, Call
Check, 85% Pot, Shove, Call/Fold?

I think if I can get hundreds of reps in these spots I'll stop effing up in game as much. It'll be automatic and no longer influenced by tilt.

I'll be back later with more training results. Hopefully this drill idea works well.

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/28/24 GTOW Trainer Session #10

This session was extremely productive!

I ended up just training hundreds of different river spots. I think this is something I could easily see myself spending a good week doing until this is no longer a weakness in my game. With the GTOW Trainer, you have to be super specific if you want to start the hand at the river which is a little unfortunate. I have to specify exact positions and exact lines. I can't just get it to have me start on the river facing a shove.

So, with that in mind, I mainly looked at the following lines CO vs BB:
Check - 33% Pot Bet - Call / Check - 75% Pot Bet - Call / Check - 85% Pot Bet - Shove
Check - 75% Pot Bet - Call / Check - 75% Pot Bet - Call / Check - 85% Pot Bet - Shove
Check - 75% Pot Bet - Call / Check - 125% Pot Bet - Call / Check - 60% Pot Bet - Shove

I trained about one hundred of those each. I also got about 50 reps in each spot beginning from the first CO river decision. So, in other words, I had to decide whether to triple barrel or check back and end the hand. These situations don't come up THAT often in real game play, but they still come up often enough to occur several times per session. When they do occur, they're extremely leverage spots and you want to get them right. I am extremely optimistic about using this drill to improve my river decision making in the future.

I'm going to take a quick break and then get started with my evening session.

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/28/29 ACR 5NL Session #10

+240bb in 2427 hands!

Session Review
Really proud of this one! I had to SCRAP for this win.

I was down 2 buy-ins as many as 1500 hands into the session here. I lost AA to AK for 150bb preflop, I lost AA to KK for 100bb to a runner-runner straight when villain jammed the flop in a 4 bet pot, I chopped QQ vs 22 preflop, and another chop KK vs QQ on a flop jam when they binked their set on one of the two runouts... all in the same session, lol. Standard stuff for us online players, really. I still booked the win!

I never lost my cool during any of this. I never got too tilted. I had zero angry outbursts. Admittedly, I did check the score a couple of times, but, overall, this was a great success. I made a few big mistakes, to be sure, but I didn't make any idiotic river call downs today. As they say in sports (I think?), you don't rise to the occasion; you fall to the level of your training. I train my ass off to make sure that level is constantly improving.

Again, just really happy with this. It isn't so much that I won (that doesn't hurt though, lol), it is moreso that I did SO much better managing the mental game today. I'm definitely proud of my efforts today. Go me! lol.

Tomorrow is my wife's birthday so I'll get my review and study done, but I won't have time to play or use the trainer. I'll be taking the evening off.

Hope you enjoyed your weekend everyone!

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/29/24 Morning-After Session Review #11

Sticking with the change I made yesterday, I'm going to look at a number of spots in varying depth depending on how deep I personally had to go to get a takeaway.

Super Small 3 Bet from BB
The first spot here is something that happens all the time, but I can't really train for it because GTOW solutions don't exist: a recreational player plops in a min/super small 3 bet from the blinds. This one was 6bb so it is entirely possible this is just a normal 3 bet range and they don't know proper sizing from the blinds. Ranging immediately becomes hard for me. Against a true min raise, I typically range my opponent as extremely polar with nuts and air; the more recreational the player, the more I lean towards nuts. Again, in this case, due to the size, I could just be facing a linear 3bet range.

Preflop: Hero opens 54dd on the BTN to 2.5bb. Villain raises to 6bb from the BB. Hero calls.

Flop: 6c 2h 2c. Villain bets 20% pot. Hero calls.
The sizing is pretty strange for a potential overpair here. Typically, these recreational players will go: Pot / Pot / Jam on safe runouts. It's impossible to say for sure, but this action leads me to weaken my perception of villain's range.

The AI solution HEAVILY favors overbetting here as Villain. That mirrors my experience of what real Villains do in this situation as well (bet pot):

Turn: 6c 2h 2c, 3c. Villain bets 50% bot. Hero raises 75% pot. Villain folds.
Increasing the size of the bet on this turn makes very little sense to me. If Villain had a flush draw, he likely bets the flop much bigger. At this point, I am ranging Villain as mostly having air and newly picked up semi-bluffs. Why else would this card actually prompt an increase in betting size? At the time, I believed a one-club hand was very likely. I didn't want to give him a cheap river so I raised fairly big intending to call a jam or jam if he calls and no club comes on the river. As it is, he folded.

The solver plays Villain's ENTIRE range with small bets here:

Again, the sizing just made no sense. The flush completing is better for my perceived range -- not his. My defense against these super small 3 bets is often to take the great price for my draws and/or low pocket pairs, hope to hit, and then stack their overpairs. If nothing hits, I fold and end up paying very little for the opportunity to get in a hand with fantastic implied odds. The draws hit here. A straight completes. A flush completes. Why suddenly size up when these factors favor the PFR?

Nevertheless, the solver only raises flush draws in this spot:

When facing a 100% pot raise (I used 75%), the solver defends Villain's range as follows:

All pairs and all holdings with a club are still defensed some of the time. Flushes are always defended, pairs with a club are always defended, and 2s are always defended.

The defense against a 50% raise is similar but more liberal:

Now, you're essentially always defending all pairs even without a club.

After looking at this, even knowing these solutions are an EXTREMELY rough approximation of villain's real range, I believe the large turn raise to be a mistake. When he calls, I'm isolating myself against club holdings. If a club hits on the river, I've built the pot for him. When the club doesn't hit, he has an easier time letting go of pairs with a club when I jam. I fold out all pure bluffs. If I just call here, I can fold to a large river bet if a club hits. I can raise a variety of runouts, too. If he doesn't bet, I can size down and still get a call from a variety of pairs with and without clubs.

Overall, I think slow-playing made more sense here even with the highly dynamic texture. Either way, I can't be 100% sure in these spots, but it is good to think deeply about them because they do come up often (the non-optimal 3 bet sizes).

BTN vs BB 3b Pot -- Defending against Bet - Bet - Check/Shove

I was really unsure about this one in game. I used the full clock before the time bank started trying to decide whether or not to check back the river. For context, Villain is the single tightest reg that I play against. I think I can caught on one hand the number of times I've caught him bluffing and none of them were in huge spots.

Here's what happened...

Preflop: Hero opens AQhh on the BTN for 2.5bb. Villain raises KK to 10bb in the BB. Hero calls. Effective stacks are 121bb.

Flop: As Ks 2c, Villain bets 50% pot. Hero calls.
Standard.

Turn: As Ks 2c, 3h. Villain bets 75% pot. Hero calls.
Also standard. Yes, he has AK in his range, but he also has flush draws and gut shots that play the same way. He can play ATo-AQo with a spade this way. Using a 100bb solve, this is actually just a majority shove:

The issue becomes how different this looks when you use the 150bb solve (which uses a 12bb sizing and thus has a much tighter 3b range from BB):

At 150bb deep, Villain is no longer even supposed to have ATo or AJo or any of the lower Axo that he has in abundance at 100bb deep. Which range should I give Villain considering we're 122bb deep, he's very tight, AND he used the smaller 10bb 3bet size? Eh, that's tough but it probably makes more sense to lean to the tighter range based on opponent tendencies above all else.

River: As Ks 2c 3h, 6h. Villain checks. Hero bets 33% pot. Villain shoves. Hero calls. Villain wins with three-of-a-kind kings.

This is where I really, really wanted to check back. Instead, I talked myself into the idea that it is still possible for him to have weaker aces in his range that would call a small river bet. Once he shoves, I call again because he can certainly play any of his broken draws this way.

Even at 150bb deep, the solver likes the 33% pot bet with my holding:

However, when we look at what BB is supposed to call with here, it's mostly Kx holdings and any other pairs that unblock missed spade flush draws:

Does the tight regular I'm up against fire 75% pot with any of those Kx holdings on the turn? I don't think so. That immediately makes this a bad bet in my eyes (using the 150bb ranges).

The ONLY part of his shoving range (as seen above) that I'm ahead of is the broken QJ gut shots that don't block flush draws and some 64/43 holdings. He is NOT supposed to play missed flush draws this way (because they heavily block my bluffs). He is NOT supposed to shove JT holdings presumably because they don't block my most likely holding of AQ. Still, I'm theoretically supposed to call:

Nevertheless, even after looking at this, and seeing that I'm theoretically correct, I don't like the river action against this particular opponent. Against a typical 100bb deep BB 3bet range, this is a slam dunk call, I think. Against typical villains who will find the shove with missed flushes, it is a slam dunk call. I've never once caught this guy shoving a bluff. And the only realistic bluff he's supposed to have is QJs without spades. Once he shoves, I'm beat. I need to fold.

Fold the Second Nut Flush???
This hand occurs against the exact same reg as above.

This is a multiway pot so we can't model anything precisely. Everyone should have an even stronger range than the solver predicts at each street. The BB cold-calls and gets out of the hand on the first bet. They're essentially irrelevant to the hand so I'm going to look at a custom 125bb deep SRP, CO vs SB solve to model this as closely as is realistically possible.

Preflop: Villain opens in the CO with AJhh to 2.5bb. Hero calls in the SB with KThh. Effective stacks are 125bb.

Flop: Ts 6h 3c. Hero checks. Villain checks.

Turn: Ts 6h 3c, 2h. Hero bets 125% pot. Villain calls.
While most of my range is played with middling bet sizes, the solver does overbet here about 20% of the time mixing between 125% and 175%

My goal with this bet size is just generally to end the hand right there. I likely have the best hand, but it is quite vulnerable. If I get a caller, I don't bet the river unless I improve. If I get caller, and I improve, I've built the pot. That's exactly what happens.

River: Ts 6h 3c 2h, 7h. Hero bets 150% pot. Villain shoves all-in for 83% pot. Hero calls. Villain wins with A high flush.

Putting in the overbet here is nothing unusual on my part:

Look at Villain's calling range on the turn:

Granted, this is a multiway pot, so his range should be stronger, but he's calling with weaker flush draws, Tx holdings, sets, two pairs, and straights. I can get value from so many of these holdings. The solver does generally prefer a 75% sizing and I do think that makes sense given that you're probably not going to get a call from any of the Tx holdings unless they hold a heart when you overbet. In a multiway pot, you might get someone nitty enough to start folding two pair or sets without a heart, but I still think they mostly call. Given that his turn calling range should be stronger than a heads-up pot, I don't mind my 150% pot bet here because that stronger range should still have a good chance to call down against this size.

Of course, the only real interesting part of this hand is what to do when Villain shoves over the top of the 150% overbet. I only lose to one hand: the nut flush.

I snap-called and lost. However, even against the super tight opponent I'm playing, I think you have to call here. I don't think the EV is as high as against a balanced, solver opponent, but if you don't call the 2nd nut flush then your opponent's can bluff you off of any flush board by shoving. Even versus a nitty opponent, I don't think I had a choice in the end.

Turn Overbet with the Nuts

No deep analysis here; just a friendly reminder to myself: you often smash huge 125-250% overbets here with strong draws. You have to do it with the nuts, too. That's how that range stays balanced. Yes, you'll get a lot of immediate folds, but it is what allows the bluffs to work the rest of the time.

Wrong Flop Size in 3b Pots

First, it is important to remember that J/T high textures often have a higher size for the flop c-bet than anything Q-A high -- especially from later positions. Second, when you're playing deeper than 100bb, and we were about 125bb deep here, you're really going to struggle to get it all in by the river if you use the 33% flop c-bet. Unless you bust out an overbet on the turn, which isn't often desirable because it folds out so many hands your range can get value from, you'll end up in an awkward situation where shoving is 150-200%. Going 50% on these flops when deeper solves that problem. This isn't anything I'm going to do a deep analysis on but I've had this come up repeatedly in the last 2-3 sessions.

Missed River Bluff Shove

I don't usually lack the guts to pull off bluffs, but, for some reason, the triple-barrel blocker shove in SRP is something I often find myself chickening out on. In this one, I have a huge nut advantage due to BB 3betting almost all combos of AQ and I'm blocking the JT straight which can play this way. I don't want to get too deep on this one, but, once you bet the turn, you should river with this line and this holding. I need to do a better job of finding and pulling the trigger on these blocker bluffs.

Terrible River Calldown

This has to be one of the worst river call downs I've ever made. I'm up against the most recreational of recreational players here. I put in a small bet here with a weak top pair Ace holding. He min-raises. Given the player profile, we're looking at an Ace or a draw that connects to 65. I call the big turn bet because I still have pair + gutshot and I'm blocking the completed 43 straight. However, by the river, all the straights connected to 65 get there. 78 is a straight. 43 is a straight. I beat ZERO aces because the 2 is on the board. In order for me to win this pot, this has to be a recreational triple-barreling air. I beat literally zero value that he does this with. This call was insane. I knew how bad it was when I made it. That's why I keep hammering these river situations so that I'll start making the right play even when emotion of some kind has distorted my logic. This is just so bad. This is a free 20bb gift from me to the rec.

Big Time Blunder in 4 Bet Pot

This is the most important pot of the entire session. This was just a massive, massive mistake.

Preflop: Hero opens UTG to 2.5bb. Villain raises to 7bb from the CO. Hero re-raises to 20bb. CO calls. Effective stacks are 150bb.

Flop: Jc Td 3d. Hero bets 50% pot. Villain shoves for 81% pot. Hero calls.
Villain wins with a pair of Kings on both runouts.

First, my flop bet is okay:

With the 50% sizing, I fold out many holdings that currently have me beat:

This sizing folds out some AKo without diamonds, under pairs, some AQs, and even some QQ without a diamond. The issue becomes clear when look at the shoving range...

The only "bluff" I'm ahead of here is AQdd... which I fully block:

Now, the solver doesn't have KQss in the 4-bet calling range 150bb deep here. He could have that though, right? No... I block that, too.

The only "bluffs" he can realistically have here are suited connectors with the flush draw. Other than that, the shove generally represents something that is clearly ahead doesn't want to give me equity to draw further.

Because of the holdings I'm blocking, his range is almost entirely pocket pairs and probably pocket pairs without diamonds. The best one for me would be queens. JJ and TT are sets. I need a K or runner-runner diamond to win. Against QQ, either a K or an A nets me the win... but I block QQ. Against AA, only a K can help me, but AA seems unlikely given that I'm blocking non-diamond AA holdings, too. KK without a diamond makes some sense, and I'm not blocking that. Regardless, I'm blocking almost all of his bluffs and I have very few outs versus the value. This is an autofold.

This was a -40 EV call:

My big errors here were thinking that I had for more outs than I really did and not considering fully just how badly I was blocking his bluffing range. The blocker effect is huge.

If you look, AKo with a diamond is basically a 100% call:

With AKo, you're blocking AA/KK and unblocking QQ. It is more likely that both of your over outs are still live. This is a pattern I've seen repeatedly against this check - bet / shove line in 4bet pots: you can bluff catch with AK in some of these doublebroad way flush spots but you CANNOT do it with AQ. This was an expensive lesson to learn, but I won't make this mistake ever again.

An Interesting Line with ATo in a 3b Pot

SB vs BTN in 3b pot here. Flop comes down T96fd. I have ATo without the relevant flush suit. I bet small because the board is highly connected. However, it turns out the correct size is 75% here. Once you take that 75% bet, and the turn comes back clean, you're supposed to stuff it all-in:

Given that I lost this pot because Villain rivered one of their straight draw outs, this would've been a handy line to know about. I think the key here is how draw heavy the board is. You're not going to look for big bet / turn jam with every JJ or Tx holding on every texture. This one has both a straight draw and a flush draw. You always have to worry about overs. I just thought this was an interesting, solver-approved way to protect your vulnerable top pair equity.

Double Broadway Flush Texture in 3b Pot

This is the longest time I've ever spent studying a previous session so I'm going to keep the rest of these very short. I just thought this was an interesting spot. You're supposed to overbet turn here almost 100% of the time with anything that unblocks both spade and straight draws. Villain's range is very, very draw heavy in these spots. Just something to look out for and keep in your back pocket.

AKs on Flush Board

When you a double broadway on a flush board, especially AK, you block the only other hand that will be willing to call a huge overbet or jam. You have to size down:

Aaaaaand that is it for this doozy of a review. I apologize for any careless errors in the writing; I just don't have time to edit this due to the length.

Today is my wife's birthday so I won't be engaging in my usual schedule. I might actually just play a short, early afternoon session instead of watching RIO videos and hitting the GTOW trainer. That way, I still have something to review tomorrow morning. I think it is the least disruptive to my schedule.

Anyways...

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/29/24 ACR 5NL Session #11

-110bb in 498 hands.

I didn't have time for even a full hour of play here. Oh well. At least I'll have a small sample to look at for tomorrow morning's review.

The rest of the day will be spent on birthday activities for the wife.

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/30/24 Morning-After Review Session #12

As you can imagine, there isn't a lot to talk about from a 500 hand session:

3bet/Squeeze Pot Turn Barreling with "Air"

I have noticed that I tend to give up too quickly, or at least I nearly always give up, after the first barrel on paired boards if the turn doesn't bring me any additional equity.

The global c-bet frequency on this paired board is lower than I'd expect:

When you look at UTG's squeeze calling range, it is very strong and very tight. Facing that 50% flop c-bet, you don't necessarily accomplish anything useful:

You're folding out KJ/KT hands that have equity, but you're also currently ahead of them. You fold out KQ which you have dominated (and you block). You fold out some AQs which you also block. You're mostly just betting into a range that has zero problem calling with almost all holdings.

The turn barrel starts to fold out pocket pairs below the T and the 5 as well as the remaining suited broadway hands:

Depending on what the river brings, you can certainly fire the third all-in barrel:

On any Q+ river, you're firing almost your entire range. Even on bricks, there's mixed shoving with AQ here.

On the hypothetical K run-out, Villain has to defend QQ, JJ, and even some 77:

Is that happening often? Probably not at 5NL. Proper defense also relies on trapping AKo/s and KK++ at the proper frequency which I also have my doubts about.

So, again, I don't have to give up quite so quickly with these holdings as I have a fair few legitimate outs as well as scare cards that provide greatly bluffing opportunities here. I think I both have more fold equity than I thought and more than I should in these spots against real villain ranges. That said, somewhere in the back of my mind, I should also keep in mind I am probably c-betting these textures too much to begin with.

C-Bet Frequency in 4bet Pots
I know you can't c-bet every single texture 100% in 4bet pots, but a lot of 5NL villains seem to interpret any check as weakness and they just start going off:

This is a spot where I would really benefit from using a HUD. If I know villain's 4bet statistics, I can quickly grasp what their 4bet range might look like. Some recreationals literally only have premiums. Others seem to call way too wide and give up way too fast. Against the former, you obviously want to c-bet way less and, against the latter, the strategy is the exact opposite. I was playing at a different time of day than usual and I'd never seen this villain before so I opted for "equilibrium" play as a baseline. However, I think this may be a case where opting for "population tendency exploit" is than the better baseline. It may well be always the better baseline until specifically proven otherwise.

Fire the Triple Barrel All-in Bluff or No?
To me, this was the most (and only truly) interesting spot of this very short session:

Preflop: Villain1 is in the CO and opens to 2.2bb. Villain2 on the BTN calls. Hero squeezes from the BB to 12bb.

First, even though CO only opens to 2.2, I think the better sizing here is 13-15bb. I think the 12bb is a little bit too good of a price and encourages continues. This isn't the hand I want to encourage continues with either.

Flop: Ks 9c 2c. Hero bets 33% pot. CO folds. BTN calls.

I pickup a pair on the flop and immediately opt for the small c-bet. 20% might make even more sense here given the pot is already bloated multiway, but I don't have access to multiway solves so I can't truly know what equilibrium looks like. In any case, K high textures crush my range.

Given that BTN cold-called the CO open and then called behind the squeeze as well, his range should be fairly predictable: suited connectors, pocket pairs up to JJ or so, suited double-broadways, and maybe some AQo + A5s.

For the sake of having something to look, if we pretend that only BTN called the squeeze, when BTN then also calls the 33% cbet, BTN is supposed to defend backdoor spade flush draws, all club flush draws, Ks, and back door club flush draws including AQo and pocket pairs with a club. That's a very wide defense range:

My guess is that a real villain's defense will be more equity driven and based around sets, gutshots, club flush draws, Kx, and pocket pairs above the 9.

Turn: Ks 9c 2c, Qs. Hero bets 50% pot. Villain calls.

The Qs turn here is good for my range. The JT straight completes here, which I block. I pickup a gutshot to the J. The second barrel won't get rid of any of the flush draws, but it should fold out most of the remaining pocket pairs without additional gutshot equity:

River: Ks 9c 2c Qs, 2d. Hero shoves all in for ~50% pot. Villain calls. Villain wins with K8cc.

All the remaining draws miss here. With my 9, I'm possibly ahead of many of those draws. I think this is where this becomes a rather interesting spot. If I check back, I give villain the opportunity to potentially bluff the flush draws he's whiffed on. However, I also give him the opportunity to see a cheap showdown with any remaining pocket pairs and AQ holdings that made it to the river. What to do?

Against a properly defensed range, the solver prefers to shove, but it is indifferent.

As I thought, this is mostly because the shove gets rid of some of the remaining pairs that called the turn because they still had a gut shot:

You're not really folding out a lot of weaker Kx with this shove.

As it turned out, Villain called the squeeze way too wide and had K8cc. That is one reason why squeezing is so profitable. Many Villains flat the squeeze way too wide.

Overall, considering this shove is indifferent at equilibrium against one opponent, I think it is probably a bad shove in a multiway pot. I don't think, in a multiway pot, you're getting all the same back door flush floats. Villain is not as incentivized to defend as wide and they don't defend that wide in the first place. I don't think many of those AQo holdings with a club even get to the turn. I don't think many of the pocket pairs below 9 with a club get to the turn. And I don't think many of the pairs with a gut shot are defended frequently enough on the turn to make the river bluff profitable.

I created a custom solution where Villain was overfolding flop/turn with the changes discussed above. The river strategy for my range changes drastically:

As you can see, this spot becomes nearly a range check. After the check, Villain is supposed to shove a huge portion of his missed draws:

When he does shove here, I'm calling with every single pair at least sometimes:

Again, overall, I think checking back this river makes the most sense. I may get stacked regardless with these specific holdings, but, in similar spots, where we arrive to the river with basically just strong hands and air, and I have a medium strength hand, it probably makes more sense to keep his bluffs in his range and check back. Against an actual human's range, this shove likely just isolated me against Kx holdings, sets, and JT. All the missed flushes just fold. The pocket pairs which might be beating me aren't around anymore to worry about.

Somehow, I still managed to turn a 500 hand review into an essay, but that is all for this one today, folks.

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/30/24 RIO Video Study Session #12

1) Preflop Impact on Cbetting Strategies
The first example here takes a look at how opening to 2.5x versus 2x effects the c-betting strategy used. Against the wider 2x calling range, the solver uses all sizes and a more polarized strategy. Against the narrow 2.5x calling, the strategy is closer a range bet for 33%.

UTG vs BB: you’re already forcing some indifference from top pairs on JT2r when you go 75% flop, 125% turn. This gives me an idea for exploiting typical recreation

2) Preflop Adjustments
The first few minutes of this video drives home a point I learned the hard way: you cannot use solutions when studying/training that don’t fit your rake structure. You’ll get destroyed. By taking my VPIP from ~28% to ~23%, my win rate has literally gone up 13bb/100h all-in adjusted.

The next part of the video focuses on the “calling horizon”. These are points on the extreme ends of the sizing spectrum where strategy changes drastically. Against very small sizes, you have to call incredibly frequently. There then comes a point against sizes that are so big that you can't have a calling range. These sizes are smaller than you think!

For example, in SRP BTN vs BB, against a 4x open, you basically don’t have a calling range. You only raise/fold. Against a 2x open, you’re calling 57% and only folding 29%. Note to self: 4x makes for a good, GTO-ish isolation size because of this. Also, you’re folding 55% vs. 2.5x and 68% vs. 3x. At some point, I’m going to have find pre-exist solves or do my own for 3x. 3x is used all the time in my pool and you can’t just close your eyes and pretend it is the same as 2.5x.

In 3 bet pots, CO vs BTN, you don’t have a calling range against 4x, either. That is raise-fold territory. I also run into this! When I open 2.5x, at least a few times per session, I’ll see a 3bet to 10bb from BTN. Against a 2.5x 3 bet, you’re calling ~50%. Against 3x, that drops to 29%. These are huge differences in resulting range composition versus relatively small bet size changes.

In 4 bet pots, CO vs BTN, you’re calling 64% against 2.5x 4 bets and calling only 32% against 3x 4 bets. There’s no way that I am defending properly against these minor sizing differences. There is no way anyone in my pool is playing these correctly, either. Again though, we see at 3.5x, you’re only jam/folding.

In 4 bet pots, BB vs BTN, you’re calling 49% against 2.0x 4 bet and calling 1% at 2.3x. That’s an insane difference. In my games, at least once per session, someone will 4-bet one of my BB raises to 10-11bb and they'll make it 30-40bb. I now know that the only proper response here is jam/fold. I've always suspected that and I mentioned something similar when I brought up an ATs hand not that long ago. It is good to see the math confirm my suspicions. I will definitely make this adjustment going forward.

Still BB vs BTN: Against recreational players who call too often, you’re not going to 3bet as polarized from the BB. Using a more linear strategy, you’ll make more money. Against a recreational who is using a tighter, linear 4 bet strategy, you have to become much tighter yourself as well. You’re only shoving QQ+ and AKo/AKs. This is a key realization for me. It is unnecessary to shove TT/JJ holdings if the villain isn't playing a polarized range. Only the best regs do that at 5NL. I can make that adjustment, too. That's a HUGE difference.

This was my favorite RIO video so far. There was tons of immediately applicable information. I already plugged a big leak just from watching this (responding to 4x 3bets/4bets). To fully take advantage of this information, I’m going to have to learn to use a HUD properly. I’ve always felt that I was calling jams / jamming too wide preflop by “following the charts” versus many recreationals. This video mathematically demonstrates that is the case.

I still have GTOW Trainer work to do before tonight's session.

I have a doctor's appoint today because I've injured myself again (face palm). This time it was my calf. It went pop pop pop during some leg pressing and now I'm limping around. I'm just hoping it doesn't require surgery, but I'm not optimistic. Once you've heard a muscle/tendon tear, you can't really forget the sound and you're not likely to mistake it for something else. The doctor can't do anything at all, of course. They just give you a referral to an orthopedist... who also does nothing except refer to you a place that can run an MRI on you... who also tell you absolutely nothing and all they do is give the MRI back to the orthopedist... who then schedules another appointment to read to you what they see in the MRI... and THEN you schedule a surgery if you need one. Each step can be more than a week apart depending on appointment availabilities. In the mean time, you're just injured and waiting to find out what is going to happen. It's a very fun process that I'm greatly looking forward to going through yet again, lol.

In any case, you don't need a functional calf to play poker! So I do have that going for me.

Have a good one!
~Orca

7/30/24 GTOW Trainer Session #12

I did not get a ton of reps in today.

Due to the aforementioned doctor's appointment, I only had time for ~420 full hands from start and then I worked specifically on squeeze pots from all spots starting from preflop. I managed to get in about 225 reps of those. So, all in all, I got about 650 reps in today. That's better than zero, I suppose.

I'll be back much later this evening with the results of my session.

One quick note on my progress towards beating 5NL... If I can win 250bb this session, I have accomplished my goal of 50,000+ hands and 20+ buy-ins.

I'm currently +18 buy-ins in the last 50,000 hands. I'm +25 buy-ins in the last 20k hands after I tightened my preflop ranges. The left side of the graph from when I was still VPIP'ing 28% is still dragging me down quiiiiiiiite a bit. Still, I'm on the precipice of beating this stake and it could possibly happen tonight.

Wish me luck!

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/30/24 ACR 5NL Session #12

+309bb in 1150 hands...

I told my wife that if I got up 250bb+ in this session, I'd cut it early so we could spend a little extra time together tonight to celebrate. Celebrate what, exactly?

I HAVE BEATEN 5NL:

+2065bb in my last 50749 hands.

Starting tomorrow, I'll be testing out a new pool... the 10NL pool on ACR! On the advice I've received from better players, 10NL and 25NL are where I should be anyway (ASAP).

ACR takes 5% or caps rake at $3 per pot. $3 isn’t going to be less than 5% until you’re playing at least a 100NL all-in pot. I'll do my best to move up quickly while still satisfying my desire to beat each stake. 20+ buy-ins across at least 50k hands is not an unreasonable standard, I think. That is far less than my usual monthly volume. I'll have to see how it goes.

Dear Diary...
I am damn proud of myself for this. I know full well that many others have beaten 2NL and 5NL much faster than I did. Hell, it took me 300k hands in the last four months to finally get the job done at 5NL. I do believe I could've done it faster had I fixed my preflop tendencies sooner, but that is irrelevant right now.

At my lowest point, I had lost 100 buy-ins at 5NL... I was on a ONE-HUNDRED BUY-IN DOWNSWING. There were moments during that time where I not only doubted my ability to ever be a winning poker player, but it was also one of the few times in my entire life where I truly wondered if I was just not intelligent enough to do something.

However, doubt and fear are not sufficient reasons to stop trying. What I am most proud of is that I never once truly considered giving up. I kept showing up to the tables every single day. I kept studying every single day. I tried to address every leak that I discovered both in my game and in my life. I paid the price to achieve this goal and, as corny as it is, it means a lot to me. For me, this is an emotional moment.

Tomorrow I will tackle 10NL with renewed vigor and an even larger fire under my ass than the one that already exists. I want to be a winning player, dammit.

The poker dream is still alive!

Have a good one,
~Orca

p.s. check out the new thread title, :)

Congratulations Orca. Keep staying consistent with your training and your schedule. Seems to me that it is very important to keep working on your mental game and putting systems in place to help give you structure in your journey.

good job on making improvement so far.

7/31/24 Morning-After Review Session #13

I only played ~1100 hands in this session and, in the end, there just wasn't much to look at. I looked through every single pot and this was the only hand I really wanted to dig into. Because I'm only looking at one pot today, I'm going to try and dip deep into this one.

Preflop: Hero opens in the SB with QQ to 3bb. Villain raises from the BB to 12bb. Hero re-raises to 25bb. Villain calls.

Flop: Ad Kh 5s. Hero bets 25% pot. Villain calls.
This is just about the least favorable flop for QQ that you can imagine, but it is obviously amazing for my range in general.

See, I know the "by the book" sizing here is to bet 10% pot. SB has a massive equity advantage here range vs. range. The small bet pushes the equity advantage and I think many reg villains are still overfolding to this size especially blind vs blind. I'm not sure if the pool realizes how differently blind vs blind pots play even when they're 3bet or 4bet pots. The ranges are just so much wider than other 3bet and 4bet spots.

BB is not supposed to fold ANY pocket pairs to this sizing. None. Plenty of folks are already folding lower pocket pairs on this texture against this size.

However, recs often interpret these super small bets as nuts/air and they have a tendency to raise the shit out of them. For better or worse, I often use one size up against recreationals to try and avoid them misinterpreting my sizing as weakness. I think, in retrospect, that's probably just a mistake. As long as I keep my range balanced, it shouldn't matter. Some recs will overfold and some recs will overraise or overcall. As long as I play the next moves correctly, I should profit, overall, in both situations. And, in any case, this trains me to play the correct line as a default versus good and unknown opponents rather than defaulting to the bigger size.

Turn: Ad Kh 5s, Td. Hero bets 25% pot. Villain calls.

Betting the turn here is a clear mistake. Once Villain calls the 25% pot bet, my equity advantage shrinks.

The solver prefers to check 100% of the time here when you bet 25% on the flop:

Even if you bet 10% on the flop, you're still overwhelmingly checking back the turn:

In particular, this sizing incentivizes Villain to continue with many holdings (including lots of draws) and, while an Ax holding can be played this way, if I want to represent a strong holding, 50% makes more sense here.

Villain only folds the weakest Kx holdings to this 25% bet:

Villain becomes indifferent with, or starts to pure folding, Kx holdings without flush draws or at least a flush blocker against 50%:

River: Ad Kh 5s Td, Tc. Hero Checks. Villain bets 15% pot. Hero folds.

When you do arrive to the river in this fashion with QQ, you're never checking. You're always jamming.

The jam here makes a ton of sense when you see how the solver is supposed to respond:

You're folding out all remaining Kx holdings except the ones that are full houses and sets. You even make AJ holdings fold or become indifferent. Now is a real recreational villain folding AJ here? I don't think so, but I do think you get the folds from Kx. You also avoid facing a tough bluff-catching situation on the river.

Villain bet 15% on the river. When the solver bets 10% on the river, QQ beats absolutely nothing except some slivers of 65s and 54s that remain (the ones that missed the diamond flush draw).

Considering that even some Kx holdings become indifferent to this river size, I think folding QQ here is appropriate:

What did I learn?

When I evaluate this hand as played, I think it is clear I missed a jam. That said, my strong intuition here is that he had Ax or better. Nevertheless, the correct play is the correct play.

And, on that note, I think the more important take away is how the hand should play out when you take the far, far, far, far more common turn-check line.

When Hero check backs the turn, Villain, essentially, either checks about 50% of the time or bets 25% about 50% of the time.

I want to look at how I should respond to both situations.

Let's start with branch where Villain bets 25%:

All QQ holdings become indifferent. The weakest holdings that continue are Tx with gutshots. All the rest is, at a minimum, Kx and flush draws.

I'm not going to post pictures for every size, but, on the river, QQ is close to a pure call against a 10% bet, indifferent to 25%, and a pure fold against a shove:

Now, in the branch where Villain checks back turn, we generally check back river, too:

In this scenario, Villain really only checks down the river, bets 50% or shoves:

Against the shove, you pure fold. Even against 50%, there is some suit magic going on with my particular holding, but QQ is still close to a pure fold:

No, Seriously... What Did I Learn?

As boring and simple as this "takeaway" is after such a long analysis, the best way to play my range on this flop is to mostly use that 10% sizing as a range bet. Obviously, there are deviations with certain holdings and good reasons to deviate against certain types of opponents. However, in general, just bet the 10% on the flop and polarize with a 50% sizing on the turn. Try to get the cheapest showdown possible with these third pair type holdings.

If you are going to take the more aggressive line, you need to go all the way and turn your QQ into a bluff-shove. Stopping one street short just costs you an extra bet with very little turn fold equity. You don't FULLY get the Kx out of there until you shove river.

In short, when you go aggressive, go aggressive. Otherwise, bet small and try to get that cheap showdown.

This is something I can begin to implement immediately in many/most similar 4bet pot textures.

That's all for this review folks!

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/31/24 RIO Video Study Session #13

1) Designing Deepstacked Preflop Strategies:
Core Principles
a) Preflop ranges are much more flexible (and slightly wider) and offer more opportunities for exploits
b) Wider flatting ranges even from positions that normally 3bet/fold
You even have a flatting range HJ vs UTG and sometimes flat as wide as KK
c) Reverse-odds and implied odds are magnified (SPR is higher!)
d) Strong offsuit hands like AK and AQ aren’t as valuable
e) 3bet ranges are less linear: nutted hands have more value
f) The impact of rake is reduced with more money behind
g) 3bet, 4bet, 5bet sizes all go up

3 Betting
a) We’re allowed to open wider from every position (except SB) because there is less incentive to 3bet medium strength hands and thus overall 3 bet frequencies drop
b) Most hands really hate to face a 4bet because the 4bets will be much bigger thus providing terrible odds to medium pocket pairs (this can happen to hands even as strong as QQ)
c) AKo is significantly devalued due to reverse implied odds post flop: it has great blockers and can generate an amazing amount of fold equity but the value of TPTK drops dramatically when deep stacked with higher SPRs (just like in SRP)
d) Set mining becomes less profitable because the odds of being up against straights, flushes, and better sets goes way up. You’ll end up against TPTK and two pairs less often than 100bb in 3bet pots.
e) In general, when IP, we defend mostly by flatting. Our 4bet range becomes extremely polarized.

4 Betting
a) We mostly want to use big 4 bet sizes and very polarized strategies as 5 bet shoves gives poor odds to any holding that isn’t KK or AA
b) If you face a small 4 bet, you can defend more aggressively
c) Use an aggressive 4 bet strategy against players that 3bet wide, linear ranges
d) In live settings, even stacking off with KK might be -EV
Being OOP
a) The value of position is amplified the deeper you get
b) 4betting is the best tool for OOP because it decrease SPR and decrease the value of position
c) 3betting ranges becomes MUCH tighter and even some premium/semi-premium hands become mixed calls
d) Offsuit hands go down in value because pairs go down in value with the higher SPR

Table Dynamics
a) Most hands now played a mixed strategy. These gives you more room to maneuver and choose the line you think works best against that type of opponent
b) We’re incentivized to cold call more often to get weaker players involved
c) Against a squeeze, the cold-caller has a much higher calling %. The original raiser is incentivized to 4bet far more often because of this.
.
.
.
2) Understanding EV Preflop

a) Old linear charts tend to outperform more modern charts in low stakes games because other players are not following modern charts, either. Modern charts solve for equilibrium. Most recs and even regs at low stakes do not play an equilibrium preflop strategy.

b) Rake is the “hidden player”. The bigger the rake, the more the marginal holdings become -EV. Nevertheless, against recreationals who make big mistakes postflop, we can regain that EV and we still want to maximize the hands we play against them (especially if the regs let us)

c) Adjusting to Nits: open more aggressively – especially with steals, 3 bet more aggressively if they fold a lot or don’t 4bet enough, fold more often to their 3bets especially if they come from BB, don’t try to run them over if they’re showing strength, just fold marginal defenses as they are -EV against a tighter range

d) Adjusting to aggressive players: tighten up opening range when they’re in position, 4 bet the right amount – do not increase frequency, we want to have the stronger range post-flop, do not decrease BB 3bet frequency

e) Against 3bet and 4bet: slightly bigger sizes can have a huge negative impact on calling frequency; worry less about overfolding preflop and worry more about defending marginal hands for multiple streets in big pots. If they use a small size, frequency can potentially go way up.

f) Notes to self: if someone is not 3-betting enough from BB, even by a small amount, it dramatically changes the continuing strategy. Most opponents do not come close to perfectly imitating the junk/”bluff” part of the BB 3bet range. That likely means I’m continuing way too wide from the BTN against BB 3 bets.

Have a good one,
~Orca

7/31/24 GTOW Trainer Session #13

Today's work:
1) 420 full hands from start randomly selected from 200bb/150bb/100bb stack depths, GTO or 2.5x opens, and GTO or Smaller 3 Bet sizes -- this is my usual "full game play simulation" work to keep fundamentals sharp

2) 240 full hands from start 100bb deep, 2.5x opens and hero exclusively plays BB. You can never, ever be too good from the BB. The less you lose here, the easier it is to have a great win rate. In particular, I focused on check-raise frequencies quite a bit.

I'm about to fire up a Primed Mind audio and get started with my first session at 10NL! I'll be back in ~5 hours with the results of my maiden voyage into the 10NL pool, lol.

Have a good one!
~Orca

Make sure you have time to assimilate the information and let it consolidate. after a heavy study load it's good to not just dive in to a session, you need to rest and let that fatigue of engaging reset.

7/31/24 10NL on ACR Session #1

+558bb in 2543 hands across exactly 4 hours of play (7-tables)

Is That It???
My first impression of 10NL... is that all you've got? This felt no harder than 5NL. I saw a few less people limping, but the play seemed to be exactly the same level as 5NL. I didn't notice any increase in difficulty. There were a few solid regs who I've already identified, but there were a few of those at 5NL, too. In fact, I recognized many of the user names from my days in 2NL and 5NL! There were way, way more tables going which was awesome, but I can't say there is much difference in the skill of the pool... so far. Maybe I'm speaking too soon.

Other Notes
At times, it felt like this session was just dragging on because all the spots I was getting into were so simple. I was fighting against autopilot during the 2nd to 3rd hour because the pace of play was actually a little slow compared to what I prefer. I'm going to stick to my plan of playing seven tables for at least a week before I make the jump to eight-tabling, but I really don't think it is going to be a challenge.

I'm struggling to get quality sleep lately for some reason and I felt the fatigue coming on towards the end of this session. In the last 45 minutes, I actually yawned several times from sleepiness. I'll need to further reduce my caffeine use and maybe take a day off here to get back on the right side of the fatigue ledger. Tired play is not optimal play. I know that much.

I wouldn't really call this "shot taking" 10NL, but I would call it a successful first session! I'm feeling optimistic about my chances to beat this stake in an efficient manner.

I'll be back tomorrow with some hand histories from this session.

Have a good one!
~Orca

Good volume and a lot of effort into the studies.
Motivating and I found something interesting which certainly can think of.

How do you find energy to study and play so much?

8/1/24 Morning-After Session Review #14

There is one hand in here where the GTOW Analyzer says I lost like 5000 EV, which isn't even possible. When you look at the hand, it's clear there's just a malfunction in the code so I'm just going to ignore that, lol.

Bluff-Catching 4bet Check-Raise Jams

Preflop: Hero opens A5cc UTG to 2.5bb. Villains raises from the CO to 7.5bb. The action folds back to Hero who re-raises to 20bb. Villain calls.
Flop: 6d 5s 3d, Hero bets 25% pot. Villain jams for 112% pot. Hero folds.

This was a very tough spot for me. I almost used my entire time bank. It is important to note that I am in this pot versus someone I have identified as a good reg. Obviously, I have nothing more than a bluff-catcher here on a board where there can be quite a few bluffs. Against a more recreational player, you might have an easier fold. Versus a villain who can easily be semi-bluffing with suited connectors or double-broadway flush draws, the situation is different.

Before I get into any of my reasoning, it is important to acknowledge that 50% is by far the preferred size for my range here:

Due to both the connectivity, the 6 being the high card, and the flush being present, I think polarizing with a big flop bet makes a good deal of sense.

What is villain jamming here? I'm putting him on vulnerable overpairs like TT-QQ, double-broadway flush draws, and low suited connectors with straight and flush draws. The solver uses a narrower jamming range here against the 25% pot bet:

Against the 50% sizing that is more typically used by my range, the shoving range looks more realistic:

As played, Hero is supposed to call 100% of the time:

The EV of the call here is 0.81. That means, realistically, if villain is even slightly unbalanced towards value in this line, this is not a call. If villain is slightly unbalanced towards the semi-bluffs, it becomes an automatic call.

Ultimately, I think I am okay with my fold here. As is clear from the solver data, this would be a very high variance call down. This is close. The overbet shove, in my mind, against a human, is more likely to swing towards vulnerable overpairs than draws. The 25% pot bet, against a human, gives them a good price to see another card with those draws. I think a reg is calling at least some of the time to see the next card with that price. As such, I'm discounting a bit of the semi-bluffs and weighting towards overpairs.

Even if it isn't overpairs, most of the semi-bluffs have tons of outs. Even 87s not only has a straight draw and a potential flush draw depending on suits, but it also has two overs. The same goes for any double-broadway shove. Villain has a shit load of outs. If I need them, I only have five.

Again, this was a high variance spot and I ultimately opted for the fold. I just need to make sure that I don't ALWAYS fold these spots to regulars because they very well could notice and develop exploits.

Passive Turn Play with Strong Draws

No deep analysis here. I have a bad habit of passive turn play with relatively strong draws. I need to raise the turn more often.

Dominated Straight Draws

Again, no deep analysis; these are just obvious blunders.

In Hand #1, If a K comes, Ax is a big part of Villain's range. Even if an 8 comes, the AK straight is already complete and villain has more of that in his range. Even if I peel a J, I may still lose to the AK straight. This was a 50bb donation. You can't make donations that big. This is a mistake I make too frequently with dominated straights.

In Hand #2, if the T comes, the AK straight completes which Villain has at full frequency in his range and I don't. Additionally, the Ts may be a dead out on the flush texture. This isn't a draw worth calling a single bet.

Another Missed River Fold

I just couldn't let go of the set, could I? This Villain just may be the most fun of all the fun players in the pool. This is already a 100% fold, but, against this villain, it is a 200% fold. I will continue to highlight every time I make dumb decisions like this on the river until I stop doing it.

Bluffed Off The Pot?

Preflop: Hero opens JTss on the BTN to 2.5bb. Villain in the SB raises to 10bb. Hero calls.

Flop: Jc 6c 4h. Villain checks. Hero bets 50% pot. Villain raises 50% pot. Hero calls.

Villain should be 3betting a fairly wide, linear range when they use this sizing:

His checking range, theoretically, is fairly polar and quite well-defended with many traps as shown above. Because of that polarity, I am incentivized to stab small and wide with my range in order to generate folds a good price while paying less when I take the trap-bait:

I knew the correct sizing here, but I made the mistake of playing my hand instead of my range thinking I could generate more folds with this size and get protection for my vulnerable top pair. Instead, I face a fairly big 50% check-raise. The solver check-raises the following range:

The 50% size is not really used, but, when it is, the main holdings are overpairs without a club, AJx without a club, and Axs nut flush draws where the second card is low.

Even against the big raise, Hero is supposed to call:

Turn: Jc 6c 4h, Qs. Villain shoves all-in for 64% pot. Hero folds.

I found this to be a tough spot. As I mentioned above, this big check-raise line is mainly taken with flush draws and overpairs by the solver. Is a human doing something super different? My intuition says... no. I think human play and solver play probably align here.

Here's what the solver is shoving turn with:

We can see that the main candidates are: AK, AJ/KJ, nut flush draws, and overpairs. However, do we do think that a human villain is so liberally shoving Jx holdings after a queen turn? They might do it sometimes, but I don't think it will be as frequently as 70% of the time which is what the solver is doing here -- especially KJ. To me, against a human, this range is even more polarized. To me, the holdings that make sense are AK, KK-AA, and nut flush draws. QQ-JJ are also possibilities, but those hands have outs to the nuts and are going to use non-shove sizing at least some of the time on the turn.

Against the solver's range, this is a call 95% of the time. At ~+3.3EV, in a 200 chip pot, this is still a very high variance call down, but it is borderline mandatory. If the range is even more polarized than the solver's, which I think is very likely for reasons discussed above, I'm not sure how that changes the picture.

I decided to do a custom AI solve where the Jx holdings were largely taken out of the shoving range:

Here, I have Villain shoving strong Qx, overpairs, all flush draws, and sets. Against this stronger, more polarized range, JT becomes a very clear fold:

Now, it is possible I gave far too wide of a shoving range there and that would certainly impact the outcome of the solve. However, I think what is clear here is that JTss is a pure bluff-catcher. You're hoping for AK or a flush draw with that shove and both of those holdings still have outs. You're behind any real value including stronger Jx. I think this is likely another high variance spot and I don't feel too bad about mucking this one.

Folding the Nut Flush!?

We can't consult the solver for this one without making a ton of assumptions and doing some nodelocking. BB is never supposed to lead here so the solves aren't useful because the ranges that arrive to the river make no sense.

Typically, I assume that players who are leading are doing so with an extremely unbalanced, value heavy range at these stakes. I make this assumption until proven otherwise due to my experience and seeing a bunch of show downs. When Villain continues to barrel with the overbet on the turn, after leading a flop that doesn't favor his range, I'm largely putting them on value heavy holdings like 44 and QT. I can see this line with something KJss as well, but I'm heavily discounting gutshots that don't have at least one spade. When the river brings another queen and pairs the board, and villain snap shoves for 260% pot, I can't fully discount either QTo or 44. What bluffs would take this line? Maybe a missed gutshot that holds the K of spades? Villain can't be making a nut flush blocker bluff because I hold the nut flush. I just couldn't find enough draws to make this range balanced and I went ahead and mucked the nut flush. In this same situation, with this same line, I think I'd do it again.

That's all for today, folks! I'm going to take a short break to trot the hounds and then I'll be back with RIO Training Video notes for the day.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/1/24 RIO Video Study Session #14

I have finished the preflop section!

I'm a little conflicted as to whether or not I want to skip videos made before roughly ~2018. I know Pio was released in 2015ish and became widespread a year or two later. Many of the videos before that date are often about how people did all the stuff that solvers now do by hand. I ALWAYS get some value out of it but the ratio of useful information to mere interesting discussion is pretty low compared to the videos made in ~2018-2020+. For now, I guess I'll go for completion and do my best to go through everything. At ~2 videos per day, it'll still take me less than a year to watch them all so that's really nothing in the grand scheme of things.

1) Building A Strategy: Preflop and Flop Play
Good reminder here that many microstakes players call 3bets too much and don’t 3 bet enough themselves. This incentivizes a stronger, more linear 3 bet range and it incentives overfolding against 3 bets – especially speculative hands. Many 4 bet ranges are even worse in terms of how tight they are. Against low 4 bet % players, you’re probably only continuing AA and KK in many spots.

Uri Peleg Heuristic: most players are risk averse! If in doubt about whether you should bluff, lean towards bluff. A risk averse opponent overfolds. If in doubt about whether you should bluff catch, fold. A risk averse opponent under bluffs.

2) Three Types of 3 Bet Ranges, Part II
This video covers one of my biggest weaknesses: using the HUD to influence strategy decisions. In particular, this video covers how to use HUD stats to decide whether to flat or 3 bet. I still don’t even use a HUD (outside of an RNG #) so I’m filing this information away for later use.

Still feeling physically tired today so I'm very likely to substitute some GTOW Trainer time for a nap. The plan is to work very specifically on this situation in GTOW:

4 bet preflop: Hero 50% pot bet, villain jams, call/fold? The solver doesn't take that line a lot, but humans do. I see it every single session.

Until next time...

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/1/31 GTOW Trainer Session #14

I decided to focus entirely on responding to flop jams in 4 bet pots.
It looked like this:

4 Bet Pot:
CO vs BTN: 50% Bet, Jam, Call/Fold? - 100 Hands
CO vs BTN: 25% Bet, Jam, Call/Fold? - 50 Hands
UTG vs BTN: 50% Bet, Jam, Call/Fold? - 50 Hands
UTG vs BTN: 25% Bet, Jam, Call/Fold? - 50 Hands
SB vs BB: 50% Bet, Jam, Call/Fold? - 50 Hands
SB vs BB: 25% Bet, Jam, Call/Fold? - 50 Hands
SB vs BB: Check, 50% Bet, Jam, Call/Fold? - 50 Hands
SB vs BB: Check, 25% Bet, Jam, Call/Fold? - 50 Hand

Takeaways:
1) These spots are extremely intuitive for the most part. I just got unlucky running into a few tough spots here lately. Until you get to Blind vs Blind situations, you're not stacking off unless you have at least top pair, a flush draw, or a pair + straight draw outs.

2) The only tricky hand class is AKo/AKs. That technically isn't really a "hand class", but it is one of the main types of hands that is actually indifferent in many of these scenarios. Sometimes you have to bluff catch. Sometimes you don't. The more draws that are possible, the more you lean towards having to bluff catch with AK to stay balanced.

3) As is always the case, you have to stack way, way wider blind vs blind including occasionally getting it all in on a K high flop when you're holding something as weak JJ. Those spots are trickier and warrant further study, but, for the most part, these spots are still fairly ABC. Considering most microstakes players have a stronger 4bet range than what is supposed to happen at equilibrium, folding when you've got a close call is never too big of a mistake.

I took a nice long nap after this. I'm back from the park and I'm about to start my pregame routine. I'll be back in ~5 hours with tonight's results.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/1/24 ACR 10NL Session #2

-682bb in 2470 hands

I got beat up today!

Just a horrible, horrible day in terms of variance here. I'm quite confident that when I upload these hands to the GTOW Analyzer that it will show I actually played better than yesterday.

There was one concerning trend though: today there were only 7-8 tables going for most of the session. Because I was on nearly all of them, I saw the distribution of regs to fish. Besides me, there was another reg who was also on every single table. I would say, on average, each table averaged 5 regs for the duration of the session. There weren't as many recreationals at all today for whatever reason. If that's going to be a trend that continues, 10NL will certainly be much harder than 5NL. Even though I'd say the regs aren't much better here so far, if there is a much greater ratio of regs to recs on a consistent basis, that makes it much harder to win.

Overall, I know that losing 7 buy-ins in one session is pretty brutal, but I've had it happen plenty of times. This time, I handled it like an absolute champion. I never got upset at any point. I never broke my focus to check the daily results. I never allowed any significant amount of tilt to build. I recognized the beginnings of each time and quickly dissipated the emotion with breath work and general presence.

I'm undeterred and unbothered by this. I'll be back tomorrow with more study and more play, as always.

Have a good one!
Orca

Poker Book Review #2:
The 100 Biggest Mistakes That Poker Players Make
by Alexander Fitzgerald

First things first, I thoroughly enjoyed this book and found the content extremely helpful and applicable. Let's talk about what this book is and what the book is not.

What This Book IS

This book IS a no nonsense guide to increase your profitability in poker. The author, Alexander Fitzgerald, has been a professional Poker player for over fifteen years and has relied upon Poker income to pay his bills since he was 18 years old. The book IS written in a conversational tone and the content is heavily driven by anecdote. While that may not be ideal for sitting down to hardcore study, it is absolutely ideal for casual listening while driving, brushing your teeth, walking your dogs, and other low effort, menial tasks. For me, that's perfect because that is the only time I listen to audiobooks and podcasts. The book IS useful for live players, online players, and both cash and tournament players. The examples and anecdotes used cover situations that occur in all game types.

If I had to put it succinctly, this book is like having a twelve hour conversation with a grizzled Poker veteran about what they'd do differently if they had to start all over again, what actually makes the difference between winning and losing, and a few key strategies that can make a big difference to your bottom line -- particularly against recreational players who are vulnerable to exploits. All in all, I felt like listening to this audiobook was equivalent to downloading key pieces of "street Poker" wisdom without having to sit at the tables for fifteen years myself.

What This Book ISN'T

Here's what the book is not... It is NOT a hardcore, GTO-driven strategy guide. It is NOT an extremely deep discussion on the technical nuances of poker. It is NOT meant for those already playing high stakes. It is also NOT: boring, impossible to listen to without sitting down to take notes, a high-minded poker lecture.

Should YOU Read It?

Again, overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this book. I think this book was tailor made for individuals at my level who are still solidifying their fundamentals and plugging the most common leaks on and off the table. If you're looking for in-depth discussions about where the pool falls short of proper check-raise frequencies by 3% in particular nodes, you're not going to get what you're looking for from this book. If you're looking for insight on how to increase your general table sense, how to get into the mind of the average recreational player, some common, highly profitable exploits, and no bullshit advice on how best to manage yourself away from the table to maximize your play on it, then this is the book for you.

I think most novice and intermediate players will receive a ton of value from this book even when they're hearing about mistakes "they already know" about. Repetition is the mother of skill and if you hear something one more time and, this time, it actually makes you take action towards implementation, then the entire process of listening has been worth it.

Next Up:

This one has a ~7 hour run-time so I'll be back with a review sometime next week.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/2/24 Morning-After Session Review #15

So, as it turns out, I didn't make a ton of mistakes in this session, but I made some big ones in high leverage situations and that contributed to the enormity of the final loss on the day.

Facing 100% Check-Raise 200bb Deep

Preflop: Villain raises on the BTN to 2bb. Hero raises from the BB to 11bb. Villain calls. Effective stack sizes are 168bb.

I got taken into deep waters on this one and I ended up sinking. First of all, I know QJo is a dubious 3bet here when you're somewhere between 150-200bb deep. I will fully admit that I autopiloted here and put the raise in without checking stack depths. DOH!. However, as it turns out, that's still something GTOW does from time to time:

Being right for the wrong reason isn't much comfort though.

Flop: Ks Ts 5d. Villain checks. Hero bets 50% pot. Villain raises 100% pot. Hero calls.

As far as my flop c-bet, there's nothing too interesting here in my opinion:

Range vs Range, I have 55% equity here. My range is using a variety of sizes because of how deep we are. 50% is a perfectly reasonable way to c-bet this flop with both my range and this holding.

Now, the hand completely goes off the rails once Villain check-raises 100% pot. It is important to note that the solver doesn't use this size so that immediately makes further analysis using GTOW a little less accurate:

First, I will admit that I didn't stop to calculate the % of his raise before I called. A 100% raise here gives bad odds for draws to continue. I'm 168bb deep here so I'm going to look at both the 150bb and 200b solves.

When he raises to this size, his range has become extremely polarized. I'm putting him on sets, strong draws, and maybe two-pair.

The solver agrees and only ever uses this sizing with slivers of AQs, AJs, TT, 55, and 44. A human is certainly not doing this with 44, but they might have trapped KK this deep.

150bb deep, my range is played as raise/fold and this holding is a pure fold:

I think, realistically, I should've folded right here and the hand should be over. I'm blocking both flush draws (a little) and straight draws (a lot) making it likely that Villain is raising with value. In fact, it's a little hard to see this line with anything other than a set.

That said, 200bb deep there is more maneuverability in the solver:

Still, the calling range is extremely small and my range is still mostly played as raise/fold. Again, considering 168 is closer to 150 than 200, this just needs to be a fold. I don't have the pot odds to call a 100% raise especially considering blocker effects. Poker 101. You can't afford to forget this stuff while playing.

I'm not going to analyze the rest of the hand as I think the key takeaway comes right here on the flop: don't forget pot odds while playing deep. I could've saved myself 100bb with a fold here.

Value or Bluff-Catcher?

I'm not going to do a deep analysis here but I want to acknowledge this hand because the river raise was a 30bb mistake. On a board where a straight and a flush have completed, especially against a BTN cold-call range, two pair with the flush blocker is nothing more than excellent bluff catcher. While the line Villain took here was extremely weird, my hand still isn't good enough to raise river here. This is just a bluff-catcher.

AK vs KK: Is this EVER not a Trap?

Again, I don't want to do a deep analysis here, but I do want to think this through logically. Villain is a tight reg who is a bit of a nut-peddler. He checks back an AKx flop. That is never supposed to be done. This is a range bet texture and most regs know that. That should immediately set off red flags.

However, there's still the chance that Villain is just making an error here and playing his holding instead of his range. I bet 20% pot looking expecting to get a lot folds, but, ideally, hoping to get Villain to continue with some marginal holdings that may have checked back. Villain calls.

The turn brings a 9c. Hero bets 75% pot. Villain jams. Once Villain jams here, I'm in a world of hurt. When you just look at the texture, this is an obvious call. There are straight draws and flush draws on this board. That said, does a reg EVER check back a strong draw on the flop on an AKx texture? That just rarely happens.

In my mind, I'm almost certainly looking at a set. Considering I'm heavily blocking AA/KK, I'm thinking 7s or 9s are likely here. With the 75% pot turn bet, I'm now pot-committed. Even against 99 or 77, I might still have four outs. There is still the small possibility Villain has played a draw this way. I feel as if I have to make the call.

The solver agrees, but this is a -55 EV call to stay "balanced":

This is one of those weird spots where I wonder if Villain has just turned his hand face up by checking the flop and jamming the turn. As the title says, is this EVER not a trap?

A5s on 5 High Flop

Preflop: Hero opens UTG to 2.5bb. Villain raises on the BTN to 7.3bb. Action folds back to Hero. Hero re-raises to 20bb. Effective stacks are 112.5bb.

Flop: 5h 4s 2s, Hero bets 50% pot. Villain calls.

While the 50% pot bet is used sometimes, the solver prefers a flop jam here:

Villain's response is to call with every single flush draw, straight draw, pair with a gutshot, and QQ+. You get folds from tons of double broadways and even some TT-JJ:

In the future, I will definitely look for these flop-jam opportunities in 4 bet pots. As played...

Turn: 5h 4s 2s, Ts. Hero checks. Villain bets 50% pot. Hero calls.

The solver prefers a much more aggressive turn approach here, too, electing to jam about 70% of the time and check back 30%.

I'm not going to show it, but Villain's folding range is very similar to the flop against this turn jam.

As played, Villain bets 50% pot. We're a little deeper than 100bb so this sizing makes more sense. 100bb deep this would just leave 9bb. Here, it leaves behind 30 or so. Nevertheless, let's look at what the response would be to a 25% pot bet because that's the closest option available:

Have you noticed the pattern here? I simply didn't play this hand aggressively enough. I didn't play my range aggressively enough. The SPR is extremely low here and I need to stack off more lightly than I would in 3 bet or squeeze pots.

River: 5h 4s 2s Ts, 9s. Hero lead jams 31% pot. Villain calls. Villain wins with Q high flush.

I'm never supposed to lead jam here as it is a -17 EV play:

I knew I was effed here and I tried to bluff my way out of it. Not smart. Desperate. I got picked off easily and deservedly so. I am supposed to check/fold to a river jam. I could've saved 30bb here as well.

Pot Odds and Equity with Draws

Okay, again, Poker 101 here... When you get check-raised on that flop multiway, you don't have the odds to call a turn overbet even when it is 105%. You certainly don't have the equity against the range that takes that line either -- especially multiway. If you bink the flush draw, you likely don't get another bet. The implied odds aren't great either. This was another 30bb donation that didn't need to happen here.

Reg Checks back K High Flop in 3bet Pot

This was the biggest blunder of the entire session. Again, when a reg checks back a K high flop, there is a super high chance you're being trapped. This one is also paired so this is a range bet texture and virtually every reg knows that. What was I thinking calling that river bet!? Horrible. 50bb donation.

I want to just make a brief mental note of this hand. This particular Villain is the other reg besides me who plays every single table. I've already picked up that this is a pet line of his. I've only played for two days and I've seen him take this line half a dozen times. He bets flop huge and then overbet jams the turn in 3 bet pots on flush draw boards. I've folded to it each time I've come against it, but I saw a showdown in this session where he took this line with a bluff. He's definitely doing this with flush draws and made hands. I need to call these down when it makes sense. I cannot, against this reg, overfold this line. And, because he plays every table, I will come against this again... soon.

Failed Hero Call

In the interest of saving time, I'm going to zoom to the spots in this hand that I felt warranted further analysis.

Preflop: Hero opens QJss from the CO to 2.5bb. Villain calls in the SB. Effective stacks are 100bb.

Flop: Qd Th 9s. Villain checks. Hero bets 50% pot. Villain calls.

Turn: Qd Th 9s, 2d. Villain checks. Hero bets 75% pot. Villain raises 50% pot. Hero calls.

Okay, first, I will acknowledge that I am generally supposed to check back top pair + straight draw in these situations. You don't want to unnecessarily build a huge pot for a marginal holding. That said, this was a recreational villain who wasn't using proper sizing and seemed to be overcalling. Against these players, I often go thinner for value.

Here's the solver's approach:

When I face the check-raise on the turn, I'm largely thinking that Villain has a flush draw. Now, of course, SB can have TT, 99, and especially 22 in this situation. TT and 99 3bet probably the majority of the time, but you never know with a rec. 22s are a real, real possibility but that's a small part of his range. KJ is the current nuts and I do block that. There are plenty of two-pair combos that villain has also. If Villain is fast playing a holding that is scared of a flush draw, wouldn't they use a larger sizing? 50% gives any flush draw perfectly fine odds to call here.

Here's the solver's raising range:

As you can see, it is raising sets, straights, flush draws, and jacks which is exactly what I thought.

I make the rather easy call:

River: Qd Th 9s 2d, 9h. Villain bets 100% pot. Hero calls. Villain wins with three of a kind 9s.

Okay, so what the hell is Villain doing here? If Villain has a nutted hand like TT, KJ, 99, or 22, why would they leave 20bb behind? Sure, some recreationals might be afraid they won't get the call if they shove. More realistically, Villain doesn't have a nutted hand.

With the board now paired, I no longer lose to two pairs. I'm discounting sets. What value do I lose to? 9s. However, the only 9s that make sense are flush draws that contained a 9: K9dd, A9dd, J9dd, T9dd, 98dd, etc. Does villain have those in his range? Yes. Does villain also take this line with missed flush draws or missed straight draws on occasion? Yes. I think so.

Ultimately, I put in the call and Villain does end up having a 9. Of course, he has A9cc which makes zero sense whatsoever, but that's what you're up against when you play recreationals. Calling these big river bets is always a huge gamble and you're likely to be wrong far more often than you're right because of population tendencies.

I don't hate my call here even after analysis. I can't select for a pot sized bet on the river, but, using the 60% option which is the biggest non-all-in option, the solver seems to agree that this is an indifferent holding:

I've said it a million times but I suppose it is worth saying one more time:
Microstakes villains don't have enough river bluffs

Okay, that's all for today's review. I'll be back later today with more training and study updates.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/2/24 RIO Video Study Session #15

I ended up deciding to go through these RIO videos in reverse chronological order. I'm going to watch everything from 2024 then everything from 2023 and so on and so forth. I've found that the videos that have come out after the popularization of GTOW and Pio are simply more helpful and applicable to the current game. I think I can maximize my time investment by first focusing on those videos and then carefully picking and choosing videos from before that area if they address a particular area of concern. If today was any indication, I think this was the correct choice. The newer videos simply have more valuable content.

1) Studying 3 Bet Pots the RIGHT Way
When you discover a node where the defense against an action is likely misplayed by your opposition, you have to consider the implications. For example, in a 3 bet pot: flop is 8s 6s 4h and goes check/check. Turn is 2d. You’re often supposed to overbet value here for 125% pot because you’ve missed a chance to build the pot with the flop check (among other reasons). Villain is supposed to defend much wider than you’d think against this bet including defending double-broadways with no draws. That just doesn’t really happen. If Villain is overfolding this node, it means you can take a step back and now overbluff using the overbet with hands that weren’t included in the solver’s bluffing range originally. You can identify these opportunities by looking at bluffs that barely lose any EV compared to the checking line. If you’re losing 1-2% EV compared to optimal, that is easily made up for by real world conditions that don’t mimic equilibrium (in this case, an overfolded node).

Note to self: a) When doing solver trainer work, or any other solver work, take special note of situations where you’re defending way wider or way narrower than you expected. These spots offer clear exploit potential as other human players are likely to interpret these spots the same way as you did initially. b) When you see spots that are very close in the solver in terms of EV, just remember that that is a hand that can be swung either way by only a smidgen of overfolding or overcalling. A bluff-catching hand that is a +0.5 EV call and called 100% of the time is not a good call down on an underbluffed runout (imagine one where all the draws hit). C) Opponents will tend to play closer to their absolute hand strength than their relative hand strength on most boards. If you find spots where there are big gaps between relative hand strength and absolute hand strength, exploits are likely.

2) 4-Bet Pots BTN vs CO and BvB: Differences and Similarities (flop strategy)
A high: when both connected and flush draw present, you can’t range bet. Size up and start mixing. A low low when rainbow and not connected are often just range bets for 25%.

K high: much better board for 4 bettor. You’ll often range bet a larger size.

Q high: still using a larger bet size, but frequency isn’t quite as high. However, when you use 25% range bet, the opponent is only supposed to fold 8% and they are likely folding way more than that. BvB is quite different with much more mixing than BTN vs CO.

J High: BvB the defense on J high disconnected against a 25% range bet is to not fold anything.

T high: the smaller 25% bet doesn’t accomplish as much and you need protection from many two-over holdings. The larger sizing tends to make more sense and works better.

In general, there will be more raising versus merged/linear ranges than versus polarized ranges. That is why IP has more raising as part of its defense BTN vs CO compared to BvB.

SB 4 bets far fewer double broadway flush draws so the range construction is significantly different and it impacts strategy on flush draw boards.
The less connected and the drier the boards, the more often you can bet. The more connected they are, and if there are flush draws, you have to mix more and protect the check back range.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/2/24 GTOW Trainer Session #15

I cut training short again today to take another nap.

All I managed was 420 full hands from start randomly selected from 200/150/100bb deep. I need at least some daily exposure to 150bb/200bb pots because it is clear I don't really know what I'm doing in 3 bet spots when that deep. If I had to put my finger on it... it's like they play a lot like SRPs but with 3 bet ranges. The dynamic is interesting due to the SRP.

As per usual, I'll be starting my evening session in a bit here and I'll be back in ~5+ hours with the results.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/2/24 ACR 10NL Session #3

-151bb in 2599 hands

Really frustrated by this session. I was well on my way to bouncing back and booking a solid win and then the session unraveled in the last 500 hands. I lost a bunch of all-in pots in absurd ways to fishy players. I've realized that when that happens it triggers some kind of entitlement tilt (as if I am not allowed to lose pots to bad players -- lol).

I really don't have much to say. This one left a real bad taste in my mouth. I'll be back at it tomorrow.

Have a good one,
~Orca

8/3/24 Morning-After Session Review #16

When doing these reviews, I think it is often very tempting and very intuitive to focus on the most difficult spots in the biggest pots. While I absolutely think that has merit, and I'll continue to do that type of review on a regular basis, at my current level, I think the more productive area of focus is to zone in on are simple, unforced errors. Blunders. I fritter away more than a buy-in every single session on mistakes that I shouldn't be making. While these are errors are "rare" in the context of a 2500 hand sample, it isn't that difficult to push these errors closer to zero frequency because they shouldn't require any thinking. Rather than digging deep to find new exploits, right now, I'm going to challenge myself to dig deep to stop making simple errors. I think that is more than enough to beat 10NL.

E1: 3betting KTo from SB 150bb Deep

This is never done when 150bb deep. It is very rarely done 100bb deep. The simple error here is not checking stack depth. This is a 25bb mistake.

E2: Floating Back Door Flush + Over in 3bet Pot

This kind of float is really only done in SRP in favorable rake environments on textures where you face range bets. It is not done in 3 bet pots -- even BvB. I compound this mistake with an all-advised river bet. This is a 32bb mistake.

E3: Poor River Call Down

In the first one, When Villain double-barrels the completed flush, I can't call down on this river without a flush card when there is an over to my pocket pair. Again, this is isn't sexy to point out, but it is an obvious 5bb mistake. In the second one, we see a very similar scenario: the flush has completed and there is an over to my pocket pair. These aren't calls.

E4: Calling A Fish's River Raise

I have no regrets whatsoever about value betting this river when my straight completes even though there is now a flush on the board. The HJ limper is a bonafide fish. However, the sizing here should be aiming to get a call from Ax which means 75% and not 150%. Once that overbet is raised, you are 100% beat vs. most fish. Some fish are maniacs. This one wasn't. This was an anger call down. This was me being mad I lost to the fish. This mistake cost me 24bb between the sizing error and the more important call down error.

E5: Flop Sizing on J High FD Board, BvB 4b Pot

Neither my range nor my holding prefer to use a 25% sizing here:

I need to be polarized on this board because my range is composed primarily of unsuited broadways, premiums, and Axs. I mostly miss this texture:

BB's 4bet calling range is dominated by suited connectors and suited broadways, so this flop smacks Villain's range:

On this type of texture, with this type of hand, I either need to play 50% flop and turn jam when I pickup equity/bluff equity or I just check/fold. Instead, I lose over 60bb in this pot.

E6: Missed River Jam in 3b Pot

While you can occasionally check back KQ in these situations, especially because AQs makes up a huge portion of the calling range, you wouldn't do it in this exact scenario when you're blocking the flush draws that might be enticed to bluff-jam the river:

E7: Overdefending Multiway

There is really no need to call a 7.5bb turn bet here. Sure, Villain has flushes in his range. Even if he bricks, are you really going to call down A high multiway versus a river bet? While making a play like this can occasionally make sense heads-up in a SRP, it doesn't make any sense here. It's just a ~8bb donation.

E8: FPS with a Set

When you drill a set in a 3 bet pot, it can be very tempting to always let them try and catchup. However, it is important to remember that sometimes the only opportunity you have to charge draws is on the flop and river. Many players are going to pass on the opportunity to bluff on the river when they miss. They will, however, pay to see the river if you bet the turn.

And then there was this Villain who declined to bet turn/river even when they... hit???

I supposed this is why you often see the solver lead 50% on turns where an A/K hits when you've got a set. Villain has often hit on those types of turns and they're in a position where they have to call. You then set up an easy river shove.

E9: Passive Play with Combo Draws

I do seem to recall that I had super low RnG on both streets, but, still, it never hurts to remind myself that trapping is NOT the preferred line with these types of hands. The preferred line is to start piling money in to maximize both fold equity and the size of the pot when you hit.

E10: Missed River Bluff-Jam 3b Pot

When Villain checks back the turn, he caps his range. Yes, there are certainly some traps there, but the turn is a mandatory stab. You have to follow through with the jam because his range contains many Ax holdings that float the 20% turn stab:

As you can see, you're even folding out some 8x and TT-JJ. The solver calls villains 87ss 100% of the time, but does Villain really do that? Hard to say. Regardless, when you see the range composition here, and realize that you're actually losing to many missed Ax flush draws that are autofolds, you have to jam.

E11: Just Because They Limp...

It doesn't automatically mean they're going to play horribly post flop and just roll over for you. Don't overplay your hand against limpers. It is easy to get burned.

E12: 3-Bet Overcallers

In the microstakes, you'll often run into people who overcall 3 bets in spots where they aren't supposed to have an overcall range. Typically, they are almost always set mining. When you get jammed on in a spot that seemingly makes no sense, you're almost always beat. I know folding here would never be a GTO approved play, but it is hard to ignore the pattern. Sure, maybe they have QT or maybe 54 wants to play this way in a rec's mind. Realistically, though, they've usually binked a set. In this case, it was trapped AA. I don't know if I can get away from KJ here but it would sure do a lot for my win rate to avoid even a few of these borderline "coolers". As always, these villains just don't have enough bluffs. Your bluff catchers never do as well as they do in GTO land.

That's all for this one, folks. I think the main lessons of the day were: 1) don't overplay hands versus fish and always remember they don't have enough river bluffs, 2) avoid fancy-play with your sets in 3 bet pots; don't miss value bets, 3) call down tighter on flush complete boards, and 4) do your best to avoid simple mistakes with and against flop c-bets in 3bet/4bet pots; they can be very, very costly if you continue to compound the mistakes on later streets.

Reviewing this session helped ease a little of my frustration, but certainly not all. It is never fun reliving the bad beats the next day. I'll spare everyone the details as I'm quite sure no one cares about online bad beat stories at microstakes.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/3/24 RIO Video Study Session #16

1) GTO Training: Blinds vs Blinds 3b Pots (Live Play)
It is always interesting to hear more skilled players explain their thought process while making decisions over a large sample of hands. However, I think this particular content type typically goes a little above my head. I find it hard to follow when people just rattle off their strategy’s approach to different textures. I need to do more work on developing my own heuristics.

2) Exploiting Different Player Profiles in 3bet Pots
This video takes a look at how extreme nodelocking can affect the optimal strategy on a given texture.
a) In the first example, we take a look at the equilibrium game tree to get an idea of what optimal actually looks like.
b) Then, we take a look at what happens if the 3-bettor never responds to a check-raise with a 3 bet. The result is that it becomes profitable, in a vacuum, to raise with all of your bluffs. However, when they make it to the turn, they now have a much stronger range and all turn bluffs become -EV.
c) Against a villain who pure ranges checks the flop, the IP defender must be way more careful with betting. When the OOP 3 bettor continues after a flop bet from IP, turn bets must also be very small and carefully selected because the range that arrives to the turn is so much stronger
d) Against an OOP 3 bettor who is range c-betting for a small size, the correct response is a massive increase in check-raise frequency

I'm going to take a break and then put in some reps on the GTOW Trainer.

Have a good one,
Orca

8/3/24 RIO Video Study Session #16

1) GTO Training: Blinds vs Blinds 3b Pots (Live Play)
It is always interesting to hear more skilled players explain their thought process while making decisions over a large sample of hands. However, I think this particular content type typically goes a little above my head. I find it hard to follow when people just rattle off their strategy’s approach to different textures. I need to do more work on developing my own heuristics.

2) Exploiting Different Player Profiles in 3bet Pots
This video takes a look at how extreme nodelocking can affect the optimal strategy on a given texture.
a) In the first example, we take a look at the equilibrium game tree to get an idea of what optimal actually looks like.
b) Then, we take a look at what happens if the 3-bettor never responds to a check-raise with a 3 bet. The result is that it becomes profitable, in a vacuum, to raise with all of your bluffs. However, when they make it to the turn, they now have a much stronger range and all turn bluffs become -EV.
c) Against a villain who pure ranges checks the flop, the IP defender must be way more careful with betting. When the OOP 3 bettor continues after a flop bet from IP, turn bets must also be very small and carefully selected because the range that arrives to the turn is so much stronger
d) Against an OOP 3 bettor who is range c-betting for a small size, the correct response is a massive increase in check-raise frequency

3) Studying
I've grown unsure about my study process. Typically, I spend 2.5-3 hours per day reviewing my previous session. I'll then spend an hour watching RIO videos followed by 1-1.5 hours in the GTOW Trainer. I'm not sure if I should be narrowing my focus of study. At my stage of development, is it better to drill many common spots for a high volume? Or is it better to say, for example, spend an hour specifically on CO vs BTN in 3 bet pots? I decided to start going through some of the RIO study videos to see if I could find an example of someone who is playing higher stakes to see exactly what their process is or what they recommend. Currently, my instinct is that I'm spending too much time on session review and my GTOW Trainer reps should be on very specific spots rather than randomly selected ones. This video was more about studying in general, but I'm hoping there are some videos in the study section that get more into specific about the best way to study for Poker.

I'm going to take a break and then put in some reps on the GTOW Trainer.

Have a good one,
Orca

Today, I couldn't shake the feeling that my daily scheduling needed a bit of an audit:

I know that is difficult to see, but it essentially looks like this:

07:30am: Wake Up, Morning Routine
08:00am: Walk Dogs
08:30am: Meditate
09:00am: Morning-After Session Review
11:00am: Gym
12:00pm: Post-Gym Activities: Eat, Shower, Change, Etc.
12:30pm: Walk Dogs
01:00pm: Run It Once Video Training
02:00pm: GTOW Trainer: post-flop, specific spot, eg UTG vs BTN SRP
03:30pm: GTOW Trainer: 420 full hands from start randomly selected
04:00pm: Dog Park /w Wife
05:00pm: Dinner /w Wife
05:30pm: Pre-Session Warm-Up
06:00pm: Play Session
10:00pm: Walk Dogs
10:30pm: Relax /w Wife
11:30pm: Sleep

Most of these activities don't break down into perfect 30 minute intervals (dog walks are more like 15-20 minutes), but this is close enough.

The main changes I want to make here are to spend a little less time each day doing my morning-after reviews. I'm still going to look through each hand, but I'm only going to write about ONE thing in the interest of saving time. I will endeavor to make that topic the single most important takeaway from my study session. That might be a theme across a few hands or it might just break down a single hand in great depth. I will stop doing the ultra long reviews where I look at 10+ hands, though.

Secondly, I want more structure in my GTOW trainer routine. Ideally, I will pick the "focus" spot based on the RIO video content I watched that day. I will still do one round of 420 hands randomly selected from 100-200bb deep, different open sizes, different 3 bet sizes, and from all positions to ensure I don't going backwards in areas that I am not focusing on. My hope is that this will be akin to a basketball player still practicing their free throws after doing more advanced skill work.

Long-term, I will definitely begin to take at least one full day off per week. I will coincide this with my wife's working schedule. She's currently working seven days a week so it is convenient for me to do the same at the moment.

I'll be back later tonight with my session results.

Best,
Orca

8/3/24 ACR 10NL Session #4

+1186bb in 2651 hands

How's that for a bounce back session? lol.

Today was my first attempt at eight-tabling. As expected, I didn't notice any huge difference in the efficiency of my play. However, I will say that during this session there were a few moments that I did feel rushed when I was involved in 3-4 hands simultaneously. I can't recall that ever happening while 6-7 tabling. So, for now, I think I'm going to cap the final number at eight tables unless my brain somehow gets faster in the next few months. Seems unlikely for an old man like me, ha.

What am I supposed to say about a session like this? This is my biggest win ever. I've never won over $100 in a single session before. My initial deposit is up from $300 to nearly $700.

I'll be back tomorrow with a much SHORTER morning-after review tomorrow focusing on a single lesson rather than a 5,000 word essay. Well, it still might be 2000 words, lol. I can't stop myself from writing a lot.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/4/24 Morning-After Session Review #17

I'm beginning to see that keeping these reviews to only two hours is probably not realistic nor ideal. The little bit of time I save isn't worth the sacrifice of deep learning that can occur when I allow myself to spend as much time as I want on a spot. That said, I think 2.5 hours is fair and quite doable.

While reviewing my 2500+ hand sample today, the one theme that kept jumping out at me was that my check-raise and general raising strategy is very far off. I kept 1) missing check-raises in 3 bet pots and 2) I kept using a 50% raise size in SRP when the preferred size is overwhelmingly 100% in many instances.

I want to take a look at both errors:

Missed X/R in 3b Pot #1:

CO is a recreational player who leads into me for 50% pot which Villain is never supposed to do. I default to calling when the preferred strategy here is raising at least 70% of the time. The additional flush equity allows me to play this quite aggressively and potentially fold out a significant amount of better Ax holdings.

Missed X/R in 3b Pot #2:

Here a reg fires a 75% c-bet into my flush draw + gutter. The 33% raise here is supposed to fold out Ax below AJ, double broadways without at least back door flush draws, and a variety of pocket pairs.

I think this may be an overdefended spot when I look at how the solver plays it, but, still, I want to acknowledge even the potential XR opportunities I missed because there were so many in this session. I need to find these more often otherwise I'm allowing my opponents to realize their equity too easily.

Missed X/R in 3b Pot #3:

Here, I have a K high flush and I am supposed to raise this lead over 80% of the time. It is clear to me that my habitual bias is to trap in every single situation like this. I am not playing aggressively enough and I'm winning some smaller pots as a result.

Missed X/R in 3b Pot #4:

Again, I flop a set on a texture where Villain is very likely to have a piece of the board. While just calling is the taken line ~50% of the time, I think I do it 100% of the time. Raising here allows me to take control of the betting action. While Villain may simply have folded to the raise, if they call, I am now in a position to make sure the turn doesn't go x/x which makes it infinitely easier to get all the money in by the river. Here, I only got one street of value.

Missed X/R in 3b Pot #5:

This particular villain is a recreational maniac. Trapping versus this particular player is often a great plan. However, again, I still want to acknowledge this opportunity. Given that Villain has KJo here, he probably will not be able to find a fold to a turn check-min-raise. Allowing the initiative to stay in Villain's hands means a missed river bet where, even if Villain ultimately folded, they would've been in a very tough spot.

Missed X/R in 3b Pot #6:

Again, here I have two overs, a flush draw, and a gut shot. The preferred XR frequency is 90%. I am just missing too many of these.

X/R Sizing Errors in SRPs
The other error I mentioned was continually using 50% pot XR sizings when the board called for 100%. I am realizing that I default to 50% pot XRs in SRP the majority of the time. I tend to only use 100% on very dynamic boards and usually only ones with flush draws. That's not a good heuristic. 100% is used way more often than that.

5 Examples of Failing to X/R 100% Pot

I'm not going to address each of these individually. I just wanted to point out this error because I found it so often during my review. I think, in this case, simple awareness can be curative. I need to use that bigger 100% sizing way more often.

In effort to guide my studies in a more directed way that translates into better play, I'm going to spend my time each day focusing on whatever the theme I undercovered during my morning review was. So, today, that means I'm going to watch RIO videos about check-raises and I'm going to focus my training time entirely on X/R opportunities on the flop in 3 bet pots. I think having a narrower, specific focus will translate into far faster integration while actually playing.

That's all for now, folks! I'll be back later with my notes on two RIO check-raise videos.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/4/24 RIO Video Study Session #17

1) Check-Raising the Flop from the BB
Remember, at low stakes, the more often Villain has to find bluffs with low pocket pairs and other natural bluffs, the more you should likely overfold that node. The easier it is to find intuitive bluffs, like blocker-based bluffs on a board where a straight completes, the more often you’ll have to find a way to call down.

2) Check-Raising in 3 Bet Pots
In this video, the analysis focuses on a single Pio solve to a specific hand. However, the key takeaway is that when you face a villain who is range-betting the flop for a small size, or just c-betting more frequently as an exploit versus the pool, you must increase your check-raise frequency. I know that I am not checking-raising enough which is why this has been my focus area for study today.

Another note: x/r frequency tends to go up on dynamic boards and one reason is that you want to get the money in with your strongest holdings before scare cards come that allow your opponent to potentially get off their overpairs

I'm going to take a short rest and then get on to the main study work of the day: drilling 3-bet pot flop check-raise opportunities in GTOW.

Have a good one,
~Orca

8/4/24 GTOW Trainer Session #17

I was able to drill about 400 3bet pot flops to hopefully improve my check-raising frequency. My main conclusion is that I'm typically missing check-raises with decent draws. I'm finding the rest of them. I have a tendency to just call and hope I hit my draw. That's the one spot I really need to turn up the aggression. I also have a tendency to do that in SRPs so this was a very productive session and a meaningful realization to have.

I also did my usual 420 full hands from start randomly selected from 100bb, 150bb, 200bb, 2.5x open, GTO open, GTO 3 bet size, and smaller 3 bet sizes. I'll continue to do a round of that daily to ensure my fundamentals in common spots stay sharp. The bulk of my training, though, will focus on a specific problem or a specific spot. I think I'm starting to get past the point where my game benefits a ton from just throwing massive amounts of randomly drilled spots in there. I really need to see the same spots over and over to develop my heuristics further and further refine my understanding of the nuances.

Anyways, I'm going to take a brief break to take care of my hounds and then I'll get going on my evening session.

Have a good one,
Orca

8/4/24 ACR 10NL Session #5

+371bb in 2653 hands

This could've been another monster session for the 'ole win rate, but I had just about the worst luck of entire life with pocket aces today. Got cracked four times and another two preflop all-ins ended up as chops. The pool was super, super weak today. The ratio of fish to regs was just amazing, but there weren't that many people playing overall which was the only drawback. I had to settle for 6-7 tables for a good chunk of the session.

All in all, another win booked so I guess I'll shut up and count my blessings.

I'm currently up 13 buy-ins in my first five sessions at 10NL (13k hands). If I hit +20-25 buy-ins well before the 50k hand mark, I may have to consider breaking my self-imposed rule on that. If I can learn faster by playing 25NL, why wait?

I'll be back tomorrow with analysis of the session as usual.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/5/24 Morning-After Review Session #18

There are two main themes that jumped out at me from today's review and, unsurprisingly, both are areas that cannot be directly looked at in a solver.

Single-Raised Isolation Pots against Limpers
Area #1, which I won't dig into too deeply, is playing ISO pots against fish who have limped. These players fit into different categories and you have to be sure to stereotype them correctly. One version of these limpers that I encounter very often is the extreme calling station -- especially on both the flop and the turn. They'll call with anything. They pretty much just don't fold.

I went head to head with this villain repeatedly for example:

Because these types of Villains just don't fold the flop and turn, you either need to be prepared to fire some high variance triple barrels on the river or you just don't bluff:

And, as a direct follow-up, when you have ANYTHING, and I do mean just about anything, go thinner than you think is correct for value:

I've finally come to truly understand that the single biggest boost that I can possibly make to my win rate is going to come in the form of efficiently exploiting fish. Trying to get the best of regs for 1-3bb/100 is not how you win big. Beating fish for 10-20+bb/100 is how you win big. Period. Here, in this area, I need to become far more efficient and far more ruthless in ensuring I maximize the number of pots I play against these players. I need to be far more liberal in using both single-raise and 3 bet isolation bets. I need to incentivize them to enter pots when they are left to act behind by calling certain holdings that I might normally 3bet. Get these players in the pot and take their money. That is the true essence of professional poker. Unless you're a high stakes reg going against a line-up that has virtually no real weak players, grinding out half a bb in EV is not how you become a crusher. Beat the hell out of the fish.

Poor Multiway Pot Play
The second area is multiway pot play. I'm extremely dissatisfied with my performance here. I think far often I'm playing passively in most spots:

Here, a reg attempts to isolate a fish who limps UTG. I call behind because I want the fish to stay in the pot. I flop top pair on a flush board and bet big primarily looking to end the hand or, ideally, to get called by the fish and push the reg out. The opposite happens. The reg calls and the fish folds. The 8 completes two straights which are completely irrelevant because a reg wouldn't isolate with 97 or 74 from the HJ. The only realistic two pair is 65 and sets are certainly possible, but most villains raise flop with both of those holdings a very large chunk of the time on a texture this dynamic. I think Villain's range consists very heavily of double broadway flush draws. Checking back here for pot control is certainly an option, but so is overbetting turn to ensure flushes don't have good odds to call. When the flush hits, I have to give up, but most times it won't and that's how I maximize my money with this holding... I think. I can't check any of this in a solver.

Again, repeatedly throughout the session, I kept playing too passively on turns or using sizes that encouraged Villains to keep drawing on dynamic boards:

Every single one of these needs to be an overbet and, likely, quite a BIG overbet in the 175% region. There is no reason to give Villains a good price to draw here. If they want to play against the odds and call anyway, most of the time they're going to miss. When they hit, I just give up and live knowing that this is a profitable decision. When I actually give them the correct odds to draw, I'm going to lose over the long run. Mixing in these smaller sizes isn't necessarily worth it to "stay balanced" especially if I'm not in an all-reg multiway pot (which rarely happens).

While the following mistakes weren't part of a specific type of multiway pot mistake, they are multiway mistakes nonetheless.

I can't fold this:

I have an open ender + flush draw + pair. I'm drawing to the stone cold nuts if the 7h hits. Even against the 175% bet, this must be a call. As an aside, this is a good testament to how effective these big turn bets could be when I'm the one making them.

Further, the one time you don't want to be aggressive is when your hand is nearly invulnerable:

There is very little upside to raising here. If they have nothing, they may continue to bluff on later streets. They may catch up and continue to bet. If they have a pocket pair, they may continue to try and bet thin for value. You can't be afraid to get set over set on a board where you're this invulnerable. This is an obvious slow play. The rest above? Those weren't slow plays. Those were dynamic boards. This isn't.

Well, that's all for today's review folks. If I can, I'm going to try and find some RIO content on multiway pots. If I can't find anything like that, I'll look for videos on exploiting common types of fish. With this being on the forefront of my mind after this morning's review, I think I'm primed to absorb a higher percentage of any information that is presented on these two topics. I think it makes sense to capitalize on that priming by focusing on these subjects today.

I'll be back later with the results of my studies.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/5/24 RIO Video Study Session #18

1) Exploitative Poker: Profiling Recreational Players and Making Adjustments
Core Principles:
a) A very aggressive, exploitative style is going to perform way better against recreational players. Their mistakes revolve around playing very wide ranges and overvaluing their hands. Therefore, protecting our ranges make us lose EV in practice
b) Fastplaying strong, but vulnerable hands and strong draws performs much better than going for mixed strategies typical of the GTO approach
c) Recreational players will struggle to put you on strong hands if you took a passive line on previous streets. Except for some slow plays, these runouts are terrible to bluff, but extremely profitable to thin value bet with very large sizes.
d) We don’t have to worry about balancing our ranges. We can counter exploit regulars that try to isolate the weaker players in spots where we have the range advantage.
e) When playing hyper aggressive opponents that will float and raise our bets extremely aggressively, and bet very frequently against a check, we can Cbet hands which we don’t mind bet-folding and hands which have very strong equity to continue against raises on most turns. We can check-raise more vulnerable hands to put all the money in on one or two streets and benefit from protection/equity realization,
Note to self: watch out for spots where fish donk the river for ~1/2 pot on missed flush draw boards. This is very often thin value / missed flush. I see this action at least once a session and it usually stumps me.

2) Hyper-Exploitative Ideas (Part 2)
Check-raise more often when…
a) Villain uses B33 (70+) on boards that should be B67 (50-) – check raise % can go as high as 20%+ when the global frequency is normally 13%
b) Villain snap folds a lot of solver approved floats
c) Villain has a lot of great turn barrels against your hand (65cc on Qc Js 6h)

Raise donk leads more often when…
a) You’ll have to call a turn jam anyway (eg 87hh on Qd Th 9h)
b) Villain is merged and vulnerable on many runouts (65cc on 9s 4c 2c)
c) You’re nutted and you don’t block anything important (AsAc on Qd 8s 2d)

Double barrel more often with…
a) Robust equity + great triple barrel candidate (65ss on 8d 3c 2s Tc)
b) Robust equity + top end blockers (KThh on Qc 3h 2c Ad)
c) Robust equity + meh blocks + unblock river folds (Ks8d on Ad 6d 4h 5c)

Note to self: it is time to start thinking more about equity denial. I am not raising donks enough. Many 10NL villains are donking with crappy top pairs and middle pairs. They are too merged. They benefit from seeing more cards and realizing their equity.

I really have a lot more studying that I need to do on exploitative play.

Time to put in some reps on the GTOW Trainer.

Have a good one,
~Orca

8/5/24 GTOW Trainer Session #18

Today's work was 420 hands starting on the flop in SRPs where BB donks 33% pot into the BTN. BTN has to defend. I only played the flop. I wanted to get a better idea of how wide to defend and, more importantly, which hands to raise and how often. I think microstakes villains have far too strong of a donking range in general, and floating quite as wide as you do against the solver doesn't make sense, but it probably VERY GOOD sense to increase the rate at which you raise the hands that already raise in GTO. I have a much better sense of how to defend against donks now thanks to both Hunter Cichy's video discussed above and due to this training session. Having synergy between the study content and trainer reps greatly improves the rate at which I seem to learn.

Anyways, time to take a little break at the dog park with the hounds and my wife. I'll be back in ~5+ hours to report the results of this evening's session.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/5/24 ACR 10NL Session #6

+17bb in 2785 hands

I mean, does this even count as a winning session? lol.

Super, super annoying session. I got stacked like at least six times in preflop situations and that's very hard to recover from when you're not on the winning end of your fair share. It what it is.

Look at this... 0.61bb/100 and 16.1bb/100 all-in adjusted, lol.

I still have very little doubt that I'll rack up the 20-25 buy-ins I need at this stake to move up to 25NL in short order.

I'll be back tomorrow morning to analyze the session, but I think, when I look at it, the main takeaway is going to be that I need to start using a HUD so I can avoid shoving AK into players that only 4 bet QQ+.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/6/24 Morning-After Session Review #19

This review isn't going to be sexy because when I analyzed today's hands, there were only two things that really stood out and they are fundamental in nature...

Unlucky Preflop or Something Else?
First, I got stacked six times in this session. All six of those times that I lost a full stack were hands where the money went in preflop.

Now, I can't do anything about these two:

If you get your Aces cracked, just swallow it and move on. The end. You also can't be mad about losing a flip where you're the favorite when you have TT vs AK. That's a good call and you need to run that same scenario as often as you can find it.

And the two after those, well, this is just the price you sometimes pay when you 4bet jam AKo for protection:

I don't worry about these in the long run because those "protection" jams often win tons of smaller pots for every time you run yourself into KK+.

However, these next two, while completely standard on the surface, belie one of the biggest problems in my game -- I currently don't use HUD statistics while playing.

I know full well that some players have 4bet stats that are so nitty that you can really only continue with KK+. Others are at least far away enough from optimal that you have to at least start reconsidering AKo. Had I been using a HUD, it could have potentially swayed me towards a fold -- especially with that AQs hand. At some point, I will have to make it a priority to learn proper HUD use and integrate it into my game. I don't need a HUD to beat 10nl or probably 25nl, but I need to start using one BEFORE I need it to win and not after.

Missing Standard Cbets in SRPs vs BB
I have greatly reduced the amount of drilling I'm doing on the fundamental spots because I'm trying to plug leaks. In so doing, I've noticed that my cbet game is slipping a bit. I'm missing some fairly standard, texture based cbets with air-ish hands.

Like these:

For today, I'm going to focus on RIO videos that cover flop c-bet heuristics in SRPs against a BB defend. I'm going to drill at least 420 flops (not full hands) focusing specifically on recognizing high frequency textures. My goal is to try and internalize global frequencies rather than just intuit what my hand wants to do. I'm very good at the latter, but having a strong grasp on the actual concepts behind the intuition is incredibly important for reducing the rate of unforced errors.

Well, that's all for today folks! I'll be back later in the day with RIO video notes and the results of my GTOW Trainer session.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/6/24 RIO Video Study Session #18

1) Flop Heuristics by Henry Lister
a) Average C-Bet Frequency is 68% across all textures
b) Rainbow: Bet frequency increases
c) Gutshot>OESD>Straight Present: frequency decreases in this order (lower cards are generally better for BB)
d) Tripled: 25-33% range (sometimes bigger)
e) Paired RB: T-A 33b Range, 3-8 paired 33b 50%
f) Monotone: Bet frequency drops drastically (55% median)
g) A standalone is neutral, both players have lots of Ax
h) K-T: bet frequency increases for aggressor
i) 3-9 cards: bet frequency decreases when 2+ present (especially when connected)
j) Disconnected boards are significantly better for IP aggressor (eg K62 or Q73)

2) Flop C Bet Strategy by Tyler Forrester
a) Low Connected Boards: BB is supposed to lead far more than they actually do. As a result, you can afford to check back more than you do in the solver sims. The BB range will be stronger than it “should be”.
b) Monotone boards: you’re even checking back flopped flush draws because if you always fast play the flush, any time you check, and these boards are often highly mixed, you’re extremely capped. Villain can just blast off with any flush and flush draw.
c) AQ-AKx: best to bet big because real villains don’t check-raise enough. This means you simply won’t get enough money in with your good hands if you go small.
d) JT9fd – the relative strength of hands on this board is so strong that players often misplay them. Two-pair is closer to the relative value of top pair on K72 rainbow board. The solver even folds 87 at some frequency once money starts piling in on this board.
e) If you’re going to split your range on any board, you need to know the accompanying bluffs that go with the value hands. Otherwise, you’re going to end up far too value heavy and you become easily exploitable: villain just folds when you’re using the bigger sizes.

Note to self: bigger flop bets make sense against recreationals who won’t fold pairs. You’re just going to barrel off sizes around pot on most runouts. They won’t fold most second pairs and sometimes even 3rd pairs.

Time to drill some flop c-bet action in the GTOW Trainer!

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/6/24 GTOW Trainer Session #18

Today the focus of my trainer work was a little more memory intensive than my usual simple drilling. Sure, I wanted to get the answer "correct" for the specific hand I was playing, but I was far more concerned with whether or not I could predict the global frequency for that texture and which sizes GTOW was primarily splitting between. That's a lot harder to do.

For each hand, I would make my best guess and then refer to the table below to see how close I was. I made that table a long time ago when I first started studying with solvers. Referencing it so frequently meant that I only got through about 150 flops in the ~60-75 minutes that I had available to study this. Still, I think clarified my understanding about a few textures and that was the goal. A lot more work will be needed over the coming years to fully memorize all of this stuff. Every day I put in the work makes me a little better and that is all that matters.

I've added my usual randomly selected full hand drill into my session warm-up routine now. In that time slot, it still serves to keep my fundamentals sharp while simultaneously getting my head into the right poker space before I start playing for real.

I desperately need a break to let my batteries recharge. I'll be back sometime this evening with my session results.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/6/24 ACR 10NL Session #7

-1228bb in 3426 hands

I had a complete meltdown today. I don't even want to post about this. I don't even want to discuss it. This could've just been another run-of-the-mill bad session to bounce back from. I was down ~7-8 buy-ins about halfway through and I was running 20bb below all-in adjusted EV. I got incredibly tilted and opened more tables. I played up to 11 tables at various points in an effort to try and win it back before the end of the session. That obviously didn't work and things got even worse.

I have no words. I pretty much just wasted all of the progress I had made at 10NL. I broke my discipline. I broke my own rules for the amount of tables I'd play. I broke my own rules for the length of the session. I had numerous angry outbursts directly in front of my wife and dogs including cursing at the top of my lungs and slamming the table.

This is all just an incredible embarrassment and not at all indicative of how I am as a person. I am sick to my stomach.

I'll be back tomorrow because that's all there is to this now... tomorrow and the future. I will never respond this way again to a bad session.

I am disgusted with myself.

Have a good one.
~Orca

Morning-After Session Review #19

While looking through all of these hands, the biggest thing that jumped out at me was... I didn't play all that differently than normal. And, in that, there is a very large lesson: I'm clearly not prepared for the reality of variance. Even as a massively winning player, you're going to have massive losses across small samples from time to time.

In the past two sessions, I've run more than 20bb/100 below all-in adjusted EV. Again, in the past two sessions, I've lost something like ten stacks with pocket aces. They've been cracked after getting it all in preflop numerous times, they've been cracked by sets, and they've been cracked by two pair. That stuff is going to happen. When it all happens in the same session, there's just nothing you can do. You're going to lose. You can't allow that to lead to any spiraling.

When this stuff happens, it just ain't your day:

Why I Played 10+ Tables...

The main reason I started playing more tables in this session was actually due to the fact that, admittedly, I was bum hunting a little bit. There were a good 10-13 tables going for the duration of this session. Outside of me, there are another handful of regs who play 6+ tables. There were a few tables that were literally 100% regs. I kept trying to get onto better tables and this led to me having more tables open than usual. After a while of playing table carousel, I got annoyed and just left all of them open because it didn't seem to be slowing me down. I think, in the future, I'm going to sit out at tables that are 100% regs and wait until I've got a replacement table up before closing the window. If I just keep playing through, I inevitably get too many active windows open and I'll start making bad decisions. If I just immediately leave an all-reg table, sometimes the wait list feature puts me right back on it so that isn't an option either. I need to use the sit out feature to get around this.

Technical Poker Takeaways
As far as actual poker takeaways, there are a few, but there was no overwhelming theme. As you might expect, I made a handful of small errors due to playing too many tables. However, let's talk some actual poker strategy...

Bluffing Fish
I think I'm getting a little too far out of line versus recreationals especially with my bluffs:

As it turns out, fish can get dealt good hands, too. They can even limp them. When I do try to bluff a fish, I need to make sure the line is extremely believable for someone who isn't great at hand reading and there needs to be a clear "scary" runout that I connect to or I'm just going to get called down way too much. Against certain profiles, you're getting called down so often with so little that I think removing close to all river bluffs might even be the way to go.

Slow Play Top Sets More

On a disconnected rainbow board multiway, top set is the current nuts and, realistically, someone needs runner-runner to beat it because virtually no one is trapping AA in a SRP. Checking the flop gives everyone a chance to catch up (or start bluff).

In the 3 bet pot example, checking back turn allows villain to bet with flushes that you can jam over the top of and to stab with bluffs that weren't calling another bet anyway. Even when the flush does complete, unless you're 150-200bb+ deep, you likely have to get in in with your set regardless.

Paired Board Defense from the BB

This is what I'm going to work on today... paired board defense from the big blind. The check-raise frequencies are extremely high and the hands you have to defend are not intuitive at all for me. This is especially true when you're actually in the field and real villains are using b50 and b100 on these boards that are typically only using b33 in solver land.

Final Thoughts...
As soothing as it is to look through these hands and realize that I didn't suddenly go from a huge winner at 10NL to being the worst player in the pool overnight, I'm still incredibly frustrated with myself for breaking my own rules. Nothing matters more than that... and it all stems from getting emotional due to variance. I harped on this in my opening paragraph, but it bares repeating: variance is insane; you're going to have HUGE losses even as a winning player. You're not playing Chess anymore; you're not playing basketball; you're not wrestling; you're not playing any of the sports or games you've played in the past -- you are GAMBLING. Sometimes that damn quarter is going to land on tails 10 times in a row and, well, that's just Poker for ya. Stay calm and carry on.

If I stick rigidly to my disciplines, things will take care of themselves in time. A single huge losing session is nothing to be upset about and you will NEVER be so good that such a session becomes an impossibility. The only thing to be upset about is breaking your own rules because that's something you have full control over.

I've always considered myself a tough person, but Poker is revealing to me that maybe most of that toughness is just physical or skin deep. I do not handle losing well. At all. Every discipline talks about trusting the process and letting go of results orientation, but Poker is another animal entirely. If you don't TRULY understand what that means, and take it to heart at a core level, you're going to get chewed up and spit out emotionally. This is one of the only games in the world where the worst players players often beat the best players on any given "play". If that keeps upsetting you, when it is a feature and NOT a bug, you're playing the wrong game. And I am not playing the wrong game. I feel I am built for this game.

I want to take this moment to renew my commitment to becoming less results-oriented. That which you focus upon improves and this will continue to be an area of focus for me going forward.

Have a good one!
~Orca

Keep up the good work, I was the one that cracked your AA the other night in the QQ vs AA AI Pre that you posted(the one with Q River)��

8/7/24 RIO Video Study Session

This video was 75 minutes long so it ended up taking my entire video study slot, but it was well worth it.

1) Becoming a Boss: BB vs BTN OOP in SRP by Luke Johnson

a) Global Stats
i) Global frequency for BTN is 72% and the most common size is b33.
ii) Global raising frequency for BB is 14%, global folding is 40%
iii) When OOP does defend, it does so with a raise 23% of the time
iv) We raise bigger cbets less frequently
v) Population overfolds, underraises and undercalls

b) Heuristics for defending vs Flop Cbets
To find the bottom of our defense range:
i) Pairs
ii) Flush Draw
iii) Straight Draws (look for ones that can turn multiple open enders instead of just gut shots)
iv) Overcards (2 to the board, 1 to board and 1 relative to 2nd or 3rd card)
Call or raise? Consider IMMEDIATE SDV vs Equity
i) Low SDV and high EV = raise often
ii) High SDV and low EV = call often
Note: this is why you often don’t raise pairs with good SDV even when they have a straight or flush draw attached

c) Play vs Solver
i) If you have the ability to call a lot of turns, you’re less incentivized to raise flop
ii) When you’re value raising, you don’t want to block continues (eg don’t have the flush card on a flush board) but you DO want to block continues when bluffing (you want the flush card on a flush board)
iii) With two pair, you raise bottom two pair and top two pair far more often than top and bottom two pair (eg Q74, Q4 is raised the least)
iv) Consider relative hand strength on each board: open enders aren’t raised as often on flush draw boards when they don’t have the relevant suit (or if they only have one card of the relevant suit)

I'm still going to stick with my plan to drill primarily paired board flops as the BB defender. After I get that done, I'll be back with some takeaways.

Have a good one!
~Orca

It looks like the majority of Poker players use Discord to communicate so if anyone wants to add me on there to chat, I've just gotten it set-up:

8/7/24 GTOW Training Session #19

Defending the BB on Paired Flops in SRPs

Today, I focused entirely on defending the BB when the flop brings a paired board. I played against all other positions and against randomly selected sizes. In general, the main conclusions that I came to were three-fold: 1) you actually don't defend as wide as you would see in many training videos when you use solutions that account for microstakes rake, 2) you are supposed to raise flush draws and gutshots way more than I currently do and last 3) a proper BB defense strategy includes many, many leads on certain textures.

As far as 1) goes, the defense is often very intuitive until you get to spots where you're playing against the BTN and the SB -- this is especially true when you use 2.5-3x open sizes which are the standard at 10NL in ACR. The ranges just aren't as ridiculously wide as a 2x HJ open with 500NL rake. You don't have to defend these super thin double overs without back door equity. In fact, you really ONLY defend the ones with backdoor equity in most cases.

The global frequency for raising on these paired boards is often right around 15% depending on the exact positions. I found that many gutshots are raising closer to 30%. There are plenty of spots where flush draws raise more than 50% or even raise pure. I'm still teasing out heuristics on those, but, suffice it to say, I'm not raising those nearly enough because they're almost always raised at much higher than the global frequency.

Last, but certainly not least, you need to lead on many of these boards.

They keys for leading seem to be as follows:

1) You want cards between ~9 and ~4 on the board. There is a range asymmetry between the BB and most other positions in terms of calling various suited hands which leads to the BB having more cards in this range. The BB is significantly more likely to have sets, straights, and especially trips when the cards are in this range.

2) That range asymmetry dries up when the cards are in the 2-3 range and T+. No one has a lot of 2x and 3x so the effective nuts shift back towards IP's over pairs. Of course, this is somewhat less true when you use lower rake solutions and lower opening amounts. Still, most 7xs suited hands get defended by the big blind and most 2xs don't regardless of the exact preflop conditions we use.

3) Next, you have to consider position and how dynamic the board is. As the IP opener's position becomes later and later, they open more suited hands with lower cards. You lead the least against the button on these textures and you lead the most against UTG. The presence of a flush draw greatly increases the leading rate for BB because they both have more flushes and more cards in that lower range. When the cards are also connected, that is another bonus for the BB and increases leading frequency. Something like 855 has an open ender with 76 so it will be led more often than 844. Likewise, something like 544 will be led the most because there are even more possible straight draws.

Overall, I'd say this was a productive bit of a study. The bit about leading was a good reminder as I haven't been leading these boards as often as I've been leading connected low boards like 765r, but, in reality, the leading frequency is supposed to be huge on 766fd, too.

I'm going to take a break and then get on with the evening's session.

Have a good one!
~Orca

8/7/24 ACR 10NL Session #8

+579bb in 2810 hands

I wish I could say that I handled myself well in this session, but I really can't say that at all. I managed to get up about 550bb with less than an hour to go in my session. And then I punted off 500bb in about 15 minutes mostly against a recreational player who was shoving every other hand. I missed on on two consecutive bluff catching attempts and I managed to give my entire 400bb stack to one singular guy. The first stack for 100bb and the second one for 200bb, of course. I then promptly lost a preflop all-in. So, in a matter of minutes, I lost 3+ hours of work.

Well, I lost my shit about it. Even worse than yesterday. I threw a little temper tantrum complete with cursing and bashing the table. I was honestly on the verge of throwing my mouse out the window. Again, I'm not proud of any of this nor do I even think it is funny (maybe a little funny but only retrospectively), but it is what it is. I write about it to keep myself accountable. I look at Poker as avenue towards mastery and I look at mastery of a craft as an avenue towards self-actualization. Being better at a game means nothing if I don't become a better version of myself along the way. It is clear to me that not only will that happen by continuing with Poker, but it HAS to happen or I won't be able to achieve a high level of success.

I managed to regather myself and finish the session. I finished... very strong. I won back all that I lost and then some. This wasn't because I unlocked some tilt-induced level of great play, it was just because all the regs logged off and got replaced by fish. I almost feel guilty for not continuing to play because the games were really THAT good. Even so, I can't really move my schedule around to play late night sessions because I won't have any time with my wife, but I guess it is just something to note and be aware of.

I think I'm going to go over Jared Tendler's books again (The Mental Game of Poker I & II) and, perhaps, this time actually sit down and read the eBook format. I've listened to the Audiobooks twice, but I've never sat down and filled out all the worksheets. Clearly, I need to do something more than just "promise myself to do better" when it comes to losing tilt. It isn't getting unlucky that sets me off. It is going from a winning session to a losing one. Losing my "wins" is the trigger.

I'll have to think about this some more and come up with an actionable plan to work on it. As I said, promising to just try and do better isn't going to cut it at this point.

I'll be back tomorrow with some actual strategy analysis from the session.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/8/24: Mental Game Development'

Tilt: A Come to Jesus Moment...

After a second straight session where I had an embarrassing, emotionally driven, angry outburst due to nothing more than standard variance (and standard losing), I've realized that I need a more robust plan for dealing with this issue. Meditating once a day and "trying harder" just don't seem quite sufficient.

I'm a firm believer in that which you focus on improves, but that which you measure gets managed. I track, and post about, every single piece of my strategy development plan whether that is my morning-after hand history reviews, the notes I take on RIO videos, or the GTOW Trainer drills that I put myself through.

I do not measure, or track, how long I sleep each day, the quality of the sleep, if I meditated or how long I meditated, nor do I track whether or not I went to the gym. I don't track my caffeine use. Currently, I do not regularly consume content about improving the mental game.

I think all of that needs to change. I realize I already post way too much, but, for me, this blog/journal is more about self-accountability than creating anything readable for anyone else. I know full well that any normal human is not going to keep up with the output of posts I create. They're too long and too many and not valuable enough for every single one to be worthy of reading. That really doesn't matter though because, again, that which is measured is managed.

Moving Forward: My Mental Game Development Plan

Going forward, I am going to make the following changes to my daily process to ensure that my mental game is being taken care of and developed at a similar pace to my poker strategy:

1) Measure and Track Physical Biometrics, Meditation, and Exercise
I have an Oura ring which measures a variety of physical biometrics: heart rate variability (HRV), sleep duration and efficiency, resting heart rate (RHR), temperature, and daily steps. The reality of peak mental performance cannot be separated from peak physical condition. Even the most centered individual will struggle with emotional control on multiple nights of low duration, low quality sleep. I think many tilt and discipline issues that people have, in all avenues of life, are actually directed rooted in poor energy management or states of dishealth. Step number one towards this aim is getting my Oura ring fixed as it hasn't been holding a charge for a while now.

To keep myself more accountable about this side of the mental game, the hardware side if you will, I'm going to begin to log my physical biometrics in a daily post, I'm going to track and log my meditation sessions (whether or not it was completed and for how long), and my gym sessions as well

2) Quit Using Caffeine
I have a sneaking suspicion that my sleep quality has dropped substantially lately because I often have a bit of caffeine before my sessions and my session occur only ~5-6 hours before bed. I am very sensitive to the insomniac effects of caffeine. I know this from my previous life as a weightlifter. I don't like to waste money, and perhaps I'm just making an addiction-based excuse, so I'm going to finish the caffeine products I've already purchased but I will not be buying any more. When they run out, I'm going to move to being completely caffeine free seven days a week. This should increase my chances to have the best quality sleep possible and, as a result, I should need pre-session caffeine to feel at my best, mentally. Caffeine, in and of itself, as a stimulant, can potentially interfere with proper emotional regulation anyway. I think this is a key change moving forward.

3) Consume Mental Game Content Daily
Lastly, as I've mentioned before, I listen to audiobooks, podcasts, or videos on a daily basis while I do basic chores. Lately, I've been listening to Poker strategy during these times. I'm going to stop doing that. First of all, it is often very hard to properly digest poker strategy talk when you can't look at a screen and you have to visualize hands/ranges while walking your dogs (for example, lol), but, secondly, I already dedicate multiple hours per day to this exact type of strategy development. Mental game discussion is something that I can absord at a more relaxed pace without laser focusing on exactly what the content creator is saying. There are many, many sports/performance psychology and Eastern philosophy audiobooks available and I could easily spend the rest of my life going through without making all that big of a dent in the totality of them all. Surely I will find golden nuggets in many of them that make a big difference in my level of skill when it comes to mastering my psychology.

To begin with, I'm going to abandon my current audiobook, which is one of Jonathan Little's, and I'm going to start by going through ALL of the RIO videos on mindset. There are fifty of them so it's a decent-sized project that should take quite a while to get through.

To those ends, I may as well get started right?

From the Heart by Jason Koon
Two comments stood out the most strongly from this video for me:

The ones who make it are the ones who stick around the longest without
allowing any catastrophic events.

Coming from one of the top high stakes pros, I think this is a sobering message. I am fully capable of engaging in some kind of "catastrophe" that destroys my bank roll if I don't get the crazy outbursts under control. Not only that, but it is hard to imagine that riding such large waves of emotion bodes well for my ability to stick around for a long-time. The simple take-away here is to continue to focus more on the process AND ENJOYING the process than the short-term results. Short-term variance can be absolutely insane and you cannot base even the tiniest percentage of your self-esteem on whether or not you've had a winning session.

When Koon asked how a friend handled seven-figure swings, the friend said...

At first, it felt like I was drowning, but, when you do something long
enough, you become numb to it.

Progressive desensitization is a real thing. If I keep playing, I'll keep losing. Each individual loss, inside of a larger winning trend, becomes another data point, another reference experience, that an individual loss is irrelevant. This is exposure therapy. As long as I continue to work through each of these experiences, and as I collect more and more of them, they'll stop impacting me as much. This is a very long-term strategy but the reality is that sometimes there isn't a shortcut. Sometimes you have to hurt bad enough and for long enough that it doesn't affect you anymore. At least, with this one, I can say I'm on my way, lol.

What's Holding You Back by James Obst
Obst presents three stategies in this video to help deal with the ups and downs of mental performance:

1) Stop-Gap Solutions
While it isn't optimal nor ideal, sometimes you just need to come up with a short-term solution that prevents you from doing too much damage while you're spiraling. If you know you make terrible river decisions when tilted, maybe you need to make some nitty folds on the turn to prevent getting into those spots while you're experiencing tilt. Sure, those folds may be -EV, but playing the rivers would be way, way more damaging. For me, these outbursts USUALLY don't affect my play that much. However, before I start smashing things, maybe something as simple as sitting out on every table and stepping outside to take a few deep breathes might be a more effective stop-gap solution than trying to stay present and continue playing while I'm experiencing searing anger.

2) You Can't Separate Physical and Mental
On this point, Obst shares an anecdote about how he drove his body off a cliff during one particular WCOOP. He tried to play every single tournament and resorted to using downers and uppers to sleep and stay awake. The result was that he lost seventeen days in a row. When he started taking care of himself again, he won at the highest rate he ever had. This is what inspired to me to (eventually) completely give up caffeine as a part of my mental game development. I shouldn't need any stimulants to play at my best.

3) Don't Post About Your Bad Luck
This is a key point for me! While I am not active on social media, I am very active in this journal/blog. When you post about how "unlucky" you got in a losing session, and all these qualifiers about how you could've won so much more or done so much better, you're reinforcing a belief system that paints you as some unlucky victim.

The cards will fall roughly the same for everyone over a life time. You are not unlucky.

I'm going to stop engaging in this kind of behavior. This is a low-level attempt at managing your self-image and your image in the eyes of others. I don't care if I'm seen as a "bad player" because of how one session went -- neither in my own eyes nor in the eyes of others. I care to be seen as a high character individual who works hard and gives it their all. I can control my character; I can control my actions; I cannot control variance.

No. More. Whining. Period.

Aaaaand that's all for now. I have an unusual schedule today filled with tons of one-off life errands. I don't have a realistic chance of getting through my usual study load. I will probably complete my session-review later in the day, but, most likely, I will not have time to watch an RIO video and do trainer reps. We'll see. I'll squeeze in whatever I can.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

Day After Session Review

In reviewing this session, there are two areas that clearly jumped out to me as areas where I need to spend additional study time:

1) Playing Sets (especially in SRP)
2) 3bet Cbet Strategy on connected low boards (9 high and below, flopped straight possible)

The BIGGEST Leak in my Game: All-In Blunders
However, a third "problem" clearly jumped out at me as well... I'm still making too many abject blunders when defending against shoves:

In the first example, I'm playing against a bonafide, maniac recreational. That said, that's still never a call. The nuts on this board is a straight flush and villain can definitely have J9ss. Villain can also absolutely have: 88, QT, and T8. Villain ended up having K2ss which is... just something else, but my call is worse than the shove even theoretically. And, where things count, in reality, I called. This is one of those situations where it just isn't worth it to call without a nutted hand. Anything less than a full house should never call here. Even in hindsight, I wouldn't call down an A high flush. If you can't beat any value hands against these 10NL recreationals, calling down huge river bets is just not worth it in SRP. For the tiny percentage of the time that they're doing something insane with pure air, the rest of the time you just lose a stack. This was the hand that started my spiraling, too. Terrible all around.

In the second example, the obvious answer here is that I should not be floating that wide in a 4 bet squeeze pot. Ranges are just too tight. This is an auto-fold even with the weird 20% c-bet size. This is not the first time I've made this exact mistake in one of these reviews so it is really worth repeating to myself: you do NOT float naked back door nut flush draws in 4 bet pots against the 25% sizing. You know, maybe there are some weird exceptions but this is should be a good heuristic for me going forward.

Poor Strategy with Sets
Example #1: Bottom Set

This one is super straight forward: raise bottom set almost pure in most SRP situations. You're unblocking the calling range. In this particular case, Villain was likely bluffing and you just get a fold, but the right move is the right move.

Example #2: Top Boat

Here, I need to be more patient. Shoving here folds out all of the hands he would bluff and medium strength hands he might try to bet for thin value.

Here are the hands that call:

Here are the hands that put in a bet after I check:

While you might miss some value from a few top pairs that end up checking behind, the hands practically overlap 100% and there is an entire bluffing region using the Ah and the Kh that you can get more value from. I have the stone cold nuts here. I can jam over the top of any bet safely. This is a spot where slow playing simply makes more sense. In the end, I got lucky. Villain used their entire time bank and made a crying call with A3cc. They damn near folded it and they almost certainly would've bet that holding for 60-85% on the river. With that much committed, they have to call a river shove over the top. I just didn't play this well regardless of the result.

Example #3: Top Set

Here, I've made the opposite mistake: I have top set on an incredibly dynamic board where my hand has become vulnerable to both straight draws and flush draws. There are many scare cards for both villain AND I. Raising this turn gets Villain to commit more money with his draws and gets more value from his strong holdings before a scary run out comes. As played, the four straight comes in on the river and kills the action. He had top two pair and I should've been able to get way more value here.

3bet Pot Cbet Mistakes on Low, Connected Boards
Example:

UTG vs BTN in 3bet pot. Flop comes down 432fd. I thought this was practically a range check. It isn't even close. The IP 3bettor is betting 70% of the time. The entire range plays b50 at 60% frequency. I'm way, way off here in my understanding of the frequencies.

Example #2:

IP just cbets these textures way more than I thought.

Session Review Takeaways
I can't really "drill" these big all-in decisions too effectively. They don't come around that often and it's hard to set them up in the solver. The solver doesn't go x/x/jam in SRPs very often. I know that much. I just have to continue to get better at folding marginal (and worse!) holdings in these spots. I've reduced the horrible hero calling so, so much since I started this journal. I have a good deal of confidence that if I just keep posting these horrible decisions, I'll keep making better future decisions. Having to "fess up" to the dumb stuff I've done is a deterrent to doing more dumb stuff in the future.

While I can setup drills where GTOW only deals me pocket pairs, I'm still only going to get a set 12% of the time so it is hard to effectively drill optimal set play as well. I may still try in the future. For now, I just want to move forward with a few simple heuristics: 1) you'll tend to slow play invulnerable holdings like boats and top sets on dry boards, 2) you'll have to start doing some fast play on boards where even top set is vulnerable, and 3) the check-raise frequency for bottom set is insanely high; simplifying to raising 100% of the time isn't a terrible simplification. It is certainly a step forward in the right direction compared to how often I miss these raises now.

Now, on the other hand, it is VERY easy to study IP 3bet pot cbet strategies. There are tons of videos on 3bet pot cbetting and setting up drills is incredibly straight forward. So... THAT will be today's training focus: 3bet strategy on low, connected boards. I'll probably look a little bit at OOP as well to ensure I'm confident with my strategy in both situations.

I went way over my time limit for this today... I'm currently at nearly 3 hours including write-up time, yikes! That said, I find it incredibly valuable to put my thoughts into words. Nothing helps me learn faster and more effectively than trying to put concepts into something that a human can read and understand.

With that said, that's all for today's review, folks. I'll be back with the results of my 3bet pot studies later.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/8/24 Study Session Results

I only had time for one video and a short trainer session today.

RIO Video Notes:

Building Simple and Effective Flop Strategies by Freenachos

1) Complexity Pyramid
There is value in playing a simpler game tree with higher accuracy versus a more complex game tree with less accuracy. For example, if you play a strategy that captures 97% of the possible EV and you play it with 100% accuracy, you capture 97% of the available EV. If you attempt to play a strategy that captures 100% of EV, but you play it to 95% accuracy, you can lose up to 5% EV. If, in reality, you’re playing that strategy closer to 60-80% accuracy, the EV losses will be massive compared to the simpler strategy option that you can actually play accurately.

Base of the Pyramid: PURE Strategies regardless of texture
Next Level Up: Pure Strategy on certain texture, eg b25 on K high and range check on 9 high and below
Highest Level: Mixing strategies and potentially mixing strategies with multiple sizes

I think the comment I left on the video itself really sums up my thoughts here:

I love the idea of making an attempt to systemify the entire game
tree. I think, in reality, the vast majority of players are making
these simplifications intuitively. The complexity of actual solver
outputs with multiple sizings is far too immense for the average human
mind to be able to replicate with any degree of accuracy. We end up
relying heavily on our heuristics, but the issue becomes that those
heuristics aren't all encompassing and they tend to leave large gaps
in our strategies. Those gaps are then filled in by on-the-fly
decision making that can, at times, be either entirely random or
subject to immense bias towards specific tendencies. Because human
minds often work alike, people then end up having very similar
tendencies due to using similar heuristics.

Those shared tendencies then open the door for exploitation of nearly
the entire pool. From there, a circular element enters the picture
where, because the pool has certain tendencies, the pool then has a
tendency towards a certain response and the pool becomes exploitable
at both entry points in the circle. The example that comes to my mind
from the video are the boards where range checks can potentially be
used without a lot of EV loss. Most lower stakes pools tend to
overstab because most players in lower stakes pool tend to improperly
defend their checking range.

This video has really opened my idea to the strong possibility that
I'm studying and playing needlessly complex strategies that are
probably costing me significant win rate against the pools I play
with. Not to mention, the simpler your strategy, the easier it is to
play more tables and rack up more volume without running into "new" or
"difficult" spots that you haven't encountered before.

Anyway, great video.

GTOW Trainer Work

After that, as I said, I worked on 9 high and below flops where a flopped straight is possible as the IP 3 bettor.

I did 50 flops CO vs BTN and 50 flops HJ vs BTN.

Here are the general takeaways:

1) 8 and 9 high 3 straight boards are the worst for IP and use low frequencies and sizes. I believe this is because these boards connect well to OOP's suited broadway holdings.

2) Less connected boards where flopped straights are still possible use bigger sizes and higher frequencies. We are most concerned with 3 straight boards. Boards with a two card gap or gaps between all 3 cards have higher frequencies and sizes.

3) Boards 7 high and below trend toward b75

4) Suits are highly relevant. On FD boards, you want one of the two suits on the board and especially the flush draw suit. Even on rainbow boards, you don't want the suit that isn't represented on the board.

A lot of these things are patterns that repeat all through 3 bet pot cbetting strategy. I think I was just surprised to see that the super low connected boards are not particularly terrible for IP. You're still using a very polarized strategy on 7-4 high connected boards, but the betting frequency is usually around 45-50% compared to 20-30% on the 8-9 high 3 straight boards. Again, I think this is because the super low boards don't connect well to either range and this shifts the nuts back towards overpairs where IP has a big advantage.

Short study session today, but, overall, I definitely have a better understanding of how to play these low boards as the IP 3 bettor.

I need to take a break and prepare for my evening session.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/8/24 ACR 10 NL Session #9

-549bb in 2946 hands

I'm not going to sit here, lie, and say that I all of the sudden no longer have a hard time swallowing these huge losing sessions. I still do. However, from a process perspective, I did notice a small shift today in how I was processing the loss.

Today, I was listening to the first part of Leszek Badurowicz's video on "How to Be Less Results-Oriented" and he mentioned that as a 3bb/100 winner at PL100, across a sample of 300k+ hands, his biggest winning session was 18 buy-ins... and his biggest losing sessions was -24 buy-ins(!). In the grand scheme of things, 5 buy-ins wins or losses are not even that big when you're multi-tabling and playing 3000 hands in a single session.

The single biggest determinant of short-term results is variance.

I did not play poorly. I have not been playing poorly. That is what matters.

Again, I won't lie and say that these losing sessions no longer bother me. It still bothers me. A piece of me still expects to win every single time, but, today, I felt the beginning of a new seed taking root where I was able to simply let go of the results of this individual session. I am trying to start thinking of each individual session as a mere play in a game. Even in a highly uncompetitive and one-sided basketball game, both sides score. The losing team may actually score quite frequently. It's just one play. There are hundreds of plays per game and dozens of games per season and, if you're lucky, many seasons to a career.

My job is not to win every session. My job is to play well, adhere to my strategy, and play the pre-agreed upon amount of volume. Today I did that. Does the losing still suck? I'm still at the point where the losing sucks and I don't feel great... but I did my damn job and that's what matters. I do feel good about that. I truly believe this is the beginning of a mindset shift where I can take these losses in stride without getting upset whatsoever.

Oh, and even though I am only up a single buy-in in my first 25k hands at 10NL, I have managed to be one of the winner's of ACR's rake race this week. Even if I didn't play tomorrow, I get $50 in rake back which is (obviously) worth five buy-ins! That's a nice little boost. It is encouraging to know that if I just play my usual volume, I will likely always receive a weekly +5 buy-in boost. I did the math and this will be the case at 25NL, too, because the rakeback prizes can go as high as $500 per week. That's a great incentive to put my ass in my computer chair and grind the volume I'm supposed to grind. Not that I ever miss a day anyway ; ).

I've ranted enough.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/9/24: Beating 10NL Day 10

Going forward, I'm just going to make one post per day. I'll simply edit the post to reflect what I've completed as I go through my daily process (note to self: this doesn't actually work; it won't let me edit the posts). Each post is going to end up monstrous, but I think, in the end, it will be more organized this way and far less spammy on my part. I've made over 100 posts in here in less than 3 weeks, lol.

Mental Game Development

Health Metrics
In my last post on mental game development, I talked about how I wanted to start tracking my fitness, meditation, and other physical biometrics. I was able to get in touch with the support people over at Oura ring (wearable fitness tech that allows you to track a bunch of different metrics like sleep duration/quality) and I found out my ring has a disconnected battery. They're sending a new one, but it could take up to three weeks before I receive it. I won't be able to start tracking those biometrics until that comes.

However, I do have a CPAP that tracks how long I wear my mask. I have diagnosed sleep apnea. I am ~5'7"/170cm and well over 200lbs/90kg. I am not by any means fat, but, as an ex-bodybuilder, I carry way more muscle than the average person my height and this greatly increases my risk for things like sleep apnea.

I promise not to post any more semi-nude physique photos (this stuff is standard in the bodybuilding world, sorry, lol), but this is one of the last photos I took before I tore my pec off the bone and "retired" from my bodybuilding goals. I had gotten up to 230lbs/104kg.

I'm now down below 220lbs/100kg. One of my goals is to lose another 50lbs/22kg over the coming years. Much of it will be muscle and I perfectly happy with that. Losing much of the muscle I gained during my bodybuilding days will only serve to increase my life span at this point. I don't need it anymore. I think there is a small chance that this will also carry over to playing poker more effectively if for no other reason than the fact that being heavy simply represents another stress on the body (even if it is muscle, trust me).

The two metrics I CAN track, even now, are:

Health Metrics
Bodyweight: 217.8lbs / 98.8kg
Sleep (Mask Time): 7.9 hours

Health Management
Meditation, 20 minutes: Complete, (1/1, 100%)
Gym: Skipped, (0/1, 0%)*

*The gym is always the first thing that gets cut when I fall behind on my daily schedule. I do not recommend this approach but my situation is unique. I actually want to lose some muscle and I have two large dogs which need 60+ minutes of exercise per day. I am never sedentary because of them.

Mental Game Video Content

How to Be Less Results-Oriented by Leszek Badurowicz
There were two huge key takeaways in this video for me...
1) Leszek mentioned that as a 3bb/100 winner in PLO100, his biggest losing session was -24 buy-ins. He only plays 1500 hands or so per session. Granted, PLO is much higher variance than NLHE, but, considering my sessions are twice that length, at least in terms of the number of hands, I really shouldn't be surprised when I have these occasional +10 buy-ins or -10 buy-ins session. Huge swings will happen. Variance is the primary determinant of short-term results -- NOT your level of play.

2) Leszek cites two different studies where participants were offered financial incentives to complete a task as quickly and efficiently as possible. In both studies, the participants who were NOT offered a financial reward (the control group) actually performed better. What appears to be the case is that thinking about money represents a stressor. That stressor can be motivating for low-effort, rote tasks, but it erodes creativity, coordination for complex movement patterns, and high level cognition.

How to Increase Self-Confidence by Leszek Badurowicz
The main takeaway from this video had to do with Leszek's use of the mountain climber analogy. Research on the mindset of mountain climber's has revealed that their attitude tends to mirror current weather conditions in opposite manner of sorts. When conditions are good, they tend to think about what they will if the weather conditions turn. There is no guarantee that the weather will remain favorable and they cannot afford to have even a momentary lapse of concentration or it could cause severe injury or harm. On the other hand, when the weather is terrible, they search for reasons to be optimistic and grateful.

This mirroring works in poker, too. When we are in the midst of a perceived upswing, we can become often confident. We may bluff more often and be more prone to spewing off chips. On the other hand, in a perceived down swing, confidence issues may arise which lead us to be too timid. To help with swinging emotional states, we can begin to think like mountain climbers. During upswings, we should consider what it will be like when the next inevitable down swing begins. We must find ways to maintain high levels of concentration even when it feels like everything is working. We must continue to study even though it seems we beat the games with great ease. Likewise, when we are struggling, we can think about what our mind set is like during an upswing. We can use strategies to increase our confidence in the moment and ensure we aren't playing from a place of improper fear.

I am literally making myself a worse player by constantly worrying about whether or not I am having a losing session.

If that isn't motivation to change, what is? I need to give up "checking the score" during the session. It is actually worse than completely useless. I'm taking precious seconds that should go into decision times to look at the graph AND the worrying about results reduces my mental capacities. This has to stop. The results of an individual session do not matter. The process is what matters.

Poker Strategy Development

Day-After Session Review

As I thought, at least in terms of GTO play, this was one of my best sessions at 10NL so far despite losing 5+ buy-ins.

As I looked through all the hands, I made a variety of errors, but there were no clear patterns or trends. I tagged several dozen mistakes, as per usual, that I wanted to look into further, but most of them had at least some unique properties.

That said, I've settled on using today's study to try and get a better understanding of cbetting as the BB -- particularly with the trash/bluff 3 bet region. This is such a unique range to play because it is just so wide and polarized compared to other 3 bet ranges. Heuristics are difficult to develop it's just so easy to make mistakes with that trash region. You can't simplify as easily and you certainly can't cbet anywhere near as often as you do from other positions.

In particular, I made a couple of cbetting mistakes that prompted me to want to look into this deeper:

In retrospect, both of these are pretty obvious misses especially the AKs hand. That said, in game, I do struggle to know what to do with stuff like Q9o when I end up in a 3 bet pot. Usually, I try to default to how I think my range should play rather than considering my holding, but, if you look at the sims, there are plenty of hands in the BB's trash 3 bet region that just immediately give up. I want to look into this further and try to feel more comfortable when the 3 bet bluffs don't get through and now I'm in an actual pot with a garbage holding.

I know this is the lamest review I've ever done, but there just wasn't much in particular to discuss. The range of errors I made was so wide that each sort of fit into a unique category. I'm sure future reviews will be more thematic as they have been in the past.

RIO Video Study Session

1) Cash Hands in 3bet Pots by Brian Hastings
I couldn’t find a video specifically on BB vs BTP in 3bp, but I was able to look a little bit at SB vs BTN in this one. I think the spots are sufficiently different, because of how much tighter the SB’s range is, that you can’t really generalize any lessons, but, nonetheless, this was a fun hand history for this particular spot.

I didn't have time for a second video today as I'm a little behind on my schedule. I'm off to drill BB vs BTN in 3 bet pots.

GTOW Trainer Session

In the end, I focused entirely on BB vs SB in 3bet pots. Doing so allowed me to have the greatest number of reps working with that trash region in the BB's 3bet range. Further, both of the pots where I made cbet mistakes in the last session were actually blind vs blind anyway.

I ended up drilling 200 flops. There's A LOT going on and it is very difficult to draw up heuristics so the following takeaways are super, super rough and not nuanced at all:

1) A High: tends toward b33, but goes polar with b50/b75 on double broadway textures
2) K High: tends toward splitting b33/b50 and goes polar with b50/b75 on double broadway textures
3) Q High: tends toward splitting b33/b50 and uses mainly b50 on double broadway textures
4) J High: tends toward splitting b50/b33 and uses mainly b50 when there's also a T present
5) 9-8 High: tends toward b50, but uses b20/b33 on super connected textures.
6) 7-4 high: tends toward b33
7) Paired Boards: still close to a range bet in many situations
8) Monotone Boards: tends toward b20 when there are low high cards and b33/b50 when there are high cards depending on if there are multiple broadways
9) Triple Broadway: tends toward b20

Next up, I put in my usual 420 full hands from start randomly selected from 100-200bb stacks, 2-2.5x opens, and GTO or slightly smaller 3 bets.

10NL Session on ACR Results

-204bb in 2948 hands

Throughout this session, I made a concerted effort to not look at results. I didn't check how I was doing until the very end. I left the session thinking that I played well. When I checked the results, and saw that I was down two buy-ins for the session, I immediately noticed some negativity creep into my mental state... but I was able to let go of that quickly. Why would I be upset when I felt I played well the entire time?

I'm definitely beginning to understand why so many journals/blogs on here state that one of their goals is to only check results once a month. I don't think that is an approach I'm going to take personally, but I definitely have to admit that I play better when I'm not thinking about where I stand on the session. There is less stress interfering with my decision making.

Also, as an important aside, I have to be careful when my time banks start running low on the majority of tables. This can sometimes happen towards the end of a session. After a long session, I've had to use up most of the time bank at least once on the majority of the tables for a tough decision. When there are 6-7 tables with only two seconds of time bank left, I feel pressure to play more quickly and I think this has a negative impact. If this happens, it is probably best to just leave many of the tables that have a low time bank and get back on the waiting list. I may lose my seat, and I may lose a few minutes of game play, but, when I rejoin the table, my time bank is fully refreshed. I hope that isn't considered "cheating" of any kind but I do think, for me, it is going to be an approach I take rather than trying to rush around on so many different boards.

Last but not least, while I can certainly handle nine tables, it leads to just a few time-based mistakes every session. The perfect number really does seem to be eight and I need to stick to eight going forward.

I think I'll conclude each of these posts going forward by displaying my total progress towards beating 10NL so far:

-119bb in 27,822 hands (not including rake back)

That's all for today! My plan to edit the post as I finished more of my routine didn't really work. I kept getting error messages when I'd try to update. Going forward, I'm just going to do one long post at the end of the day.

Enjoy your weekend everyone!
~Orca

8/10/24: Beating 10NL Day 11

Mental Game Development

Health Management
Health Metrics:
Bodyweight: 217.2lbs / 98.5kg
Sleep (Mask Time): 7.6 hours

Health Exercises:
Meditation, 20min: Complete -- (2/2, 100%)
Gym: Incomplete (0/2)*
*I will go tomorrow for sure. I am finally caught up on my schedule. Again though, I consider weightlifting the least important part of managing my health given I did it so intensely for 10+ years.

Mental Game Content

1) Are You A Really Great Competitor? by James Obst
So far, for me, the key takeaway from this video is that I need to be as strong within as without. Great competitors do not show weakness during competition. They don't remark about how there's surely a Q coming when they get it all-in preflop AK vs AQ. In my case, they don't whine about variance or point to differences in bb winnings versus all-in adjusted bb winnings. They don't tolerate negative self-talk. If you don't allow the seeds of negativity in your inner space, they won't grow into outer manifestations. Don't even entertain thoughts of being unlucky. Don't EVER entertain thoughts of inferiority. Focus only what needs to be done, both internally and externally, to play the next hand as well as possible. Nothing else matters.

One final point: James mentions a friend who told him that he felt like he had been playing like a "btch" at final tables. He had become scared money and was folding way often when he felt he should be shipping it. Instead of the standard advice, which is basically just try harder, James suggested dropping down in stakes and taking 100% of the shoving opportunities that presented themselves. In other words, just remove the choice entirely. If there is a bluff-shove opportunity, you HAVE to do it. I feel like I can benefit from a similar approach right now when it comes to bluff shoving. I almost *never take blocker-based bluff shoves. My red line is terrible. I want to experiment with taking all of these opportunities so I can get a better feel for when they will succeed and when they won't.

2) Thinking Clearly: Poker Biases by Sean LeFort
This video took common human cognitive biases such as sunk cost fallacy, the availability bias, and the clustering bias and put them into a poker context. It reminded me quite a bit of Daniel Kahneman's work except it was a discussion about poker. I think, for me, the biggest one to keep in mind is regression to the mean. You cannot get caught up on small sample sizes when true win rates require hundreds of thousands of hands to determine. Poker is not a game where you can win every session. It just isn't. I have to continue to work on letting go of that mindset that I've developed from other games/sports where you should be successful in nearly every practice/game. Poker doesn't work that way.

Poker Strategy Development

Overall, I played a very solid session here. As always, there are a few mistakes that I wish I could take back.

This one jumps to the forefront:

For some reason, this is a lesson I've had to learn over and over: 3 bet pots play more like single-raised pots when you're 200bb deep. You are not supposed to be eager to get it all in with a single top pair. Here, I'm actually even supposed to majority fold AQo preflop and for good reason: the reverse implied odds are terrible when you're this deep.

That said, the three main errors that jumped out at me in this session were:

1) Missing a variety of cbets as the BTN vs the BB in SRPs:

These aren't even all of them. I'm not going to get into this today as it is a bit of "simple" mistake in the sense that you either have these cbet heuristics down or you don't. I'm marking this particular topic for future drilling because it is sorely needed. I've noticed at least a few of these every single session (I seem to miss more as the BTN than anywhere else).

2) Passive play with combo draws

Again, no deep analysis here. This isn't the first time I've brought up this error, but hopefully it will be the last. My personal bias is to tend towards check/call with these holdings, but they almost always prefer to raise. I am simply not aggressive enough with these hands.

3) Passing on most optional bluffs and even some mandatory ones

I suppose my play has begun to mirror population tendencies in that I'm too passive on rivers. After having a look at my red line last night for the first time, I want to challenge myself to try pulling the trigger on ALL of these opportunities. Sure, I may lose more than my fair share, but, right now, I'm taking these opportunities at a frequency well below equilibrium when the population tends to fold more than equilibrium. That doesn't make sense on my part. I need to lose the fear of pulling the trigger on these big bluffs. No one likes to lose a stack, but these kind of blocker bluffs HAVE to be in your game.

Here are another two that I marked as "missed" in 3 bet pots:

With the K4hh hand, I'm supposed to check and give up right off the bat, but, once I double-barrel here, I have to finish the job and put the triple barrel in. I'm repping trips queens or the flush. Villain is holding 88 without relevant suits. That one gets through. If I'm going to have no fear on the first two barrels, I need to fire the third.

The second one is trickier. Again, I'm probably best off just folding QJ on the turn, but, once I make it to the river and villain checks back, there is an opportunity to shove repping the completed flush. This is a line often taken with lower suited connectors, but I didn't even consider it here because I think I wrongly assumed the Q had some decent showdown value. I may have gotten looked up here, but, again, I want to challenge myself to take these opportunities so I can get a better feel for playing much, much more aggressively on rivers. Who knows? Maybe Villain gets nervous and folds AJ there.

Last, but certainly not least, these ones disappointed me the most because I've studied these lines in GTOW plenty:

In both of these spots, once Villain has started checking, and once you've committed to putting in the first probe, you're almost ALWAYS following up with a medium/big b50/b75 if the next card is another low card. Villain has tons and tons of unpaired double broadway holdings that won't withstand the pressure here. These b20/b33 followed by ~b75 repeat themselves in the solver over and over and over on these types of runouts in 3 bet pots. I know better than this. I cannot miss these. I cannot allow myself to begin too tight and too timid just because I haven't been running hot lately. I know these lines and these bets need to get put in every single time. Population overfolds to these lines in the microstakes. At higher stakes, I assume more caution is needed as check back lines should, theoretically, be better protected. Here though, I just can't miss these. I've studied this.

That's all for today's session review. I'm going to spend today watching videos from the "bluffing" section on RIO. If I can think of a good way to drill river bluffs, I'll do so. Otherwise, my trainer time will likely be spent on drilling cbetting as BTN vs BB in SRPs.

Run It Once Video Study

I'm absolutely loving the series on bluffing by Francesco Lacriola so far.

1) On Bluffing -- by Francesco Lacriola

Remember, the solver-based equilibrium solutions are the results of two clairvoyant rational agents playing against each. They adjust until balance is achieved. This is impossible for real humans. You don’t need to be perfectly balanced in every situation. Humans have absolutely no way to determine if your frequencies are off. They will never get the necessary sample of hands needed to determine something like that unless you’re egregiously unbalanced (eg bluffing any two or never bluffing at all).

If villain under-defends a specific street, the range they arrive to the next street is “stronger than it should be” and you’ll have less fold-equity (unless villain is prone to hero-folds). The opposite is also true: if players are overdefending, bluffs on future street will be more profitable than they should be.

You should assume, for most people, that the more money that they’ve invested into the pot, the less willing they will be to fold.

Don’t assume all recreationals are calling stations. Many of them highly value metagame and game flow. They will drastically adjust their strategy if they think, for example, you are a “bluffer”.

2) Bluffing: Advanced Plays -- by Francesco Lacriola

Remember: many of the plays in this video are plays we should have in our repertoire; they are not to be used every single chance we get.

a) Floating the flop IP and betting against a missed CB on a blank turn (turn probe)
i) This play works extremely effectively against players who struggle to balance a decent turn check range
ii) In general, we use smaller bets on blank turns because we expect their range to be weaker here than on more dynamic turns. We will see more pot control strategies with stronger holdings on boards with straights and flushes possible.
iii) The frequency of our turn probe depends heavily on how villain constructs their range. It can be extremely high if they don’t check-raise often enough
iv) If we get called on the turn probe, we need to carefully evaluate their range before planning a river bet. Sometimes they will call with a capped range planning to call down on any blank river. If that’s the case, we can comfortably give up on the river having already made a profitable turn probe.

b) Bluff-Raise the Turn
i) Most players have a clear idea of how to play against flop raises, but they struggle against turn rases because it is harder to figure out the range behind this line
ii) This play is extremely effective to punish players who barrel recklessly on turns that “look” better for their range than the defending range
iii) In order for this to be profitable, villain needs to be barreling low equity bluffs like JTo on 842Kr.
iv) This play is extremely effective in a vacuum or when used seldomly. Opponents will quickly adjust if you overuse this line

c) Leading the turn after check-calling the flop
i) This play is really effective against opponents who use bigger c-bet sizes. It is used on turns which pair the board, bring possible offsuit straights that the defender has in their range, and two pairs.
ii) This lead isn’t polarized and has to include several protections bets and bluffs. Villain is going to have a tough time with the air portion of their range and has to overfold unless they’re able to play aggressively against the bet
iii) This play isn’t very effective against small c-bets on the flop… not only because villain is more likely to have trips in his range when he bets his entire range small, but because denying equity realization to two random overcards is more valuable in bigger pots

d) Raising the river against a triple barrel
i) This play is the most opponent dependent play in the list and relies on villain being able to value bet thin and his range not being polarized.
ii) We represent an extremely polarized range and try to put pressure on villain’s thinner value bets
iii) We need to carefully choose hands with the best blockers before considering the execution of a river bluff raise
iv) The most important factors behind deciding whether or not to go for this play are villain’s range and how he is going to perceive our range
v) Works well in situations in which villain can valuebet a straight on a paired board and on boards with possible flushes if villain value bets too often with strong top pairs or over pairs
vi) The most common blocker based bluffs are the nut flush blocker and two pairs that have become counterfeited on full house boards especially when villain can value bet straights/flushes
vii) For the full house line: blockers are key. On KJTT9, you would much rather have KJ than K9 or J9 as 99 probably never gets to the river against a triple barrel line anyway. KJ blocks KT and JT.
viii) For the nut flush blocker, this is heavily, heavily opponent based. Many opponents will never fold any flush against a huge shove. This line is more effective against opponents who are at least somewhat familiar with GTO strategies.

e) 3betting the river as a bluff
i) This is very advanced and highly situational in order to be profitable
ii) It works best when you block bet the river with a balanced range and villain has some thinner raises in their range. For example, they’re raising 2pair, sets, straights, or flushes on boards with stronger hand categories available. They have to be able to raise a 2nd tier hand for this to work.
iii) It is extremely important that our line is credible and that we play our nutted hands in the same fashion

f) Metagame considerations
i) If certain types of bluffs are extremely profitable among a certain population, they often become a trend. Players tend to copycat.
ii) If everyone does a play, everyone adjusts and they stop working as well
iii) We can try to exploit the metagame by overbluffing lines that tend to be underbluffed by the population but offer fundamentally sound bluffing opportunities

That was it for today's video session. I think it is hard to specifically drill "bluffing" opportunities, but I think I'm going to spend about ~30 minutes looking at BTN vs. BB on randomly generated rivers where the line has been check/b33, check/b125, check/??? to get to the river. The goal of the training will be to look at whether or not to put in the 3rd barrel. After that, I'm going to spend about ~30 minutes looking at BTN vs BB where the line has gone check/check, b175-b250 / call, ??? to get to the river where I look at whether or not to put in the second barrel. I still need a review of BTN vs BB flop cbet strategy but that'll wait for another day. I'm going to focus heavily on bluffs for the coming week.

GTOW Training Session

The bluffing drill I setup actually worked quite a bit better than expected!

I ended up doing the following:
BTN vs BB, as BTN: x/b33, x/b125, x/ ??? -- 100 rivers
BTN vs BB, as BB: x/x, b175/call, ??? -- 50 rivers
BTN vs BB, as BB: x/x, b250/call, ??? -- 50 rivers

The most important take away from this training session was just how important it is to unblock flush missed flush draws on flush draw boards when these turn overbets come into play.

You can sometimes bet with absolutely nothing so long as you unblock the missed flushes:

In the vast majority of cases, unblocking missed flushes is more important than blocking completed straights:

I did find a few notable exceptions such as 43ss and 32ss which are, essentially, just so low that they don't block enough flush combinations to matter. I saw a lot of instances where, so long as there was any straight that completed, or any board changing card on the river, you could bluff air so long as you unblock flush draws. This gives me a great deal more confidence when it comes to pulling the trigger on these blocker/unblocker bluffs. Any time that I'm both blocking a straight AND unblocking a flush on these turn overbet lines is generally a complete slam dunk of a bluff. I will not miss these opportunities going forward.

I also played my usual 420 full hands starting from preflop randomly selected from 100-200bb, 2.5x/GTO opens, and GTO/smaller 3 bets. I still think doing a small game play simulation each day is nice for staying sharp on the fundamentals. It only takes 30 minutes or so.

10NL Session ACR #11

+187bb in 2785 hands

Thoughts on the Session...
Another day in the books where I didn't bother to check the score once during the entire session. I didn't do quite as well as I did yesterday at taking certain things in stride... Losing shoves with AK will probably never be my favorite thing, but, again, I am trying to shift my mindset to one where I see each pot as an investment. When I make those shoves, I share a certain percentage of the pot. Sometimes I will win the shoves. Sometimes I will lose the shoves. That's irrelevant. Each opportunity I have something like ~47% of the pot share depending on exactly what I'm up against. Many times, those shoves generate folds and that is why they are profitable overall. Whether or not I win in a given session will generally come down to variance in those exact kinds of spots. I don't have control of that and it isn't worth worrying about.

I stuck to eight tables today and I feel it was a big improvement in reducing the amount of times I felt rushed or hurried. I will continue with eight tables going forward. The only exception would be if I decided to try a 100k hand challenge. For now, that's not on the table.

And, as promised, here is my total progress towards beating 10NL:

+68bb in 30607 hands (not including rake back)

The goal remains +2000bb with a minimum of 50k hands to consider the stake "beat".

I'll be back tomorrow with my usual analysis and study work.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/11/24: Beating 10NL Day #12

Mental Game Development

Health Management
Health Metrics:
Bodyweight: 217.7lbs / 98.7kg
Sleep (Mask Time): 8.6 hours

Health Exercises:
Meditation, 20min: Complete, (3/3, 100%)
Gym: Incomplete (0/3, 0%)

Mental Game Content

1) Applications of Psychology: Heuristics and Biases by Kieran Harris
I actually completed this video yesterday and I wish I would've done the write-up when the video was still fresh in my mind. This video was very similar to LeFort's video on biases and how they apply in a Poker context. The one clear example that still jumps to mind for this video is that the main mechanism behind using heuristics to simplify problems is that, essentially, it is a strategy involving question substitution. When we arrive at a difficult river decision, instead of asking "what is Villain's range" and trying to work through that potentially difficult cognitive issue, we can simply ask ourselves "do I feel like Villain has it this time?". If you give in to that very human shortcut, you're leaving profit up to the emotion of the moment. These types of situations can be greatly influenced by whether or not you're running hot/bad lately and a million other factors. In these difficult spots, resisting the urge to take the short cut and actually going through the thinking process is mandatory. Heuristic thinking is very useful in other aspects of life that perhaps aren't as important to our day to day thinking, as a means of saving valuable cognitive resources, but, in poker, we need to use our brain more often than not.

2) Overcoming Natural Bias by Darren Wee
This was my 3rd mental game video in a row about biases, fallacies, and heuristics. There's obviously going to be a lot of duplicate content across three videos on the same topic, but the most valuable lesson from this particular video was a good reminder on the nature of regression to the mean versus the gambler's fallacy. Just because you've flipped tails twenty times in a row does not mean you are more likely to flip heads on the 21st go. Each flip of a fair coin is still 50/50. Regression to the mean occurs over large sample sizes and has nothing to do with each individual trial.

If you're running 10bb below all-in adjusted EV this week, it doesn't mean you're anymore likely to have a good week next week. Your edge is still exactly the same (plus any improvements you've made that week) and you're just as likely to win or lose as before. It is only across massive samples of hundreds of thousands or even millions of hands that we will begin to see a result that might be reflective of your true win rate.

If you consider things from this perspective, a down swing is not something that actually exists. You cannot be "in a downswing". You can only zoom in on a piece of a graph and point out a trend. The next data points in the graph, at least in terms of predicting variance, will have nothing to do with the preceding data points. So, in a way of looking at it, a down swing only exists as an artifact of looking at particular intervals of time. If you zoom out further, or zoom in closer, you may be in an "upswing" on another interval.

In the end, all you can do is play each hand as well as you possibly can. All the rest is completely outside your zone of control.

3) Time Management by Leszek Badurowicz
As a self-professed self-help junkie, I was familiar with many of the time management concepts that Leszek presented in this video including Stephen Covey's four quadrants of time management: 1) important but not urgent, 2) important and urgent, 3) urgent but not important, and 4) not urgent and not important. I average about an hour of screen time on my phone per day which, trust me, is a huge win compared to where I used to be. I think time management is one of my biggest strong suits. Well, maybe not time management per se, but I can definitely stick to a schedule. My real problem is legitimately expecting to get done more than I can actually get done each time. If one activity runs longer than planned, I always have to cut something out.

That said, I think this video is a solid one and I absolutely endorse all of the concepts within. Block out your time. Turn your phone off. Focus on thing at a time. Don't move on until you've complete the thing you were focusing on. It's very simple, but it adds up to tremendous progress when you're consistent over long periods of time.

Poker Strategy Development

Post-Session Review

Another overall solid session here, but, as usual, I was able to find plenty of mistakes. There were two main themes that I want to cover, but, first, I just want to point out a few very simple mistakes that I have to stop making...

STOP CALLING LEAD SHOVES FROM FISH!

Fish do not do take these lead-shove lines with a balanced range. They just don't. Just the other day I posted a hand where a fish shoved 90+bb on the river on a paired, flush draw board and I said I wouldn't make a call in the future unless I had a full house... this stuff is why. I know it is hard to toss the nut flush draw against a fish who has limped, but many fish limp with a highly polarized, uncapped range. Some of them even limp AA every single time. I think this is just too risky of a call down without a great read on the opponent being a maniac or the type who overvalues all flushes/straights even when the texture has devalued those holdings, relatively speaking.

Overplaying Top Pairs/Overpairs 150-200bb+ Deep

100bb deep, you just shove that river and live with the results in most cases. You're heavily blocking KQ. However, 150bb deep, BTN vs BB, ranges are significantly wider. Villain's range contains: T9s, 98s, 87s, JTs, J9s, JJ, and even KQs. All of those holdings can easily get to the river in this manner because it is easy to call the 33% flop cbet with a gutshot. In fact, they even call bigger flop sizings when they have a backdoor flush draw. This is a very big mistake. I shouldn't be value betting the 4 straight board here when so many straights and two pairs are possible. I should check this river and fold to the shove. This was my biggest mistake of the session. I have no excuses here. This wasn't a fish. I just misplayed the hand. Badly. I've repeatedly overplayed top pairs and overpairs when 150-200bb deep lately and I have to remember that the bigger SPR in 150-200bb deep 3 bet pots makes these spots play more similarly to SRPs! You shouldn't be so eager to get it all in with a top pair or an overpair unless the runout is exceedingly favorable. This is a very costly mistake even if you only make it a few times per week because it costs you more than a full stack each time.

River Bluffs
I will give myself credit for finding a few more river bluffs than usual in this session:

However, I still missed many big shoves in high leverage situations:

In the KTs 4bet pot hand, I just completely choked there. That has to be a shove.

On many of the other hands, I missed opportunities to turn pairs into shoves and this is a very common theme in my hand histories. I do not find the bluffs that require shoving marginal SDV. I continue to overestimate that show down value. Today, I don't have time to go into any great depth about any of these spots in particular. It is just something that I am continuing to note. I will have to just continue to study and try to do a better job of recognizing these spots.

The Theme of the Session: Missed Slowplays

The main mistake I kept making in this session was going too fast when I should be going slower:

There's two main types of mistakes that I tend to make in this regard: 1) not slowing down on flush complete boards when I could be keeping their bluffs in (when OOP), and 2) fast playing sets that are either completely invulnerable or close enough that I can afford to let the opponent catch up. Again, I just don't have time to break each of these spots down in massive detail, but I do think those two heuristics are very key: 1) consider checking back river on flush complete boards when you're OOP with a holding that can easily bluff catch 2) strongly consider slow playing top set on all but the wettest boards, and 3) there is no need to play your full houses aggressively when your opponent has recently checked; let them catch up.

Okay folks, that is all for today's session review! I am going to continue to focus on bluffing in my studies today and probably for the coming week as well. I'd like to try and become a more aggressive player or, at the very least, stop missing key bluffing opportunities in high leverage spots. As a default, I'd rather overbluff than underbluff against almost all populations. Default human nature is to be too conservative and risk adverse. Being, by default, "too aggressive" takes advantage of this all-too-real human tendency.

RIO Video Studies

1) Bluffing Practical Applications
a) Ad4s on 4c 5d 2h 3d 5c -- calling turn bet sets up future river bluff in case the board pairs or the diamond flush finishes. In these spots, the best bluffing candidates are usually counterfeited two pairs.
b) 57hh on Kh 4d Qh Ac 6d – low missed flush draws (5 high and lower) can often be great river bluffs because they don’t really block a lot of the missed flushes your opponent has most of the time and they unblock the folding range
c) KdKh on Jc Td 6c 8d Ad – in this case KK with a diamond blocks the nut flush draw and the nut straight
d) Qc 8s on 6h 2c 7c Kc 6d – triple barrel with a flush blocker
e) 7d4d on Ks 2s 7c 5c Tc – recreational player uses a small block bet on the river which turns his hand face up to some degree and this shove is purely based on range perception. Flushes are going to have a lot of fold equity for recreationals on these runouts. The rec used a super small 3 bet with Aces (they love to do that).
f) As 3c on 8s 4s Jc 2c 7s – hero block bets river, villain raises river on a board that contains a lot of straights, hero shoves the nut flush blocker representing the flush. This only works if you are against a villain who is capable of raising a block bet with a merged value range
g) Ts 9s on 3h 3d 7c 7s – this turn lead only works because villain used a bigger flop bet which polarizes his range

2) Bluffing: Exam Time
a)

Debate whether or not it makes sense to balance a reasonable bluffing
frequency on the river and the metagame implications of your choice

It doesn’t always make sense to balance your bluffing range on the river. The reason for this is that population tendencies must be taken into account when considering the metagame. There are certain spots where a lot of the population has learned about “popular bluffs” such as using the nut flush blocker on a flush complete board. In general, there are spots that are currently overbluffed or underbluffed by the population in the current metagame. In these spots, you likely don’t want to go so extreme as to never bluff or to bluff any two cards, because then you increase the likelihood that your opponent notices what is going and actually adjusts, but you definitely want to lean towards imbalance on the side that exploits population tendencies as per the current meta game.

b)

Villain opens from the BTN to 2.5x and we call from the BB. Flop comes
9c 9s 8c. Villain cbets 33% pot. We call. The turn is Tc completing
the flush and some straights. Villain bets 66% pot and we call. River
is a 2h, a complete blank. Villain bets 66% pot again. Describe which
factors are allow us to have a profitable bluff and which hands are
the best bluffing candidates.

First, we need to understand whether or not villain is the type of player who will bet with a merged range for value here. Are they capable of value betting a straight or a weak flush on this board? If so, we have a potentially profitable bluffing opportunity because we have offsuit combinations of the available full house in our range with 98o and T9o. We want to unblock QJ and maybe flush draws. T8 without a club is the ideal choice here.

c)

Villain opens from the BTN to 2.5x and we defend from the BB. Flop
comes Qh 8c 2d and Villain bets 1/3rd of the pot. We call and the turn
pairs the 8. Debate if we should consider implementing a lead range on
this turn.

We do not have a strong enough incentive to develop a leading range on this turn. For one, the BTN opens a wider range of hands and that range contains plenty of 8x. More importantly, many villains are betting range or close to range when they use the 1/3rd sizing on this dry, disconnected texture. Villain should still have all of their 8s in range here.

d)

“What are the most important factors to consider before planning to
barrel on some runouts?”

One of the most important factors to consider is whether or not Villain is likely to have overdefended or underdefended the flop and turn based on metagame, texture, and sizings. If they are likely to have underdefended because of their perception of you as a player, because the cbet sizings you chose are difficult to defend against, because of their individual tendencies or population tendencies, they will be arriving to the next street with a narrower range that is stronger than it should be. Most bluffs will just be lighting money on fire at that point. The opposite is, of course, also true. If Villain is arriving to the next street with far too wide of a range, they will struggle to defend against further pressure.

Second, we must consider blocking and unblocking effects. Do we block the nutted or value portion of the runout? Are we blocking likely floats and weaker marginal holdings? Even if Villain has overdefended to get to this point, unfavorable blocker and unblocker effects may still influence us to give up.

Things I missed in this answer: how a card impacts range distribution (eg K favors in the IP aggressor), how much fold equity you have on the current street, how many weak pairs + draws are in villain’s range and how does he perceive those barreling spots (he likes/doesn’t like to make light calls)

e)

We defend the BB against a BTN 2.5x open. Flop is Kd 8d 6c, we
check-call the flop cbet and we also check-call on a 7d turn
(completing the straight and the flush). Which cards do you want to
hold and which ones do you not want to hold to consider bluff-raising
on a 2c river?

In this spot, the ideal card to have to bluff-raise the river is the Ad paired with a card that doesn’t block the T9 and 54 straights. You’re looking to block flushes and unblock straights, basically.

Things I missed: we don’t want to block pairs here because they may be thin value betting sets. T9dd is also a good candidate to bluff because they still unblock the offsuit straights and sets we are targeting and it is, in and of itself, a great bluff catcher. We’d rather that villain didn’t have that holding. If you only bluff with Ad, if villain is ever holding that card himself such as AA with a diamond or AK with a diamond, they’ll autofold thinking that you don’t have any bluffs. You’re too easy to range if you only use the A of diamonds.

f)

How do we exploit players who barrel too frequently and too thinly on
very coordinated turns?

A player with these tendencies is an ideal candidate for bluff-raising the turn. The ideal candidates are semi-bluffs. If done in a vacuum, you can practically use any two cards. If not done in a vacuum, this must be done at a very low frequency otherwise the villain is likely to catch on and adjust.

Things I missed: 1) we bluff-raise more pairs and gutshot type hands, 2) we can implement a leading range on rivers which contain scare cards for the top pair/overpair/two pair portion of their range, 3) we can delay flop raises with strong value hands to the turn

As for today's GTOW Training reps, I'm going to try and get some more experience with playing sets. As it turns out, there is a setting in the trainer that allows me to only be dealt hands with sets so that's what we're going to do.

GTOW Trainer Session

I was able to put in reps with about 150 different full hands playing sets from all positions, SRPs, 3bp, 4bp, squeeze pots, etc. I'm not confident enough to provide any heuristics, but I do think there were some basic things that I saw over and over again:

1) You're often slowing down with top sets on dry boards to let the opponent catch up. This is particularly true on boards where you're range does a lot of checking anyway. For example, you have TT on a T high board in a 3bp as the BB. If you're range betting a texture, you're still range betting. If you have KK on a K high board in a 3 bet pot BTN vs CO, you're still cbetting your KK. However, there are often opportunities to slow down on the turn even on those super favorable textures. Outside of very dynamic textures, top sets are often trapped.

2) Bottom set raises at almost 100% frequency against small bets. You're just unblocking so much of their value/calling range. It's easy to get multiple streets of value.

3) Middle sets play a more mixed strategy and it was hard for me to discern any real pattern with this sample size.

I want to continue to do more reps with this drill at some point. I think playing something like a few thousand hands with sets would help me sort my game in these situations permanently.

I'm off to take my hounds to the park and then I'll be hitting my evening session.

8/11/24 10NL Session on ACR #12

+196bb in 2958 hands

I'm very frustrated with myself after this session and it has nothing to do with variance, tilt, angry outbursts or anything of the like... it has to do with actual poker strategy.

I'm calling down shoves too lightly. I gave away no less than three buy-ins today calling shoves that I had no business calling and one of them was in a 200bb pot. It has become abundantly clear to me that I need to actually drill these situations. I need to drill river shoves. I'm calling down in situations where the solver is mixing like 90% fold and 10% call. Against this population, that is LIGHTING MONEY ON FIRE. They are not good enough to properly balance a bluffing range. They just aren't. They're risk averse. Sure, there are lots of other bet sizes where bluff-catching is necessary on a variety of textures.

Against shoves, though? No. Not really. I get at least ten of these shoves wrong for each one I get right. Unless I'm going against a good reg or someone who I've clearly labeled a maniac, it just isn't worth it to call these shoves. Like, at all. I know that is HIGHLY exploitable, but, at these stakes, it is costing me so much win rate.

Here's my new heuristic against ALL SHOVES by non-regs in this pool:

What is the WORST value hand that they do this with? Do I beat that hand? If no, FOLD. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME!

If I just do this one thing, I'll win an extra 1-2 buy-ins every single session. Seriously. I make this mistake AT LEAST once a session. It is time for this to stop.

And, as a far distant second, I need to bluff shove more myself. The pool doesn't do it enough and neither do I. Because the pool doesn't do it enough, people over fold. If I have a spot where I think the solver might mix a shove in, I need to shove. It gets through way more than it should. Even when it doesn't, I learn more about these plays work against real humans.

These are really the only two things in my game that I need to change to start crushing 10NL at more than 10bb/100. I'm dead serious. Fold to all shoves where I don't beat the worst value hand and bluff shove in all reasonable spots. If I do that, it is game over.

This realization has lit a huge fire under my ass. I'm out of time today and I need to start preparing for bed, but I am already feeling incredibly motivated to ATTACK tomorrow's studies. I know exactly what I want to look at and what I want to drill.

Last, but not least, I need to reinstall the post session review. I don't mean deep hand analysis like I do each morning. I just mean setting a few major focus areas and seeing how I did with them. In the past, it was things like "no angry outbursts" or "don't check results during the session". Those are still great ones, actually, lol, but I want to add the following one FOR SURE: did you fold to ALL shoves where you don't beat the worst hand that does this? (I'll play more balanced against good regs but that is the only exception). I want to put this somewhere I can see it during my entire session. I already know just what to do. This is going to be a game-changer for my results. Wait and see.

As per the new norm, here is my progress towards beating 10NL so far:

I'll be back tomorrow to do it all again. Just like I am every other day. Stay hungry; stay relentless.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/12/24 Beating 10NL Day 13

Mental Game Development

Health Management:
Health Metrics:
Bodyweight: 217.8lbs / 98.8kg
Sleep (Mask Time): 7.6 hours

Health Exercises:
Meditation, 20min: Complete, (4/4, 100%)
Gym: Complete, (1/4, 25%)

Mental Game Content

1) Patience by Tommy Angelo
You gotta love Tommy's content. The banjo was a great touch. I think the number one takeaway from this video for me was very simple: all forms of tilt are impatience. All forms of impatience are dissatisfaction with aspect of the present moment. All dissatisfaction is resistance to what is. When I have angry outbursts while playing there is only one root cause: I want things to be different than the way they are. This is, of course, insane. Things cannot be different than they are. Therefore, the long-term, permanent cure to tilt can only be one thing: cultivating a greater sense of acceptance for what is. While there are many useful tools in the fight against tilt, such as the injection of logic, ultimately, it never fully stops until you stop needing things to be different than they are. You are entitled only to actions -- not results. My job is to take right action and accept the rest, come what may. At some point, as a part of my mental game development, I will resume my studies of Eastern philosophy.

2) Less by Chris Pimmer
Listening to this video, I couldn't continue to ignore the fact that I've clearly scheduled about 45-60 minutes of activity into my daily schedule that just isn't feasible. Every single day, without fail, at least one thing will come up that takes a little more time than you expected: some days I get into long chats at the dog park with other owners, the other day my brother contacted me needing help with his diet and fitness plan, several days I needed a nap before playing, one day I slept for 9 hours instead of my usual 7.5-8 (I don't use an alarm clock), one day my wife asked me for extra time together that evening, and so on and so forth. Something invariably comes up.

I need to shave some time off my poker studies each day. I would love to somehow cut time off of my session reviews, but it doesn't seem possible without somehow reducing the amount of hands I look. I really don't want to do that for some reason. I can't put a logical finger on it, but I think it would hurt my growth immensely to only look at pots greater than 10bb for example. Many of my most common mistakes are simple cbet errors or flop errors in SRP. I don't want to be become totally unaware of mistakes I'm making in small pots.

Again, I have to cut something, though. Otherwise, I'm just going to keep skipping the gym. My solution, I think, is to drop down to only one RIO Poker Strategy video per day and remove my 420 full hands from start from my GTOW training time. I will also find a way to cut my gym sessions to 45 minutes instead of 60 minutes. Making these cuts should be enough to allow me to stick to a daily schedule that has enough slack that the occasional interruption can come up without guaranteeing I miss the gym.

One more huge realization that I got from this video: I need to spend consecutive study days on the same topics. While there is some merit to focusing my studies on whatever my biggest error was from the previous session, I'm far more likely to have content "stick", and to achieve much deeper levels of learning, if I spend more like a week on each topic before moving to something else. This will give me more like 5-10 consecutive videos and training sessions on the same subject. That allows for a far greater depth of understanding to be reached than if I bounce around from topic to topic each day. That's a change I'm going to make to my study process starting now.

Poker Strategy Development

Morning-After Session Review

According to the analyzer, I played well. However, the issue with my play right now is not in nailing the nuances. I am quite sure that I do that far, far, far better than the average player in the 10NL pool. I find more air ball bluffs, I probe turns much closer to the rate I am supposed to, I know the proper sizings in the majority of situations, etc. etc. etc. None of that is what is holding back my win rate... at this level.

At this level, I need to do a better job in all things shoving. In particular, I have to stop calling so wide. I learned to play Poker by playing the solver. I have 150k+ hands against the solver trainer. I got immediate feedback on every single one of those hands as to whether the play was "correct". What was the final result of this? My play is far more "balanced" from a GTO perspective than the average 10NL player. The problem is that the players I am playing against are NOT balanced. They are not finding creative bluffs. They are not turning marginal showdown value hands into shoves. They MIGHT find only the most obvious blocker bluffs such as the nut flush or a straight blocker. Most of the time, when they shove, they are underbluffing to a degree that is so comical that you could profitably fold, well, everything but the nuts.

I am not going to take my strategy that far because some of these people also shove too thin. They play their absolute hand strength. So what do we have to think about when calling these shoves at 10NL? I've landed on the following heuristic that I got from Alexander Fitzgerald's book The 100 Biggest Mistakes Poker Players Make...

What is the worst value hand that they take this line with?

I'm going to have this question up on a notepad on my screen the entire time that I play 10NL going forward. I'm going to spend this session review write-up going through five river shoves where I should've done this exercise before finalizing my decision.

Let's begin.

River Calldown #1: Recreational goes Pot - Pot - Pot

What's the worst value hand that a recreational player would do this with? A jack. Potentially just about any jack. Even a weak one. Is it possible for someone to find bluffs with a missed flush draw or using a 3 that blocks the 63/A3 straight? Yes. Is that particularly likely against a fish who has shown huge strength with three pot sized bets? No. Bad call. -40bb.

Bad Call Counter: -40bb

River Calldown #2: Recreational Lead Jams the River

BTN (hero) vs HJ (villain) in a 3 bet pot. Line is Check/b33/Call, Check/b50/Call, Shove. The river pairs the board and completes a flush draw.

What's the worst value hand that a recreational player would do this with? MAYBE trips 8 if they have a heart. More likely, they do this with a completed flush. Can a creative player lead jam with something like the nut flush blocker? Sure. Is it likely against a fish who has been limping 50% of hands and playing a strategy that doesn't even remotely resemble equilibrium play. No. Bad call. -34bb.

Bad Call Counter: -74bb

River Calldown #3: Multiway Pot

Here, we have a three-way multi-way pot where two fish call behind my 4bb iso attempt. The player I was attempting to iso folds. BB leads 33% pot. I raise 50% pot with top two pair. SB folds. The turn brings a T completing AQ and Q9. I check for pot control as sets and the Q9 straight are real possibilities. The river brings a blank 6. BB shoves. I snap call without even thinking (why???).

What's the worst value hand that a recreational takes this line with? It's hard to say. My best guess is that some recreational villains will do this with Kx two pairs. The issue, of course, is that I am blocking those. The rest of his value shoving range is likely 33, 66, and Q9 (assuming it is likely Villain 3 bets TT, JJ, and AQ). Against that range, my hand is a pure-bluff catcher and a poor one because it doesn't block the straights or the sets. I'm blocking the only value hands I'd potentially beat. It is outrageous that I didn't even consider folding here. This should be an easy fold against a recreational who hasn't been profiled as a maniac. -68bb.

Bad Call Counter: -142bb

River Calldown #4: Rec goes Bet - Bet - Jam

This is a very, very similar hand to #3. In this hand, I raise from UTG to 2.5x and a recreational Villain calls behind in the HJ. I check and villain bets 75% pot. I call. The turn brings a T which brings me two pair, but also completes both the AQ and Q9 straights which I don't think we can take out of Villain's range (most players don't have a HJ calling range but, when they do, it should be relatively strong). Villain bets 75% pot again. I call again with my two pair. The river is a complete blank. The flush draw misses. Villain shoves river.

What is the worst value hand a recreational player is doing this with? As I said in the previous example, it is a bit hard to say. Villain can certainly have 44 and Q9. It isn't impossible they're trapping KK or JJ, but both are unlikely. Recs do occasionally trap such hands in single raised pots but they still mostly raise them. I think AQo and Q9s are very realistic possibilities. In the end, my best guess, as above, is a Kx two pair. In other words, once again, on a straight complete board, I have a pure bluff catcher that isn't blocking the straight. I'm essentially relying on a recreational villain to be shoving a busted flush or straight draw. Instead, they have KT and I lose another 40bb.

Bad Call Counter: -182bb

River Calldown #5: Facing Jam vs Reg 200bb Deep

Now, I admit that maybe I shouldn't even count this one because it was against a reg. However, from what I saw, this wasn't a super strong reg by any means. Nevertheless, I'm going to look at it.

Preflop: A Reg Villain raises to 2.5bb UTG. I raise to 8bb from CO. Action folds back to Villain. Villain calls.
Flop: Flop comes 9d 8d 3c. Reg checks. I bet 50% pot. Reg raises 35% pot. I call.
Turn: Turn comes 8c making the board 9d 8d 3c 8c. Reg bets 50% pot. I call.
River: River comes 2d making the board 9d 8d 3c 8c 2d. Reg shoves. I call. Reg has full house. I lose.

What's the worst VALUE hand that a reg is shoving here? Well, let's see what the worst value hand the solver is shoving:

The solver is shoving JJ without a diamond and T9s. The solver is also shoving the nut flush blocker and busted straight draws like 76 and 65 to balance out a bluffing range. The clear value hands that need to be beat are K+ high flushes and full houses.

So, here's the real question that matters, if QQ with a diamond is indifferent against the balanced range, how does it fare against a potentially stronger range that isn't shoving JJ or T9? It's an autofold. Do I think the average 10NL villain has the balls to shove T9 here? No way. JJ without a diamond? Also no. Am I a giving the average 10NL reg enough credit to shove broken straight draws here? Also probably not. When we are this deep, most people tighten up because they don't want to make a BIG, session-defining mistake.

I wouldn't blame someone for arguing with me on this one and saying that this is a necessary mixed call down against a reg. However, again, my read was that I should exploitatively fold and then I thought better of it because I (wrongly) assumed that this would be a 100% call in solver land. As it turns out, it is indifferent in solver land and folding 50% of the time. I'm going to call it a mistake. As such, this is another -116bb that didn't have to happen (I consider the flop and turn calls mandatory).

Final Bad River Call Counter: -298bb

Just like I said last night, the biggest thing I can do for my win rate now is to stop making these calls. It isn't about finding a few additional fancy bluff lines in single-raised pots or making sure I find the odd blocker based shove here and there. What I really have to do is fold more often against river shoves. I've been saying that for the duration of this entire blog. So... When is it going to stick?

Microstakes villains don't have enough bluffs when they bet the river big.

If you're not up against a skilled reg or a maniac, you need to beat some of their value range to have a call. Period.

That's all for today's review. There were a few other spots I looked at but I think this is a good place to call it a day.

For today's study work, I'm going to watch a video on bluff catching the river and then I'm going to setup the GTOW Trainer to feed me nothing but spots where I have to call/fold river shoves. That will be my entire study and training today: call/fold to river shoves. Nothing else matters more to my game and my win rate right now.

RIO Video Study Session

1) River Calling: Decision Points by Tyler Forrester
a) What’s his value range?
b) Does our hand beat some of his value range? ,<-- look familiar?
c) Can he have many bluffs from prior action?
d) Does our hand block any of these bluffs/value hands?
e) If a thinking player, how does he perceive us?
f) If not thinking, what is his general strategy?
g) What’s his mood?

2) Bluffing and Bluff-Catching in Uncommon Scenarios by Francesco Lacriola
Interesting hand history looking at some unique river bluff-catching and bluffing spots.

I am starting to think I might get more value from purchasing a course of some sort so that the content is more organized and focused. Some of the RIO videos are gold, but, a lot of the time, they’re mainly a bunch of hand histories with a little Pio/GTOW analysis attached. They’re interesting, but it doesn’t help a new player like me to understand the theoretical concepts behind all the decisions. At times, it feels a little bit like a lottery as to whether or not I’ll find a video that makes a big difference in the spot I’m trying to understand.

Next up, I'm going to set-up various GTOW drills that will require me to call/fold river shoves in SRPs and 3BPs.

GTOW Trainer Session

50 hands each:
SRP, BTN vs BB: check/b75/call, check/b75/call. check/shove/ call or fold?
SRP, BB vs BTN: check/b33/r50, b75/call, shove/ call or fold?
3BP, CO vs BTN: check/b33/call, check/b75/call, check/shove/ call or fold?
3BP, BTN vs CO: check/b33/r35, b50/call, shove/ call or fold?
3BP, BB vs BTN: check/b20/call, b75/call, shove/ call or fold?
3BP, BB vs BTN: b20/r35/call, b50/call, shove/ call or fold?
3BP, BTN vs BB: b20/call, b75/call, shove/ call or fold

For every single one of these hands, I challenged myself to come up with the worst value hand that a real villain might take this line with. These are lines that very commonly used and that I will go against multiple times per session. I think I may have biased the training a little too much towards 3bet pots this time. In the future, I want to run this drill again with more focus on different SRP set-ups including different positions and different lines. I just tried to come up with some scenarios that I thought would be common.

In general though, I think 90% of the value of this exercise just comes from actually stopping to ask yourself "What's the worst value hand villain takes this line with". As long as you don't make some sort of snap decision, it is a big improvement.

Results of ACR 10NL Session #13

+189bb in 2640 hands

I really think, from a process perspective, this is one of the best sessions I've ever played. I had no business booking a win in this session. None whatsoever. In the first 60-70% of the session, my VPIP across all tables was probably under 20%. It was one of the most insane variance experiences I've ever had. I wasn't getting unlucky by any means. I was just getting no cards. I was getting no action. I got dealt AA 10+ times and all I got was the blinds. There was just nothing whatsoever happening.

I stuck with it and kept myself in the session by running and winning a bunch of absolutely monster bluffs. I almost never post any of the good plays I make. I focus entirely on my mistakes because that's where there is far more to learn. Tomorrow, I may pat myself on the back a little and show a few of them.

Off the top of my head, I only made two poor river calls in the entire session for a combined 30bb. That's a massive improvement! I had a notepad open and visible on my screen, for the entire session, that read "What is the worst value hand villain does this with?". I avoided the river donations that had been plaguing my win rate recently.

More than anything, it was just so cool to see all my training paying off. I found blocker bluffs, I found showdown value bluffs, and I even triple barreled a low pocket pair on a scary texture for Villain's range and it got through for 100bb in a super deep stack spot.

All I can say is this: hard work pays off. I CAN'T WAIT to get back to it tomorrow.

As always, here is my total progress towards beating 10NL:

+458bb in 36205 hands

Gotta love the grind!!!

Have a good one everyone,
~Orca

Impressive work! keep goin!

8/13/24 Beating 10NL Day #14
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management
Health Metrics:
Bodyweight: 217.6lbs / 98.7kg
Sleep (Mask Time): 8.8 hours*

*As a very brief aside, I'm waking up quite late today after sleeping much longer than usual. I'm going to have to cut out the gym and some study time today. Does that annoy me or upset me in the slightest? Absolutely not!

I believe one of the most important factors for avoiding burnout is to let your body sleep as much as it wants to. I know it is not possible for most people to stop using an alarm clock, but, if your situation allows it, it can be an absolute game-changer for your motivation, energy, and overall well-being. When I'm pushing myself a little too hard, I'll have days where I need 9+ hours of sleep and I'll still feel like I also need a nap before my session (when I was training for powerlifting/bodybuilding, this happened almost every day). Instead of worrying about how much "productive" time this is going to cost me, I prioritize the rest and take the nap on top of my long sleep.

I know from experience that nothing is more important, for me, than avoiding sleep debt in terms of sustaining a high work rate across a long time period. Sleep is the single most important recovery variable in probably any single goal that exists -- this goes way beyond poker. It is easy to think of your ability to work hard and discipline yourself as completely separate from how you treat your body, but that is simply incorrect. No matter how strong your will is, a strong mind will not outlast a weakening body indefinitely. \

Respect your boundaries and your limits. Get the most out of yourself, yes, but go no further. Rest as much as you need. Watch how quickly your motivation and output soar. The mental, physical, and, if you believe in such things, spiritual are inextricably linked. If you allow a weak link in that chain, that weak link will you hold back from your true potential.

Health Exercises:
Meditation, 20min: Complete, (5/5, 100%)
Gym: Incomplete, (1/5, 20%)

Mental Game Content

1) Quitting by Tommy Angelo
In the past, when I didn't have a defined schedule for playing, quitting was a huge problem for me. For whatever reason, I definitely possess the personality type that never wants to stop playing while I am losing. I always think I can come back and win in the end. More often than not, that just turned small losses into huge losses across 6-8 hours. These days, I seem to have a great handle on quitting because I don't give myself any choices in my session. I play for exactly four hours. No more, no less. I'm not allowed to quit before put in my volume and I'm not allowed to keep playing once I have no matter how good the games are. No choice, no problem. I will have to re-evaluate this strategy if I ever start playing live poker some day. I know people sometimes say that certain games are too good to quit, but is that ever really true? Maybe it will be true for me someday. As for online microstakes, the game quality is similar no matter when you play. All that matters is sticking to your plan. I'm able to do that for now.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

Morning-After Session Review

Overall, this was another solid session. During the review, it became abundantly clear to me that I just need to continue to focus on river decision making for the foreseeable future.

I found some cool bluffs in this session and I'll share a few as I said I would last night:

However, I still missed loads of good river bluffing opportunities:

Overall though, as I've been saying, the biggest opportunity to improve my win rate right now mostly just comes down to making better river decisions.

I am still making a few massive blunders per session:

I should never be shoving on a 4 straight board when villain can easily have a superior straight. I miss these spots quite often for some reason. This is a 60bb mistake. On the second hand, I should never be value betting an overpair on a 4 straight board. I will admit that I just completely missed the fact that the 4 straight card landed in game. I was autopiloting, playing a little too quickly, and I just slapped the bet in there. These two uber simple, totally avoidable mistakes cost me nearly a full buy-in. That's a MASSIVE reduction in win rate. I don't make these types of mistakes often, but even once per session is too often for blunders this obvious.

Where I can really improve, where I can really spend more study time, is river bluff-catching. I'd like to take at a few potentially dubious river calls in a little bit more depth to see if I can poke any holes into my in-game thinking process.

Questionable River Call #1: Flush AND Straight Complete

Here, we arrive at the river after I have bet both the flop and turn as the OOP preflop aggressor. The river completes the KQ straight and a flush has already completed on the turn. I river two pair with a flush blocker. I check the river. The opponent bets pot. Should I call here?

What's the worst value hand villain is betting with this line? I honestly think the worst hand they're value-betting at this size is a set. Even then, I don't know if they use this size unless the set has a flush blocker. Realistically, they're mostly representing a straight or a flush. I definitely cannot beat value here.

Do 10NL villains bluff in these spots using this line? Yes. They can absolutely bluff a diamond here like the Ace or K. In fact, if they think I'm overbluffing the turn, they might widen that bluffing range because they're used to most opponents having an extremely weak checking range.

Ultimately, I think this is a solid bluff-catch. I'm sure it is indifferent at best and probably has a low calling frequency in this spot, but I won't beat myself up over this one. I don't think I missed an obvious fold. Final verdict: justifiable call.

Questionable River Call #2: Pot-Pot Villain

Here, I defend my BB against a 2.5bb raise from a villain on the CO. Villain bets 33% on the flop and I defend with top pair + decent kicker. The turn brings both a flush draw and a straight draw. Villain bets pot. I defend again. The river is a completes 74 and 42 straights which Villain shouldn't have in his range. Villain bets pots again. Should I call here?

What is the worst value hand villain takes this line with? Given the runout, I can see villain taking this line with AK. I should 3bet all AK in my range so Villain can comfortably extract value from my Ax holdings here with AK. Everything else would be two pair or better. In other words, I beat no value and this is a pure bluff-catcher.

Can a 10NL Villain take this line with missed flush and/or straight draws on the turn? Yes, but, in my experience, they're significantly less likely to do this one a board that doesn't look "scary". Most 10NL Villains are more likely to bluff when flushes or straights complete even if they don't block them. They intuitively know fold equity is higher versus other 10NL villains on runouts that are worrisome.

I think I can significantly discount bluffs in this situation versus this particular player who is repeatedly potting. Again, in my experience, players who repeatedly pot as their preferred bet size are often less sophisticated players. This size is rarely chosen by GTOW, which means, at the very least, that they primarily use Pio instead of GTOW if they're using solvers at all. At these stakes, using a lot of pot-sized bets is a tell that the player doesn't do a lot of solver work, in my opinion.

All in all, on a dry runout like this, even though the solver is mixing a call 50/50 with my holding, I think this is a pure fold versus this player type. Final verdict: Bad call.

Questionable River Call #3: Trips on a Flush Complete Board

Here, a major fish limps UTG and the BTN attempts to isolate by raising to 3bb. I call from the BB with J7ss hoping to get involved in a multiway pot with the fish. The fish folds and I go heads up with the reg on the BTN. Villain bets the flop 33% and I call with my pair of 7s. The turn brings another 7. Villain bets 33% pot again and I check-raise to 100% pot. Villain calls. The river completes the flush. I check planning to fold to any big bet representing a completed flush. Villain bets 50% pot. Should I call here?

What's the worst value hand villain would take this line with? I will be honest and admit that I couldn't come up with a good answer to this in game. It felt like an attempt to use a sizing so small that it would guarantee a call from me and ensure value. It felt like Villain was afraid I would fold. Why would you bet merged here?

Would Villain take this line with weak trips? Would Villain be crazy enough to take this line with two pair that had the nut flush blocker? The solver DOES (very rarely) take this line with trips (without a flush blocker) and two pair with the nut flush blocker. That's part of why this ends up being a 50/50 indifferent call in the solver (the solver also finds a balanced amount of bluffs, though, and I absolutely do not believe a 10NL reg can do that in this spot). If Villain isn't going to bet Ax holdings (bluffs and "value") with the nut flush blocker for this size, I can't call here. I just don't think they're doing that very often if at all. I think this sizing often represents a medium strength flush or a full house looking to get raised.

Final verdict: bad call. Fold.

Questionable River Call #4: Overpair on Paired, Flush Complete Board

I'm actually not even going to analyze this one in any great depth because it is an obvious blunder and mistake in my opinion.

Given the action here, where Villain has called my flop 3 bet, I think I can already narrow the range down to nothing worse than a flush draw with some kind of backup equity. Villain is not taking this line with anything worse than a J and even that would be thin without a flush blocker. I have a stone-cold bluff catcher... and a terrible one at that because I don't block the flush draw.

This should have been an automatic, autopilot, instafold. Final verdict: bad, bad call.

That's all for today's review, folks! I'm going to continue to watch RIO videos about river decision making and I'm going to continue to focus my trainer work on calling down river bets in medium/big pots. Today, I'll focus almost entirely on SRPs as I think that is still where I'm making the largest mistakes. With ranges being at their widest, these spots are the most difficult to get right and these are the spots where I can benefit the most from improving my heuristics and overall theoretical understanding of river decision making.

RIO Video Study

Bluffcatching: Hand Review and Useful Heuristics by Francesco Lacriola
1) Bluff-Catching Pros
a) Our can value bet worse or the same hand
b) We have lots of hands that didn’t improve and end up being as bluff catchers on the river
c) Our opponent is polarizing too much in spots in which their range probably wants to be more protection oriented
d) Bet sizing is off/our opponent is not telling a coherent story
e) We can have lots of strong missed draws that are going to fold to a river bet
f) We have specific reads on villain

2) Bluff-Catching Cons
a) The runout has improved our range significantly
b) It’s very hard to find natural bluffs and villain has to be creative and resourceful
c) Villain is representing a very wide value range and the board interacts well with their range
d) The betsizing is tailored to extract as much value as possible from multiple parts of our range in a scenario in which we have tons of bluff-catchers

DON’T BLUFF CATCH BECAUSE THE SOLVER IS CALLING OR BECAUSE YOU HAVE A
GOOD BLOCKER! THE SOLVER IS AIMING OT PLAY UNEXPLOITABLE POKER. IF
YOUR OPPONENTS ARE UNDERBLUFFING, YOU SHOULD ALWAYS FOLD HANDS THAT
DON’T HAVE ENOUGH EQUITY VERSUS THEIR BETTING REGION!

GTOW Trainer Session

SRP Only, 50 Hands Each:
BB vs BTN: check/b33/call, check/b125/call, check/b60/ call or fold?
BB vs BTN: check/b33/call, check/b125/call, check/b85/ call or fold?
BB vs BTN: check/b33/call, check/b125/call, check/b150/ call or fold?
BB vs BTN: check/b50/call, check/b125/call, check/b60/ call or fold?

Highly, highly effective drill here. I'm going to spend more time tomorrow going through further permutations of betting lines that produce the final river decision point. This was incredibly enlightening. As it turns out, I was calling down too lightly even against the solver which means I'm calling down comically wide against real players who don't bluff enough. In particular, I am overcalling flush complete boards any time I have any pair with a flush blocker; that's not enough! Super glad I took the time to set this up.

I've just completed my daily trip to the dog park so it is time to get ready to play!

10NL Session on ACR #14

+663bb in 2759 hands

Once again, a very solid session here in terms of process. I had zero angry outbursts, I never checked the results once during the session, and, for the most part, I did a good job of asking myself what the worst value hand villain would be that villain would take this line with. I did autopilot a few bad calls, but there's always something to work on. Centering myself, taking a breath, and making sure I think before I make snap decisions on the river is something that I'll have to keep focusing on as I move forward.

I think I made very few outright river mistakes. I'll examine the ones tomorrow that I thought were close. There was one right at the end of the session that I made for 80bb that is still bothering right now. I know that one was bad.

And hey, that red line is positive for a second session in a row. I've been finding the right spots to be aggressive.

Here's my total progress towards beating 10NL:

+1113bb in 38964 hands

I'll be back tomorrow to do it all again. And, as far as 10NL is concerned, I'm starting to see some blood in the water.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/14/23 Beating 10NL Day #15
.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management:

Health Metrics:
Bodyweight: 218.1lbs / 98.9kg
Sleep (Mask Time): 8.2 hours

Health Exercises:
Meditation, 20min: Complete, (6/6, 100%)
Gym: Complete, (2/6, 33%)

Mental Game Content:

1) Simplifying Poker by Lucas Greenwood
On the surface, this video is a Poker 101 video breaking down the game to its core elements, but, if you dig a little deeper, this is a video about the single most important part of being a winning poker player: being locked in. You need to develop a strategy, yes, but then you need to execute that strategy and take advantage of opportunities as they present themselves. The most fundamental aspect of being able to do that is paying close enough attention that you pick up on any bit of information that might allow you to more accurately range your opponent. Focusing and acquiring these bits of information can lead to knowledge asymmetries that become exploitable for profit. The more you're able to lock in and pick up on bits of information that your opponent leaks, the more skillfully you can apply your knowledge. The more skillfully you can apply your knowledge, the bigger your edge. Strategy skill multiplied by mental skill equals edge. One without the other is incomplete and insufficient to maximize your winnings.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

Morning-After Session Review

Based on both the analyzer and my qualitative assessment, I played really well this session. There is one huge "EV error" I made in folding AKs preflop, but, well, I had a read, lol. A recreational min 3bet me, I re-raised 3x the min bet, and they insta-shoved 150bb deep. The analyzer says it was a -25 EV mistake or something like that, but I feel pretty good that action is usually AA/KK versus the type of recreational I was dealing with. I could've been wrong. Some recreationals like to jam AJo and other bizarre holdings. I went with my gut just this once and I don't usually do that.

Anyway, the focus is going to remain on river decision points both in these write-ups and in my GTOW training sessions.

Let's just get right into it...

River Decision #1: Facing Triple Barrel on Flush Complete Board with 2nd Pair in SRP

Context is needed on this particular hand. The Villain in the BB is a weak, very nitty reg, which is a key data point. I don't know that I've ever seen them show down a single bluff in any hand that I've played with them. Considering that I have an overpair with a diamond on this monotone flop, I think the flop and turn bets are absolutely mandatory. However, when the river brings a J, and villain continues to bet, I now have a pure bluff catcher. In my opinion, this particular villain is only value-betting something that can beat a jack even with the 50% sizing.

In the solver, this hand is indifferent. So, against this player type, I think that's an autofold and this is an incorrect decision. These are the types of hands that I snap-call when autopiloting (and I snap-called this one, too) that I need to start THINKING about before I do anything. Sure, this is "only" 10bb, but, when you do this a couple times per session, it becomes a problem.

River Decision #2: Facing Triple Barrel with TPTK on Paired Board in SRP

Again, context is needed because this Villain is a very unusual player type. Again, we're dealing with a weak reg who I'd describe as... selectively aggressive. Here are some of their tendencies: 1) massively overdefend all flops, but massively overfold to turn barrels, 2) massively overstab when checked to, but massively underbarrel rivers with air/bluffs, and 3) massively overuse large bet sizings with a merged range. They're an extremely profitable player to play against, but they can be a bit tough because you have to put your hard hat on and be ready to call down some big bets with medium strength hands.

When we arrive at the river, the only question that really matters for my little heuristic about the worst value hand villain would take this line with is the following: does he do this with AQo or worse? The solver does not. This human might. I think it is unlikely, but I can't definitively say no given how large they tend to bet with an entirely merged range.

The fact that they slow down with their usual 75-125% sizing (that's really the only sizings this villain tends to use), I think, turns their holding a little face up. This villain would continue to barrel big with an 8 or a full house. If they were bluffing, and bluffs are a bit hard to find at this point, the solver even turns KT into one, I don't see them sizing down either. I think I missed a clear tell here.

I think they've telegraphed a purely medium strength hand here. I think I can eliminate strong hands and bluffs. I ONLY beat AJo and AQo... if those can be considered medium strength hands. I think this is a really close spot when considering the full context of the situation. The final nail in the coffin for me is that this villain usually doesn't have the guts to barrel off multiple streets with a bluff. Unless I have a strong read that makes me SURE they'd do this with AQo, I can't call here. I believe this should've been a very close fold.

River Decision #3: Facing Turn Pot, River Pot 250bb Deep

In this situation, a villain in the BB raises to 2.5bb, the villain from the last hand calls in the SB, I squeeze from the BB to 11bb. The BTN folds and the SB calls.

The flop comes down 987fd. I checked and I would check my entire range in this spot as it tends to smack the SB's entire range: 1) it hits the low pocket pairs, 2) it hits the suited connectors, and 3) it hits the suited double-broadway holdings.

The turn comes down the 5h bringing a four straight. Villain bets pot. I reflexively called without even thinking. That was my first big mistake in this hand. This texture is just too good for villain's range to defend a naked 2nd pair without even thinking. I should have used the full shot clock at least.

That said, the solver does defend my holding here 50% of the time:

Again, this Villain is a bit of a spaz who uses almost nothing but pot-sized bets to run over most people at the table. The other players overfold so much that this Villain has built their entire strategy around blasting pot-sized bets.

This turn spot is very easy to have bluffs in. They can easily have flush draws or Tx/Jx gutshots here. However, once they barrel the river for pot, which is now 80bb, I don't think I can make that call. This villain does not usually barrel multiple times with a bluff. Human nature comes into play here as well. Most villains choke in huge spots and can't pull the trigger on big bluffs. They tend to play too tight and they have even less bluffs than normal (and they already don't have enough). I'm sure this is no longer true at higher stakes, but it does tend to be true at 10NL.

If they're not bluffing, what is the worst value hand villain takes this line with? On this runout, value is obviously built around the straights, but the solver does go pot-pot with JJ (blocking JT nuts) and it does this with sets. 2nd pair doesn't beat any of that. I have a pure bluff-catcher.

Here's the solver's range:

Like I said, there's tons of appropriate bluffs there and even some creative ones that humans will probably never arrive to the river with (suited Ax wheel holdings without relevant flush cards). There's just no way that a normal 10NL human has a properly balanced bluffing range here. In general, in my experience, these 4 straight boards are underbluffed if anything.

I just don't think I should be making that river call. That's why I continue to focus on these spots. Some of these are quite close, yes, but getting them right is the difference between an 1-2 buy-ins every single session. I am still leaning too far towards bluff catching in the big spots. This may one day prove to be very useful at higher stakes, but it just isn't useful right now from an exploitative standpoint considering the 10NL player pool tendences. I have to try and find more folds in these spots.

River Decision #4: Fold Bottom Set? Really!?

Here, I flop bottom in a SRP vs a TAG regular. They bet 1/3rd pot and I raise 50%, which I actually think is my first (small) mistake. The preferred raise size here should be 100% because this is actually a fairly dynamic flop. While I do have a flush blocker, the 3 doesn't block all that many flush combinations in BTN's range. He has all the double-broadway holdings that can make a straight as well. I want to put immediate pressure on all of those draws with the 100% sizing. That particular sizing is just perfect for putting draws in a tough spot in terms of pot odds. The solver does split between 50-100% here, but it prefers 100% and I don't think I need to be balancing two check-raise sizes on this texture.

I don't use the big size, though, and villain continues with his pocket jacks as a result. The turn brings the KQ straight which I obviously have to respect as he has all the suited combos and unsuited combos in his range here. I size down to 75% and I get raised 50% pot. I considered shoving here, but I don't think it is necessary when you're holding a spade:

Villain shoves the river and I actually thought about it. I even went into my time bank. I wanted to fold this hand. Ultimately, I couldn't convince myself to fold a set to a reg. I gave them credit for at least having some bluffs here.

To my surprise, my holding is legitimately indifferent here even in solver land:

So... what is the solver bluffing with here? What is the solver's worst value hand?

The solver has a smattering of bluffs mostly comprising of a bunch of missed flush draws and straight blockers. The worst value hand the solver is jamming is AJ without a spade -- top two pair. If a human would also do that, 33 is a mandatory call as I'm beating some small part of the value range.

As it so happens, I did not think this particular human would shove AJo here as they are a tight reg. I made the call anyway considering my hand a pure bluff-catcher. I got it wrong. Villain had JJ. I don't feel bad about this one at all. This was an uber-close decision.

That said, what's the theme of many of these hand histories at 10NL and below? Against microstakes villains, bluff-catching shoves and huge river bets is a waste of money and winrate. They never have properly balanced ranges on the river. They aren't bluffing enough.

I hate to say this, because it just feels so wrong to me, but, as a pool-based exploit, I think you can exploitatively fold every single hand that doesn't at least chop with Villain's worst value hand in every single huge river spot.

Going forward, my new motto will be: when in doubt, throw it out. lol. Seriously, if you err towards the sides of folding against huge river bets, you're not going to go wrong at these stakes. There are simply better opportunities unless you've profiled a surefire maniac or an extremely good reg (both are few and far between in the microstakes).

That's all for today's review! Onto some RIO video study.

RIO Video Study Session

Overfolding Exploitatively by Antonio Miranda

Video Overview:
1) Most players lack bluffs in a lot of spots
2) Underbluffing is the most common leaks in low and midstakes
3) We can improve our win rate a lot by folding at right spots

The most common spots where we can exploit them by folding are:
1) Spots where they should bluff unintuitive hands OTR
2) Spots where they should bluff non-natural hands OTT (eg Q727 rainbow, they arrive to river without enough bluffs)
3) Spots where they only call OTT SD value hands or better, they have to then turn SDV into bluffs on the river
4) Against players who don’t split bluffs into different lines

Hand Examples:
1) 54o on 55J9T, facing huge river check raise. Does population have enough bluffs in this spot? Unlikely because they’re going to need to bluff pair + straight blocker to have a balanced range here.
2) JTo on 9Q94K, facing river 3 bet jam. Does population have enough bluffs in this spot? Villain needs to turn counterfeit two-pair into bluffs here to block full houses.
3) ATo on K3TKJ, facing triple barrel jam. Does population have enough bluffs in this spot? Unlikely. You have to bluff suited connectors and Qx without relevant suits. Real players aren’t generally triple-barreling 22 or Q7.
4) JTo on AQTQQ spade flush draw complete. Does have population have enough bluffs in this spot? You have to bluff flush draws. You have to bluff KJ with a spade that blocks the royal flush. Most players will not be able to turn flushes and straights into bluffs.

My Takeaways:
The biggest takeaways here are that 1) you need to look for spots where, especially in SRPs, they are supposed to have a ton of absolute air to balancing their bluffing range. Population will not find these bluffs at the correct frequency because they aren’t natural or intuitive. The second thing, 2) you want to find spots where “showdown value” (it may not actually have real showdown value against the ranges that should be in play) needs to be turned into a bluff. If Villain is supposed to turn flush draws into bluffs on paired boards, they likely won’t find those. If Villain is supposed to bluff jam a pocket pair that blocks the nut straight, they likely won’t find that (especially if it is 3rd pair or so on it’s own; eg AKTxx with QQ). If all they have to do to have enough bluffs is turn busted draws into bluffs, those are the spots they are most likely to have enough bluffs. In spots where they need to triple barrel low pocket pairs to stay balanced, that isn’t going to happen. If tons of draws complete, and you need to make a bunch of blocker bluffs, I also don’t think those happen at a high enough frequency.

In fact, if you really think about it, the only spots where most normal villains have enough bluffs are spots where they can just bluff their missed draws. They’re not likely to find enough bluffs in ANY other spot that requires bluffing air or showdown value.

GTOW Trainer

Today, we continued with drilling river call downs. Clearly, that is where I need the most work and that is where the work will be focused for the foreseeable future.

SRP Only, 50 Hands Each:
BB vs BTN: check/b50/call, check/b125/call, check/b85/ call or fold?
BB vs BTN: check/b75/call, check/b125/call, check/b60/ call or fold?
BB vs BTN: check/b75/call, check/b125/call, check/b85/ call or fold?
BB vs BTN: check/b75/call, check/b75/call, check/b60/ call or fold?
BB vs BTN: check/b75/call, check/b75/call, check/b85/ call or fold?
BB vs BTN: check/b75/call, check/b75/call, check/b150/ call or fold?
BTN vs BB: check/b33/r50, b125/call, b60/ call or fold?
BTN vs BB: check/b33/r50, b75/call, b60/ call or fold?

I'm just continuing down different nodes of the SRP game tree here. These are very realistic lines, I think. I'll end up in a handful of these situations during every session. I can already tell I'm making better decisions. Some of the spots that the solver bluff-catches are so counterintuitive, but, when you look at the ranges being used, it makes sense. I'm realizing that, the further you go into the game tree, the more divergent reality and the equilibrium strategy become. Both subtle and significant deviations from the ideal range with each action compound so quickly. You can easily arrive at rivers in game with ranges that have no resemblance whatsoever to equilibrium. This is especially true against recreationals.
.
.
.
.
.
ACR 10NL Session #15 Results

+518bb in 2940 hands

Another fantastic session from a process perspective. Zero angry outbursts. Very measured river decision making (for the most part). I really feel that all my training, both mental and strategic, is just continuing to pay off in extremely apparent fashions. The amount of tilt I experience has been reduced so much and I credit that to meditation and continuing to consume mental game content.

There are only two mistakes from this session that are currently bothering me. It has (very little) to do with the actual hands. For one, I snap-called a river shove over the top of a thin value bet that I made without even asking myself what villain's value range was. That's unacceptable. Thinking about it and then calling anyway? No problem. I'm totally cool with that. The autopilot snap calls are killing me. I have to find a way to make sure that I'm actually thinking through each big river decision. THINK! THINK! THINK! lol. I only did this once in the entire session, but it was a 3 bet pot for a stack so that's the worst time to start autopiloting.

The other one was just a dumb decision that I want to write about so I never do it again. I opened AKo to 2.5bb, reg 3 bets to 7.5bb, and a recreational cold 4-bet min-raises to 12.5. I blindly shoved AKo because I rolled a shove. Of course, the rec had AA. Because of course they did. What else would they take that line with? That HAS to be a fold on my end. I thought about it and did it anyway, which bothers me. The default assumption when a recreational min-raises a 3-bet has to be "trap". It has to be. Until you see otherwise and see them using this tactic in multiple situations, just assume KK+. In fact, that's my default assumption for a min-raise 3 bet, too. Until I see them doing it with a somewhat balanced range, or doing it often enough that they CAN'T have only premiums, I just assume they're trying to trap and I only play speculative hands that have great implied odds. There's no reason to treat min-raise 4-bets any different.

Anyways, no one wants to listen to me complaining about a +5 buy-in session. As always, I will be back tomorrow to try to get just a little bit better than I was today.

Here's my progress towards beating 10NL so far:

+1622bb in 41905 hands

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/15/24 Beating 10NL Day #16
For the life of me, I cannot get my post to work today so I'm going to try and post one piece at a time and see where it is going wrong. UPDATE: Okay, I got it to work. I think I must've hit a character limit or something (looooool). The rest of this post is continued in the comment section below it.
.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management

Health Metrics:
Bodyweight: 218.1lbs / 98.9kg
Sleep (Mask Time): 8.8 hours*

*I need to remember to leave my phone in the living room before going to bed. When I leave my phone on my night stand, I invariably waste 20 minutes each morning dinking around on my phone for no good reason. I don't have 20 minutes to burn with the schedule I try to keep. I've successfully eliminated this habit in the past by just not bringing my phone into my bedroom each night when I go to sleep. I must remember to do that daily.

Health Exercises:
Meditation, 20min: Incomplete, (7/7, 100%)
Gym: Incomplete, (2/7, 29%)

Mental Game Content

1) Freedom From The Known by Mathias Maasberg
One thing that I've learned over the years is that people who become very good at literally anything are capable of incredible levels of lateral thinking. In this video, Bruce Lee's philosophy of Jeet Kune Do is quoted extensively. The most famous quotes, of course, being his remarks about water and to take what is useful and discard the rest. It should be to no surprise that this philosophy is extremely popular in both actual martial arts and the fitness community as well. I'm sure it is popular in every self-development community. A surefire sign of high general intelligence is to be able to draw connections between seemingly disparate fields of knowledge.

Jeet Kune Do was created by Bruce Lee because he believed that most martial arts had become too rigid and did not prepare practitioners for real world combat. Much later, he would be proven to be correct by the creation of MMA tournaments. If you only practice certain types of kicks, and you only defend against those types of kicks, when someone from a completely different style kicks in a way you've never seen, you will be caught off guard and your training will fail you. Lee's style was "no style". He believed you should train in all disciplines and all techniques in order that you might be able to respond accurately to any type of attack.

The similarities to poker are obvious. There are those who try to play a "pure" GTO strategy, but they are not robots and, of course, they cannot get anywhere close to the complexity of solver game trees nor can they sustain accurate frequencies across all spots. You must be trained in solvers to properly respond to these opponents. There are those who attempt to play a "pure" exploit strategy and focus on attacking human nature or using MDA to spot trends. If you are able to spot these types of opponents, they can be counter-exploited by playing in a way that is opposite of population tendency. There are other players which fit certain profiles like maniacs, nits, and straight-forward, honest ABC players. Maximizing your win rate against these varying strategies requires a different approach in each case. This becomes further complicated when you're involved in hands that bring in multiple different types of players.

While it may be tempting to limit yourself to only style, you will not maximize your success in real fights if you do so. A fighter trained in both striking and grappling disciplines can beat a superior pure striker by taking them to the ground and they can defeat a superior pure grappler by forcing the action to stay on the feet. The mixed martial artist flows to positions and techniques that allow them to beat the opponent that they are currently facing. They do not default to a preferred style or method.

There is no need to have a "style" of poker. Fight in the manner which gives you the best chance to defeat your opponent. Know all styles. Know all opponents. Prepare for everything. Predetermine nothing. Be like the water which creates a huge splash when a boulder is thrown into it and yet barely ripples when hit by a small pebble. Respond with pure appropriateness to each situation.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

Morning-After Session Review

Averaging an EV loss of -0.01 across a 3000 hand sample is one of the best results I've ever had. However, once I dug into the results, I was able to identify a couple of trends in the errors I made. They aren't new. These have all been leaks in my game for a while.

Error #1: Mistakes with Sets

Villain raises UTG to 2.5bb and I call on the BTN with 55. Everyone folds. The flop comes K86r. Villain bets 33% pot. I call. The turn brings a heart flush draw and gives me a set of 5s. Villain bets 75% pot. I raise 100% pot and villain folds. I am never supposed to raise bottom set here even though, when my range does raise, this 100% sizing is preferred:

Villain is supposed to respond to the huge bet by jamming nut flush draws, two pairs, sets, AA, Kx + flush draw, and a variety of holdings that we have great equity against with bottom set:

I will admit that I do not understand what is going on here. If anyone else thinks they do, feel free to let me know. Considering that there is a pattern here where the sets raise less in order of their value, I have to assume that if I keep a look out, I'll notice something similar in other spots. For now, I'm just making a small mental note here, but I'll probably continue to raise most sets in these spots until I understand why I am not supposed to raise bottom set here.

Error #2: Cbet Mistakes on Paired Boards vs CO,BTN,SB

I am not going to analyze this. I just picked the first two I found. I haven't studied cbet strategy on these boards recently. Obviously, against BB, in most instances we are pushing equity with 33% pot bets on paired boards. Against the stronger ranges of CO, BTN, and SB, we don't have an equity advantage. Against these ranges, our betting on these boards should be far less frequent and more polarized. I am continuing to play them the same way I would against BB. I know that is a mistake, but, for now, this is a low priority study area. Eventually, I do want to look at it in-depth and get it right. So, for now, I'm just making an entry in the blog here to remind myself this needs to be on my study to-do list.

Error #3: Playing A Little Too ABC in 3 Bet Pots

Again, I'm not going to go into great depth here on any particular hand, but I just want to make a mental note that my 3 bet pot game has gotten a little stale. I'm playing too straight forward and I think it is costing me win rate against regs. My lines are lacking some creativity and I'm not finding bluffs quite often enough on the turn especially. In the other cases, I am the one giving up too easily to aggression. This is a habit formed from playing fish. As we all know, they don't have enough bluffs and it can be easy to get into a bad habit of giving up to aggression without really thinking the spot through to figure out if the line is credible. Against regs, this is a habit that will get you murdered in 3 bet pots. I think improving my 3 bet pot play is probably the area I'm going to study next after I finish this round of study on river bluff-catching.

Error #4: Snap-calling Shoves

This is the hand I mentioned last night in my short post-session write-up. When Villain jams over the top of my river value bet here, I absolutely do not have a snap call. The solver is folding 83% of the time in this spot (when using 50NL solves). I think this was just human nature kicking in: I have an Ace! CALL! That's, of course, terrible play. This deserved SOME thinking.

I used the most commonly used sizing by the solver on every single street. I'm not going to post images of that because it isn't where the hand gets interesting.

Here's villain's solver-approved shoving range:

What is villain's worst value hand? AQ. I am beating zero value.

What is villian's bluffing range? Villain is mainly bluffing missed KQ straight draws... but they also have to turn QJ into a bluff in order to have enough of them. If they miss even one of those QJ bluffs, that makes ATdd an autofold. It's already almost a pure-fold. So, in the end, this isn't complicated at all. This should've been an easy fold.

I have to get better control of that instant reaction to absolute hand strength. A top pair with a medium strength kicker is by no means an autocall on this board. I think this was the big blunder of the session. As per usual, the fix is very simple: 1) I need to stop and ask myself what villain's value range is and 2) I need to consider if it is hard to have bluffs on the current run out and 3) I need to consider blockers. I didn't even make it into step one on this hand. Had I done even that much, I think I would've just folded because this was a weak reg.

THINK! THINK! THINK! About every single shove! The extra thirty seconds can make a massive difference to win rate.

RIO Video Study

Five Basic Tips for Bluff-Catching by Peter Clark

1) Forget about absolute hand strength against Polarization
a) When your opponent reaches a sufficient level of polarization, where you cannot beat a single value hand, blockers are all that matter.
b) There is a human bias towards absolute hand strength. This is one reason why you are snap calling without thinking in some spots! You must break this habit and focus on relative strength+blockers when the opponent has polarized.
c) Hand Example: KJo on K79hh2K, facing triple barrel. You’re unblocking flush draws, but you’re blocking busted straight draws.
d) Blocking bluffs is worse than blocking value. They have less bluffs than value in their range so when you’re blocking bluffs you do more to influence the potential bluff:value ratios in a way that isn’t favorable.

2) Look for Spots where Bluffs are Unnatural
a) We only have 10-15 seconds to act. The brain defaults to easy solutions when faced with time constraints. We will rely on heuristics in these situations.
b) “Naturalness Theorem” -- The more unusually high the absolute hand strength required for bluffing, the more underbluffed the spot.
c) Hand Example: AdAs on T65sssKh – hero double barrels small, villain jams turn. In order to have enough bluffs here, Villain needs to be jamming straight draws and pairs with a spade. Is that something a human would really do multiway? Unlikely. The A of spade, in this case, is blocking the most obvious and realistic bluff that a human would use (nut flush blocker). Realistically, villain is only jamming sets and flushes for value here. You’re not beating any of that. Because you’re also blocking his main bluffs, and his value range is likely composed of hands that take away many of your outs (flushes), you don’t have the equity to call.

8/16/24 Beating 10NL Day #17

If anyone would like to chat on Discord:

.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management
Bodyweight: 217.7lbs / 98.7kg
Sleep Time (Mask): 6.1 hours*

*Next week, I am going on vacation for a few days to attend my wife's brother's wedding in our home state. She left ahead of me early this morning. I ended up staying up quite late to hang out with her considering we won't see each other for about a week. My body decided to wake-up at the normal anyway so here I am sleep deprived. Napping before tonight's session will be mandatory.

Health Exercises
Meditation, 20min: (8/8, 100%)
Gym: Incomplete, (2/8, 25%)

Mental Game Content

1) Attention by Chris Pimmer
In today's day and age where no one can ever put down their phone, this is a topic of outsized importance and it goes way beyond the scope of poker. Personally, I try to be as hardcore about this as I can afford to be. I make extensive use of the screen time and downtime features now on iPhone. Usually, I am able to keep my screen time to less than three hours per day. I don't have my phone available at all while playing. In a game where edge is increasingly hard to come by, getting rid of your phone while playing is just such an obvious place to start.

2) The Six Levers of Poker Profits by Elliot Roe
Having previously read Elliot's book, I am very familiar with the concept of the six levers. That said, at the end of the video, Elliot challenged the listener to rate themselves from 1-10 on each lever and determine what their current bottleneck is. I'll go ahead now with that exercise.

#1: Skill: 2.5/10
Clearly, without doubt, my skill level is current poker bottleneck. I am a winning 10NL player, but being a winning microstakes player is the lowest achievable level of skill you can have in Poker. I am currently winning at 6bb/100 all-in adjusted. I fully understand that there are plenty of high stakes and low stakes player that could crush this limit for 10-20bb/100 with great ease. I think the difference in win rate is mainly due to my low knowledge level about MDA/exploitative poker. Relying on my heavily solver-based training is building an excellent foundation, but it isn't the best way to beat bad players for a high win rate.

#2: Edge: 7/10
I think I have a sizable edge over the other 10NL microstakes villains. I believe I can say, without too much arrogance, that I am one of the best regs in the current pool. After all, very good regs in this pool tend to just move on quite quickly. I'm pace to do the same myself. I'm still not one of these mega-crushers who wins for 10+bb/100 and never has a losing session, but I'm doing quite well for my first two weeks at 10NL, all things considered.

#3: Efficiency: 8/10
I have a high degree of mental training compared to the average new player. For one, I'm older. I'm 33 years old. I have a lot more of my shit together than a youngin' in their 20s. I have competed in sports for decades. I have been in high pressure competitive situations for a long time. As far as poker specific emotional regulation goes, I have a long ways to go. I'm quite new to that. So, when I write 8 here, I am moreso grading in relation to the other factors. I don't think efficiency is a big bottleneck for me. I get enough sleep every night, I don't drink or use drugs (especially while playing), I eat healthily, and I generally take very, very good care of myself away from the table. I imagine that I'm actually more professional than a good deal of actual professionals that make a living from this game. I come to the game having already developed a great deal of discipline in other avenues of life. That discipline has carried over quite easily to Poker.

#4: Volume: 9/10
I'm not sure that I could realistically play any much more than I do without either sacrificing my study time significantly and/or getting a divorce and rehoming my dogs. Both of those actions would actually hurt my volume in the long-run as my skill development wouldn't keep up in the case of the former and, in the case of the latter, I'd eventually burn out without my social support system. Averaging 20k hands per week is no joke. I do know the ultimate standard for being a megagrinder is 100k+ hands per month. I don't play QUITE that much. I'm one tier down from that, though.

#5: Stakes: 2/10
I mean, you can't really play much lower than I do, but I don't think I'm making any kind of a mistake here. I am not setting unreasonable standards for moving up. I started off with a $300 deposit, which, for me, is just play money. I began with 2NL and forced myself to prove I could win there. Once I did, I moved up to 5NL within a month. It took much longer to win at 5NL, but, again, once I did, I moved up within a matter of weeks. That initial deposit is now more than $900 and I'm obviously well bank-rolled for 10NL. I'm well bank-rolled for 25NL, but not 50NL. I'm on the verge of moving up to 25NL just as soon as I meet my own criteria for "beating" 10NL. I don't think I'm holding myself back by being a bankroll nit. I really don't. I play microstakes because I'm just not good yet. I don't do it because I'm scared. I am not scared. I can tell you right now... I am not scared.

#6: Rake: 7/10
Microstakes games get raked to hell and back. We all know that. That said, I play on ACR and the rake is 5% with a $3 cap. There are places with better rakes for microstakes players, but they're hard to access as a US-based individual. I am actually winning more in rake back on ACR than I am in actual winnings at the table. I will be a winner of the rake race again this week for another $50. On top of a $50 "achievement" that I unlocked earlier this week, I'll have more than 17 buy-ins in rake back at 10NL while only winning ~14-15 from actual play. I feel like I could be doing a lot worse than ACR in terms of rake. I don't think it is anywhere close to a bottle neck. The faster I move up, the better the rake situation gets, anyway.

So, I mean, there you have it. It is very clear what the bottleneck to my poker profits are. I don't play high enough stakes because my skill isn't high enough yet. That doesn't bother me at all. I've been playing for a matter of months -- not years. My long range goal for Year 1 was just to beat 10NL because I watched a video that said, in 2020 and beyond, if you can't figure out how to beat 10NL on your own in the first year or so, you probably just don't have the requisite talent to go very far in poker. I think, even now, I've proven to myself that I do have decent potential as a player.

Who knows how far I can go? I intend to do everything in my power to find out.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

Morning-After Session Review

Another solid session from the perspective of the analyzer. That said, there is one -40+ EV play in here that isn't a mistake at all:

Stacking off with AQo 150bb deep!?

Okay, so, in solver land, you obviously never call off a 5-bet jam 150bb deep with AQo. However, this particular player is the single most loose, aggressive player in the entire 10NL pool. I am not exaggerating. In fact, this player is the main reason I had so many tables up. I wanted to be absolutely sure I wasn't missing a table that they were on. If it wasn't for losing this hand, I would've won 5 buy-ins off of this player on just this table in a 250-300 hand sample. They regularly stack off as weak as ATo and 55 in these spot. I know because I've been on the other side of plenty of these jams. They usually play 2-3 tables at once so I kept wondering why I could only find them on one 10NL table. That led to me having 10-11 tables open for most of the session. It's not a good justification, of course, but this is a player you have to hunt down. I feel like some weird predatory creature in saying that, but those are the facts.

Maaaaybe Getting Too Far Out of Line with Triple-Barrels

In this spot, the turn barrel is 100% solver approved:

This b75 barrel, in solver land, folds out remaining double broadway flush draws that have tons of equity and some lower pocket pairs that we are losing to. Nut flush draws and some suited connector combo draws with multiple outs keep drawing. Anything 9x and above stays in.

The river is the J of spades, which I thought was relevant. All 9x holdings are now second pair. TT is no longer an overpair. All the flush draws and straight draws bricked. I thought the J of spades gave me sufficient fold equity to shove.

The solver does shove my holding sometimes:

The solver shoves AQhh 100% of the time because it blocks the biggest part of villain's folding range (bricked nut flush draws). The larger sizing is needed in order to target remaining pocket pairs and 9x. In theory, even with AQdd, this shove should make 9x holdings indifferent:

Back in reality, my opponent makes a good call with 98dd. I lose the pot.

Did I spew off a stack here? Upon further analysis, I don't think so. I can easily see most humans overfolding 9x to this line because, as always, most 10NL villains don't have enough bluff shoves. I got caught on this one. No regrets.

Potential Spewing with Triple Barrels #2

The b25 c-bet is nothing interesting in my opinion. On a low, paired board, all the double-broadway holdings without a flush draw are going to struggle to continue and that is a huge part of villain's range. With the board this low, virtually any pocket pair is going to continue, of course.

The turn brings the 6d which is essentially a brick. Neither of us has much, if any, 6x. Now, this is where my decision making gets a bit dubious. I pick up absolutely no equity whatsoever and decide to continue to barrel b50 which probably isn't necessary with this particular holding (even though that is what my range will generally do). I'm up against a range consisting almost entirely of flush draws and pairs which I should have two overs to. I might get a better price to see the river card by checking here. Nevertheless, I do barrel.

The solver only barrels my holding 5% of the time:

The river brings a 4h meaning all the flushes and straight draws have missed and all of the pocket pairs have gone up in value. I elect to shove my AKs which is -1.5 EV compared to a check.

My value shoving range mainly starts at JJ (TT shoves ~10% of the main):

My opponent makes the call with TT. This holding is supposed to be indifferent in the solver:

However, and I rarely say this, I think TT is going to be underfolded here by the 10NL population. They're just too likely to fall in love with the absolute hand strength (of an overpair) and overdo the hero calls in this spot. I don't like this shove. I think I actually had less fold equity than the solver would suggest because of this run out.

I suppose I can live with the turn bet, but I don't much like that either in retrospect. In this case, unlike the last one, I do think I got a bit spewy. I tend to be too conservative because that's what works in 10NL, so this is a step in the right direction, but I need to be better about choosing spots that make sense. In this spot, I'm ahead of all the flush draws and I don't have enough fold equity versus any of the pairs. If the river comes J+, sure, fire another jam. In this case, no. Final verdict: bad decision.

As far as deep analysis, that's going to be all for today's review, but I do want to keep track of the 3 bet pot mistakes that I'm making. Becoming better in 3 bet pots is absolutely my next area of focus. For today, I'm just going to dump a bunch of mistakes that I made into one place to keep them in the back of my mind. Maybe my subconscious can do something with this information while I'm waiting to switch my study focus to 3 bet pots.

Floating Too Wide

On this texture, against this size, the threshold for a float is AK/AQ with a diamond. This float is -4 EV. Yikes!

A Bunch of Missed Turn Barrels

I need to do a much, much better job of finding unintuitive turn barrels in 3 bet pots.

Be More Aggressive With Flush Draws

This is a very bad habit of mine in general. I need to do a better job of raising pure flush draws. I don't raise them nearly as often as I raise other draws. I have no idea why, but, in this case, hopefully awareness can be curative to some degree.

That's all for today folks! I think I'm going to do ONE more study session on river bluff catching today. I will focus on bluff catching the turn after a turn check-raise. After that, I'm going to try and spend a good week (at least) on 3 bet pots.

8/17/24 Beating 25NL Day #1
Damn, feels pretty good to write that! Let's get to it.

If you'd like to chat, please add me on Discord:

.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management

Health Metrics
Bodyweight: 218.1lbs / 98.9kg
Sleep (Mask Time): 7.5 hours

Health Exercises
Meditation, 20min: Incomplete (8/9, 89%)*
Gym: Incomplete (2/9, 22%)
*I actually forgot to do this yesterday and mistakenly marked it complete. Shame! lol.

Mental Game Content

Working my way through the "Being a Professional" section on Rio now.

1) Mental Aspects of Live Poker by Leszek Badurowicz
While this video was intended for online players who are going to be playing at a live tournament/festival for a change, I think the lessons are relevant to all forms of poker. If you want to be at your best, you have to handle the basics of taking care of your brain: 1) stress management including appropriate time for leisure activity, 2) getting enough QUALITY sleep (sleep hygiene is HUGE!), and 3) avoid foods that seem to adversely affect your cognition. That stuff is all relevant for online play, too.

2) Making it as a Pro by Nick Rampone
In this video, Nick goes over the common pitfalls that hold back players who have the talent or skill to win, but can't seem to make it happen in real life such as: gambling addiction, poor bankroll management, and fear of moving up. Nick agrees they all come down to one core theme: discipline. Discipline is the glue that holds all structured human accomplishment together. If I can stay on my current path, I should do okay.

3) How to be More Professional by Leszek Badurowicz
In a video that was all about professionalism, the main thing that jumped out at me was the one area I am not up to par with poker professionals: ergonomics. I have a crap desk. I have a crap computer chair. My computer monitor is not huge and I bought this PC because it had acceptable specs to run Pio sims and was priced because I got it on a Christmas time deal. At some point, I absolutely need to upgrade my playing station. I am essentially using garbage compared to most real players. I need to spend some time, some day, learning about how to set-up a multiple monitor system so I have more screen real estate while playing. A more comfortable desk and chair wouldn't hurt, either.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

Today, I was able to go over some of my hands with Indifference who was kind enough to spend some of his precious time helping me out. Hearing the perspective of another player who plays higher stakes than me was enlightening especially with regards to "hard to study" topics like multiway pots and dealing with fish limpers. Thanks again man!

Here's my GTOW Analyzer Results:

This is right around where my current skill level seems to settle: 5% "mistakes" and an average EV loss of -0.02 per hand.

As I completed my review, unlike many other days, there weren't a lot thematic mistakes. So, I'm going to go in another direction, and just focus on two hands in a little more depth.

These two hands were my largest EV mistakes according to GTOW so the goal is to determine if these were actually blunders or if they're only mistakes in solver land.

Potential Blunder #1: Calling Flop-Jam in Deep 3 Bet Pot

Right off the bat here, we can see that my range prefers to polarize and use b50 on such a dynamic texture:

My hand is often a c-bet but the preferred size is b50. Nevertheless, I do go with b33 and villain jams for 180% pot. I don't think I considered the fact that we were deeper than 100bb heavily enough here. I don't think I thought about the pot odds enough. With that size, I need almost 40% equity to call.

If you look at Villain's solver approved jamming range:

You'll see JJ, TT, and KQhh which all make sense. There's slivers of a bunch of stuff that a human would never use like AQo and KJss. There's also big chunks of AQdd and 99, which, in solver land, make sense, but, back in reality, many real humans probably don't find those. Real humans are also going to find AJ at some frequency and nut flush draws (which I block entirely). I think it is fair to say that a realistic jamming range is a fair bit stronger than the solver's here.

Against a perfectly balanced jamming range, AKo is indifferent when this deep:

When Indifference and I plugged a more realistic jamming range into Equilab, it became clear you're probably only clearing 30-35% equity. This should've been an easy fold and the reason is that this is a 180% overbet jam. In a 4 bet pot, with 100bb stacks, bluff catching with AKo makes much more sense here. In this spot, I really just didn't give enough weight to the basics of pot odds. There's no way this is a good call.

Final Verdict: Blunder

Potential Blunder #2: Set vs River Jam on 4 Straight Board

Here, I raise to 2.5bb from UTG and get a call from a weak reg on the BTN. The flop comes 532r and I drill middle set. On this texture, I range check. Villain bets 50% pot and I raise 50%.

The solver prefers a 100% raise here, but 50% is used, too:

Against this 50% check-raise, Villain is floating almost all pairs and anything with a gutshot:

The turn is 7c which brings a flush draw that I don't block. I go with b125 to both set-up a potential river jam on a clean run out and to deny cheap equity realization to draws. My range generally prefers b75, but b125 is fine with this holding:

Villain calls and the river brings a horrible card for my holding: 6h. I decide to check which is the preferred action for my holding and my range:

Villain jams and puts me in a super tough spot. We have to look at their solver approved jamming range here to gauge a sense of realism:

In order to have enough bluffs, Villain needs to jam: 1) every single missed Ac/Kc flush draw, 2) 88 and some 99, and 3) A5 and A3 holdings. The solver is also jamming 76 and 65, but mixing check/jam with 22. In other words, the solver is value-bluffing with two pair here. Ultimately, this doesn't seem realistic to me.

Sure, okay, yes, a decent reg should be able to find some of those missed Ac flush draws because they also block the A4 nuts. The K high ones? Maybe, but those are less likely. Bluffing all-in with 88? No way. The A5 and A3 SDV bluffs? Not a freaking chance. Now, maybe a super bad player might think jamming overpairs is value here, but I'm the one with the uncapped range in this spot and I don't see that as likely either. And what about the jams with two pair? Turning two pair into a bluff is something most players can't do.

The solver views my hand as a +20 EV call. I think, in retrospect, the fact that a human player could potentially take this line with 22 means that I have to call. A +20 EV call, though? I don't believe that.

Final Verdict: nitty fold and, ultimately, a bad fold. Call next time.

Alright, that's all for today's session review folks! I'm off to the dog park and then I'm going to start digging into 3 bet pots today.

RIO Video Study Session

C-Betting Across Positions by Frankie Carson
1) Ax High Boards
a) SB mainly uses a ton of small bets because they have an average equity of 61% OOP
b) BB mixes sizes and has a more polarized strategy because they bet a more polarized range especially against CO/BTN (a more linear range is used vs HJ/UTG)
c) BB checks as much as 60% on AK5r vs later positions. You can’t just pretend it’s the same thing as other positions. You have so much more air in your range. You must check more and polarize your betting strategy. Against HJ, BB is still range betting.
d) On AJ5r, SB and BB are often range betting against CO/BTN but cbet % drops below 50 vs HJ and UTG. This is because, especially with small blind, the ranges become more symmetrical and there’s no longer the AK advantage.
2) Low Connected Boards
a) 764ss, we now have too much air to range bet especially as SB. The plethora of broadways don’t connect in anyway unless they have flush draws. IP has almost twice as many draws as OOP.
b) On these boards, the main sizing is 75% and a polar strategy is used.
3) Paired Boards
a) Again, there’s too much air. A more polar strategy is needed. You’re using ~50% cbet frequencies for b50 most of the time.
4) Two Tone vs Rainbow
a) A64r vs A64fd. The rainbow version is range bet by SB, but the flush draw version cbet percentage drops down to 50% or so.
Summary:
a) There are significant differences in cbet strategy vs earlier positions (UTG/HJ) compared to later positions (CO/BTN). Often times, there are more range bets versus earlier positions and more polarized strategies are needed versus later positions.
b) Low connected boards tend to favor the IP 3 bet caller and require polarization. You should be using big bets on most of these boards for low frequencies (eg b75 at 30-40%)
c) Paired boards also require a polarized strategy and cannot be range bet. You’re typically looking at frequencies of 40-60% and using b50-b75.
d) Flush draw boards can significantly change the strategy for the OOP 3 bettor because the flush equity significantly changes the playability/equity realization of IP’s range. Boards that were range bets can become mostly checks.

GTOW Trainer

I focused strictly on my SB 3 betting strategy in today's work. I ended up doing ~170 full hands. I was especially focused on cbet strategy on a variety of textures, but, again, I did play the full hands to refresh my skills on each street.

There were a few key takeaways. One wrinkle that I need to use with more frequency in game is trapping overpairs on low boards and low paired boards. The solver often does this at 25-50% frequency depending on the exact board. I probably do this like 10% of the time. Additionally, I need to think about checking back some rivers when I have a nutted/semi-nutted holding and a ton of draws missed. This gives my opponent the opportunity to bluff their draws when I'm blocking the value range.

Other than that, I was very pleased with how well my strategy held up in this training session. My in-game simplifications seem to be quite solid and resulted in GTOW trainer scores consistently above the 85-90% threshold. I'm happy with that for now.

I'm going to take a quick break to rest and then it is on to my first session at 25NL!

ACR 25NL Zoom Session #1

-539bb in 3233 hands

Welp, I got my ass kicked, didn't I?

I'm going to try and not read too much into it. It's just one session. However, I thought the competition was noticeably stiffer here at the 25NL Zoom tables. Bluffs that always get through were being picked off relentlessly. I got virtually every bluff catcher wrong for the first half of the session. I felt I was being thoroughly outplayed until about halfway through. I started to adjust and then I did far better. In the last hour, I got served some unfortunate variance. I think, at this point, I can tell the difference between being outplayed and variance related swings.

So, overall, this was a very mixed bag and, like I said, I won't overreact to one session. I had 39 buy-ins going into this session and I'm willing to take that down to 10 buy-ins before moving back to 10NL to rebuild my roll.

I would've preferred to stay on the reg tables, but one thing about ACR is that the 25NL Zoom pool is the single biggest pool on the whole site. There are almost always 100+ players in it at any hour of the day. This generally means that there aren't that many reg tables. I saw only 4-6 running so I decided to go with Zoom.

I started with two tables for the first hour and I saw that I only played ~500 hands. I'm usually playing upwards of 750/hour. I moved up to three tables after the first hour. After the second hour, I moved up to four tables and I thought that was just about the most I could realistically handle. It is easier to play more volume when on the Zoom tables because, even though I'm getting more hands per table, it is impossible to be involved in more than four hands at once. I'll have to have a good think about whether I should settle on 3 or 4 tables. I think four might be the better number in this case because it guarantees me a level of volume where I can for sure earn 5 buy-ins per week in the rake back race. That might be key for prolonging how long I can sustain this shot at 25NL.

Anyways, I'm really looking forward to digging into these hands tomorrow to figure out where I can do better. I got a little discouraged halfway through this session after quickly dropping five buy-ins, but I rallied to get back past break even at one point. From there, my mind settled down and it was back to just another day of playing poker.

I can tell beating 25NL Zoom is going to be a much bigger challenge than anything else I've faced yet in my poker journey. I'm up for a challenge, though : ). I WILL find a way to get better and beat this stake just as I have every other one before it. So, again, as always, I'll be back tomorrow with the takeaways from my studies.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/18/24 Beating 10NL Day #2

One brief note before anything else, I am not going to play the Zoom tables and anymore. A friend sharing this with me is the main reason why:

The only Zoom pools that run on ACR are 200NL and 25NL. There's no point in getting used to the Zoom tables when I'll just have to go back to the reg tables as soon as I'm done with 25NL anyway. Considering the massive differences in win rates, and the fact that I personally prefer, and am used to reg tables, I'm going back to the reg tables even if it costs me volume. As above: quality over quantity.

Zoom neutralizes some key edges in my opinion.

For one, it makes it supremely difficult to get a good read on many of the opponents you're playing against. Until you get a proper sample, which can take a long time, you don't know how someone is playing because you don't see them play any hands. You're always moving to the next table without seeing how the hand plays out. This is even harder for me because I don't currently use a HUD. I feel like, despite playing as many tables as I do, I'm very good at locking into which players are fish so that I can start targeting them. Despite not being a very sophisticated exploitative player, I do think I have intuitive sense of how to adjust to player types once I profile them. I couldn't get a single read on anyone while playing Zoom. It was too fast and the hands against each opponent were too infrequent.

Second, Zoom encourages everyone to have better preflop hand selection. Recreationals don't have to suffer through going card dead. They can just fold their junk and immediately get dealt a new hand. This removes the need for preflop discipline. Anything that makes the recreationals automatically play better is not good for our win rate.

Third, and I didn't even want to mention this at the risk of sounding like a whiny loser, but I do believe there is more RTA going on at Zoom tables. If for no other reason this is because the Zoom format lends itself well to just having GTO Wizard up while you're playing. If you're on reg tables, you can play four tables, get ~300 hands per hour or so, and sometimes be in 2-4 hands at once. On a single zoom table, you can play ~300 hands per hour and easily check every single decision in GTO Wizard on every single street because you only have one table up and you can use the full clock for every decision if necessary. I have heard many experienced players complaining that they believe RTA is a real problem on the ACR 200NL Zoom tables. I have no reason to doubt the opinions of far more experienced players than myself on this issue. Now, I'm not delusional and I am not saying I had a bad session yesterday because of cheating, lol. This is just another consideration that I felt I should admit is on my mind as an influencing factor for avoiding Zoom tables.

It is fine to make mistakes so long as you endeavor to learn from them. Playing Zoom, for me, I believe, was a mistake. I will not make that mistake again as I fancy myself as someone who can learn quickly from their mistakes.

Mental Game Development

Health Management

Health Metrics:
Bodyweight: 217.0lbs / 98.4kg (new low for the year!)
Sleep (Mask Time): 7.5 hours

Health Exercises
Meditation, 20min: Incomplete, (9/10, 90%)
Gym: Incomplete, (2/10, 20%)

Mental Game Content

1) How to be More Disciplined by Leszek Badurowicz
My favorite part of this video is the discussion about the marshmallow test. Many of you have surely heard about it by now. They put very young children (4-6 years old) in a room and put a marshmallow in front of them. They told them if they could wait until the researcher got back, they could have a second marshmallow. The vast majority of children failed. The interesting part of the study came when they followed up with the participants over the course of more than 40 years. The children who were able to resist temptation and delay gratification were more successful in virtually every single avenue of life. This shouldn't be surprising. If you are able to discipline yourself to favor long-term gains over short-term satisfaction, you'll eventually build a magnificent life.

What's more... the most successful children in the study used a particular strategy: they moved the marshmallow far away and tried to position themselves so they couldn't even see it. This is key in adult life as well. You have a problem eating too many chips? Throw all the chips in your house in the garbage. Stop buying them. You watch too much TV? Don't own a TV or at least use the parental control features on today's smart TV's that limit how much you can watch per day. If you're a social media addict, have someone set a password that you don't know that sets time limits on the ones you are most prone to wasting time on. Do you have trouble with doing something after spending a lot of energy throughout the day? Do it first thing when you wake up then (this is how I was able to get started with my gym habit and I now use it for meditation). Outsourcing your discipline or removing the need to be disciplined at all is often more effective than white-knuckle will power.

2) Finding Success at Poker by Lucas Greenwood
While this video discusses many aspects of Poker professionalism, the core message is about being a high character individual. Poker is an incredibly demanding profession. You need to be diligent about studying and playing despite having no boss to force you to work. You need to be able to regulate your emotions under fairly intense duress which is not something that comes naturally to most people. You have to be able to discipline yourself to stick to your bank roll plan. You have to honor your word to your backers and people who have put their trust in you. This all points to the same thing: self-development. I've long since learned in my other endeavors throughout my life that you don't achieve the level you want; you rise to the level that you already are. You want to be a better player? Be a better person, overall. Be healthier, be more emotionally stable, be more disciplined with study and play, clarify your goals with more precision, build a stronger social network that will support you and provide opportunities, and just do everything your power to be... better. It all matters. Everything matters. Being the best version of yourself is not just some cute, trite saying; it is core ingredient for all life success recipes.

In my opinion, character is all that really matters in this life. We don't do anything to earn being born smarter than others, more beautiful than others, stronger or faster than others, and we certainly don't earn lucky breaks like being born into countries where computers and the internet are common place... or, you know, surviving to adulthood or even being born at all. I try not to admire people just because they were born with tremendous gifts; I try to admire people who have consistently made good choices as they attempt to become the person that they're capable of being. Wealth is a byproduct of luck times character. I'd rather skip the luck part and just focus on character. The rest takes care of itself.

3) Success Factors by Julian Koplansky
One idea that I really liked from this video, and something that I have personally found to be true in my own life, is that your ability to tolerate workload is trainable. When I was a punk kid playing sports, I would read about guys like Kobe Bryant who would do 3-4 workouts per day and only sleep 4-6 hours per night. I thought that if you wanted to be truly great, like those people, you needed to work 16 hours a day like they seemingly did.

What I didn't understand is that they had built up to these regimes over years and years of training. You can't start at the end. You can't skip the development process. In my own weight lifting journey, I went from training three times per week for about 90 minutes at a time to eventually lifting six days a week for at least two hours a session. If I had tried that from the beginning, I would've just gone backwards from burnout and inadequate rest/recovery. My body and my mind weren't ready for that. In fact, if I hadn't already developed my ability to work long hours through entrepreneurship, I wouldn't be able to study as hard as I do at Poker. I don't come to this completely undeveloped in that regard. However, I am relatively undeveloped in my Poker attributes which is very exciting because it means I am only scratching the surface of my potential to grow as a poker player. I will continue to push myself to find out what my limitations truly are.

Oh, it is worth mentioning that Kobe Bryant eventually came to regret his training schedule. He felt that he was under-recovering and, in his last years, he pulled back significantly on the training load and slept more. That comes as absolutely zero surprise to me. Limits exist. They're generally higher than you think, but certain personality types can easily blow right by them. And they do it all the time. They then go through these funks of semi-depression and low motivation. They end up thinking there's something wrong with them and they just aren't a hard worker or a motivated person. Many of them are the hardest working people you'll ever know... they're just burnt out from inadequate rest.

Again, balance isn't just some cute concept that gets bandied about... if you actually want to do your best, you have to have your broader needs met to sustain the highest possible outputs. You NEED a social network, you NEED proper nutrition, you NEED enough sleep, you NEED relaxation, you NEED something that brings you a level of happiness and joy. If you push on through without these things, you'll get lapped by someone who tends to them properly. I know because I've been there. Sometimes "less" really is "more".
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

On the surface, the analyzer sees this as just another typical day for me. When I dug a little deeper, yeah, that was still pretty much the case. Sometimes you lose.

That said, I did discover a few thematic errors and one of them has me very displeased with myself.

Error #1: Soft Play in SRP
I'm not going to post any examples of this because the theme isn't exactly concentrated to one type of error. Early in this session, I was just getting every single decision wrong in SRPs. In retrospect, upon viewing these hands in-depth, this was clearly just variance and not some massive jump in the skill level of the pool. However, I incorrectly interpreted it that way in the moment. Because of that, I massively decreased my cbet, turn stab, and and river bluff frequencies in SRPs. While this kind of thing doesn't have some profound impact on your win rate, it does add up because these spots are frequent. There's only one real lesson on this one: don't ever change your strategy in the moment unless you're quite sure the sample size is sufficient. This wasn't happening against a single opponent and it is just illogical to think that the pool is somehow that different than 10NL. I got in my own head and needlessly turned down my aggression factor for no good reason. I won't repeat that mistake.

Error #2: Misplaying AJx Boards Early Positions vs BB in SRP

I mean, these are just not frequent overbet boards. There is no nut advantage here. BB defends AJo and AJs mostly by flatting against early positions. One of these got me into big trouble and cost me half a stack.

Error #3: The Return of Terrible Hero Calls

This was my single biggest loss of the entire session: -150bb. I have to admit that I ultimately called here because the line just didn't make any sense. What 2x does a SB cold calling range have here? None -- if playing at equilibrium. SB also isn't supposed to defend 44 with a preflop call here. In fact, with 50NL rake, they're supposed to 3bet/fold 55, too. They're not supposed to have any hands that can beat ATx except JJ and A3 (and I block the only A3 that gets to the turn).

However, here's the problem with all of that: real humans don't play the correct ranges -- especially when they're flatting out of the SB. I flat in the SB, but I do it with the equilibrium ranges. Most people that flat in the SB at microstakes are fish and their range is potentially almost as wide as it is from the BB. With this shove, villain is repping AT LEAST 2x in my opinion. I should've just folded here due to the dubious blocker effects and the fact that I am not beating a real human's value range.

When looking at a 500NL solve (which has a 5-10% call frequency with 44 and 55 etc), the solver's all-in range here is way too insane for a human to mimic:

We see jams with pocker pairs below TT, there is a jam with A5, every single nut flush blocker holding is jamming, etc.

Here's the bottom line: I wasn't beating any potential value here and I'm blocking the most obvious category of bluffs which is missed nut flush draws. Sure, I also block the most likely combination of A3, but I can't just assume that Villain FOR SURE doesn't have 2x, 44, or 55 just because that's "not supposed to be" in their range.

I worked for a good week trying to take these calls out of my game at these stakes, but here we are. Always more work to do, I suppose.

I'm not going to comment so much on these ones, but, when you add everything up, I lost multiple buy-ins to big calls that are outright bad or at least questionable:

Error #5: Poorly Selected Bluffs

Alright, admittedly, maybe this isn't the best example. Villain min-raises my 2.5bb UTG open from the BB with J8o. Typically, I assume this is a fish trying to trap a premium hand because it usually is. I call with the pure intention to set mine with great implied odds. In this case, though, this particular player is actually using some kind polarized strategy.

The line is, of course, completely bizarre. Villain flops two pair. Checks flop. Bets 1bb on the turn after the turn counterfeits his two pair. The river brings him a full house and now he can only lose to 99. He bets 5bb. I raise huge because I'm mainly putting Villain on overpairs. I have a hand that can't beat anything and the double-paired board should be scary for any overpairs here. Villain tanks for his whole time bank and then calls (maybe slow rolling?). If you'd like to try to figure out what was going through their head, please be my guest, lol.

In this one, I think there is a problem with the credibility of my line. At the time, my thinking on the river was: a) I unblock the missed flush draws, b) I block the JT nuts, and c) it is very easy for me to have a variety of rivered Kx two pairs. However, I think blocking JT is completely irrelevant in this case because most humans are not checking back the flop with JT. If I've rivered Kx two pair, the sizing doesn't make sense as you're looking to target Ax holdings. You'd only raise 50% or so. I'm not repping anything except perhaps 77 and 77 shouldn't get to the river in this manner. It is very possible that I just ran into the top of Villain's range, but it is also very possible he jammed a bluff right over the top here because of how nonsensical my play was. In reality, I'm suppose to just fold turn here so, overall, this ends up being a 50bb mistake and that is a win rate killer.

I think that's all I really want to focus on for today. After reviewing my hands, I really felt like I deserved to lose yesterday. I didn't think it was pure variance, but rather legitimate poor play in the first half of the session (literally all these hands are from the first half of the session). Perhaps I got into my head a bit because I was moving up stakes and the session started off in the red. It's hard to say.

Nevertheless, I just didn't play my best. I am capable of making much better decisions than this. I expect to play much better now that the "jitters" about moving up are out of my system. In fact, I'm a little pissed off and I can't wait to get back into the ring and slug it out with the 25NL pool tonight.

8/19/24 Beating 25NL Day #3

Add me on Discord:

.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management

Health Metrics:
Bodyweight: 215.8lbs / 97.8kg
Sleep (Mask Time): 7.6 hours

Health Habits
Meditation, 20min: Incomplete (8/10, 80%)
Gym: Incomplete (2/10, 20%)
No Caffeine: Incomplete (1/1, 100%)*

*Today is my first day going without caffeine. My goal, going forward, is to limit all substance use to days where I won't be playing that day or the next day because of the impact that almost all substances have on either sleep duration or sleep quality. I generally only partake a handful of times per year, anyway, but I think this is a good policy. Complete sobriety is not a goal of mine although I've accidentally finished entire years without drinking before. At this stage of my life, I'm married and I'm not out trying to meet women, I have zero tolerance and get horrible hangovers, and I'm just too old to tolerate feeling like shit, lol. Partying is something I left behind in my early 20s. Nevertheless, caffeine use has been more of an issue because it is, essentially, a performance-enhancing drug with considerable side effects. In the long run, because I'm such a sensitive sleeper, and because I play at night right before bed, it makes sense to stop using caffeine for an edge at the tables. I believe, for me, it takes more than it gives.

Mental Game Content

1) How to be a Better Poker Player by Sean LeFort
One point that Sean brings up that I had to acknowledge was that, in the long run, for balance purposes you cannot have all of your emotional eggs in one basket. I learned that the hard way when I was a hardcore lifter. If I had a bad session early on in my journey, which is much less common than in poker, but it can still happen a few times per month, it would ruin my entire day. When I got married, got pets, and allowed myself to care about some other hobbies (I used to be a season ticket holder to an NBA team before we moved a few years ago), this effect almost completely disappeared. When one area of my life was going poorly, the others never were and any carry over was minimized.

Right now, I still have my wife and my dogs, which always bring me joy, but I think I've gone too far in minimizing my lifting. At some point, the honeymoon phase with poker will end, I think. I won't have this burning desire to train and play for sixteen hours a day like I do right now. For now, it feels like, if there were 30 hours in a day, I'd use all six extra hours on poker. I invested nearly fifteen years of my life into lifting. At one point, I was squatting 600lbs/270kg for 5 reps, I could bench press 450lbs/205kg+, and I deadlifted over 700lbs/320kg. These are things that brought me immense pride when I accomplished them. I'll never do any of that again because I'm not willing to pay the price that comes with weighing 120kg and using PEDs. However, I think, at some point, I will set new physical goals. Maybe I will get back into martial arts which is something I did in my early 20s. Maybe I will do crossfit. I really have no idea, but I think, at some point, this trend of going to the gym only once or twice per week is going to end and I'll be back doing some sport 4-5 times per week.

On the surface, this may seem like it will hurt my poker development, but I know the opposite to be true. People mistakenly think that balance is all about putting an equal amount of energy and effort into all areas of life: health, wealth, happiness, etc... but what balance is really about, at least to me, is creating a sustainable ecosystem for maximum personal growth. For short periods, you can dramatically accelerate your progress in any one area by neglecting the rest of your life, but it just isn't sustainable. My current life balance ecosystem is not sustainable. I have too many eggs in the poker basket. I am okay with that for now because I understand it is temporary and won't last. At some point, I will drop from 70 hour poker weeks to 50 hour weeks and I have zero issue with it. I will drop down to playing 5-6 days per week and I'll have at least one full day off where I don't even study. For now, I'm going to ride this wave of enthusiasm for as long at lasts (and hopefully all the way out of the micros at the very least, lol).

2) 7 Characteristics of a Winning Poker Player by Leszek Badurowicz
This one was all about Carol Dweck's "growth mindset" concept. I actually read this book when it came out and, to some extent, the book gave voice and explanation to a transformation that I had all on my own.

If you're not familiar with the concept it is best encapsulated by the following discovery from Dweck's research: A) Children were divided into two groups and given math problems that were quite easy for their current level, B) One group of children was praised for being smart after having finished the problems and the other group was praised for being hard working, C) The group that was praised for being smart was averse to trying harder math problems while the group that was praised for being hard working were happy to continue trying harder and harder problems with some of them even finishing work well beyond their grade level.

The researchers end up concluding that the mechanism at play here was an underlying desire to be consistent with one's image of one's self. Smart children didn't want to risk their current perceived value and social standing by trying something and failing. After all, maybe they wouldn't be considered smart anymore if they couldn't solve the next set of problems. On the other hand, for children who saw themselves as hard working, it was only natural to continue to try new problems even if they were extremely hard. That's what hard working people do; they keep trying.

In the end, researchers realized that many people see qualities as fixed and immutable. You're either smart or you aren't. You're either talented or you aren't. Other people tend to see most qualities as trainable. They think intelligence can be developed. They think skill can be cultivated. It turns out that, almost across the board, people with the "growth mindset", who believe anything can be learned or developed, vastly outperform those with the opposite belief system. This is due to the simple facts that they are less afraid of making mistakes and don't see any problem with continuing to learn, study, and train in order to fix those mistakes.

Personally, I was that kid who was constantly told how smart they were. Believe it or not, I considered myself a very lazy individual until I reached adulthood. In a sense, I got very lucky. Competition made me realize that I was not lazy; I was just scared to try. I got lucky because I hated losing so much and my hatred of losing drove me to practice, study, and train compulsively at anything competitive that I took an interest in. However, I used to hide my efforts because I didn't want anyone to know how much I cared and how hard I was trying on my own time. I guess I wanted it to all seem effortless.

When I was about 5-6 years old, my uncle taught me to play Chess during a family reunion one summer. Within the weeks I was there, I eventually beat everyone in the family except two people: my uncle who taught me to play the game and his eldest son who was even a little better than him. I bothered and pestered them both to keep playing against me all day, every day. They'd occasionally relent to my annoyances and oblige. I was never able to win, though. I went home that summer and asked my Mom for several books on Chess and, when I learned of the existence of the software program Chessmaster, I begged for that, too. After doing enough chores to secure the goods (lol), I studied and played obsessively. I never lost to anyone in my family ever again. I had achieved a 1700 rating by the time I was 9 in online play, but, for whatever reason, I lost interest and stopped playing the game entirely for many years. Even now, I play less than once a year.

However, I never applied that kind of effort to anything else until well into adulthood. I experienced abject humiliation if I wasn't immediately good at something. Because of this, I rarely tried anything new at all. It took me until my 20s to realize that I could tap into this work ethic at will. I just had to stop being so afraid of being perceived as not good at things. I couldn't understand how many other people were so unafraid of looking foolish.

It feels a bit strange to think back on it because, now, I'm oriented in the completely opposite way. I'll try anything. I have zero afraid to look stupid. I don't care if I'm bad at something initially. I have no problem with publicly journaling my failures in the microstakes. I've somehow developed the notion that I can learn anything if I find the right teaching resources. I no longer even think about whether or not I'm an intelligent individual. Yet, on the other hand, work ethic is the corner stone of my entire value system.

I consider any meager success I've had in life entirely the result of this mindset shift... You can do anything you set your mind to. There is ALWAYS a way to learn and get better. I firmly believe that I can achieve all my goals in poker so long as I am willing to put in the necessary work to grow and get better.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

Morning-After Review

Another typical session from the perspective of the analyzer.

As I dug into today's hands, there was a very, very obvious theme that jumped out at me and I'm going to spend my whole day studying it:

Misplaying Flush Draw/Flush Complete Boards

First, I want to cover a very, very basic mistake that requires no analysis... it's just a bad habit of mine:

Not Raising Nut Flush Draws Frequently Enough in SRPs:

Whether we're talking about check-raising or just continued aggression, I don't find these raises often enough. I had five opportunities like this in this session and I only took two of them. At equilibrium, you're supposed to raise many of these opportunities 50-80% of the time. 40% isn't enough. If I'm being honest, I think I actually do it more like 20-30% of the time. This is one of those cases where I think just writing about this, and pointing it out to myself, should be enough to help fix it. It's just a matter of reminding myself the frequency is supposed to be higher. And, to add to it all, microstakes villains play really poorly against b125-250 in my experience. Any time I can put them in those nodes, it is an advantage for me.

Now... let's move onto much bigger mistakes:
Misplaying Flush Draw Boards in 3 Bet Pots

#1a: Jamming a Missed Flush Draw?

In general, I need to develop a better understanding of when we are supposed to follow through on missed flush draws and jam the river. I know this almost never happens in SRPs because you generally have better bluff options. That's not always the case in 3/4 bet pots. Bluffs can be more limited and sometimes we need to use our missed flushes even though they're usually not ideal candidates because they block a lot of our opponents missed draws/bluffs as well.

If we look at Villain's calling range to the b75 cbet, we see that they actually have to float quite wide to meet MDF:

Villain needs to go as thin as AT/A9 with backdoor nut flush draws. They're even defending some KQ/KJ with backdoor flush draws. They're defending every single AKo. They're even defending AQo and low pocket pairs that unblock back door flush draw bluffs.

Once the second b50 barrel goes in, they're defending mostly made hands, flush draws, and gutshots (which make up 35% of the calling range):

Once we get to the river, my all-in bluffs are made up mostly of gutshots and missed flush draws:

Villain's folding range versus jam is made up of... mostly missed gutshots, flush draws, and pairs weaker than Jx:

This one is really tough for me. It seems like you're blocking huge chunks of the folding range when you hold AQdd. That said, I think this is just a unique spot without a lot of options to choose from because we started with a paired board. Any time the flop pairs the board, the continuing range for the defender becomes really narrow in the types of hands it has in it.

In game, I don't think I thought enough about the fact that I could still get a lot of folds from pairs below Jx. I had a hard time coming up with draws that Villains calls two big bets versus and then misses on the river. What I missed was the fact that villain is supposed to float many suited double broadway hands with back door flushes. Some of those turned gut shots. Those all fold to river aggression. If you get enough folds from pairs below Jx, the bluff is still profitable.

Of course, in this case, Villain was likely just clicking buttons with AQhh and this is evidenced by the fact they felt the need to "show" the bluff at the end of the hand, lol. Whenever someone does that, I tend to see it as a sign of a fish. "Look at me! I got a bluff through!". I usually translate that as: "I don't bluff often and this is a cool moment for me". It sure as hell will never tilt me, lol. I feel grateful for a free showdown I didn't have to pay for.

#1b: River Bluffing... a Different Missed Flush Draw?

This one is, in many ways, very similar to the last one. Normally, I don't think about triple-barreling my missed flushes. However, again, there's many missed straight draws and gutshots on this board: QJ, KJ, KQ, 77, 88, etc. And, again, you can still potentially fold out some pairs that decided to call the turn barrel: JJ, QQ, Tx, and MAYBE wheel Ax that block flush draws.

In any case, missed flush draws are certainly not auto checkbacks on the river in 3 bet pots. There's more thinking to be done. In spots where you might not have enough bluffs, or villain has a lot of missed straights/gutshots or vulnerable pairs, they still may make viable bluffs.

#3: Jamming a Straight on a Flush Complete Board

In the interest of saving time, I'm not going deep on this one because it isn't necessary. When the river completes the flush, and I jam, I'm just folding out holdings that I beat and isolating myself against flushes. Maaaaaybe I get a call from a set or two pair with a heart. The correct sizing here is something between b10 and b60. I don't want to isolate myself against the top of villain's range with a jam on this texture with this hand class. This is a type of mistake I should never be making at this stage of my development. I know better than to fall in love with absolute hand strength and jam just because.

#4: 4th and 20, Time to Punt

This was a failed exploitative play. In fact, I got counter-exploited... hard. In these spots, many microstakes villains check back AK/AQ type hands and always call the 20% float. They then usually overfold to the big turn barrel. Once villain CALLS my b75 turn barrel, they're extremely unlikely to have air anymore. In fact, overpair traps and heart flush draws are all very likely here.

When both a flush and a straight complete, I decide to jam thinking that, against a non-solver opponent, I have way more fold equity than I should. In solver land, 100% of the bluffs and value jams are based around flushes with the bluff region coming almost entirely from nut flush blocker holdings. My holding is never jammed. Value and bluffs are based around flushes on a flush complete board. Amazing, right?

I later realized this opponent was a reg. I wouldn't have played this this way had I known that during the hand. Nevertheless, even thinking I'm potentially up against a fish, I think this is a clear punt. Flushes are too big of a part of their range here when they call the huge turn bet. Ultimately, props to my opponent for looking me up with AAh. I hope they at least sweat the decision a little bit, lol.

That will be all for today's session review folks! I'll be back this evening with a follow-up post right below this one that will detail the results/takeaways from the rest of my daily studies and the results of tonight's session.

Have a good one!
~Orca

Great blog! Looks like the discipline from your bodybuilding days are transitioning into studying and playing poker. Good luck on your journey.

8/20/24 Beating 25NL Day #4

Add me on Discord:

Mental Game Development

Health Management
Health Metrics:
Bodyweight: 216.3lbs / 98.1kg
Sleep (Mask Time: 7.8 hours

Health Habits
Meditation, 20min: Complete, (9/11, 82%)
Gym*: Incomplete, (3/11, 27%)
No Caffeine: 2/2, 100%

*I have decided that when I get back from my vacation, I'm going to start resuming going to the gym every single day. Most days, I will just do a short cardio session, but I will also get some lifting done 2-3 times per week. I think prioritizing 45 minutes of studying over going to the gym each day that I don't manage my schedule absolutely perfectly is short-sighted. Being in excellent physical condition, especially from a cardio perspective, should have big carryover to sleep quality, sleep duration, cognitive efficiency, mood/affect, etc. It should be worth more to my win-rate long-term than an additional 45 minutes of study per day. Well, at least I think so, anyway. Either way, a shift towards a little more balance can only be a good thing in my case.

Mental Game Content

I am instituting a one paragraph limit for these write-ups going forward. As much as I absolutely love to wax poetic about self-development, as it is probably my single favorite topic in existence, this is one area I CAN afford to get back an extra 15-30 minutes of studying per day. I don't need to write a mini-essay for each video I watch.

1) Training for Poker like an Elite Athlete: Process by Bradley Chalupski
Ah, now you have someone speaking my language. Excellence in bodybuilding is all about building a process. The sport is 24/7/365. Even when you're not training, you're dieting. When you're not dieting, you need to minimize all stressors, both physical and mental, to maximize results. In the end, your ability will be measured when you take your talent times the quality of your process times the amount of time you've been engaged with that process.

This is why I'm so concerned with studying in the most efficient manner possible. This is why I'm so concerned with finding the best way to identify my weaknesses. This is why I'm so concerned with each 15-30 minute time slot in my schedule. If you can squeeze a 1% improvement in your rate of learning daily, with a small change to your process, that accrues massive differences across six months. In the end, this is why I'm strongly considering joining a CFP that has an entire system already built into it: you receive a ready-made, already optimized learning process.

Okay, that was two paragraphs. Sue me.

*2) Getting to High Stakes: A Step-by-Step Guide by Freenachos
I am strongly considering applying for Nacho's CFP. They generally only take students who have reached 50NL or higher so I'm not at the point where I can apply... yet. That said, I have read some of Nacho's blog and it is very inspiring. I want to do everything in my power to reach high stakes as well.

While it may not be some super scientifically accurate number, one exercise Nacho did in this video was he looked at the number of tables available at various stakes and then compared that to the tables open at 1KNL. The ratio was about 200:1. Again, it's not super scientific, but we can then estimate that roughly 0.5% of serious online players make it to playing high stakes. While that may not seem insurmountable, the odds of dying in a car crash, in the USA, are roughly 100:1 or 1%. Then again, the odds of becoming a professional American football player are roughly 1:250,000. I'll take those odds.

After all, why not me? I'm no dummy. I work very hard and I'm willing to make the necessary sacrifices. Why not me? Why not try? Why not go for it? Of course, I will try. I will go for it. I will do everything in my power to reach 1KNL and above.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

Session Review

This is just my baseline now: ~5% mistakes and ~-0.02 EV loss per move.

When I dug into the hands further, today was one of those days where I wouldn't say there was necessarily a theme. There were just a smattering of different kinds of mistakes mostly. I'm not sure how many of them need deep analysis, but most of them deserve a brief spotlight because they're the kind of errors where awareness is curative.

#1: Missed Counterfeited Two-Pair Full House Blocker Jams

This is a type of bluff that I recently learned about from Francesco Lacriola in an RIO video. The key to getting these bluffs through is that you should have the offsuit version of the possible boat in your range.

In the SB v BB SRP example, 95s blocks J9 and I have J9o in my range. Once the second J hits the board, any flush draws in my opponent's range are in huge trouble here. JTo and J9o are both holdings that I would raise from the SB in this situation. With good blockers, and a hand that likely no longer has a lot of showdown value, I can bluff all-in here. Villain ended up having a super weak draw and I won anyway, but that's pure luck. I shouldn't have missed this bluff.

The Q8ss example is also very, very similar and this time I paid the price for not recognizing the spot. I raise QJo pure from the HJ. I think most strategies do. In this case, Villain is a solid reg. They understand they no longer have a clear value bet when the second J hits. QJ is too big a part of my range. The check shows vulnerability here. I should've stuffed this because, again, I'm blocking the nuts and this is a good reg. This reg can make a fold here with a small flush. Would they have? Who knows? Wizard considers this a nearly -3 EV mistake. Ouch.

Clearly, I need to do a better job of being aware of these full house blocker bluffs. Again, the big keys are 1) if you're going to jam over the top of a raise, is villain the type of villain to value bet a straight/low flush on a paired board? 2) if yes, are there offsuit boats available or did you need to spike a set at some point to have a full house on this board, realistically? If both of those criteria are met, a bluff jam is a great option.

#2: Hero Calling River Raises

You want to know the one line where the average microstakes villain has even less bluffs than when they triple barrel the river for pot+ sizings? River raise lines. Very silly hero calls here on my end.

With the 86 holding, better two pairs are available. I'm only beating stone cold bluffs and this is a recreational player. Terrible waste of 30bb.

In the second example, I'm up against an unknown reg (they were 6 tabling, but I have no history with them). Calling with the Kh flush blocker isn't terrible. However, and I try not to put TOO much stock into these things, but Villain snap called my river overbet and then snap shoved my thin river value bet, too. If I want to bluff catch here, it's much less pricey to check back the river and then face something like 60-150% on the river versus having to face this jam. All things considered, I immediately regretted this call and not just because of the results. I thought I ignored timing tells and my intuition on this one.

#3: A Bunch of 3 Bet Pot Mistakes

Here, a recreational villain looks me up with 88 after I bluff shove AKo on a tripled runout. I've said this before, but I think these runouts are underfolded by population. Recreationals fall in love with absolute hand strength. After all, how can I fold a full house!?

When using a 50NL solve, Wizard uses the exact same flop and turn line that I do at high frequency. However, it checks back river and then bluff-catches a shove with 75% frequency here. The reason being is that Villain is supposed to float a variety of double-broadways with back door flushes or straights. When the Q comes, some of those turn a gut shot. AKo is ahead of all those potential bluffs. If Villain checks back a low pocket pair, you save your last 50bb.

I don't think this is an egregious punt. Checking here is +5 EV and the shove is +2 EV. Losing 3 EV in a single move is obvious really bad, but Villain is supposed to purefold this combo 88. This gets through enough to be profitable even in solver land. Again though, beyond the solver, I think the bigger mistake is expecting rec villains to fold full houses. If anything, I think, in the future, I'll shove thinner in these spots against recreationals knowing that they will have a hard time folding any pocket pair.

This doesn't require any commentary. You're just not floating any AQo holdings here without a diamond. This type of thing is super common across all 3 bet pot spots. No idea why I floated this. Just a terrible decision that I compounded when I led on the K turn.

Oh, look, another spot where I was supposed to triple barrel river with a missed flush. This is exactly what I trained for yesterday and I still missed it!

I've realized why these spots rarely come up in my solver training: my strategy often simplifies to using the b75 on turns where I want to polarize in 3 bet pots. However, the solver exclusively uses b50 here (and mixes b50/75 in many other flush scenarios) and, when you do use b50 on the turn, after a b33 cbet, it keeps many more paired holdings in Villain's range. They're supposed to call a ton of Tx to a b50 and fold almost all of it to b75 in this spot. So, if you b50 the turn, you still have enough fold equity to jam river. If you b75 the turn, and get a call, you're supposed to pure check. Equilibrium can be that sensitive.

I think the error here, on my part, is not sizing down to b50 when the turn brings a straight. That's a reasonable heuristic that I can implement. I still want to polarize, but, when the board is scarier for my top pairs, a smaller size is called for. The same thing happens when turns complete flush draws. While there are some occasions where b75 is used on a flush completing turn, you mostly size down to b33/50 even after a b20/b33 cbet. I think, in the future, sizing down on straight complete turns also makes sense.

It breaks my heart to make yet another error on a flush draw board after I went through 200 full hands on this exact topic yesterday, but here we are. This is a PURE check-raise. I have the nut flush draw, two different back door straights, AND an over.

Villain takes a very strange line when they jam river here. I wanted to call this so badly. Every instinct was telling me that they were trying to buy the pot. What does villain jam here for value? They could've trapped TT on the turn and are now hoping to extract value from Ax. AT makes a bit of sense as well. The solver calls any Ax holding 100% of the time here, but I don't think solutions are very valuable here because the solver also never jams.

Ultimately, I just didn't know what villain was doing here and I think there are better spots to make money than these situations where you're completely guessing and doing something that has never come up in your training. If I had to guess, though, I think this was a bluff.

More importantly than all that, I missed the PURE check-raise on the flop with the nut flush draw + additional back door equity. Can't let that happen.

Alright, that's all for today's review folks! I'm going to end this post here so that I don't run into character limits. I'll be back tonight with the results of the rest of my daily studies and my last 25NL session before vacation!

Have a good one everyone,
~Orca

RIO Video Study Session

BB 3 Betting Strategies and Post Flop Play by Francesco Lacriola
1) The big blind closes the action and doesn’t have to worry about squeezes. This incentivizes a polarized range
2) Some of the range is a pure 3 bet and never folds to 4 bet. Other parts of the range have more dynamic response
3) The EV of medium strength hands increases if the opponent does not 4 bet enough and calls more dominated hands. The EV of medium strength hands decreases if the opponent folds a lot and 4 bets a more linear range
4) The EV of weaker holdings increases if the opponent overfolds, doesn’t 4bet enough and/or plays passively postflop allowing us to realize more equity and decreases if the opposite occurs

Choosing More Linear vs More Polarized 3bet from BB
1) A more linear range allows for a higher cbet frequency and a more aggressive cbet strategy

3 Betting Medium Strength Hands
1) Suited broadways, medium pairs, offsuit broadways
2) These hands can be played as pure flats or pure 3bets against different player profiles. Mix should only be played against competent opponents.
3) If an opponent overfolds preflop, you want to polarize more
4) If they are 4 betting a more linear range, you lose a lot of EV as well
5) Medium strength hands are a key part of more linear 3 betting ranges and give us more post flop playability
6) We don’t have to worry about overfolding to 4bets if we think villain doesn’t 4 bet enough and/or using too linear of a 4bet range

Post Flop cbetting Strategies
1) Range betting is much less common because of the polarity of the ranges
2) Most 9 high or lower boards don’t interact well with the 3betting range there we prefer a more polarized cbet strategy (98x is a little bit of an exception due to interaction with broadways)
3) Khigh boards are the best boards for the 3bettor
4) We need to be a bit cautious on A high boards because we don’t 3bet as many suited Ax combos as small blinds. Most of our weak off-suit aces are drawing dead to the better Aces in villain’s range
5) We can play more aggressively on rainbow boards versus flush boards

Evaluated Nut Advantages / Nut Asymmetries
1) Lower SPRs make it more comfortable to play for stacks even on boards where villain has an advantage in terms of sets like 97824
2) BB needs to be extremely cautious on boards which connect very well with offsuited broadway combos that are high frequency calls for the IP player and low frequency 3 bets. Double/Triple broadway boards are often bet very small sizes only
3) Monotone boards are extremely complex to play and cbetting strategies might vary a lot according to the top card. The stronger our pairs and overpairs, the more aggressive we can be
4) 3 straight boards force BB to check almost their entire range unless we have more offsuit straight combos on that texture than Villain does

Balancing Checking Range
1) When we check we give our opponent the option to check behind and realize equity
2) If they stab a linear range, we won’t have a lot of fold equity with marginal raises and check calls. Our stronger holdings will increase their EV against a linear stabbing range.
3) If our opponent over stabs when the flop goes check/check and you check the turn again, you might want to purposely have a stronger double check range

Key Takeaways
1) No point in 3 betting trash hands against players who don’t fold preflop, opt for a more linear 3 bet range
2) The exploit against tighter 3 bet ranges is to massively overfold preflop. This is something we always have to keep in mind when we face a BB 3 bet from any position. You need their HUD stats.
3) It is more important to understand the key principles about linearity and polarization than it is to memorization specific frequencies for each hand. Against certain player profiles, you likely want to use pure strategies in most cases. You only need to mix against competent regs

GTOW Trainer Session

Today I played 200 hands post-flop as the IP caller versus a BB 3 bet:

The biggest takeaway for me was just how much better I need to get at... BB play, lol. The solver balances the checking lines so beautifully across all three streets. To properly play BB in a 3 bet pot, you need A LOT of checking and a LOT of check raises. I'm playing way too straight forwardly. I've focused on not making complete blunders with the various hand classes thus far. Eventually, I need to actually drill into proper frequencies. I'm no where close to as good as I need to be in that regard yet.
.
.
.
.
.
ACR 25NL Reg Table Session #3

+870bb in 2684 hands

I don't think I played my best here. The games were just very, very good today. I will not lie... I am super tempted to try and squeeze in one more session tomorrow night. My flight is Thursday morning. I have some preparation to do for the flight, but only like an hour of packing and preparing the apartment to be left alone for a few days. I have to take my dogs to the sitter as well. I only need 2.5 more buy-ins for 20+ here... It would be one hell of a start to the trip if I managed to get to 50NL right before I left..... Decisions, decisions, decisions, lol.

Here's my total results at 25NL so far:

+1733bb in 8127 hands

Alright, screw it. I'm going for it tomorrow! If I hit +270bb at any point in the session, I'll stop it early in the interest of saving time.

CAN'T WAIT!

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/21/24 Beating 25NL Day #5

Add me on Discord:

Mental Game Development

Health Management

Health Metrics:
Bodyweight: 216.4lbs / 98.2kg
Sleep (Mask Time): 7.3 hours

Health Habits:
Meditation, 20min: Complete, (10/12, 83%)
Gym: Incomplete, (3/12, 25%)
No Caffeine: 3/3, 100%

Mental Game Content

1) Bankroll Matters by Tommy Angelo
I think there were a couple big takeaways from this video, but the first takeaway is that you need significantly less buy-ins to shot-take when you have a non-depleting bank roll. When people need to take money out in order to pay for things, this makes it significantly harder to move up in stakes. Luckily, my life is currently situated in a way where I shouldn't need to even consider this before reaching high stakes.

The other interesting idea was converting your bankroll into units of time once you reach a sufficiently high level. I do think this makes a good deal of sense. The more money you have, the more you stand to lose when you blow significant chunks of it. A multimillion dollar roll can potentially be shuttled into an investment account and you can live off of the interest for the rest of your life. There's probably no reason to risk 10-20% of your roll at any given time like I do every single time I play 8+ tables.

Additionally, unless you switch to live and find juicy games, there's only so high you can climb in stakes before edge evaporates into reg-battling nothingness anyway. Online poker income isn't infinitely scalable. There is a legitimate glass ceiling for most of us. Maybe if you're Linus things are different. However, assuming you won't be able to beat Linus (lol), at a certain point, it just makes sense to start shuttling poker income into investment classes with more room for growth like real estate.

Personally, I already own one investment property from other business ventures and my main financial goal with Poker is to fully pay off the mortgage on that property and acquire a few more. If I can do that within the next 5-10 years, I will almost certainly switch over to live poker and start playing for different reasons. If money was no longer a concern, I think I'd love to focus on major MTTs and going for titles, bracelets, POTY awards, etc.

However, for now, there's so far to go before that's even a far off dream that it isn't even worth thinking about. What is worth thinking about, at least some day, is when continuing to climb the stakes no longer becomes worth your time from the perspective of edge, variance, and increase in hourly. That point does exist... but it is probably quite deep into high stakes when you reach games that are exclusively reg battles.

2) How Poker Shapes our Character by Leszek Badurowicz
The single notion that I want to focus the most on from this video is the idea that you can be so hard working and so disciplined that it becomes a detriment to your progress. I know this to be true. Not only is overworking not worth it solely due to the damage it can cause to relationships and your psychological well-being, but burnout is a legitimate risk. I have pushed myself into burnout several times in my life. Each time, I needed multiples months of doing almost nothing to recover.

I've gotten significantly better at recognizing the signs, but, even now, I know I'm doing too much. At some point, I will need to institute at least one full day off per week. In Elliot Roe's A Game book, he says that most of his high stakes clients settle on 5.5 days per week with one full day off of everything, one day off of studying, and two full days off of playing. I think that sounds about right for sustainability.

I also recognize the need for a secondary hobby that provide an emotional boost when things are going particularly poor in your main pursuit. I will most likely turn to the thing I have always turned to: lifting weights. Right now, I train at my apartment's crappy hotel style gym. I can get the job done there, but nothing replaces lifting real weights at a real gym. Some day, and some day soon, I will get back to doing some real lifting (at a significantly reduced capacity and time expenditure). I will pursue some kind of physical goals again and I will use these pursuits as my secondary hobbies to balance out the poker obsession.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

The stats are the same as ever, but I did not play well in this session. I blundered repeatedly in high leverage situations. I may have won 9 buy-ins, but, in all honesty, I squandered away maybe half of my win rate in this session and that's just egregious.

The theme of the session was abject blundering.

We'll start with something I almost never commit...

A Big Preflop Error

My RNG on this one was literally 100. I could've sworn that there was a very small jamming range with 99 against a cold 4 bet in this spot, but there isn't. It is just an artifact of rounding.

Unfortunately for me, it was AA and not AK so gg and a full stack donated on a hand that is supposed to be indifferent between calling/folding not calling/jamming.

Missing HUGE Value with Ill-Timed Shoves

Here, I flop two pair on A high flush draw board in a BvB 3 bet pot. I get check-raised on the flop and immediately jam. Why? This makes no sense. I'm playing a good reg in this hand who is unlikely to stack off light with a middling Ax holding. I need to call AT LEAST one street here. Many runouts are entirely safe for me. If a scary card comes on the turn, I can react appropriately versus whatever size Villain chooses for the turn barrel. Villain used their entire time bank before ultimately folding. I definitely could've gotten at least one more full street of value here on a safe run out. Very likely, on a brick run out, they're giving up a stack with an Ax holding. This was horrible.

This one isn't AS bad, but it is still pretty damn bad. The turn here needs to be 75% in 150bb deep pots to maximize the value you extract from strong Kx and one diamond holdings. Then, on the river, the shove doesn't make a lot of sense because you're just folding out Kx that you want to extract value from and you're isolating yourself against flush draws and full houses. If you bet ~35% pot here (or 60% considering the b50 turn), you likely get a call from Kx and walk away with another 30bb. If you get shoved on, you hate life, but you make the call and hope it's a bluff or a worse flush draw. As played, I only got ~35bb out of this. Played properly, it should've been 60-70. That's a huge chunk of missed value.

This one is against a super fun player so I'm not as mad about it. I got my money in ahead and I correctly put them on a draw. That said, again, there are plenty of run outs that go in my favor here. B50 extracts another street of value and allows me to slow down on rivers that aren't favorable. Against this particular opponent, I don't think I made much of a mistake, but it is worth noting that I went on later in the session to make the two shoves above. That shows a pattern of incorrect thinking and NOT just a one-off decision against a fun player. That is the main reason I point this one out, also. I need to be FAR more judicious in properly selecting value shoves.

The Return of Hero Calling Recreationals

I actually blame this one, and maybe a few of the ones that will follow, on playing too many tables. I didn't take into full consideration that this hand is against the same super fun player from the TT hand above and that they had used an uncharacteristically small 3 bet (we all know what that means). You can't call river shoves against recreationals who use the tiny 3 bet unless you know they bluff or you have something that beats an overpair. I was perfectly fine to mine the flop and turn, especially with the prices Villain gave me, but that river call is horrible. Just horrible. I mean, that's not even a call at equilibrium against a proper 3 bet size. I realize there are missed flush draws and maybe a missed straight or two with this one, but, again, we all know that fun players are heavily weighted towards strong pocket pairs when they use tiny 3 bets. I know better than this.

The SAME fun player limps from the HJ, gets isolated to 3.4bb, and I raise to 12bb. HJ fun player calls. Reg folds. The flop comes down 643r. I check and the fun player b20s. I float and hit top pair.

Now, the fun player b50s and here is where I start making mistakes. I think I need to raise or shove this. I'm ranging this fun player almost exclusively on speculative hands like suited connectors, suited gappers, pocket pairs, and pocket pairs. They weren't the type of fun player that limps AA. Against that range, I want to get all the money in while I'm potentially ahead and they'll be willing to commit to their draw (just like they did with 55 on 7768fd). However, I do just make the call.

When the flush completes, and they still shove, I think I have to fold. In game, I thought they could play a worse Ax hand this way and I was obligated to call. The reality is, had I been playing less tables and thinking about it a little more, this was not the kind of player who was limping AJo and ATo. Those holdings are exceedingly unlikely. What's far more likely is that they've hit the jackpot with one of their speculative hands and they have something that can beat Ax. In the end, they had 33 and I was behind the whole time. That's not what matters, though. The thought process matters. That turn needs to get raised and, when it doesn't, I need to fold river.

In the end, I lost THREE STACKS to one of the biggest fish in the entire pool in the same session. Just brutal.

Another fun player, a different one this time, uses a min-raise 3 bet, calls my 3x 4 bet, and then open shoves a K high flop on a flush draw board. What's more likely: a) they have Kx or AA and are scared of the flush or b) they're shoving a flush? Fun players will often check-jam flush draws, but an open jam is a little more rare. This was the kind of fun player who was buying in for 40bb and playing really passively. Again, I had 9 tables going, when I know it should be a maximum of 8, and I didn't think through the player profile enough. I don't hate this call versus many fun players depending on their profile. THIS fun player was tight-passive. Not a great hero call.

Like I said, it's hard to think I played well when I made so many mistakes in high leverage spots. If you add everything up between these half dozen hands, there are a minimum of several buy-ins that I donated back to the pool for no good reason.

Calling the shove with 98, shoving with ATdd, and shoving the 87 are the ones that bother me the most. I think those are pure blunders with absolutely no real justification behind them. Just bad plays that I didn't think through properly.

I don't know how many times I need to learn this lesson, but, no matter how good the games are, do NOT give in to the temptation to play more than 8 tables. It really just takes one careless mistake in a 3bet/4bet pot to completely wipe away the extra bb you might gain from the additional ~300-350 hands that an extra table brings across a 4 hour session. Even if I'm winning at 5bb/100, hell 10bb/100, that's only an extra 15-30bb per table. If the extra table causes ONE mistake with a missed/improperly sized value bet, that extra win rate is erased. If it causes ONE bad river call down, the extra table IMMEDIATELY becomes a negative to the win rate which it CLEARLY was here.

I need to write this again and again so that my subconscious understands: you're not winning MORE when you play 9 tables, you're winning LESS. You're LOSING more! The pace-driven mistakes FAR outweigh the added table!!!

Stop that nonsense now!

Okay, rant over. Review over. I'll be back at some point tonight with the results of my last session before vacation. If I can somehow crack +3 buy-ins at any point in the session, I'm going to just stop right there and call it a win. I don't want to get my hopes up because we all know that variance is the main determinant for the results of any one given session, but it would be damn cool if luck went my way this time and I was able to scrape out the last 3 buy-ins needed for me to feel comfortable moving to 50NL.

I'll be back to share how it went later tonight!

Have a good one everyone,
~Orca

RIO Video Study Session

1) Check-Raising Low Textures in 3BP SB vs BTN by Josh Lessner

1) Low/Mid Connected
a) These boards will typically be better for IP as IP will hit lots of sets/straights/2p that OOP won’t have
b) OOP will have tons of whiffed overcard hands
c) IP will stab quite often to deny equity from OOP’s overcards
d) To make IP indifferent between betting and checking, OOP has to XR quite often even on seemingly dangerous textures
e) The XR strat consists of a small XR and a bigger geometric size
f) The small XR is centered around overpairs while the bigger XR is vulnerable Ops + top pair that XR flop and jam most most turns
g) The small XR is utilized on very wet textures and the money piles in on safe turns. For example, on 876fd there’s tons of turns that kill our flop value range. Most runouts are so dicey that even overpairs check/call until the a favorable runout is seen

2) Low, Dry Textures
a) Much simpler texture to navigate
b) Middling frequency cbet, using geometric XR size

3) Range Construction: What Makes A Quality Bluff Candidate?
a) Ideally something that turn equity often or unblocks folds
b) T8s on 952 unblocks lots of stabs, blocks TT/88, and turns equity on many, many cards
c) It seems VERY likely that people are underfloating XRs
d) At low SPRs, don’t forget how valuable a pair is
e) On really dry boards, don’t be afraid to get creative, AK on 833 without relevant suits. IP has to float tons of worse high card hands. Consider XR very aggressively to exploit overfolds

2) 3B Pots: In Position Barreling on Low Textures by Josh Lessner

OOP must develop a significant checking range on these boards. That means you’re going to play lots of check/bet/call lines. Knowing the general IP barreling strategy and the OOP defense against barreling is something that you’ll need often.

After the flop goes x/b/c, the majority of OOP will be high cards withs ome sort of backdoor equity or SDV. This means that: a) OOP will have an equity advantage as they will be x/c lots of dominating high cards with SDV and b) IP will have a polarity advantage as IP is betting lots of PP that are far ahead or air that is far behind. This polarity will drive IP barreling frequency up by a good margin.

Think about what turn cards are good each player. OOP will xc lots of AK/AQ type hands so the highest ranks will be better for OOP and OOP will typically donk quite a bit on A or K. Low cards will be better for IP as OOP doesn’t XC many hands with low cards. Make sure that you don’t stop betting just because an overcard to your pocket pair comes OTT (especially if it isn’t A/K/Q).

Range construction… the nice thing about barreling Ip on low boards is that most of your air has 6 outs to a pair that is probably good at SD. Think about Villain’s response. If you have a 6hi FD, does your perform better as a bet or a x? You might get jammed on. You might get called by dominating draws.

River play… if you river a pair after stab/barrel, on a low, dry board, you can often jam river for value. You’ll get a lot of Ax calls.

The focus of today's GTOW Trainer work will be exclusively 9 high and below boards. The scope of the training is a little broader than just specifically low boards SB vs BTN, but I think it should be extremely valuable nonetheless.

GTOW Trainer Session

200 Post-Flop Hands on 9 High and Below boards in 3 bet pots for today's training.

By the way, not that anyone really cares, but my scores are not actually this high on the trainer. I have the configuration setup so that if I get an answer "wrong" or if I "blunder", it pauses the session and allows me to pull up the range viewer to see what the correct strategy is. From there, I always use the "change my move" feature to see what the correct line should look and feel like. I get plenty of these wrong even if the screen shots never reflect it, lol.

With the way I structure these sessions, I don't want to sit and stare at 2 solves for 90 minutes. I'm trying to put in volume so that I can subconsciously build intuition for correct play. I do also consciously try to pay attention to frequencies, but training in this manner is what I've done the entire time I've played poker so far. I've always figured that, as a new player, getting a ton of reps seeing perfectly played hands will allow me to be able to intuit the types of moves I should be making in real game play on boards and in scenarios I've never seen.

I think this is why I'm often able to respond decently well to all the random moves that fish make. I don't only practice against 1-2 sizes. It's not going to throw me for a loop if someone uses an unusual size. I train against a GTO opponent that splits range into six sizes on most streets, lol. I can usually guess how to proceed without making massive mistakes because of the volume of GTOW trainer work I do.

Even though I do ton of solver work, I would actually say my game play style is intuitive first and foremost. I am a "feel" player, lol.

I realize that this style of play has a "hard cap" and that is why I am also trying to consciously work on developing correct frequencies. That said, even if I continue this level of output for twenty years, I may never "memorize" all common spots. You'll always have to rely on feel and intuition to some degree. It doesn't hurt to build up that skill.
.
.
.
.
.
ACR 25NL Reg Tables Session #4

+305bb in 434 hands

Well, there it is! That was actually a bit anti-climatic. I waltzed straight into +3 buy-ins without breaking a sweat. I won one stack the hard way, but then I won an AKo vs QQ flip and followed that up by winning AKhh vs AKo about five minutes later. Can't be too mad about being one lucky SOB, can ya!?

I'm obviously way, way short of my standard 50k sample per stake. I'm not thrilled about that, but I'm going to challenge myself to move up anyway because I believe 25NL is one of the softest stakes on ACR. The reason I believe this is very simple. 25NL is divided into two pools: Blitz and Reg Tables. The best microstakes players on ACR, all of them, play Blitz. The game is magnitudes harder than any other microstake on ACR. Because all the good regs busy playing Blitz (wasting time?), I am sitting down at eight tables where, AT MOST, there is one decent reg besides me. That's it. There are weak regs who are barely better than the fish and then there are some of the fishiest fish you can imagine. I think I could just sit here and keep crushing this stake with great ease. I don't see the point.

I have the roll for 50NL. I'm up over $1500 now. That is 30 buy-ins. That is PLENTY to take a shot at 50NL. Why not? Really, why not? If it doesn't go well, I just move back down, crush this stake again, replenish the roll, and try again.

Coaching
Now that I'm a 50NL player, I'm going to apply for Nacho's CFP. I think it is the perfect fit for me and it is exactly what I am looking for in a coaching program. I am a systems-oriented thinker and the "game plan" they have has systematized the entire game tree.

More than that, my BIGGEST weakness as a player is using poker software correctly. Outside of decent skills with GTOW, I have no idea what I'm doing. I have no idea how to collect data and do MDA, I can barely use PT4 to track my results, lol. I don't use a HUD. Nacho's CFP focuses on all the areas that I am weakest in: MDA, exploitation, and systematic, simplification of the game tree.

Wish me luck with the application!

Final Thoughts Before Holiday/Vacation

I'm going to watch some Poker videos and read a Poker book in my down time on vacation (on the 5+ hour plane flights), but I don't anticipate having much to update the log with in the coming days. I'll make very brief posts, but I need to let go of poker for the next few days and enjoy the time with my wife. She was very worried about trying to figure out a way to get a computer set up for me to study and play, but I told her that I don't even want a computer there. The support is very, very much appreciated, but this time is going to be dedicated to her and relaxing and recharging.

Oh, I suppose I should post my "final" 25NL graph:

+2069bb in 8561 hands
17.59bb/100 all-in adjusted win rate
23.81bb/100 actual win rate

I obviously ran hot and had some good luck in this stretch, but, subjectively, I really felt like I was crushing this stake at a rate well beyond any other that I've ever played.

For all those who think that you can no longer grind your way out of the micros because "bots", rake, or because the games are just too hard, that's utter nonsense. Again, I'm living proof. My ambition is to keep pushing much, much further to fully prove the poker dream is alive and well.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

keep up the good work

8/26/24 Beating 50NL Day 0

Back From Vacation
I have just returned from vacation this morning! After four long days of travel, wedding events, dancing, drinking, low/poor sleep, I decided to take another full day off when arriving home today. I'll be back at it playing my first 50NL session tomorrow.

Interview with CFP on Wednesday
I heard back from Nacho's CFP regarding my application on Sunday. The fact that I heard back seemingly means that there must have been at least some level of interest in my application even though I'm just a brand new 50NL player. I have an interview scheduled for Wednesday afternoon. If all goes well, perhaps I'll be a member of Nacho's CFP by the end of the week. Wish me luck with that.

Poker Study on Vacation
I did almost nothing with regards to working on Poker during my vacation. However, on the flight out, where I was by myself, I did manage to read Jared Tendler's The Mental Game of Poker (Part I). This was my third time going through it, but, this time, I actually read it and filled out the work sheets versus just listening to the audiobook version.

The Mental Game of Poker

While I do think some of these answers get pretty personal, I'm electing to post it anyway as evidence of the work I'm doing away from the table to improve my mental game. The answers are so long that I do not expect a single person to read them anyway, lol.

I also want to post this because I think the book is excellent. Tendler's work is definitely the single best resource that I've come across for improving your mental game thus far. There are concrete, actionable suggestions on how to improve your tilt and, more importantly, work towards long-term "resolution" where you actually remove specific tilt triggers. I highly recommend the Mental Game of Poker.

Mental Game of Poker Client Questionnaire

First, share a bit about yourself (education, interests, family, etc.)

I am a lifelong competitive athlete. In particular, I spent more than ten years training specifically for strength sports like bodybuilding and powerlifting. I went to the University of Washington to study Business Administration but I never finished my degree opting instead to start my own business in the fitness world. I’ve been self-employed my entire life. Poker is just the next step in a life that has been entirely self-directed and self-driven for as long as I can remember.

Briefly describe your poker history. How would you characterize your
progress? What game(s)/limit(s) do you play?

I started learning the rules of Poker in November of ‘23. I played my first real money hand at 2NL in March ‘24. As of August ‘24, I have graduated to 50NL. As far as I can tell, I am progressing at a rate that probably exceeds the norm and I credit that to the fact I have treated poker as a full time profession from Day 1.

What are your goals in Poker? Short and long-term.

In the short-term, my goal is to beat 50NL. I only need to take one step at a time. In the medium term, within 3-5 years, I’d like to reach high stakes online (1KNL+). In the next 10-20 years, I’d like to challenge the very best players in the world and see where I stand. Along the way towards striving for competitive greatness, my ultimate goal is to secure financial security for my family for multiple generations. First and foremost, I'm playing for money. However, as a competitor, winning is always going to be important to me.

What personal goals does Poker support?

My primary goal in life is self-actualization through mastery. Poker is the field in which I will attempt to achieve mastery and develop into the absolute best version of my self. Further, I cannot imagine a life without competition and Poker is my current arena of competition.

List and describe the problems in your mental game. List them in order
of importance to you or by severity. Give as much information as
possible including the triggers, signs, and what you believe are the
causes.

I stake far more on Poker than monetary success. My entire self-concept is staked on whatever I am attempting to master. For me, Poker is the crucible by which I determine my self-worth. Coming from a competitive sporting background where I had far more control over the results, staking so much on Poker can be problematic because variance is the primary determinant of short-term success.

I know I dedicate more to the game than most players can afford to do. I study and play for a combined 10+ hours a day, seven days a week. This leads to a deep-seated sense of entitlement. Somewhere, deep down, I believe I deserve to win more than most players do.

This is, of course, not how variance works, but that doesn’t always matter to me in the moment. With so much on the line with regards to my poker success, I encourage an intense degree of “hate losing” tilt. Even though I know it is irrational, there is a part of me that feels like a losing session is taking a piece of my self-worth. When I lose that piece to fish getting insanely lucky many times across a session, I can experience intense anger. I think this is because a part of my subconscious believes that I deserve to always win.

The larger problem in all of this is getting caught up in any short term results whatsoever. Unlike other sports, a winning session in poker means very little. It isn’t like winning a game. It’s more like winning a single play. Even bad teams score points regularly in all Mental Game of Poker Client Questionnaire

I have a tendency to forget that, if I’m going to stake so much of my identity and sense of self on poker, I can only do so in the extreme long-term. That’s the only time the sample size becomes meaningful enough to say anything. It doesn’t matter if I win or lose a single session. It doesn’t even matter if I eventually become one of the best players in the world. It only matters that, across the life of my career, I do everything in my power to become the best player that I can be.

Losing a single session has no reflection on my talent as a player nor does it reflect poorly on my work ethic. The short term doesn’t matter and I have to stop giving it significant weight. What I should give weight to is the quality of my process in the short term and whether I’m making satisfactory progress towards being a better player in the long run. I am succeeding spectacularly in both regards in my opinion. There’s no need to indulge negative emotions towards the short-term when I’m accomplishing what I’ve set out to accomplish in the long run… thus far.

This anger tends to manifest itself in outbursts. I have smashed things, thrown things, cussed out loud, and, in so doing, scared both my wife and my dogs on occasion. That’s unacceptable. Playing worse while tilting means absolutely nothing in comparison to potentially making what I love most in this world afraid of my behavior. I am sickened by even the thought of my loved ones being afraid of me because I lack the emotional maturity to regulate my anger. It’s completely unacceptable.

What have you tried to fix any of these issues? What level of success
have you had?

So far, I have read The Mental Game of Poker three times, I’ve implemented meditation, journaling, and I listen to at least 1-2 hours of mental game content per day. I have had a good degree of success with this approach so far, but I can’t say if the issue is completely resolved or not. The true litmus test will be how I react to my next terrible run of bad luck or losing. I don’t experience these issues while winning and I’ve been crushing lately. These issues mostly come up when I’m having a session where I lose at least 5 buy-ins (especially if I’m doing so in a very unlucky fashion). I’m hoping that filling out this questionnaire will reveal any missing pieces to my approach that I can add in to resolve this issue for ever.

Do factors outside of poker ever affect your play? If so, how? Does
poker ever negatively impact your life? If yes, how?

I would say that outside factors do not affect my play, but I have yet to experience something truly traumatic during my time playing poker. If I had a loved one in trouble, I don’t know I could play well through that. However, nothing short of a major life event affects me at the table (well, computer screen, lol).

The opposite is not true. When I have a particularly brutal session, I have allowed it to spill over into the rest of my evening including the time I have dedicated to spending with my wife. While I am generally quite good at getting over this negativity within an hour or so, we often only have 2-3 hours of time at the end of the night to relax. If I spend half of it mad about something that has nothing to do with her, it is extremely unfair to our relationship.

Why do you play poker? What motivates you to play, why do you love it,
and what do you get out of it?

I play Poker for two main reasons: 1) I want to make enough money to secure my family’s financial future and 2) I absolutely love the opportunity to pour my entire heart and soul into a competition. As a kid, Chess was my first true love. Poker is like a second chance to see what Chess could’ve been had I been as driven as a kid as I am now. All I’ve ever wanted in life was a chance to achieve some kind of competitive greatness. With poker, I think I’ve finally found something where my level of inherent talent might be somewhat close to matching my work ethic. It feels like I might’ve finally found my lane; it feels like I have an amazing opportunity to give everything I have to something that I’m well-suited for. I love the competition and I cherish the chance to find out just how good I can be. I play Poker because I think it provides a truly unique opportunity to achieve financial abundance and self-actualization simultaneously. If I can become the best version of myself through Poker, I’ll have achieved all of the most important goals and dreams I’ve ever had. I will stop at nothing to make those dreams a reality.

List your three to five biggest distractions while playing. Describe
why they are a problem.

My biggest distractions while playing are my wife, my dogs, and my phone. None of them are a big problem, though. While playing, I only allow family members to get through my DND and they have to call twice back to back. All other alerts are muted. My wife usually isn’t in the same room while I play, but I do occasionally have to remind her not to try and get my attention while I’m playing. My dogs occasionally come up and try to get my attention while I play, but this happens for five seconds no more than once or twice a session. I think it is cute and it doesn’t disrupt me enough to be a problem. Focus is not a big problem for me. I think I truly excel in the area of staying focused on the game while I play.

How do you decide when to play? Do you have set times, is it flexible, or is it random?
I play at set times for set durations. I try to time my play to the presence of fish in the pool. I set my hours precisely so that emotional decision making is never a factor in session duration. I found that I’ll exploit any flexility in schedule if I’m tilting. I’ll use that flexibility to convince myself to play longer when losing in order to try and finish on a win. Mostly, this just leads to C game play as sessions stretch into the 5-6+ hour zone. I stopped this entirely by using a strict 4 hour session duration.

Describe what you do before you play. How do you warmup, if you do?
I do a 15 minute guided meditation before every session using the Primed Mind App. After that, I play 50 hands against the solver trainer on four tables. I start joining real tables from there.

What is your average session length? How many sessions do you play per
day? How many hours do you play per month on average? Are any of these
shorter than your goals?

4 hours. 1 session per day. 120 hours per month. None are shorter than my goals. I mostly worry that I am not taking enough time off, actually.

What are the reasons you would quit a session prematurely?

I don’t quit early unless there’s a life emergency. I play the four hours I’m scheduled to play even if I’m tilting.

Describe your work ethic? Is procrastination or burnout ever a
problem?

I have burnt myself out in other endeavors in the past by working too hard and not taking enough breaks. This is a problem that I’m aware of and that is inherent in my personality. My mind can handle more than my body. I will push myself to the point of breaking if I am not careful. I more capable of overwork than underwork. I generally do not procrastinate.

Describe what you do away from the table to improve technically as a
player?

I important all of my hands into the GTO Wizard analyzer. I look at every single hand that made it to a flop in the analyzer to check for EV errors and to see if I took a very low frequency line. I try to find commonalities in the spots I am losing EV. From there, I’ll look for a RIO video on the topic I seem to be struggling with. After that, I’ll load up the GTO Trainer and practice 150-200 hands in that same spot.

Do you ever act without thinking in a negative way? If yes, why? What is the typical situation when this happens?
Yes! This is occasionally a large problem for me, but I have gotten much better. Sometimes I snap call river bets that deserve significantly more consideration before bluff-catching. I believe this is due to a lack of training in these spots.

I immediately make an emotional decision as to whether or not I think they have it, or based on my absolute hand strength in the worst cases, and I smash the call button without fully evaluating their range. This happens because I have not trained these river spots to the level of unconscious competence. I didn’t know what to think about to evaluate whether a call was a good decision so I just used emotion instead.

Once I realized I was doing this, I spent a full week training only bluff-catching river bets and I found that developing a process for evaluating each situation during training carried over to real game play. I didn’t have to rely on my gut instinct (which is now better than it was before the training). After seeing hundreds of river bets against the trainer, and having to think through all of them, I engrained the evaluation process through that training. I have been making way, way less snap decisions on the river.

Describe your mindset when you are playing your best.

My mind is empty, but extremely alert. I am hyper-focused on the details of every single table. I don’t waste cognitive resources on a running mental commentary. I am mostly observing and thinking only sporadically. It’s as if the correct answers just flow through me without effort. My arousal is actually quite high and there is even some anxiety. If I’m too comfortable with the situation, because things feel too easy, I relax and my focus wanes to some degree.

Do you ever get down about your ability as a player? Does it happen
after one bad session?

I only get down about my ability during sustained losing periods. One session generally isn’t enough to shake my confidence unless I can clearly tell I was outplayed by the majority of the pool. That just hasn’t happened much. I only had any shred of doubt in the middle of a 100 buy-in down swing at 5NL. In the end, it turned out I was playing unwinnably wide ranges. I fixed that and immediately crushed 5NL. If anything, I have more confidence than I should given my very short track record. I’ve only played 500k hands. I’ve just made it out of the micros. I don’t know how hard this is going to get yet. Still, I have deep, inner confidence that I will find a way to win no matter what. That never leaves me for longer than a thought or two. At my core, at my deepest level, I believe in myself. Doubt never penetrates too far beyond the surface.

How well do you typically handle pressure situations in poker or
elsewhere?

I absolutely thrive under competitive pressure. In the face of fight or flight, I always fight. For some reason, it brings out the best in me. I tend to drop all inhibitions and pretense. My focus narrows to only what will help me win. I train so hard and these moments allow my training to just take over completely.

When it comes to social pressure, there I don’t do as well. I always put my goals first, but I have a tendency to acquiesce to others when it won’t affect my goals. I dislike being put in high pressure social situations such as a situation where I have to pick sides on the spot, for example.

Do you have specific memories in Poker that still pop into your head
randomly? Bad beats, tournament bust outs, or others.

No. I don’t think about the past often. I definitely don’t think about specific bad hands in poker repeatedly. I don’t even do that with major life mistakes, really. Once I learn the lesson, I move on.

Does thinking about poker ever keep you up at night or prevent you
from enjoying your life? If so, what are you thinking about? Do you
get stuck on mistakes?

Poker doesn’t keep me up at night, but I generally do go to sleep thinking about it. I dream about hands on most nights. I am a very different kind of person. My biggest joy in life comes from putting forth maximum effort in a pursuit I’m committed to. I take vacations and engage in hobbies so that I’m fresh for work. It isn’t the other way around for me. I live to work. I love to work. Working on something is the main fuel to my fire. I absolutely love spending time with my wife and my dogs as well, but I experience that happiness very differently than what I experience while working. That kind of things brings joy, smiles and laughter to my life. It fills my world with light. Work fills my world with purpose. Work fills my world with intensity. Work gives me a feeling of being alive that is hard to match. The other things I love fill me with gratitude and peace. My loved ones are the most important thing in the world to me, but I couldn’t live well without meaningful work.

You have the ability to magically make any of the issues in question 5
disappear. What it would be? Why?

I would stop having angry outbursts. My loved ones feeling safe and secure is more important than anything else. Poker doesn’t even matter compared to that. I don’t matter compared to that. Throwing a temper tantrum and scaring everyone around you is juvenile, unacceptable behavior. It also just doesn’t fit the image I have for myself. I am not someone who is out of control. I am not someone who lacks the discipline to regulate their emotions. It isn’t a good look and I hate it. I expect more from myself than to get so angry that I throw something across the room.

List or describe your mental strengths

I am focused, intense, and resilient. I do not quit or give up easily. I am resourceful and have a strong sense of self-belief. I expect myself to always find a way in the end. I want to win and I am a winner.

Do you take notes on your game after a session? If yes, describe.

Yes. I typically write out a few paragraphs in my poker blog/journal after each session detailing a few major process keys. I tend to track whether I had angry outbursts, whether I violated any of my personal rules like table limits or session duration, and whether or not I thought I played well outside of the final score for the session.

How much of your evaluation of your ability as a player is influenced
by results?

If I’m evaluating my ability as a player, results are quite important. A truly good player will have a massive edge at the stakes I play. I think long-term results are quite relevant to judging your quality as a player. I endeavor to weight short-term results as close to zero as possible. I don’t think I’m at the point where i have achieved pure objectivity regardless of whether or not I won the hand, the session, the month, etc. but that isn’t my primary measurement. I use things like the GTOW Analyzer to ensure I’m not making abject blunders. I review all my hands the next day to see if I used lines that are generally GTO approved. Still, I could stand to improve further with regards to letting short-term results influence my thinking even less.

Do you exercise?

Yes. I typically get to the gym twice a week these days but I go on walks out doors with my dogs for at least 45 minutes per day. I could stand to sacrifice a little study time to get my gym frequency back up to 4-5. I have let that slide using the rationale that I have a surplus of physical/health ability due to my many years of competitive strength sport. In retrospect, this reasoning is faulty. I exercise now mainly for the cognitive benefits and those are experienced only when exercise is done at relatively high frequencies. I will up my gym frequency going forward.

How much do you sleep per night? Is sleep ever an issue? If so,
describe. What do you generally notice about your play on days where
you sleep less?

I average 7.5 hours of sleep per night. I have struggled with insomnia for most of my life and I am prescribed a CPAP for sleep apnea. These days, I am a bit of a Nazi about my sleep routine and I mostly have it under control. Once in a blue moon, I’ll suffer a bout of insomnia or take longer than usual to fall asleep. My play doesn’t seem significantly worse BUT my emotional regulation IS. I will tilt far more easily and for far longer at lesser provocations when sleep deprived.

Do you eat or drink while playing?

Only water. I have a pre-session meal each time to ensure I don’t get hungry while playing. Usually, I eat a homemade burger with high quality ingredients from the store (not fast food junk).

Do you use cigarettes, alcohol or any other drugs while playing? If
so, do you think it has a negative impact on your game?

I never use alcohol or cigarettes. I have used caffeine while playing in the past but I find that it leads to a vicious cycle of fatigue. Caffeine is a legitimate performance booster in my eyes. However, it hurts my sleep quality. The next day, I’ll feel a little more tired than usual so I’ll take caffeine again. Then the cycle repeats… except I need higher and higher caffeine doses to get the same effects and the higher doses are even worse for my sleep. In the end, the negative chronic effects of caffeine outweigh the positive acutes ones at least for me.

Do you have any medical illnesses at this time? If so, how does it
affect the answers in question 5.

I don’t have any medical illnesses.

Do you have any psychological illnesses diagnosed by a doctor or
someone in the field?

No. I’m afraid I might score fairly high in narcissism and neuroticism if I’m being honest, though. I don’t think it is anything that comes even remotely close to clinical significance.

Estimate the total amount lost per month due to the issues you want to
address. Estimate the amount of time you play your A-Game.

The main issue I want to address isn’t about money. It’s worth more than that… it’s priceless. I don’t want to scare my loved ones. I mean, there is nothing more valuable than that. Money doesn’t come close to that.

I think I play my A-game only 80% of the time. My true A-game is characterized by an extraordinarily high level of intensity. I think I benefit from much higher levels of arousal than most poker players. Most players need to calm down, meditate, and ground themselves to avoid fear and anxiety taking over. If I get too relaxed, my focus wanes. I think I am the rare player who actually benefits from listening to Rocky montages before I play. I am driven by strong emotional content. When I’m reminded about how much I care about my goals, my focus heightens and the overwhelming desire to win guides me to a level where I value every single decision no matter how small. When I relax, I begin to autopilot more and I’m more likely to give up on pots where I’m not entirely sure what to do..

Key Personal Takeaways:
1) I must continue to deepen my understanding of variance especially with regards to how irrelevant a single session is in determining your quality as a player. You're never going to win every single session in poker. That's just not how the game works. Getting upset and feeling like you're now a lesser player when you lose a single poker session is no different than feeling like you're a loser if someone scores a single point on you in a basketball game. Basketball is not a game where you can realistically hold good opponents to zero points. Neither is poker. You're going to lose sometimes and this has nothing to do with whether or not you're a good player. It has nothing to do with how far you'll go in the game. It is a fairly meaningless, tiny sample.

2) I need to get back in the gym more often. I want to get into my best ever physical shape which I believe is possible. I don't mean that from the perspective of strength and muscle mass because that will never happen again. However, I do think I can get my RHR as low as it has ever been. I think I can get in the best cardio shape of my life. I think I can get the highest HRV I've ever had. I think I can get my cognitive function to the highest level it has ever been at, too. To do that, I need to stop treating exercise as something optional that I only do when I finish studying early. If I have to study a little less, so be it.

3) My biggest tilt issues are: a) angry outbursts and b) making decisions without thinking.

I think a) is primarily related to entitlement and not understanding variance at a deep enough level. I've gotten better, but there is more work to do. You are not entitled to constantly win just because you work hard. You will never get to a point where you win every session. That's variance; not an indictment against you as a player or your work ethic.

As for b), I think this mainly comes down to a lack of training. If I'm finding spots where I'm making bad, snap calls and snap decisions. I don't know these spots well enough. My default emotional reactions are feeding me incorrect answers which means I don't know the correct answers on the level of unconscious competence. These snap decisions are a GREAT sign that I need to study that spot more.

Overall, I found this to be a super helpful exercise and I am very glad I did it!

I will be back tomorrow with some real poker study and game play.

Have a good one everyone!
Orca

8/27/24 Beating 50NL Day 1

Okay, I'm not going to lie... I am still feeling a bit of out of sorts today. My normal morning routine took me more than two times as long as it normally does. This happens every time I take a vacation and I think it is common. It does not mean vacations are not worth it. The overall benefits in terms of recharging motivation and preventing burnout still outweigh the temporary setbacks of having to "restart" and any lost progress in the week that you miss.

Nevertheless, I do not quite feel back to 100% yet. The show must go on, though

Feel free to add me on Discord:

By the way, I just wanted to say a word of thanks to those of you who have reached out on Discord. I am quite happy to hear that there are more people than I thought who are enjoying the essays, err, "posts" that I write in here. Hearing that definitely encourages me to continue!
.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management

Health Metrics
Bodyweight: 220.5lbs/100kg (yikes, another typical vacation side effect)
Sleep (Mask Time): 8.9 hours (still catching up on the sleep debt I accrued traveling)

Health Habits
Meditation: Complete -- 1/1, 100%
Gym: Incomplete -- 1/1, 100%
No Caffeine: 1/1, 100%

I didn't do any working out or meditation on my vacation. I didn't have any caffeine, but I did have alcohol, lol. I got legitimately drunk for the first time in three years at the wedding and I was quickly reminded the next day why I don't do that anymore. Hangovers suck.

Anyways, I'm restarting my habit counter here because it seems a natural point to do so after a five day break from my usual routine and because I'm rededicating myself to getting into the gym every day starting today (mostly to do cardio; not weights).

Mental Game Content

1) The Grind by Serge Pouliot
One thing pointed in this video that I need to give some consideration to is how I structure my actual sessions. A lot of people seem to take extended breaks after 60-120 minutes. My sessions are four hours long. I typically get up for about one to two minutes to go to the bathroom every hour. I don't think I'd want to take a 10+ minute break too often because I'd lose all my table seats. When you're playing 6-8+ tables, it can actually take a good long while to get all your seats. However, and I've written this before, it is probably worth finding out how long I can sit out at tables before being booted. If it is something like 5 minutes, and I think it is, it is probably worth taking a 5 full minute break each hour. That way, I can get up, walk around, get a little blood flow, and maybe even do some breathing exercises to dissipate any tilt build up.

2) Cool Down by Chris Pimmer
Luckily, because I read Elliot Roe's A Game, I have had a cool down routine in place for the majority of the time I've been playing. However, the one thing I question about my cool down routine is whether or not I should do some meditation post-playing. Roe also suggests a guided cool down. I currently don't do anything like post-playing (I do pre). The reason I decided against it is because I already do a separate 20 minute meditation in the morning and a 15 minute guided meditation before playing. It seemed like overkill to be spending an hour a day on meditation. Maybe I'd benefit from dropping the morning session and doing a post play one instead. However, that will probably lead to me not meditating on any day that I don't play. I'm not sure that matters, but I'm going to keep chewing on this before making any changes.

Definitely food for thought.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

With only a 400 hand sample to analyze today, there just weren't enough hands to identify any overarching themes to the mistakes I made. I'm just going to go over a few hands that I wanted to look at in more detail.

K High Flush on Paired, 4 Flush Board

So, on the surface, my gut reaction would be that there's no way you can fold a K high flush draw to a 50% river check-raise, but is that actually true?

Here's the solver's check-raising range in a SRP as the BB:

The solver IS raising Q9 here... but not for value. It is doing it as a blocker-bluff. Q9 blocks both 99 and QQ which are in my range. The solver is also raising a few 9x hands as bluffs. The only hands it is truly raising for value are: 1) 33, 2) 99, and 3) nut flush draws.

Even against a perfectly balanced, solver range, K6dd is actually indifferent:

This is one of those river situations where it is VERY easy to just make a snap call based on absolute hand strength. However, when we consider that this is multiway, and thus ranges will be stronger, when we consider that top two pair has to be turned into a bluff to stay balanced, and when we consider that BB can defend with a mullion offsuit Ax combos here, this spot is actually a pretty clear fold as bizarre as that is.

I ultimately called thinking that my opponent could raise my river b75 with a Q high flush, but the solver never raises that thin here. Does a human? In multiway, I'm leaning towards no. Multiway pots tend to be played for more straight up than they should be. Again, as bizarre as it is, I don't think this is a profitable call.

Overpair on T High, Straight Complete Board

I feel pretty good about this fold even in retrospect. Not only does a straight complete on this board, but some villains will defend T9o at 100% frequency. 76s and all sets besides maybe TT are in villain's range here.

Look at what the solver's bluffing range looks like:

We're supposed to jam virtually every straight block in existence here including J7 and K2. There are TONS of pairs turned into jams like Q4 and 42. That still isn't enough bluffs so the solver jams AJo, too. There is NO WAY a human is finding that many unnatural bluffs. I can't see how this wouldn't be an underbluffed spot.

The worst value hand the solver jams is two pair so I have a pure bluff-catcher. Even in the solver, my QQ combo is indifferent here with 50NL solves:

This is the exact kind of hand that I'd probably have snap-called in the past due to absolute hand strength. Now, though, I consider this a quality lay down.

Middling Flush on 4 Straight Board

I don't think this hand is particularly interesting, but I do think I made a sizable river error here (no pun intended, lol). Time and time again, when you look at the solver, you're not making big bets on 4 straight boards (for the most part). In this case, there is also a flush completed. b150 isn't even mixed in until you have at least a Q high flush. With a 9 high flush, b150 is generally just going to isolate you against better flush draws.

To make matters worse, I'm blocking one of the main calling hands that I want Villain to have by holding a 6. Because of that, I should actually be sizing WAY further down and attempting to extract value from sets, two pair, and Ax. The best sizing for that is going to be b33-b50.

I just want to point this out because this isn't the first time I've bungled sizing on 4 straight boards. They're a little tricky to get right in terms of thin value betting. This one was made even trickier because of the completed flush.

Well, that's actually all for today's review. With only 400 hands to look over, there wasn't much to do.

I'm off to the gym. I'll be back later to review the rest of today's study work.

RIO Video Study

GTOW AI: Practicing 3bet Pots by Nuno Alvarez
It took me far too long to realize that this was actually a heads-up video, but, nevertheless, I watched it (little bit of sunk cost fallacy going on here, lol). This isn't my favorite type of video. I generally prefer theoretical videos that lay out concepts to play and explains even when they're against the trainer. That said, I do think it was interesting to hear a high level player go over how they're selecting bluffs and bluff catchers with blocker considerations in real time. That's something I need to get way better at.

GTOW Trainer Session

Today, I elected to just do 200 post-flop hands randomly selected from any 3 bet configuration. I'm still trying to focus on 3 bet pots with my study right now, but, after almost a week off, I kind of wanted some general training to make sure I didn't forget how to play poker entirely.

Luckily, I seem to not have forgotten everything yet, but my brain is absolutely not back in tip top shape yet. It is taking me way longer than usual to make decisions. I'm debating taking another day off of playing or at least taking a shorter session. I would just take a nap but it is already 5:30pm and I'd like to be able to fall asleep tonight without issue. We'll see. I'll probably just play as usual (and then regret not listening to the signs my body was giving me).
.
.
.
.
.
ACR 50NL Session #1 Results

-588bb in 1303 hands

I decided before the session started that I would only play for two hours. The main reason for that is because I'm still catching back up after traveling. I woke up today at 10am and that automatically put me several hours behind my usual schedule. Additionally, I just wasn't feeling quite myself today. I want to get to bed particularly early and see if I can't get back up to feeling 95%+ tomorrow. Today I felt like I was operating at 80% or so.

With all that said, not exactly a fantastic debut at 50NL... lol. I'm not particularly worried about this session. I think I've been playing long enough to know the difference between playing poorly and running poorly and this was more of the latter than the former. However, as I thought, my brain was in a bit of a fog for the first 30-45 minutes of this session. I might've made a few questionable calldowns. I'll see tomorrow morning in my review.

If this session is any indication, 50NL is going to be much harder than 25NL. The main reason I say that is because there were a lot less bad players on the tables. I was playing eight tables, and I was seated on almost every table going, there was only 2-3 players limping across all eight tables. That's never a good sign. My best guess is that each table only had 1 fish. That makes things much, much harder especially if the regs are even a tiny bit better than previous stakes.

It is what it is! Just got to keep getting better.

One more thing... I am extremely pleased to have a -6 buy-in session where I feel almost zero negative emotions once logging out of ACR. I will never enjoy losing, but this just feels like another day at the office. I can barely find a trace of anger inside of me. I think this is a sign that the mental game work I have been doing is working. Now, we'll see what happens if this turns into a legitimate down swing instead of just a single bad session. For now, progression feels pretty good.

Interview with Nacho's CFP Tomorrow
As I mentioned earlier, I have an interview with the team manager over at Nacho's CFP tomorrow at noon my time. I'll post an update here as soon as I know whether or not I'm going to be joining the team.

That's all for now, folks.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/28/24 Beating 50NL Day 2

Unfortunately, the team manager over at Nacho's CFP had a family emergency and we had to cancel the interview. The plan is to reschedule ASAP.

Add me on Discord:

.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management
Bodyweight: 219.3lbs / 99.5kg
Sleep: 6.5+1.5 hours (I will need a nap today; edit: took a 1.5hr nap in the afternoon)
Meditation, 20min: Complete -- 2/2 (100%)
Gym: Complete -- 2/2 (100%)
No Caffeine: 2/2 (100%)

Mental Game Content

1) Playing Your A-Game by Lucas Greenwood
One thing that Lucas said that I really liked was that he considers playing your A-Game to be about awareness. Playing your A-Game is when you notice little details about game flow, table dynamics, image, bet sizing, etc. that lead you to alter what you might normally do in a spot. The more you're catching onto this "hidden" information, the more you're playing your A-Game. In other words, the more present you are, the closer you are to your A-Game. That's all the more reason to continue to develop the skill of awareness in life and at the tables. Meditation pays dividends yet again.

2) Prepping to Play Perfectly by Tommy Angelo
One thing that strikes me about almost all good players is how tightly they control everything in the pre-, post-, and intra-session window. On his trips to Vegas, Tommy only played in casinos where he was staying so that during his breaks he could go to his room and meditate, exercise, or relax in exactly his preferred style. I've heard stories about how some guys will spend hours doing research on the perfect chair. No detail is considered unimportant. I had that same attitude as a lifter and, in the long term, I want to have the same attitude as a poker player. I don't think I'm quite at the point of spending hundreds or even thousands of dollars on a desk and a chair, or multiple high quality monitors, but I will certainly do so at some point.

3) Downswings by James Hudson
This was an interesting take on how to get "out" of a downswing.

I think it is important to remember that downswings, fundamentally, don't actually exist. They are an artifact of human perception that depends entirely on looking at results through an arbitrary time window. If you have lost money over the lifetime of your career, that's not a downswing; you're a losing player. If you're up money for the duration of your career, potentially across millions of hands, you're a winning player. If you select very specific pieces of that graph, they might show a downward trend. That doesn't have any bearing on future results whatsoever. Just like flipping heads 9 times in a row doesn't make tails any more likely on the 10th try, having poor results in the short-term doesn't mean you're more likely to have more poor results in the next session... unless you allow these short-term results to affect your emotional state and the way you play.

As such, the only thing you really need to do to "get out of a down swing" is to stabilize emotionally and play a winning strategy across a large sample. Both are easier said than done, but I think these are two aspects we should be working on constantly as poker players regardless of short-term results. We should always be studying and striving to increase our edge with regards to the quality of our actual poker strategy. Likewise, some kind of training to build your skill at managing emotions is going to pay larger dividends in the long run than any kind of quick-fix, confidence booster. Meditate, do the work to dismantle limiting beliefs, figure out your tilt triggers, and work towards resolution. I would leave the lucky rabbit feet to someone else, personally. I don't want my results, nor my confidence levels, left up to superstition.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

Morning-After Review

As I anticipated, I think I would've just been better off not playing last night. I think was just enough off of my A-game that I missed a few river spots for decent chunks of bb.

I'll take a look at some of them here:

Missed Gutshot Bluff on Flush Complete Board in SRP

While I don't think this hand is particularly interesting, I want to make note of it to remind myself that I don't need to get gun shy just because I'm at a new stake. I would normally take this bluff because it unblocks the original missed flush draw. The second flush draw that comes in, and then completes, should be less scary for me because villain has much less of it in his range than I do after the small flop c-bet and then turn check. In fact, as played, 70% of Villain's range has between 0-60% equity. There's A LOT that will fold to another bet. 40% of my range has 80-100% equity. I can leverage unblockers and the nut advantage here to place b85/b150 and have enormous fold equity.

Missed River Bluff in 3BP

Villain calls the flop b20 with a variety of double-broadway gutshots and low pocket pairs.

When we arrive to the river after the turn checks through, 50% of Villain's range has 0-25% equity:

Because of this, I missed a very profitable stabbing opportunity (theoretically). Most of those pairs and gutshots are just autofolds. In the future, I need to be more cognizant of spots like this where villain arrives to the river with a wide range full of hands that have mostly missed.

All that said, I don't mind the river check here too much because I think many villains underdefend the 20% flop cbet and they likely arrive to this river with way less low pocket pair holdings than the solver.

Bluff-Catching with 2nd Pair on Flush Complete Board in 3BP

Once Villain goes with the b85 on the river here, they're representing something that can beat a king because of how good the king is for my range. Either that or they have a king themselves and they're unaware of the range vs. range interaction here. Either way, AJ is a pure bluff-catcher.

So what bluffs does the solver have?

The solver mainly bluffs nut flush blockers and other 1 spade holdings. However, there is some 55 and 44 with spades in there as well as 54s of every suit besides spades. I think plenty of villains can find the nutflush blocker bluffs, but I don't think they often go with b85. I think they mainly go higher. Having to turn low pairs into a bluff here is never a good sign that a spot is overbluffed.

With both a straight (QT) and a flush completing here, I think this should be a pure fold on my end even though the solver has it as indifferent with 50NL solves:

This happened towards the beginning of the session and it is a spot that I don't think I would mess up if I was on my A-game. Hands like this are why I think I should've given myself one more day for the jet lag to clear.

Turned Set on 4 Straight Board in 3BP

I think everything through the flop is pretty standard here. My range greatly prefers to check the 3 straight turn, but my particularly holding does use b75 at a decent frequency here:

My b33 river bet is definitely ill-advised here. My range prefers to check or b10. If I want to try and extract a little more value from a Kx holding, b10 is definitely the way to go:

Once I face the river jam, I think I need to fold my set versus all but the best regulars. On these 4 straight boards, value is built around straights. I mean, duh? However, I distinctly remember considering whether or not sets could be shoved here. The answer is an emphatic no:

Villain's only real bluffs are Jx holdings that block the JT nuts. A4ss also bluff shoves because it blocks 54ss. Do real villains find those? The Jx blocker stuff? Maybe. A4? Probably not. However, when there's a close decision like this, in the solver, in real life, unless it is a spot that is easy to overbluff, and these 4 straight boards are NOT easy to overbluff (in my opinion), this should be an easy fold.

I could've saved myself quite a bit of money here with a b10 and then fold to the river shove. I don't have a problem with the thin value bet, but the sizing was off and left me more pot committed than I should've been. Even still, I should've been able to find a fold knowing how imbalanced villains tend to be when they raise over the top on the river.

Way Too Soft in Multiway Pots

I'm not going to analyze these in any depth. I just want to make a physical note, to go along with my mental note, that I've gotten a bit too soft in multiway pots. You still have to mix it up in those pots. Don't be afraid to raise and re-raise when you likely have the best hand currently. Don't assume every single person is trapping a very strong hand every single time. When many Villains use a medium sized bet, they're going to have a medium strength hand. Not all Villains are afraid to bet for thin value multiway. You have to be ready to call down with something other than nutted hands. You have to be ready to raise very strong hands that aren't the nuts. You're just playing way too soft in these spots.

That's all for now, folks. I'm going to try and go back to sleep before getting on with the rest of my study today.

RIO Video Study Session

Studying Complex Boards in 3 Bet Pots by Francesco Lacriola

1) Introduction
a) It isn’t realistic to try and replicate solver frequencies. It is much more productive to understand which reasons make EV shift
b) If we play readless, we can rely on population tendencies or try to approximate equilibrium
c) We have to think about how to maximize EV of our whole range, not single hand classes
d) What happens if we never cbet/check?
e) As the caller, what happens if we stab too often or too infrequently? What if we use a bigger size?

2) 763ss, SB vs CO 3BP
a) 3bettor: 83% check, can we simplify to range check
b) IP defender: stabbing 20% with huge frequency (60%+)
c) If the opponent stabs too much, we check range and start aggressively x/r
3) How often does villain stab against a check?
a) Way too much: check range, play aggressive x/r strategy
b) Approx equilibrium: it doesn’t matter very much
c) Less than equilibrium: cbet more often, won’t be able to x/r enough to get the value back
d) Preferred stabbing size: 20-25% (targeting A high and broadways), bigger sizes force IP to check way more often or to get punished more by x/r strategy
e) Against regs, this may not matter much, but a lot of EV can be gained against weaker regs and recs

4) Turn impact on flop checking ranges
a) A is mostly neutral as it hits both checking ranges
b) Flush tends to favor IP player and should be approached cautiously, the only exception is if villain is stabbing way too often on flop
c) Broadway and turn pairing cards can be delayed cbet aggressively
d) Blanks have to be approached in a polarized way and we have to be aware that all the Ace high and broadway still missed and their equity is still low against made hands

5) Delayed cbet strategy
a) Strongly linked to flop strategy; in general, we keep the same composition of range, but frequencies can shift drastically
b) Overcards and board pairs are best for the SB checking range; Ace is tricky and should be approached in a polarized way (how often does villain have AK?)
c) Overcards and ace highs that block FD > blocking backdoor FD > all other combos to maximize fold equity
d) Vs good flop strategy: high frequency of check on blanks (important to have delayed x/r lines) on bad turns and Ace
e) Vs overstabber: higher delayed cbet frequency on all runouts, but we also need to check some strong hands for delayed x/r
f) Vs understabber: range check on non overcard, non Ace turns – the only exception is if you’re up against loose passive players, you want to start building the pot

GTOW Trainer Session

Today, I looked at river spots in 3 bet pots from the perspective of the BTN. The line used to arrive to the river was check/b33/call, check/b75/call, check/???. I used a slightly different line when training BB vs BTN because block sizes aren't as common the flop from the BB (or at least shouldn't be).

50 Hands Each
UTG vs BTN: check/b33/call, check/b75/call, check / ???
HJ vs BTN: check/b33/call, check/b75/call, check / ???
CO vs BTN: check/b33/call, check/b75/call, check / ???

25 Hands Each:
SB vs BTN: b33/call, b75/call, jam / ???
SB vs BTN: b33/call, b75/call, check / ???
BB vs BTN: b50/call, b50/call, jam / ???
BB vs BTNL: b50/call, b50/call, check / ???

I'm off to the dog park with the hounds and then we get on with Session #2 at 50NL!
.
.
.
.
.
8/28/24 ACR 50NL Session #2 Results

-432bb in 2714 hands

Well, I am absolutely not off to a good start here, am I?

My sense of this session was that I played incredibly well... in SRP. I was the best player at the table... in SRP. Seriously, I do NOT feel out of place in this pool at all.

In 3b/4b pots, I got destroyed. I think I got stacked over 10 times in this session. I think there was at least one all-out punt in there, at least one blunder where I shoved too light, and one ill-advised hero call.. The rest I think I made the right play and simply lost. I won't know for sure until tomorrow's analysis.

I've managed to halve my bank roll in two days here. I've got 5 more buy-ins of wiggle room before I'm going to move back down to 25NL and rebuild. That's what happens when you take a shot sometimes -- you miss. I am completely undeterred. I am not even remotely discouraged. Again, I felt like I belonged at the tables with the other regs. In fact, I consistently got the better of end of most exchanges.

I just need to be more precise with my river decision making. That is still the bottleneck. If I need to go down to 25NL and put in another month of study and grind before bumping back up, so be it. By then, I can put dozens of hours into studying big river spots.

Either way, regardless of what happens in the next few sessions, I am feeling very good about where my skill level is at. I think I'm minor improvements away from being able to crush at 50NL. It does NOT seem like I'm routinely getting outplayed.

No matter what, I will beat 50NL. I don't care if it is Shot #1 or Shot #10. It's just a matter of time until I break through and win consistently.

50NL Results so far:

-1011bb in 4017 hands

I'll be back tomorrow with the usual analysis and study!

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

8/29/24 Beating 50NL Day #3

Add me on Discord:

.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management

Health Metrics:
I've finally gotten my replacement Oura ring in the mail so I can now start tracking key metrics like Heart Rate Variability (HRV), Resting Heart Rate (RHR), Sleep Quality, and steps.

Readiness:

Sleep:

Bodyweight:

Health Habits:
Meditation: Complete (3/3, 100%)
Gym: Incomplete, (2/3, 67%)
No Caffeine: 3/3, 100%

Mental Game Content

1) Understanding Variance by Stelios Serefidis
This was a good refresher on the math behind variance. I messed around on the PokerDope calculator just for fun and that is always an eye-opening exercise. Even a player with a 5bb/100 true win rate was in the middle of a 20+ buy-in down swing 34% of the time (across 100m hand simulation). They were in the middle of a 10+ buy-in down swing 57% of the time. They were in the middle of a 100,000 hand down swing 11% of the time. For a high volume online player, that's like once a year.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

I'm going to do something slightly different today: I am going to review each and every single pot where I got stacked... in-depth (insomuch as it deserves). I'm going to try and fairly judge whether or not I made a mistake in each spot.

Let's get the pointless ones out of the way here first:

#1 and #2: JJ Pre-flop All-Ins:

Standard. Without definitive HUD stats suggesting a very tight opponent, this kind of thing just happens. Sometimes they have AK and sometimes they don't. Sometimes they fold and sometimes they don't. These are +EV shoves according to GTOW 50NL solves and that's good enough for me.

Verdict: Good Play

#3: Top Two vs. River XR Shove

According to GTOW, my biggest mistake here is not shoving river myself:

GTOW is heavily discounting 87 for two reasons: 1) villain isn't supposed to defend 87o against the CO especially when they open to 2.5bb at 50NL (and even at 2.3bb it is only defended 3.5% of the time) and 2) they're supposed to raise all non-spade 87s on the turn to get the money in ahead of any potential flush draws. As such, on this board, value is built around two pair and you're shoving as "light" as A6.

However, when I b85, here's villain's shoving range:

A9 is still shoved for value. Again, I have to call... against a proper range. Does a weaker reg or recreational really shove less than a set here? I have my doubts. I have serious doubts, actually. That said, what can you really do here? Sometimes you run into the top of Villain's range.

Verdict: Acceptable Play

#4: 2nd Nut Flush on Paired Board

It is very important to note that this hand was played against a player who was short stacking and not autoreloading. Because of this, I had them pegged as a fish.

The first "mistake" in this hand is raising the flop 100%. I am only supposed to raise 50% when I do raise:

The EV difference here is 0.07 so I don't think this is really all that big of a deal. Villain re-raises me 50% and I call, which is standard:

The turn pairs the board and also completes my flush draw. Obviously, I have to worry about sets here as they have become full houses but strong Qx is still a realistic possibility. Villain checks behind.

I jam river with the 2nd nut flush draw and villain snap calls with 99. Owned by the supposed fish, I guess.

I am never supposed to jam the river here unless I have 99 or a 9 blocker:

The reason for this goes all the way back to the flop. Villain is not supposed to raise my 100% pot check-raise unless they have: a) nut flush draw (which I lose to), b) QQ or 99 (which I lose to), c) Qx + flush draw (which I beat), or d) 98s as a bluff (which is unlikely against 99.9% of the population). When the Qh hits on the turn, the only part of Villain's raising range that I'm beating are the 98s bluffs that a human player doesn't have in the first place. The Qx + flush draw hands aren't possible anymore. When I jam, I fold out all bluffs and isolate myself against a range that has me beat.

The ONLY way that this jam makes sense is if we feel confident putting a weaker reg on something like KQo or AQo. Checking makes more sense here because we give villain a chance to bluff and we do at least have a bluff catcher. That's all we have, though. And that was my mistake. I misranged Villain here. Trips actually isn't supposed to be in their range. The range that re-raises a 100% check-raise is VERY strong.

Verdict: Poor Play

#5: Overpair Jam on Paired Board in 3BP

While b75 is the standard play on the flop here, you are supposed to mix in some checks (and check-raises) with overpairs on these types of textures. You have to protect your checking range as the OOP 3 bettor. I rolled a check.

After the flop checks through, I overbet turn at 125% pot to make sure I have a good chance to shove river on a clean runout. Again, this is standard.

Here's the problem... I don't necessarily get a clean run out. The river pairs the board with top pair. After that turn overbet, the biggest part of villain's range is now Jx, flush draws, and other pairs:

My range just doesn't shove here:

With KK, I am trying to extract value from 8x, 4x, and pocket pairs. A shove isn't the best size to do that; b35/b60 is. When I shove, I'm going to fold out all bluffs and largely isolate myself against trips and better (Villain IS supposed to hero call 8x and some pocket pairs, though). With b35, I still give Villain the opportunity to bluff-raise and to make hero calls with hands like AK/AQ. The shove, in this specific scenario where the top card has paired, just isn't the best choice to maximize my value. My relative hand strength isn't high enough on this board given the line taken.

All that said, b35/b60 have an EV here of +40.13 while shoving is +39.79. When you're losing -0.34 EV in an all-in pot, it just can't be considered THAT big of a mistake. The sizing nuance here is awesome for increasing win rate in the long run, but this is still a highly profitable shove. This is by no means some kind of blunder.

Final Verdict: Acceptable Play

#6 Top Two Pair on a Paired Board in 3BP

Okay, so, on this one, the solver markers my b75 turn bet as a blunder. Do I think it is an egregious error? No, not really, but it is an error.

My range actually prefers b75:

My hand doesn't want to use b75 and instead opts for b50 because of how it affects Villain's calling range.

b50 keeps significantly more hands in the pot that we are ahead of:

Compared to b75:

With a made hand that has a bit of protection against some overcards and the flush draw, sizing down just a hair to extract value from a larger array of holdings makes sense. Nevertheless, I wouldn't consider this some kind of critical error like I said.

When we arrive at the river, my specific combo is never supposed to shove:

Similar to the last hand though, shoving here barely costs you any EV. The problem is that shoving makes a lot of Jx holdings indifferent. It causes other paired hands to pure fold. The b20 is called 100% by Jx and makes some of the weaker made hands indifferent. You just get value from a much wider range of hands.

vs b20:

vs shove:

When you do b20/b33 here, and then get shoved on, you're still supposed to call 100% of the time and the call is +~25-30 EV. So, again, the sizing nuance is quite interesting here to maximize win rate in the long run, but, with regards to this specific hand, I just ran into the top of villain's range again.

Final Verdict: Acceptable Play

#7 TPTK on Straight Complete Board, Blind vs Blind 3bet Pot

With this one, I REALLY wanted to check back the river. My opponent snap called both the flop and the turn. They weren't playing multiple tables. My spidey senses were tingling telling me that something was off here. I jammed anyway. I took the exact same line that the solver prefers to take here. Even with the theoretical timing tells, they've could easily had something like KQ. Some AQo holdings DO check here, but my specific holding has a fairly large difference between checking and shoving:

What can I say here? This was the right play, 100%

Final Verdict: Good Play

#8: Triple Barreling Bluff on Flush Complete Board

I looked at a variety of sims (150bb/100bb/AI solution with exact stacks) and they all agreed on the following two points: 1) you're not supposed to barrel that turn with KQ even when you hold the diamond especially with my combo that blocks backdoor flush floats and 2) if you do barrel the turn, you have to triple barrel and fire the river.

Turn:

River:

When I do check back turn, I am supposed to fold to a b20 stab. My hand is never supposed to see this river. Overall, this is a tough one to judge. The EV of the turn b75 is +1.85 and the check is +2.23. We're talking about a 50bb+ pot here. I think this is a clear mistake, but it's not a blunder by any means.

Final Verdict: Acceptable Play

#9: Punt of the Day? 88 in 4bet Pot

What can I say? This was pretty horrendous. So, first of all, my holding is just supposed to be folded on the flop right away:

The call is -0.18 EV, which isn't horrendous... but mistakes compound and can quickly spiral out of control.

The turn pairs the board with another A. I lead trying to rep an A. Villain calls.

That lead really isn't a thing:

Sure, there are some slivers of a 50% lead there, but that could easily just be an artifact of an imperfect solve. The only other low pocket pair with leads is 66. The EV loss is only -0.06, but, again, things are now spiraling.

The river brings a 5 which means there is now a 4 straight on the board. I shove. I could theoretically have A5 and A4 in my range here. More realistically, I am trying to get any pocket pairs below an A to fold with this shove. Villain snap calls with AKo. Successful punt is successful.

Surprisingly, when you come this far, you do shove 88 at least according to the solver:

A+ for effort, I guess? This was a very creative line to take, but the reality is that I need to just fold the flop here. When you play those low pocket pairs in 4 bet pots, and an A or a K hit on the flop, you're pretty screwed. Any kind of continue is going to be super low frequency unless you drill a set. I shouldn't have continued here.

Final Verdict: Very Poor Play

Okay, wow, that was one hell of a review. I gave that more time than I really had. After going through all of this, I feel better about yesterday's session. Realistically, that 88 hand is the only one that really bothers me in terms of just being an absolutely terrible hand. I punted off a stack there for no real reason. That certainly isn't any kind of line I've practiced or trained in the solver. Maybe it gets through if Villain doesn't have an A, but Villain did have an A.

I'm going to end this post here because I know the character limit is coming soon, lol. I'll be back with another post tonight detailing the rest of today's studies and how my session goes. Hopefully, I can start to right the ship and at least earn myself a few more cracks at 50NL. If not, it is what it is. I'll move back down and work back up. No sweat.

Have a good one everyone!
~Orca

RIO Video Study Session

1) Range Interaction in 3Bet Pots by Francesco Lacriola
I think the main takeaway from this video for me was to remember just how much our strategy changes versus tighter ranges. If you're playing against someone who folds 60% to 3Bet, your strategy will include far, far less cbetting than when you're playing someone who only folds 40% to cbet. Sometimes it isn't just about the positions involved in the hand, but rather the type of opponent can be more important. While each position should theoretically have its own thresholds in 3Bet pots, the threshold of the individual player can be so extreme as to overwhelm the typical positional ranges. Some players are looser from UTG than others are from the BTN.

GTOW Trainer

Today's GTOW Trainer work was 200 3Bet post-flop hands working exclusively with boards that pair on the flop. I mainly wanted to work on my frequencies in terms of when to check flop and check turn especially with made hands (overpairs in particular). I think my play can be a little too straight forward in these spots. I don't think I've been playing enough check-raises. I've got a much better idea of how often I should be making each kind of play now.

You'll most often trap AA because it is the least vulnerable, but everything from JJ-KK gets mixed in. Surprisingly, you'll often be very, very passive with TT depending on the exact positions because TT often suffers from domination issues versus other, better pocket pairs. As for turn traps, they're most commonly used to induce bluffs on flush draw boards. If you can get villain to bite, you just jam over the top more times than not.
.
.
.
.
.
Results of ACR 50NL Session #3

+365bb in 2454 hands

Isn't it funny how we can become dissatisfied with a +3.5 buy-in session just because at one point we were up 6 buy-ins? I have not yet achieved a state of continuous Zen, apparently, lol.

Like I said after the disastrous first two sessions at 50NL, I belong at this stake. I am NOT getting outplayed. I am doing most of the outplaying. I can tell. If these MFers want to take my money and send me back to 25NL, I ain't gonna make it easy on 'em!

Besides me, there are two other regs that play almost every table. When the games broke down to just me and them, they both sat out every single time. That's how I know I'm not the spot. One of them tried to play heads up with me for about 50-100 hands and I won by quite a big margin. They didn't try again. Again, I am not the spot. The regs don't want to battle with me.

I BELONG AT 50NL. I say this to myself and for myself. I should have all the confidence in the world.

I just need to continue to be sharper in my river decisions. I gifted another 100-150bb to fish today in spots where I know they don't have enough bluffs. It is hard, and it sucks, but sometimes you have to make the disciplined lay down with your AA (or the like). I can't treat fish like regs. Unless I've profiled them as maniacs, I need to overfold to river aggression.

If I can continue to tighten up my river decisions, which means appropriate bluff-catching versus regs, and a general tendency towards overfolding big spots vs. fish, I will get my win rate where it needs to be to crush 50NL.

I think I had some slippage post-vacation. I'm now shaking off the rust. Now, I know everyone's usernames. Now, I know their play styles. Now, I'm winning against them. Now, I'm going to continue to win.

Now, I'm going to beat 50NL.

Here's my total results at 50NL thus far:

-646bb in 6471 hands

Good luck at the tables everyone!
~Orca

8/30/24 Beating 50NL Day #4

Add me on Discord:

.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management

Readiness:

Sleep:

After a reading like this, I'm considering a pre-session nap absolutely mandatory (edit: nap taken). Further, I need to work on being in bed no later than 11pm. I've been going to sleep closer to midnight since returning from vacation and my body doesn't adjust by waking up later. I just wake up at 7:00am-7:30am regardless. The tiredness hits about midday during my RIO video study sessions.

This is all very predictable and controllable on my end. I need to be more efficient in my transitions between tasks. That is where I lose the most time each day. Oh, and, it obviously doesn't help when I do a 5 hour session review, lol. I need to keep those to absolutely no more than 3 hours and 2.5 is preferable.

Weight:

Habit Tracker:
Meditation: 4/4, 100%
Gym: 3/4, 75%
No Caffeine: 4/4, 100%
Yesterday's Steps: 6342

I didn't get to the gym yesterday because I spent such an absurdly long time on the session review yesterday. I'm not going to do that again today. I've really got to keep those shorter.

I have no idea what I want to do in terms of a goal for steps right now. 10,000 is usually the universal standard for maintaining good health, but I don't think that's feasible without adding another dog walk to my day and I'm not sure if I'm concerned enough about the current number to do that. I'll have to think about it. For now, I'll just track it here. It is insanely easy to be sedentary as a poker player and that is something I want to avoid at all costs to whatever extent possible.

Mental Game Content

1) Exploiting Variance by Francesco Lacriola
The two biggest takeaways from this video are a) you cannot fully separate the mental side of the game from the strategy side of the game and b) the best way to deal with variance is to increase your understanding of poker. With regards to the former, the better your strategy is, the less you're going to lose. The less you lose, the less you're going to have to deal with major down swings. With regards to the latter, the more you understand range vs. range interaction, the less you're going to be surprised when you run into the top of your opponent's range. The more you understand probability, the less it is going to impact you when you run into the top of your opponent's range repeatedly in the same session or stretch of sessions. When the weather man predicts that there is an 40% chance of rain, you don't get mad when it rains. When your opponent has 40% equity in a pot, and they realize that equity and win, you shouldn't get mad either. That was always a fairly likely outcome. You still take that kind of edge any time you can get it.

Here's the bottomline: the deeper your understanding of the game, the less often your expectations are going to get violated. The less often your expectations get violated, the less often you get angry, sad, demoralized, or have any kind of emotional reaction whatsoever. Most tilt problems ultimately come down to an insufficient understanding of poker math combined with an inability, or unwillingness, to accept things for what they are. The former is solved by study and the latter is solved with progressive desensitization (aka experience). You can probably speed this process along with meditation and some study of Eastern philosophy but that probably isn't even necessary in the long run. Study and play until it doesn't hurt anymore.

2) The Mental Aspect of Downswings by Mathias Maasberg
I think the biggest takeaway from this video is that you need to do everything in your power to avoid slipping into negativity and negative expectation when you play. Variance calculators often underestimate the extent and duration of downswings and this is very likely due to the fact that human psychology isn't built to withstand extended losing streaks. Our psychology is heavily biased towards short-term results because, evolutionarily, this did a better job of keeping us alive.

In a poker context, this bias can start painting your decision making in such a way where you start avoiding all marginally profitable spots because you're now expecting to lose. You can even start avoiding solidly profitable spots because you're anticipating constantly running into the top of your opponent's range. Altering your play style in this fundamental, but nonobvious way do a lot to extend and deepen downswings. This can be avoided by, as cliche as it is, staying positive -- or at least as free of negativity as possible. Each decision needs to, insomuch as it is possible, stand on its own merits and not be too heavily influenced by how you're feeling in the moment. Poker is a game of risk. When you start losing your appetite for risk, you'll begin to lose in the long run. There is no way to play profitable poker without exposure to variance. We must stay positive or at least emotionally neutral.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

GTOW Analyzer Session Review
Not started yet. GTOW has been down all day.

RIO Video Study Session

Is it Worth Calling 3 Barrels Without the Nuts? by thejericho2

1) IP facing 3 Barrels vs regs, 50 instances, 14 bluffs, 36 value hands at 500z
2) IP facing 3 barrels vs fish, 8 instances, 2 bluffs, 6 value hands at 500z
3) OOP facing 3 barrels vs regs, 16 instances, 4 bluffs, 12 value hands at 500z
4) OOP facing 3 barrels vs fish, 2 instances, 1 bluff, 1 value
5) Overall: 66 instances, 18 bluffs, 48 value, 27% bluffs when facing triple barrel in 3BP at 500z

Lesson: If you’re not sure, just fold. This is 500z. These ratios will be even worse at 50NL.

Testing My Heuristics in 3bet Pots by Steven Paul
As Raiser:
1) Lower boards = bigger sizes, less than Q high mostly block, greater than J high mostly medium
2) OOP betting ranges are more equity driven (x/f air that might bet some IP)
3) Suits matter a lot more for weaker hands (especially OOP)
4) On low boards, biggest and smallest overpairs check the most
As Caller:
1) Call wider IP
2) Careful with underpairs OOP, easy to overcall
3) X/R more aggressively OOP, IP plays a little more passively
4) The bigger your opponent bets, the less you raise
In lieu of being able to do any trainer reps today, I settled for watching someone else do some trainer reps, lol.

Taking the Day off... Sort Of

GTOW remained down all day. I was completely thrown off of my normal routine. I wasn't able to review any of yesterday's hands in the analyzer. I didn't get any practice reps on the trainer. I didn't want to go into a session at 50NL feeling off of my game. Last time I did that, I lost 6 buy-ins in one session. Instead, I watched another RIO video and spent extra time with the wife. Also, trying to review 6000 hands in one day tomorrow would've been a disaster.

Luckily, I was still able to review hands with Indifference so I still got a few hours of quality study in today. With his help, I built a basic HUD that I will begin using in the next session:

(yes, I am testing the HUD at 2NL, lol)

The white box is my RNG, rep is the number of hands I have on villain, green is VPIP, blue is PFR, and yellow is 3B%. This is enough information to identify fish substantially faster. In particular, having this data would've greatly changed my strategy on one of the hands we looked at. The villain in question had a VPIP of 50% and PFR of 2%. In other words, they limp their entire range. I isolated this villain and didn't give them any credit for premium holdings and that turned out to be a mistake. Even having this much information, I think I can avoid some costly preflop mistakes with AKo as well as significantly alter my post-flop game against players who are playing way too wide. It is a good start and I think it should increase my edge almost instantly.

Anyways, that's all for me today, folks.

Good luck at the tables!
~Orca

8/31/24 Beating 50NL Day #5

Add me on Discord:

.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management:

Readiness:

Sleep:

One quick note: I don't always put a ton of stock in the sleep readings on these devices whether it is Whoop, Oura, Fitbit, Apple Watch, etc. For example, it thinks I took 47 minutes to fall asleep but, really, I watched an episode of the new Terminator anime on Netflix before going to bed. Because I was relaxed in a dark room, it thinks I was trying to sleep. I woke up to go to the bathroom about two hours before I got up and it just isn't counting any of the time after that as sleep. It seems to think I was just in bed awake and I certainly wasn't, lol. Nevertheless, I still think it is useful to roughly track bed times and waking times. The sleep scores aren't perfect, but they aren't completely useless either. You just can't take them as gospel.

Weight:

Vacation weight is almost off.

Health Habits:
Meditation: 5/5, 100%
Gym: 4/5, 80%
No Caffeine: 5/5, 100%

Mental Game Content

1) MEDDING by Tommy Angelo
One of the most important aspects of meditation that Tommy highlights is intention. You can get into something similar to a meditative state when you exercise, but medding is only medding when you intend to do an activity with complete, non-judgmental awareness. In that sense, it is not the same thing as being in the "zone" (which we can often achieve with exercise or other performance-based activities). When performing, the heightened state you can achieve is driven towards performing well. When "medding", the heightened state of awareness is driven towards nothing; the heightened state of non-judgmental awareness itself is the entire point.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

GTOW Analyzer Review

A little bit more mistakes than usual here!

In effort to keep this review from getting ridiculously long, I am going to focus on just a few hands where I feel I made bad river decisions versus fish. I have already looked at some other hands in great depth with a buddy yesterday and I did the same for a few more on my own this morning. Most of the river mistakes I made against regs were close decisions or spots where I made somewhat unavoidable mistakes because I got into a node I didn't know well. Those don't really bother me as much as making hero calls against fish.

The following spots against these fish, however, were 100% avoidable and just a matter of pressing the fold button for the most part.

AA vs Lead-Jam on 4 Straight, Flush Complete Board

First of all, I'm not supposed to b75 with this particular combo on the turn:

The reason for this is entirely due to blockers. My particular combo blocks two different AQs combinations that are at the top of villain's calling range and a big part of their range in general (UTG is supposed to call AQs pure against a HJ 3bet in many sims). When I do b75, I start making AQs and KQs indifferent. b50, on the other hand, remains a pure call for these holdings. As best as I can tell, that's the reason we don't go for b75 here. Is this consequential in game vs. a real human? Probably not. I don't think humans are folding KQ to either b50 or b75 here. That said, the blockers are probably worth thinking about to some extent in these spots because you're going to get way more folds than you actually want with my particular holding when you polarize the turn.

Regardless, that's not the part of this hand that even matters. The river brings a 4 straight and completes the flush. Villain lead jams. Fish don't do this with bluffs. Fish do this because they are afraid of value. I'm not saying you'll NEVER see a bluff here, but it is a spot you can safely exploitatively fold. In fact, it's not even a call at equilibrium unless you have the club:

Even the solver doesn't have bluffs here. The solver jams their entire range and the only hand that isn't top pair or better is A5hh. That's the only "bluff". The solver is "bluffing" AQ and KQ on this runout. There aren't any bluffing candidates so it just shoves everything. You cannot call here. Even if you have a club, versus a fish, you cannot call here.

What happened here is very simple. I had an emotional reaction to my AA getting cracked and I called. It is nothing more than that. You just have to lay it down in this spot. There's nothing else to be done. It happens. It sucks, but it happens. You have to fold. Compared to optimizing your flop c-bet strategy, this is the stuff that really kills your win rate. You have to learn to fold in the right spots.

KK vs Range-Limping Fish

Before digging any further into this hand, it is important to note that, after the fact, I was able to see with PT4 that this particular player had a VPIP of 48 and a PFR of 2. In other words, they're limping range. It's hard to discount anything here... even AA. I made the mistake of assuming they're limping a capped range. They weren't.

I'm not going to go into great detail here in terms of looking at solves because it is pointless. What I do want to point out is the general mistake I made here vs. a fish. While every fish is different, the preferred line to take here is bet/bet/bet. You want to triple barrel with medium b50/b75 sizings for value. Many of these fish, who play 50% of their hands, are going to have trouble letting go of any pair. That's why they play so many hands. They want to see a flop. They want to see if they hit a flop. When they finally hit one, even if it is just middle pair, they're not going to be able to let go against medium sizings. They certainly never let go of a queen here. After all, you could be bluffing, right? What's another 15-20bb to see a show down?

Now, when you get raised, or face this huge b150, you just fold. It's that simple. Don't pay the fish off. They generally are not sophisticated enough to have any kind of a remotely balanced river-raise line. So, again, you just bet/bet/bet and fold to river aggression. More times than not, you get paid way more than you should with top pair against these players. When they actually hit a nutted hand once in a blue moon, you fold to the river raise, say "nice hand", and encourage them to stay at the table with your vibes, lol. There's nothing more to it than that. I have no business bluff-catching a 48 vpip, 2 pfr, and 0 3b player (yes, that's seriously their stats). I won't make this mistake again in the future now that I have a basic HUD.

Straight Flush over Straight Flush...

My perception of villain at the time was they were extremely loose and playing way too many hands. I thought they were a bit of a maniac. Now, I have the HUD data to prove that:

VPIP 51 / PFR 32 / 3B 16.

Anyway, this type of villain, in my opinion, is never bluffing here. It's too hard to have bluffs here for an average fish. Not only that, but they open, at 100% frequency, everything from ATo to T9o. This particular villain probably defends even wider than that given their stats. There are many, many potential Th holdings in range. They have almost all of them, really.

The absolute best case scenario is that they have something like Ah... but I have Ah so they can't have that.

Even at equilibrium, where the solver is bluffing random combos like JTo without a heart at full frequency, A5hh is nearly a PURE FOLD!

Here's the fundamental error I'm making in almost all of these examples... I'm overvaluing absolute hand strength on textures where huge chunks of villain's range are simply better hands. You might think... how can you ever fold a straight flush? Well, this is the one scenario where it isn't that crazy. You have a 4 straight, 4 flush board and Villain has every combination of offsuit Tx in their range. A call can be forgiven here to some extent, but you just cannot jam.

Takeaway: FOLD TO FISH' RIVER AGGRESSION!
To drive home my point about how important this aspect of poker is to your win rate, in just these three hands, had I found river folds, folds that aren't THAT hard to find, I would've saved 68bb + 42bb + 59bb = 169bb. This goes from a +3.5 buy-in win to 5+ buy-in win. That's really, really significant, folks.

If I could give any one piece of advice for getting out of the micros, it would be about this topic: learn to overfold in big river spots especially when your absolute hand strength is high but your relative hand strength isn't. There is a human bias towards wanting to call down AA because it was such a strong holding on the flop. It's hard to let go of a big win that you were already counting on in your head... but you have to do it. It makes a huge, huge difference to win rate.

That's all for today's review! I'm going to take a short break and then it will be time for more studying.

RIO Video Study

Training Fast and Slow by Max Lacerda

I'll reference a comment I made on the actual video here as my notes:

I use a somewhat similar study method, but my approach, up until now,
has involved more "brute force". I've been doing something like
playing 200 hands with specific textures or configurations and then I
allow the heuristics to form naturally.

For example, I'll do 200 post-flop hands as OOP 3bettor on paired
boards. As I'm playing the trainer, I develop heuristics in real time
and then I'm able to check them as more and more situations come up.
I've found that that helps me tease out the nuances... eventually.

I do pause occasionally to do a deeper study when something confuses
me, but I really like how you're doing it more frequently here
especially with regards to changing subtle details of the texture to
double-check if your heuristic is valid. Like I said, the method I've
been using has been a bit more of a brute force approach that relies
on lots and lots of reps. It isn't as efficient as this process.

Very cool vid. I learned something about learning which is even more
valuable than learning something about poker.

GTOW Trainer Session

Today, I went for 200 post-flop hands on connected textures. I'm slowly but surely working my way through thousands upon thousands of reps in a variety of 3 bet pot spots. I really believe 3bet pots are where some of the largest amount of edge can be gained vs. regs. The biggest edge you can gain, overall, is to learn to exploit fish and then properly table select, but we do occasionally have to play regs in order to sit at tables which have fish. We all hunt the fish together after all.
.
.
.
.
.
Results of ACR 50NL Session #4

-321bb in 2687 hands

I won't know until I take a deeper look tomorrow, but I feel I actually played quite well in this session. I think it was my best session at 50NL. I'd be surprised to see a ton of blunders in the analyzer tomorrow.

It took me about an hour to get the hang of using the HUD, but, after that, it made a big difference and I felt it helped a lot. I was able to identify fish significantly faster and this made all the difference to my ability to select tables without taking up a lot of mental bandwidth.

The biggest problem I'm facing with 50NL right now is the lack of fish. Right now, on average, the ratio is 5 regs to 1 fish per table. There were many tables that were 6 regs. Of course, I left all of those as soon as they formed. At 25NL, the ratio was more like 3-4 fish to 2-3 regs. It is hard to undersell exactly how much harder it is to win when there's only one fish at the table. For the duration of the session, there were only a couple of occasions where a table had two fish. I was never at a table with three. Not once.

I really, really don't want to do it, because it messes up my whole life including the time I usually spend with my wife, but I'll have to seriously consider experimenting with playing different times of day. I think, in particular, playing significantly later at night might be the ticket. I have full faith that I can beat 50NL, but reg-battling just isn't an efficient way to do that. If you're awesome, maybe you win 1bb/100 against regs. If you're THE best reg, maybe you win more like 3bb/100 vs. the other regs. Maybe. If you're just a decent a reg, it isn't that hard to win 10-20bb+/100 vs. your average fish. Table selection is that important. It's hard to game select properly when there aren't enough fish. You can't select something that isn't there.

I know a lot of people say ACR is one of the harder sites to play on for US players -- especially compared to Ignition (though that is infested with bots). Nevertheless, I have to keep all options open here. My goal is to move up the stakes as quickly as possible. I don't get style points or extra earnings for picking the route with the most regs.

In actual good news, so long as I am able to stick at 50NL, I will be able to attain ACR's "Colonel" rank with another 8-9 50NL sessions. This will up my rake back multiplier from 2 to 2.5. The final effect of this is that I'll be able to easily win $250 in rake back per week going forward. That will go a LONG, LONG way towards keeping this shot at 50NL going for as long as I can make it go.

Anyways, enough babbling. That's all from me for today, folks.

Here are my results at 50NL so far:

-973bb in 9215 hands

Man, those numbers boil my blood. I can't wait to have a crack at studying and getting better tomorrow...

Good luck at the tables everyone!
~Orca

50nl is the first time you will face more advance players that will make it more difficult to have a positive win rate
. also less recs. To be successful you are going to have to learn to beat the average reg at this stake.

9/1/24 Beating 50NL Day #5

It's a new day, folks! Let's kick some ass at the tables today.

Add me on Discord:

.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management

Readiness:

New low for RHR and new high for HRV! Good signs.

Sleep:

Still getting to bed too late here. When I'm running behind on any given day, I really need to go straight to bed after dinner instead of watching an episode of something on Netflix.

Bodyweight:

The vacation weight is finally fully off.

Habits:
Meditation: 6/6, 100%
Gym: 4/6, 66%
No Caffeine: 6/6, 100%
Steps: 9391

Mental Game Content

1) How to Make Millions Playing Online Cash-Games by Mechanics of Poker
Taking a short break from the RIO mental game videos to watch a podcast recommended to me by a friend. I think this still very much qualifies as mental game content because the entire interview is about trying to deconstruct what helped Matt Marinelli make it to high stakes both in terms of technical development and mindset.

Two things strike me about Matt's interview here.

First, his mindset was always completely different to other players. He wanted to be the best. Having that intention from the very beginning, created an internal expectation to work like he was someone who was trying to be the best. Unlike a lot of people who say crazy, outlandish things to get attention, or to try and "manifest" or whatever (lol), Matt stating that he was going to be the best was less of a display of arrogance and more of a promise with regards to the extent that he was going to work. He said he was going to be the best player Detox ever had, and later that he wanted to be the Michael Jordan of poker, not because he thought he was more talented than everyone else; he said those things because he knew he was going to work harder than everyone else; he said those things because he knew he had the work ethic that could one day produce results like that. It was a promise to himself to maximize his work. I like that a lot.

Second, his learning process is just so deliberate. It makes my process look like a joke. As I've been saying all along, I've been relying on a shotgun, effort-heavy process that isn't at all efficient. Matt uses Hand2Note and a stat checking algorithm to identify leaks. He then creates flop subset solutions in Pio where he can take aggregate reports to get precise numbers for frequency and precise range construction. When he's weak in a spot, he drills VERY specific spots like BTN vs BB facing 50% cbet.

Right now, my study and training is just so much more general than this. I don't have a good way to identify leaks. I just upload things to GTOW Analyzer and try to get a sense of where I'm messing up. I don't do any database analysis. All of these things are why I really want to join a CFP. I need more structure to my study. I need an organized approach. I am willing to put in ungodly, practically inhuman hours. I mean, I already do. However, I know I could be getting MUCH more from the time I'm spending.

Last, but certainly not least, I found this interview incredibly encouraging and inspiring. There is not one thing Matt did that I am not willing to do or trying to do myself. I was able to recognize all the same things that he did before I had anyone specifically showing me. I knew, intuitively, that my study process was weak and disorganized. I already knew that I needed a more systematic approach to strategy development that heavily focused on simplifications where ever possible. I already knew that I needed to systemify the entire game to the greatest degree that my feeble human mind is capable of. Based on Matt's mindset, and the success it has led to, it leads me to believe that my outsized self-belief is an asset. I'm just as competitive as Matt is. I'm just as competitive as anyone is. I'm willing to do whatever it takes to FULLY maximize my potential as a poker player. I just need a little guidance on how to make the quality of my process as high as my work ethic is.

I feel more confident than ever that I am going to make it far in this game. I know what the price of greatness is and I'm willing to pay it. I'm going to pay it.

We'll see what happens.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

GTOW Analyzer Review

As I thought, going through today's review, there were very few hands that I felt I needed to do a deeper dive on. As always, there were a few key mistakes that ended up being quite costly, but, overall, I made much better decisions in this session. Still, I can be much better and I might need to be much better in order to beat 50NL. Beating 50NL on ACR might require outplaying all the other regs consistently and that is no easy task. I sometimes wonder if there is a single reg at 50NL who has less experience playing Poker than I do. I think that's unlikely. Overcoming that experience deficit with pure technical knowledge is extremely difficult and a tall order. Better get to work then, eh?

Today's GTOW Analyzer score was driven down a little bit by the following hand:

Bluff-Catching River Raise-Jam with QQ on AK Board in 3BP

I will fully admit... this was an intuitive play. The Villain in question was an extremely loose reg who was 3 betting a lot and not folding to 3 bets. Even in the small sample, I had them profiled as a maniac.

70 VPIP, 45 3B%

I would never normally make a deviation this large, but I did here for two main reasons: 1) those stats are completely out of line and Villain was playing quite crazy in all the pots they were involved in besides this one and 2) in my experience, the broken betting lines are more often bluffed by recreational villains. They are much less likely to bluff a triple barrel.

Still, this was really sketchy on my pot. Luckily, this time, I was right and it was the biggest pot I won in the entire session. Still, the solver gave me a nice -30 EV grade for the river call.

In a very rare occurrence for me, I made two significant preflop errors that essentially cost me two stacks:

Calling 3 Way Preflop Jam with TT

I raise from the CO, fish calls on the BTN, and a tight reg raises from the BB.

According to Wizard, I am supposed to raise the squeeze here 75% of the time with TT. The issue is that this is a non-standard spot because we have a massive fish who is short stacking on the button. By raising, I force the fish to jam/fold. I make it more likely that they get out of the pot. I don't think that is wise. I think I should just be calling here in this particular situation to encourage the fish to stay in.

I do raise, though, the fish calls and goes all in, and then BB jams as well. Now, I'm putting the fish on most pocket pairs, but they can always show up with absolute nonsense in these spots. Because of that, I decided to ignore the existence of the fish at this point and just use the same range that I would normally use if the button had just folded. Even if I lose to the fish, I still win overall if I beat the reg. If you just consider the reg's likely range, TT is a +3.4 EV call:

Unfortunately, the reg turns over JJ and the fish has... T8 suited taking away one of my outs.

I think my mistake here is in just pretending the fish doesn't exist in this pot. I don't think you can do that. Even if their hand ends up being inconsequential, the reg has to have a stronger range than normal to jam into two players. Additionally, this is a tighter reg who only 3 bets 8% of the time. Most regs in this pool are more like 9-11%.

If we look at the Wizard range that the reg in the BB is supposed to jam once button calls my 4bet, it's way stronger than if button folds:

Here's what it looks like if button folds:

Is a reg with an 8% 3 bet frequency finding 5 bet jams with KQs, AJs, and even some slivers of KJs. No way. Let's be real: no freaking way. That means TT isn't +3 EV to begin with. Against the stronger range above, TT is -0.63 EV and indifferent:

When you combine everything all together, I just think this was a bad decision and a -EV call. Realistically, I didn't have time to consider all of this in game, of course. However, that's why I do these reviews. I can do the work OFF the table so that I can make fast decision that is correct next time. In similar spots in the future, I don't think I'd call indifferent holdings against a tighter than usual reg. That means, in practice, my calling threshold is QQ and not TT.

Calling 3x 4bet with AQo against Loose Villain

Whenever you introduce a new tool, there are going to be growing pains. This is a spot where I would never normally call AQo playing 150bb deep against a 3x 4-bet (even though the 4bet is supposed to be a little bigger, actually). However, I convinced myself to do so when seeing Villain's HUD stats:

Obviously, this isn't some massive sample, but it is already enough to know the following: 1) the statistical likelihood that they are playing too many hands is extremely high, 2) the likelihood that they are 3betting too many hands is very high, 3) they are limping regularly, and 4) all combined, we're likely dealing with a fish who doesn't change their ranges when playing 150bb deep. Am I that far off the mark here? I don't think so?

I'm not going to get into the actual post-flop play in this hand because I don't think it is that important. Villain ultimately had AKs and this kind of domination scenario is why you see AQo drop out of the 4bet calling range when playing deep. The reverse-implied odds are not in your favor at all.

Now, would I make the same decision in the future? I think that's hard to say. This is less of deviation, I think, than my QQ call which started off today's review. So is this a mistake after all? I'm indifferent. Pun intended.

Pure Fold a Fullhouse OTR in SRP!?

My biggest issue here is that I snap called on the river without even thinking here. Do I actually beat ANY value? Can villain get to this point with 33? Does Villain ever shove AK here? Are there are bluffs that make any sense? I should have at least THOUGHT about these questions.

I'm up against a tight reg in this hand. I've played many hands with them and I feel comfortable with that read. The HUD stats back it up, but this read goes beyond the HUD stats.

VPIP 21, 3B% 6. Like, I said, they're a tight reg.

Back to my initial questions... Villain is out of position here and they're supposed to develop a mixed strategy with their entire range. They even check AA at some frequency.

The check doesn't necessarily cap their range. Nevertheless, population tends to build improperly balanced checking ranges that are too weak. I stab very small with 77 looking to attack the auto-fold region of Villain's range:

This is a low-er frequency play but I am supposed to take this line about 20% of the time. Villain calls and the turn brings a yahtzee card: 7d. My hand is extremely well-protected here, but we still need to build the pot. We'd like to extract the maximum value here without picking a size that villain will overfold to. With the flush coming on board, and the board already paired, I usually go b75 here:

So far, so good. The river is a blank 3. Now, I'm looking to extract maximum value from any Ax holdings that have made it to this point. I go with b150 and the solver agrees:

One small problem... we get shoved on. Now the important part actually begins: what is villain's shoving range?

Now, at first glance, you might say, oh, look, Villain is shoving AK for value so we HAVE to call 77, right? Wrong! Villains is BLUFFING with AKcc, T7cc, KTcc, and a variety of other holdings that specifically block ATcc. That's how hard it is to find bluffs on this board. You have to turn AKcc into a bluff...

Look closely at the EVs. The bottom of Villain's value shoving range is TT. It doesn't even shove 77.

In fact, my particular holding is nearly a PURE FOLD:

The other 77 are better calls because they block A7cc.

So... here I am again faced with the same mistake that I make at least once in every single session: I've overvalued absolute hand strength without clearly thinking through relative hand strength on a given texture.

When you have the lowest possible full house on a given texture, and it isn't possible for villain to have the same full house because you block it with a pocket pair, you don't tie or beat ANY of the value shoving range in these spots. That means, despite having a full house, you just have a bluff-catcher.

Blockers are going to be more important when deciding to bluff-catch. On this board, it is better to call with an Ace, especially the Ac, than it is to call with the worst full house. You block more nutted hands with the Ac. 77 without a club doesn't block anything and doesn't beat any value. In the end, I could've saved a good 40bb here.

That's poker, folks. It gets messy when you get into the weeds.

Final takeaway for me? NO SNAP DECISIONS IN ALL-IN SPOTS! Never, ever! Just use the full clock even when you don't think you need to. You might realize you've missed something.

That's all for today! There were 1-2 more hands that I wanted to write about, but I'm out of time. I need to get on with the rest of my routine.

RIO Video Study

BTN vs CO 3bet Pots: Theory and Practice vs Francesco Lacriola
As IP Aggressor:
1) CO doesn’t have a ton of Kx in their range because KQo isn’t a pure call. Most Kxs 4bet. You’ll often just push your entire range for b33
2) J and T high are fantastic for IP because they are 3 betting AJo/ATo and KJo. Sometimes even KTo.
3) Low, 3 straight boards are often just range checks, eg 654 or 876
4) Paired boards will bet ~50% pot for close to range. The larger sizing makes it more difficult to float back door hands with overs

GTOW Trainer Session

Yesterday I drilled "connected" flops in 3 bet pots, but today I went way more specific and focused on three straight boards specifically.

I did 20 hands of each possible 3 straight in randomized 3 bet configurations.

Here is the short version of the notes I took for each one:
AKQ: mostly b33 with range
KQJ: mostly b20, lots and lots of checking, favors caller in a lot of spots
QJT: mostly b20, high frequency bet, some b75 range with BB, push AK advantage
JT9: mostly b20, tons of checking
T98: b33 from BB/SB vs BTN, mostly range check vs. early positions and as early positions, OOP develops big leading range from early positions vs early positions
987: late position vs late position b33, otherwise range check. OOP caller leads almost 100% in most cases
876: mostly range check, high leading % from OOP caller
765: b50/b75 for low frequencies, still medium-high leading from OOP caller, high frequency b20 when checked to as IP caller
654: b50/b75 for low-medium frequencies, less leading from OOP caller in early positions
543: medium frequency b50/b75, way less leading from OOP caller, b33 when checked to for stab
432: medium frequency b50/b75, almost no leading from OOP caller

Today, I am feeling pretty run down so I'm opting to go for a pre-session nap rather than a gym session. I wish I had time for both, but I just don't. Not today, anyway. I woke up a little too late and took a little too long on my session review (as per usual).

I'll be back with today's session results later tonight.
.
.
.
.
.
ACR 50NL Session #5 Results

-225bb in 2546 hands

Frustration is starting to set in for me now.

I know I have the technical skills to beat this stake. The other regs are not better than me by any means. However, as has been a problem for me throughout my time playing poker, I have lapses where I make blunders in big spots. 99.9% of the time, I play extremely well, but it all gets off-set by 2-3 hands per session where I completely punt or make a horrible bluff-catch. I do this every single session.

At previous stakes, it wasn't really a problem because there were enough fish who would just gift you multiple stacks per session. That RARELY happens now. Almost every single stack needs to be earned the hard way. Even the fish are significantly better.

I need to have a serious think about why it is that I continue to have these lapses. Sometimes it appears to be a mental game issue. When I'm not winning, I have a tendency to start calling down too loosely to try and get in the black. Doing this against an aggressive reg is one thing, but you absolutely cannot do it against fish and that is usually where I start making mistakes. When a fish shows aggression across multiple streets, they are going to be heavily biased towards value. Most players don't balance those lines well and fish don't even try. They might not even know what that means.

The other problem, if I'm being honest, is that I play a lot of tables. In this session, I made an absolutely horrific blunder due to the amount of tables I was playing (nine). What was the blunder? Nothing technical. I timed out and autofolded after someone had 4 bet me when I was holding AA... That's right. I autofolded AA to a 4bet. Beautiful stuff. That kind of thing just can't happen. It just can't. At this level, my edge isn't big enough to withstand these kinds of mistakes.

Right now, to move forward, to beat 50NL on ACR, it isn't my A-Game that needs to improve... It isn't the front end of my technical range of abilities. It is my C-Game or F-Game or whatever you want to call it. I am the type of player who makes a ton of terrific plays but then also occasionally makes abject blunders that someone at my level shouldn't be making. Maybe this is just my overall lack of poker experience biting me in the ass. It's hard to say. I do wonder how many other players at 50NL are in their first year of playing. I'm guessing there aren't a whole lot of other ones besides me.

Beyond all of that, tonight, I confirmed, without doubt, that the games are much softer as you get closer to midnight and beyond. That is when the American West Coast recreationals join the tables. The games are so much better when they're playing that it is almost hard to believe. I'll have to talk with my wife and also seriously think about whether or not it is worth it to change my daily schedule to stay up later. I really don't want to have to do that, but winning is more important.

Again, I am also keeping Ignition in mind. Every single American player who has played in both pools says that Ignition is significantly softer. I know for a fact that some CFPs make their American players play solely on Ignition for that reason. Geofenced pools are softer. It is just a fact. ACR is a global pool and global pools are harder.

I am frustrated and a bit angry... only at myself, of course, but it is there. I don't put in 70+ hour weeks into this only to throw it all away with whimsical blunders. I have to be better than that. My perception at the table is that if I can just remove the stupid mistakes I'm making, I'm a winning player as is without any further skill improvements and I WILL keep improving. The fastest way forward is to get rid of the blunders.

I'm talking in circles now so that's enough. But, hey, that's why I have a journal. Sometimes the most useful part is just venting and organizing your thoughts into something written.

I WILL get this figured out. Tomorrow, I will sit down and write a point-by-point plan to make sure I am doing everything in my power to maximize my chances of beating 50NL.

Here's my results at 50NL so far:

-1183bb in 11701 hands

Bah humbug.

Good luck at the tables everyone!
~Orca

The New Game Plan for Beating 50NL

1) Six Table Maximum
This is the one I hate the most, but I also think it is the single most important change.

How do you reduce the amount of careless mistakes you make? You take a little more care with each decision. What's the simplest way to put more care into each decision? You put a little more time into each decision. What's the simplest way to get more time for each of your poker decisions? Hack the platform and increase your time bank, obviously. No, no, no, lol. You decrease your number of tables. Both Indifference and Live_your_dreams85 have warned me multiple times that when I start trying to beat the learning curve of 50NL, it would help to reduce the amount of tables. I didn't listen, of course, but now I am going to. As you move into higher stakes, there likely will never be 8+ tables going anyway. I might as well start preparing myself for the eventual 2-4 table sessions that are coming my in the future.

I've been very stubborn about reducing the number of tables because, if we're being honest, playing fewer tables isn't as fun and it eliminates my chances of placing well in the rake race each week. We're not here to maximize fun. We're here to win. And rake back shouldn't even be a consideration when you're learning a new stake. Pumping in massive volume is something you can do when you're a proven winner with a big edge. Right now, even with the small sample, there's a very, very low probability I'm a winning 50NL player given the fact I'm losing at 10bb/100 through 11k hands. There's no sense in me further reducing any edge I have by playing too many tables.

Going forward, I will play a maximum of six tables.

2) Optimize Time Selection
I don't know when the optimal time to play is, but consider this my commitment towards figuring it out.

I have good reason to believe that the games are better the later at night that you play... up to a point. For one, when I start in the early evening, around 5-6PM EST, that means American recreationals on the west coast are still at work (2-3PM their time). My basic underlying assumption is that most recreations get off of work around 5PM. They probably can't get to their computer to start playing until 6-630PM. By starting any earlier than 6-630PM EST, I'm also probably cutting out most of the east coast American recreationals, too. That's a big no-no. Let's be honest: Americans are the softest group of players as a whole. We have some amazing regs, but we have the most recreationals because we have a very large recreational poker culture here. If you want to win, you want to play against American recreationals. That means building your work schedule around their leisure time. Their leisure time can't possibly start earlier than roughly 6PM.

In the latter half of my sessions, the average amount of tables going jumps from 5-6 to 8-10. Sunday is a bit of a weird exception, I think, but I spent the first hour of this session playing only four tables, mostly with regs, because there simply wasn't any other tables going. I had to sit tables myself to get them started. That's a very, very bad sign. Well, it is actually a good sign that you shouldn't be playing at that time. If there aren't enough tables going without me having to start my own, and thus risk playing heads up versus regs, I need to pick a better time to play. This seems obvious.

In the early part of my poker journey, before I started posting on RIO, I was not as disciplined with my playing times. However, in doing that, I was able to establish a few trends. Now, granted, this was back at 5NL, and it is possible all stakes are different, but a group of players seem to drop out around 1130PM-1230PM EST. From roughly 12AM to 3-3:30AM, you have a completely different group of fish and regs. There are less Europeans, particularly less eastern Europeans and far more south americans especially Brazilians. What I THINK is happening is that the east coast American recreationals start going to bed around midnight for the most part. West coast recreationals keep playing until around midnight their time (~3AM or so) and then the games usually just break down completely some time between 3-4AM.

If what I'm saying is accurate, and I do think there is at least some truth to it, the absolute best window to play is roughly 9PM-12AM EST as this is going to maximize my time against the largest number of recreational American players across the entire country. Because these times certainly aren't precise, if I'm wanting to stick to my usual four hour sessions, I think the best window is likely 8:30-9:00PM EST to 12:30-1:00AM.

I personally operate best with something like a 10PM to 6AM sleep window. Therefore, the early I can play and still have very good games, the better that is going to work for me. I think I will begin with the 8:30PM start time and only push it past 9PM if I collect enough data to suggest there is a sizable difference in the amount of players in the pool once the clock ticks past 9PM. Like I said, there's good reasons to assume that most American recreationals on the west coast of the country can't/won't start playing until after 6PM their time (9PM my time). It's also important to remember that California, just by itself, would probably be something like a Top 5 poker economy in the entire world if the state legalized and regulated poker. Making sure you have access to some of the recreationals in the west coast pool is quite important. As a brief note to self: please move back to the west coast ASAP, lol.

Going forward, I will play from 8:30PM to 12:30AM with an eye towards moving that window even later if I notice a dramatic shift in the quality of the games / amount of players in the pool at 9PM+.

3) Optimize Table Selection
There are at least two regulars in 50NL who purely bum hunt. They're completely unabashed and unashamed about how they do it. I mean, they literally instantly sit out as soon as the big fish leaves any table. They won't play a single hand vs. regs when they don't have to. In fact, they both sit in the lobby and don't play ANY tables unless there is one bonafide fish on a table. If there isn't at least one person VPIPing at 35%+, they don't sit. In the sample I have on them, they both 3B about 15% (to isolate fish in big pots more often) and they both win at about 20bb/100 (in ~1K hands each, but still). Those aren't coincidences. I can learn something here.

While the competitor in me finds this kind of disgusting, and more than a little shameful, the reality is that this an exercise in self-discipline. Do you want to battle or do you want to win and move up the stakes? The answer for me is both. I want to compete. I love to compete... but taking care of my family comes first. If I'm going to turn this into a viable profession, I need to start making real money as soon as possible. With real money comes access to better coaching opportunities, better access to, and training for, software, the ability to upgrade my equipment, the ability to move across the country (or to a different country) that optimizes my playing times, taxes, etc. There will be plenty of time to reg-war at high stakes where there is no other choice.

Outside of pride and ego, I don't see any good reason why I shouldn't be table selecting in a similar manner. Why should I play a table that doesn't have even one fish? What's the point?

Consider these results from Onklebs (a 500z crusher who was winning at over 10bb/100 there back in the day):

If Onklebs, a 500z crusher, is only beating other regs for ~1bb/100, and yet has a 10bb+/100 win rate overall, what do you think is happening for the rest of us mere mortals at tables with 5 regs? I don't think we need to open the solver to answer that question, right?

Going forward, I will not play any table without at least one fish present.

4) No More Starting Tables
Whenever there haven't been 8+ tables going, I typically start my own. In the past, this has worked out great because none of the regs at the stakes I've been playing study heads up very seriously. I have at least studied opening ranges and most of them clearly haven't. I tend to have an edge. Even better than that, starting my own tables has often led to me getting ~50 hands one-on-one against some of the super fish that like to be the first one to sit at a table. There is a unique brand of fish that purposely tries to just play heads up. They'll even sit out when other players start joining.

This no longer works at 50NL. The main reason is the two regs that I mentioned before. If I get a table going, and a fish joins, they IMMEDIATELY join the table. I don't get more than 1-3 hands against the super fish. If a reg starts playing me, they join and immediately sit out. The net effect is that I just have a heads up battle going against a reg until other people join the table.

I don't study heads up. I don't know if I have an edge against these regs heads up. What I do know, FOR SURE, is that having a heads up table going is really distracting when you're playing six max. The ranges are different so you're mentally toggling back and forth between opening like 90%+ hands and the normal six max ranges. Not only that, but you have to a make a decision every few seconds because you're involved in every single hand on that table. Each heads up table takes up a significant amount of mental bandwidth all for a situation where I have some undefinable, perhaps non-existent, edge.

This is going to stop. If I have to start my own tables just to get 4-6 quality ones going, I'm playing at the wrong time of day. The solution is to do a better job of time selecting. The solution is not playing heads up versus regs.

Going forward, I will not start a single tables nor play a single hand of heads up.

5) Strict Time Limits for Session Reviews

This may seem somewhat tangential but I don't think it is. Unless I can be more consistent with my schedule, it will be impossible to be so precise with my time window for playing.

In my current schedule, the main variable that often throws me off for the day is the length of my session reviews. Because I review every single pot that makes it to post-flop, and then I sometimes write about 5-10 hands per session, the reviews have been lasting anywhere from 3-5 hours. That's just way too long.

To limit the amount of time I spend on this activity, I am going to give myself a strict structure moving forward. I will spend 1 hour looking through the biggest pots I lost in order. If I happen to make it through all post-flop losses, great. If not, I'll end up missing out on some of the smallest pots only. When the alarm goes off for one hour, I will move on to reviewing the biggest pots I won in order. Same deal here. When the alarm goes off for one hour, I am done even if I haven't made it through all of them yet.

After that, I will give myself 30 minutes, and no more, to do a write-up on the main theme of the session. Not two themes, not three themes, not 9 random different hands, but one main theme. If I can't write about it in 30 minutes, I'm taking too long. I'm not writing articles here. I'm trying to learn and absorb takeaways.

There's a difference between writing to learn and writing so that other people have something nice to read. Even though it is just a habit of mine to try and write as well as I am capable of, I need to let go of that a bit and focus on writing to learn. That's what a journal is for: consolidating thoughts and learning.

Going forward, I will spend no more than 2.5 hours on session reviews to ensure I can maintain playing at extremely precise times.

Summary of New SOP for 50NL Sessions
1) Six Tables Maximum
2) Play from 8:30PM to 12:30AM instead of 6:00PM to 10:00PM
3) Only Play Tables with 1+ Fish
4) Never Start A Table
5) No Heads Up

New Proposed Schedule

With this new schedule, I'll be able to go to the gym with my wife which means we will get more time together each day instead of less. That makes it a win-win.

Be back later with the usual stuff.

Good luck at the tables,
~Orca

9/3/24 Beating 50NL Day #8

Interview with Nacho's CFP
After having a talk with Tom, the team manager over at Nacho's CFP, we both decided that I am a good fit for the CFP and vis versa. I am just awaiting the contract now, but I'll be an official member of the CFP within the next day or two.

Add me on Discord:

.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management

Readiness:

Sleep:

My wife is a teacher and the school year has begun again. This is presenting a big issue initially here. I am an extremely light sleeper and, currently, when she gets up for work, it is waking me up. We're going to try a few small adjustments to see if I can find a way to stay asleep. Namely, I'm going to wear ear plugs and she's going to keep the things she needs to get ready in the morning outside of the bedroom. If that's still waking me up, I am going to either have to reset my playing time back to something even earlier than what it is was initially (not going to happen) or I'm going to have to start going to bed at 6:30am. If I have to go for the latter approach, I'll just move my session reviews after my playing instead of first thing in the morning. I'm not keen on that idea, but needs must. I want to make sure I leave no stone unturned in terms of optimizing my chances to make it to high stakes as soon as possible.

I will 100% be taking a nap today after my interview for the CFP.

Weight:

We went out for Italian food last night so no surprises here.

Health Habits
Meditation: 8/8, 100%
Gym: 6/8, 75%
No Caffeine: 8/8, 100%
Steps: 9809

Mental Game Content

From 50z to 5KNL in 2.5 Years | Josef "Sunni_92" Schusteritsch
I am continuing to listen to these podcasts from the guys at the Mechanics of Poker to try and gain a better sense of what makes someone on online high stakes crusher. Really, two things keep jumping out at me.

First of all, and this is blatantly obvious, everyone works really hard. Josef, during the time he was progressing the fastest, was putting in 60-70 hours per week on poker. Depending on what you count as "working on poker", I'm in the same region so I know I'm on the right track.

I typically spend 2 hours on my session reviews, 30 minutes watching a RIO video, 2 hours on the GTOW Trainer playing 200 hands, and 4.5 hours playing if you include my warm-up. I then usually spend ~2 hours per day writing in here and ~2 hours listening to podcasts/mental game videos while I do various chores. That's 9 hours per day of hardcore study/play, 2 hours of written reflection on the day, and 2 hours of passive content absorption. I guess that's 13 hours if you add it all up. If we don't count listening to podcasts, and we only count the part of this journal where I'm reviewing hands (which I think is fair), I'm putting in almost exactly 10 hours per day. Considering I have averaged about 2 days off per month in the last 8 months, I am putting in something like 280 hours per month of active learning. I don't think I can realistically do any more than I do. I don't think working any harder is possible, but I'm always open to the possibility that I'm missing something.

Second, all of these guys study with far more precision than I do. Josef mentions how he and his study partner would spend an entire week just on K high flops. They'd run the sims, put together aggregate reports, simplify the game tree as much as possible, study it and then drill each node of the game tree for an entire day. They would spend 2 hours in a day just drilling cbetting on K high flops. The next day, they'd drill for 2 hours just defending cbets on K high flops. The next day, they'd spend the whole day just on turn strategy on K high flops. That's so much more detailed than what I'm doing.

I need to be more systematic in my approach. This is what I did when I started poker... I got a GTOW subscription. I created spreadsheets based on GTOW aggregate reports that broke down flop strategy for every spot in the entire game, and then I would drill one single specific spot until I got an 80%+ GTOW Score on that spot. Then I would move to the next spot. For example, UTG vs CO in SRP. If I could get 80%+ across a 20 hand sample, I'd move to UTG vs BTN. I did this for every single configuration in the game: all SRP spots, all 3bet spots, all squeeze spots, all 4bet spots, and all cold 4bet spots. It took me almost a month of drilling 8+ hours a day to accomplish this. If I'm being honest, sometimes it was more like 12 hours a day. When I was done, I felt like I had begun to forget some of the stuff I did at the beginning. So I just repeated the whole process again. The second time, it only took me about a week to go through every spot. I felt ready to play at that point.

Here's what some of those documents looked like:

That kind of systematic learning is how I went from not even knowing the rules to beating 2NL for 50+ buy-ins in my first two weeks of playing. That kind of rigorous study is how I've built the base of technical skill I have now.

Why am I not doing that anymore? It doesn't make sense. I need to systematize my learning approach again. I see the value in the broader learning style that I've been using, but, to reach the highest levels, you need to drill down into specific spots until you know them reflexively. Then you just move on to the next spot. You do this until you've done the whole game tree.

It's so obvious to me how these guys become some of the best players in the world. I can see the roadmap in my head. The blueprint is right there. I was already on the right track from the beginning. I've strayed a bit, though. I need to organize my study and attack things piece by piece.

The goal should be to systemify the ENTIRE game tree at the lowest level of complexity possible. Once you do that, start plugging leaks based on your database. Once you plug the biggest leaks, repeat the process and considering adding a layer of complexity compared to what you did the first time. Maybe you range bet less often and develop more complex flop strategies. Maybe you add an additional sizing on the turn or river. The specifics don't really matter. Just make it a little more complex in the spots that would be the most beneficial in terms of EV. When you do this, you'll create new leaks. Plug them. Repeat. Over and over and over. Do this for 5, 10, 20+ years. This is the guaranteed route to being the best player you're personally capable of becoming.

It's very, very clear to me now. I know what to do with 100% certainty. It's actually a very simple and straight forward process. It just requires a lot of work. That's fine with me. I like working.
.
.
.
.
.

Going Forward
I don't have any session review to do today because I did it yesterday. I am going to try and take a "nap", but hopefully it ends up more like a second sleep. After that, I'll be back to do my usual GTOW Trainer work. As soon as I get into the CFP, I'll be canceling my elite membership here at RIO. I will have way too much content within the CFP to study to make use of the videos here. However, I will not stop journaling here of course! The blog will live on. I won't be able to share any of the materials from the CFP, but I can still discuss my hand histories, what my studies are focusing on, and what type of drilling I did (Anki vs GTOW Trainer etc).

Goodbye ACR
Tom highly recommended switching most of my volume over to Ignition because it is significantly softer than ACR. I am going to start that process when I wake up. Sadly, I don't think I'll be playing on ACR anymore so I may have to update the title here. Additionally, going forward, Ignition has a four table limit so it looks like my mass multi-tabling days are over, lol.

Excited For The Future
There's a lot of changes coming up here as I am also still trying to integrate this new schedule as well. I think my usual routine might be thrown off for a few days, but I'm going to do my best to settle in as quickly as possible and get back to MAXIMUM GRIND as soon as I can. I am very excited for the future and I have one audacious goal that I will declare publicly (just this once) now that I have joined the CFP.

My goal is to be playing 500NL by the end of my first contract.

Good luck at the tables everyone!
~Orca

9/4/24 Beating 50NL Day #9

CFP Progress:

I have signed the CFP contract as of this morning. Hopefully, I'm getting started with the materials sometime today. Let's go!

edit: I haven't received any next steps after signing the contract just yet. Hopefully I'm granted access to the materials tomorrow. From there, I'll probably spend at least a day or two doing a deep dive into the materials to figure out what parts of my strategy need to change. After I do that, I'll also need to come up with a learning plan for how I'm going to both a) study all the new material efficiently in an organized manner and b) incorporate it all into my game systematically.

Add me on Discord:

.
.
.
.
.
Mental Game Development

Health Management

Readiness:

Sleep:

I cannot blame the wife for this one. My body simply hasn't gotten used to the new sleep schedule yet. It can take a week or two to install a new circadian rhythm. For now, I just have to push through some of the tiredness. I'm not used to having limited energy. It doesn't really affect the quantity of my output, but I can tell how drastically it effects my efficiency. There have been a few times where I just stared at the computer screen for a full minute before finally remembering what I was doing. Optimize your sleep, folks. I cannot overstate how much better every single aspect of life gets when you are consistently well-rested.

Weight:

Another new yearly low of 214.6lbs/97.3kg! I have not been less than 200lbs/~90kg since I started bodybuilding seriously over 5 years ago. In the long run, my goal is to get down to something like 175lbs/80kg. I haven't been that light in close to ten years.

Health Habits:
Meditation: 9/9, 100%
Gym: 7/9, 78%
No Caffeine: 9/9, 100%
Steps: 10,963, there we go :)

Mental Game Content

1) Playing the Nose Bleeds | Sergey "MunEZ_StaRR" Nikiforov by Mechanics of Poker
I find it remarkable how many of the tops guys are truly humble, but I suppose online poker isn't generally a game that helps to cultivate big egos at the top. Unlike most games, and most sports, even the best players suffer through long, traumatic downswings. We all lose big pots every single day. We all lose to bad players every single day.

I was glad to hear Sergey say that his personal experience is that the players who are at the top of the game are also people who are excelling in all areas of life: self-care, psychology, relationships, health, philosophy, etc. A lot of people assume that, once they get money, they'll use those new resources to "fix" all their other problems. In reality, many of the issues that people have with motivation, work ethic, tilt, and so on and so forth are actually rooted in the "other problems". When you eat well, sleep well, and actively do things to cultivate happiness, your energy and enthusiasm for working will reach new all-time highs. Don't take my word for it (or even Sergey's). Just try it and see. Again, I find it very validating that a player of Sergey's caliber believes in maximizing yourself as an individual in order to maximize your game on the table. My whole approach to life is based around that central idea: the better you are as a person overall, the better you'll be at whatever you choose to do in life.
.
.
.
.
.
Poker Strategy Development

With my poker life still in a state of flux as I prepare to transition to a new site, new hours, and new strategy content through Nacho's CFP, I haven't played in several days now. Today, I ended up spending the entire day building out custom solutions that I can use for training in the future: