MisterShigi

Good fold I think. You bet all 3 streets and Villain is giving you 3:1 on river so I imagine he wants a call.

I'd probably say he has something like AJss or A10ss.

If villain has 3bet 4/7 hands from SB then I am 4 betting ATo pre. If villain 5bets then I fold.

If villain is aware of their own aggressive image from the blinds they probably assume we would have 4bet AK, AQ and maybe AJ pre.

This means we are likely going to be in a very marginal situation post flop. If villain is a competent LAG then they may be aware that the above board is a great one to triple barrel on.

I'd suggest AJ is the bottom of villain's value raising range on river. Worse 2 pairs just call I think.

10's seem like the most likely holding, closely followed by KQ, as I understand why villain led flop and called turn against someone as aggressive as (I assume) Wade is. Villain could also have AA, JJ or AJ, although I expect these to reveal themselves prior to river a large % of time.

I'm guessing it comes down to whether villain is bluff raising river more than he is showing up with the above hands. As per my above post, I'm discounting bluffs somewhat as I think villain leads with bluff on river more than he x/r.

I'm not surprised that when you reviewed your DB 80% of the time they showed up with a monster.

I'm still working my way up to these limits so am not as qualified as others to comment. With that being said, my analysis of the hand was that I was confident the 10 on the river improved villain. I had him on 10's or KQ, possibly A10 less often as I think he checks back river a large % of the time. Villain raised pre and bet flop so your bet on the turn represented strength. I think if villain has two pair or trips on turn he is raising and hoping that you are strong and have at least Ax. 

At micro's if villain is bluffing river I think he is leading rather than x/r. I'm not sure how often villain expects you to fold river to a raise.

Definitely agree this would be a gross fold and one you have to be on your A game to make. I'm sure I don't fold this in-game. That being said I imagine it is folds like this that separate the elite players from the rest. 

I'm checking the river and hoping he has KQ. Anything over 1/2 pot on the river I'm probably folding.

I believe it is still worthwhile.

Players currently playing 100NL and above have had to play the micro stakes at some point to get where they are now.

I'd suggest that the lines villains take will differ between limits. However, you should still benefit from seeing the thought processes involved in these videos.

I don't play anywhere near the nosebleed limits, or even the mid stakes limits, but I will still watch these videos to see how these players are thinking about the game and constructing their hands.

My advice would be; you won't know until you try it. If you pay the $10 and feel you haven't benefited then your under no obligation to continue your subscription.

Wade,

As stupid as this may sound I consider your bad session last night a HUGE win and step in the right direction!

Yes there are things to work on still. Of course we never want to play horribly. No we don't want to be playing at all when we know we aren't really focused.

but.... you only lost 3BI.

I imagine the last time you played in a similarly tired, unfocused, frustrated frame of mind was a few days ago. What happened?... well lets just say you donated far more than 3BI :).

You deserve credit for being able to walk away last night. Some of us may find it easy to quit after losing 3BI. I am not one of those people BTW and I dare suggest you aren't either.

Considering what happened during your last bad session I think you should be congratulated for being able to quit the game when you did last night.

I'm pleased for you Wade as you appear to have taken a step forward. Just make sure you don't take two steps back. Don't get complacent. Being able to quit the game last night will mean nothing if the next time you recognise your playing badly you continue to sit and chase your losses. We know what will happen!

Just remember you earned yourself money last night by leaving the tables. By not playing, by doing nothing, by sleeping, you have woken up this morning to a bigger bankroll than you would have if you had continued playing. Remember this. Tell yourself this next time you are playing badly. Then rinse and repeat. Over.... and over... and over again.

Good luck and congratulations.  

As others have said, value bet all streets.

I think villain would call a flop cbet more often than he bets the turn if we check back.

Ok guys, I'm finding hand 1 really interesting. Your beginning to convince me about KK betting turn being superior to checking.

My argument for checking KK on turn and river is to enduce bluffs from missed draws that we fold out by betting. It seems the argument for value betting JJ on river is also because villain can call with worse due to plenty of missed draws being in our range.

Am I right in thinking that the key to the hand is how most players at 5NL are playing these draws?

My initial assumption would be that players at 5NL are checking the turn and taking the free card more often than they are betting their draws in this situation. Without analysing my DB I could be wrong. 

If this is correct then I now agree that betting KK on turn and river is superior to checking. By checking we will likely lose value as players won't bet their draws enough to make up for the times we lose value when they check back worse made hands that would have called our bet with KK.

However, if we apply the same theory to when the hand is checked on the turn and Hero bets JJ wouldn't this now be an argument for us to check back the river. As we bet the turn, based on my above assumption, we our more weighted to a made hand and villain should be less likely to call with too many worse hands.

One other thing, does anyone have any thoughts on betsizing tells at 5NL? When Hero bets 2/3 pot on turn I'm putting him on a made hand more often than draws. I've found that players that do bet their draws will often bet 1/3-1/2 pot rather than 2/3. Obviously at higher stakes I'm sure this tell is far less prominent.

ChuB - I'm still firmly in the 3bet group due to this hand taking place at 5NL. BUT.... I do think your point about the hand being difficult to play post flop and any mistakes being more costly is a valid one. This should be taken into consideration when deciding why we are 3betting.

At 5NL I am 3betting this hand for 2 reasons.

1) I am happy to take the pot down pre-flop.

2) I believe I have an edge at 5NL when playing in position against this type of opponent. I am confident they will make more mistakes than me post flop.

If this hand takes place at 25NL or 50NL then I am less confident about my edge. My reason for 3betting is more weighted to taking it down pre. I would be much more cautious post flop.

Agree preflop equity isn't everything and hand doesn't end after pre-flop action.

I'd want to know villain's bet flop stats but I'm not too unhappy with this flop. I think any 8x or overpairs are unlikely; if villain has these they most likely reveal themselves on later streets.

Villain has some 10x in his range but it is more likely weighted to air and 22-77. Villains will often donk these types of board to try and fold out our non-pair hands. I'm calling this flop and anticipate taking the pot on the turn when villain shuts down. I don't see villain double barreling the turn often. Reason being that our 3bet has helped bloat the pot and a double barrel with air is now more expensive if villain is wrong. If villain bets or calls turn I am done with the hand.

Consider what happens when we flat and the same board comes. Villain cbets flop and we call. I'd suggest villain is more likely to double barrel the turn; it is cheaper than if we 3bet, we could easily have some kind of draw, we have not shown any real strength on previous streets. Any non heart could be a good double barreling card for villain. Do we still call down with ace high? What's our plan for the river?

To summise: Villain is opening wide. We aren't going to hit our Ace often. When we do we likely win a small pot or lose a bigger one. If we want to take down the pot we are often going to have to show aggression at some point. Why not do this pre flop? It enables us to rep stronger hands post flop. We still win the pot when villain has air but villain is more likely to fold their marginal holdings that do hit the flop/turn.

Wade,

Exactly! It was trying to scroll through all the posts in your journal that formed the basis for this suggestion.

Agree, if villain's fold to 3bet is high then this is an easy 3bet pre. We should be more than happy to take down the pot without seeing a flop. Also, if they do have a low fold to 3bet and call us we know to proceed with caution on the flop and later streets.

However, if their fold to 3bet is low isn't this also a reason to 3bet A3o BvB. Villain's PFR is 30. We know they have a wide range.  A3o is likely the best hand and a low fold to 3bet means we can make them pay if they want to try and catch up.

Is BvB play any different to HUNL? I am going to be 3betting Ax more than I am flatting with it when I am playing HU and have position.

ChuBuB - In hand 1 which hands are you calling hero's river bet with?

Carl - Did you mean villain in 1st hand is a nit as hand 3 didn't call the river? I wouldn't necessarily assume villain is a nit because he tanked. He could be tanking turn because he is thinking about your range and whether to raise rather than call. Same applies to the river.

Generally speaking, I am more cautious with players that take their time or tank as they are the ones that are likely to be thinking the hand through properly. I find the players that insta-act are easier to play against as they aren't usually considering the merits of all the actions available to them.

Oops I didn't read OP properly. I missed that villain had raised 3/7 turns.

Whether I continue would probably depend on whether any of villain's previous turn raises made it to showdown and what he had. Obviously if the turn raises went to showdown and he always had trips or better then it should be an easy fold.

If all villain's previous turn raises were non sd pots or he turned up with weak holdings then I change my original line. Now I'm def calling down.

For me the key to correctly assigning villain a turn range is being able to recall the previous pots he was involved in.

I would be inclined to lead or x/r flop. With 2 overs + nut fd + gutshot and backdoor nut straight I'm playing this hand aggressively. I want to build the pot early to increase my chances of getting paid when we hit. I can also get villain to fold the best hand some % of the time.

The problem with x/c approach is that it is difficult to extract value when we do hit. Villain isn't going to flop a set or straight too often, even if they do we still have plenty of outs.

By being the aggressor we are putting villain in tough spots with their pairs, worse draws and even some two pairs. They are going to have these type of hands far more often than sets and straights. We're encouraging them to make a mistake. Imagine you are the villain with one of these hands, a hand that could be the best but that could easily already be behind and also has plenty of bad turn/river cards. Would you rather play against the x/caller? Or against the player that was betting into you and raising? Whichever you would find easier to play against then your opponent is probably likely to feel the same. You should therefore take the opposite approach.

If we can get villain to misplay their non-nut hands this should compensate for the few times they do have a set or straight.

hand 1, leaning towards checking river. we only really lose value from TT. I think he turns up with QQ+ more often and to a lesser extent some boats. If villain is capable of folding I'm not sure he would call the river with 99 as this would really only be a bluff catcher to missed draws. What non-bluffs do we bet on the river that 99 beats?

I actually really like villains check on turn. His allowing us to valuetown ourselves with 99-QQ and also giving us the chance to bluff at the pot. Same goes for the river.

Villain's check on turn and river suggests one of the following.

1) He is capable of hand reading and has likely put us on the exact range we have 99-JJ and maybe QQ.

2) He is just nitty/passive and likes to avoid bloating the pot despite having the best hand. This means he will often play the turn/river too passively or scared. I would be paying attention to how he plays when turn cards complete draws. Villain may have a leak that allows us to profitably bluff the turn against them in the future.

Villain is playing plenty of pots and has PFR of 30%, albeit from a small sample size. I'd imagine they are opening wide from SB.

I'd argue there is a case to 3b for value BvB IP against this opponent, especially at these limits. With A3o I'm more than happy to take down the pot pre if villain folds. At 5nl villains are still calling with all kinds of worse hands. If we hit our ace great, we are likely ahead. If we whiff the flop, by being more aggressive pre, we sill have a better chance to take the pot on the flop or later streets.

If we flat pre, what is our plan when the flop doesn't bring an ace or sd? (which is most of the time). Villain's range is wide and could hit pretty much any flop. Are we willing to continue with A high when facing a cbet on the flop?

Also, if we are only 3betting PP's and stronger Ax type hands BvB it makes it far less likely we will get paid off when we do wake up with a hand in the blinds. If villain knows we are capable of 3betting A3o from the BB they are more likely to call when we have a big hand. 3betting A3o in this situation may even induce a spewy 4bet from villain when we 3bet AA/KK in the BB later.

The A3o 3bet didn't work out for hero this time. I do think it has +EV in the long term.

"Take your time to think through your replies. Don't reply just for the
sake of replying, and watch your game grow before your eyes"

Great post! The above particularly stood out.

It isn't so much whether people agree/disagree with posts that we learn from. Its the why and the reasoning behind their conclusions. 

I agree that BRM is an effort to manage risk and avoid going broke. However, WR is tied into risk:reward ratio. 

To maximise your WR you have to be willing to risk a greater portion of your stack when you are confident you are ahead and villain is likely to call. however, this will also cause your losses to be greater when on the wrong side of variance.

I think we have to be very careful not to place to much emphasis on WR when deciding our BRM guidelines.

It is entirely possible that someone who wins at 2bb/100 can survive on a smaller bankroll than someone that is winning at 6bb/100 or greater.

It all depends on style of play. 

A 2bb/100 winner might have a small ball approach and be a winner because they collect lots of smaller pots and avoid situations where they are involved in big pots.

A 6bb/100 winner could have a superior WR due to being more willing to play for stacks. This type of player will obviously have times where they are winning at a far greater rate than the conservative player and even their own 6bb/100 WR. However, they will also have spots where variance causes them to lose more than the conservative player. Their BRM needs to be more conservative to allow for the greater swings they experience.

In Wade's case I would suggest his style of play falls into the later. Therefore a bigger bankroll is required.

Think we have to fold once villain raises the turn. 

We 3bet pre and bet 2 streets OOP. We have shown a lot of strength so I think villain is rarely bluffing.

Once villain raises turn I think we can take out draws from his range given that we have shown strength on every street. If villain wants to raise his draws he most likely does this on the flop. 

Similarly, can't see TT or JJ raising turn. I'd assign villain KK+.

Still a tough lay down in the micros though and one I prob don't make enough.

Glad things are going well for you Zoty!

You will still need to be aware of your bankroll in order to ensure you are playing at suitable limits. 

Just don't judge the success of any 1 session by whether you won/lost money as this can give you false feedback about your play. It's possible to play great and lose during a session. Likewise, if you are on the right side of variance, you can play poorly and still end a session as a winner.

Of course once you start looking at larger sample sizes whether your bankroll is increasing/decreasing will be a truer reflection of how your playing.

You should still be able to judge whether you had a good or bad session based on how you played. If you are unsure how you played I find that a good starting point is to use my DB to review my 5 biggest winning pots and 5 biggest losing ones. There might be something I am repeatedly doing in the losing pots that costs me money. There might be something in the winning ones I'm doing well and can exploit more in the future.

Completely agree with the above. The greatest tool poker forums give us is the opportunity to question our own play and thought processes and challenge the thoughts of others.

Listen to Phil. He is asking you these questions for a reason. I am sure he already knows the answers to some of the questions. However, he is trying to encourage you to think independently.

We can all read the advice of others and blindly agree, or disagree, with it. The greatest growth comes from questioning the advice we receive and then using it to find an answer that works for us.

I agree that flop lead leaves us vulnerable and is going to be tricky to navigate later streets.

What would your line be here? If we x/c there are plenty of scare cards that put us in a tricky situation on the turn and river.

If we are going to x/f top pair on the flop then I assume we should have just folded pre and saved ourselves the 2 bigs.

+1 for 3bet pre. I don't think a donk bet folds out his pocket pairs unless villain is extremely weak and passive which doesn't appear to be the case based on the limited stats you have on him.

If I am villain I am never folding to a donk bet here. If a K is in your range you likely c/c or c/r the flop knowing villain is cbetting almost all his range. IMO villain will interpret your lead on the flop as air or at best a 9 that can't stand any resistance.

As the villain I know I am ahead of you, or at worse I am going to get the chance to take the pot away from you on the turn.

If your betting the flop then I think you have to be prepared to fire a sizeable 2nd barrel on the turn to try and rep that K and hope villain doesn't have one themselves. I'm not sure this line has +EV.

Good luck Zoty!

Many players suffer from tilt issues due to wanting to move up stakes to quickly so you are certainly not alone there.

One thing players with these issues have in common is that they almost always place to much emphasis on their bankroll balance and how much they won/lost during a session. Due to that horrible thing called variance it is very difficult for us to be in complete control of whether a session is a winning won or a losing one. So why worry over things that we can't control? Easier said than done I know.

Try focusing on the things that are within your control, such as putting in a decent number of hands or only playing when you are in a good mind-set. If you do this you will find that your bankroll will take care of itself.

Good luck with the blog Darley!

I'll be keen to follow this thread as I think you have touched on a topic that I haven't found too many articles on. That topic being how you transition from being a great poker player in the forums to being an equally good one on the felt.

I think it is important that we realise that just because a player can post on forums giving great, seemingly optimal, advice on how to play hands this is not necessarily reflected in their own play at the tables. I have often wondered why regular posters on other forums who give good advice can often be stuck in the lower limits at the micros. The answer has to be that they have yet to find away to implement the advice they give in their own game.

Often at the tables ours minds will try and play tricks on us. We will find reasons to defy logic and go against the advice we regularly give in forums. How often do we give in to the temptation to click the call button despite knowing our opponent hit his flush or straight? In the forums we are screaming FOLD HE HAS IT and yet when it is us in that situation we somehow convince ourselves to call.When it is our own money on the felt and we stand to win/lose a big pot it becomes infinitely harder to tell which lines are the ones we would post in the forum and which are the ones we create in that moment to justify making a bad play.

IMO it is the players that can remove themselves from any emotional attachment and play as close to how they do in the forums that have the most success.

Good luck on your journey!

Hi Wade,

I found your journal a couple of weeks ago and have been impressed with the frequency of your posts and how dedicated you are to keeping readers updated on your journey. I found myself drawn to your posts due to the sense of togetherness in the RIO community and the vast amount of support you are getting from other members. It is that community spirit which convinced me to join RIO.

From reading your posts you are clearly passionate about poker and very determined to reach your goal of becoming a poker pro, or at least having a sustainable second income through poker. There is nothing wrong with having these dreams provided they are a positive influence on your play and on your life in general. Next time you take a couple of bad beats and are tempted to chase your losses ask yourself what would a professional do in this situation? If this helps you leave the table then your dream is having a positive influence.

I've really enjoyed reading your posts. However, there are times when it appears you are chasing your dreams too hard and are in a rush to make your way through the limits. If this is the case then your dream is no longer having a positive influence and it is actually negative to your EV. The good news is that you can do something about it! We have a saying in the UK, "look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves". If I were to translate this into poker and apply it to your game I would say "Look after/fix your leaks and your bankroll will look after itself". Stop focusing on how much you have won/lost in any session. Instead identify your biggest leaks and work on plugging them during any given session.

Your results suggest that you have a decent understanding about strategy and are a winner when playing your A game, or even your B game. As suggested by others, it appears your biggest leaks are playing at limits above your bankroll and chasing your loses. We can all relate to the temptation to chase our losses, I've done this myself on more than one occasion. The problem is an insufficient bankroll and a propensity to tilt will lead to going broke in no time.

The first step in fixing leaks is to acknowledge them. They cannot be fixed overnight. It is great that you are aware of them. You also need to realize that you had bankroll issues in the past and it will be almost impossible to have these issues one day and eliminate them the next. You are bound to have hiccups along the way. The key is to minimize the impact these hiccups have so they get less and less each time they occur.

Given your tendency to tilt and chase losses I would suggest adopting a conservative approach with your bankroll. Your bankroll approach is far too aggressive. A player that had eliminated tilt from their game completely, something that not many of us can do, would find your bankroll guidelines difficult to adhere to without going broke. Although you can clearly beat 10NL and 25NL my advice would be to adopt a 50+ buyin approach to each limit. Lets say you lose on average 5BI when on tilt and not leaving tables when you should. If you lose 5BI when you have 50+BI that is 10% of your roll, that's not insignificant but it also isn't disastrous. If you lose 5BI when you only have a total of 20BI that equates to 25% of your roll. That means if you have 3-4 bad days playing in the wrong frame of mind you will go broke again.

I recently reviewed my own game. I found that when I play sessions over 2 hours I lose focus a bit and go on autopilot. This inevitably leads to me misplaying a hand and spewing chips. I now have a cap of 2 hours on my maximum session length. After 2 hours I'll take a break. It might only be for half an hour but that is all I need. I go back to the tables feeling focused and less bleary eyed. A similar cap on session length might help you to prevent tilt.

In the past I've also set myself a non-monetary objective for the month. Given you sometimes appear in too much of a rush to move through limits, you could commit to only playing one limit through the month, eg. during May only play 25NL regardless of how much your bankroll grows. Knowing you aren't moving up limits during the month may help take the pressure off and prevent you chasing previous bankroll highs.

Anyway, this post is already far longer than I intended. Sorry.

Wade, you seem to have enough of a grasp on game theory to be a winning player. Keep working on the mental side of things. Keep hold of those dollars. You work hard to get them don't give them away cheaply.

I challenge you to leave the table when you are on tilt and to play within your bankroll. If you can do that then I am sure you will succeed!

Good luck buddy.

Craig