Pre-solved hands

I don't know if there's better term for this but this is important concept I just learned.

Say you call a raise and flop a middle set on a draw heavy board with 3 of you in the pot. There's heavy betting ending all-in on flop when you find out that you ran into a top set. Or something like this: tourney, stacks like 15BB, you shove with KK and get called by AA. Did you do anything wrong here? Clearly NO! You just happened to be unlucky and did everything fine. How about the Villain? Is he exceptionally good player because he won these hands?

This is what pre-solved hands are. No way anyone will not stack with these. Situations like this are just destined to come occasionally and half of the time you'll be on the good side and the other half not. Hands like this are in some sense break-even for both of you. In other words: if you stacked someone with top set over his lower set don't think you are uber-shark.



 

Some 6max fun

 NL10$ 6max on iPoker network

Won some 5 buy-ins in like 1.2k hands. Most players suck there. Hardly anyone will put hard pressure on you without a real hand. After realizing how much I play better post-flop I really opened my game with all sorts of implied odds types of hands, even open-limping from time to time! Unlike in the past, this time I played with full 100BB buy-in and now I DO realize why good players keep repeating over and over that short-stacking is way below optimal. If you are substantially better than your opposition then by all means do yourself a favor and buy-in full. And even lots of sick suckouts (KK vs AQ - ace on river) and dominated hands (AJ vs AK) couldn't stop me to routinely build 300BB+ stack. At first I couldn't grasp why I was winning at all given VPIP:38% and very low aggression. Then after thinking some more I finally saw the big picture: I was very patient and didn't chase; I was very aggressive in position, but controlled pot out of position; I was fully concentrated on my opponents, thinking hard about what their actions mean; I was carefully picking spots to bluff, semi-bluff and second-barrel.

Also I noticed interesting pattern: You raise (AK, AQ ...), weak calls, flop: rags ... instead of cbetting you check, he checks, turn: rag ... Well pot-bet here will make him fold 8 times out of 10. This also works in position: he c/c and then again check the turn.

Gamb00l update

After 10 played 2.5+0.25$ SNGs I managed to build my BR back to ~31$ and it's time to move up: 5+0.3$ (tomorrow).

The sequence was: + + - + - + + + + +

Up to this point there were total 28 games, 18W:10L which is 64.3% matches won. Also it's interesting to notice that I made profit of 5.35$ and paid 7.15$ in rake (this rate is horrible).

Played some HU cash games as well. Went fine. It's not much of a difference compared to HU SNGs, though everybody keep repeating that it's the sickest variance ever. The more I play, the more do I realize importance of position and many other common concepts one hears every now and then. HU is a very good playground if you want to both learn everything about poker (aside from playing in multiway pots, DOH) and put your skills into serious training.

Something I hear quite often these days:"HU is the new 6max".

 

Hell of a start

('+' = won, '-' = lost)

Started with ~25.8$

HU SNG

2.5+0.25$:
- + - + + - - + + + + (7:4)

BR:30.5$ => GOING UP: 5$ + 0.3$:
- - - (0:3)

BR:14.6$ => GOING DOWN: 2.5$ + 0.25$:
+ - + + (3:1)

current BR:18.6$

Feel like gamb00lin'

Recently I've seen lot posts (2+2) about aggressive moving up in stakes. That is, you don't follow standard 20+ buy-ins BR recommendations, but for ex. as soon as you have 3 BI for the next level, you move up and if you drop to 3 BI for the previous level - you move down. And up and down and up ... There is even some 2+2 dude who turned 600$ into 117k in a week !! and lost it all !!! Wooow !!!! If I somehow decide to do that, I'll probably be more conservative, i.e. little more BIs, but YES - I'm thinking of taking a shot. Say, put aside 20$ or so and give it a try ...



 

15$ here and there

Got 15$ from Party and quickly blew it all. Played bad, ran dry and got some strong holdings cracked (including set over set). Finally went on tilt and spewed the rest. What the hell, it was only 15$. I never liked Party anyway. If they continue to give me occasional $$ - fine. Till then my account there will be empty as usual.

Also got 15$ from CDPoker. I played on CD a lot recently. First I signed to Pokerinside.com for free 20$. Made up to 200-ish and then deposited 100$ to get bonus. On their main site it's clearly stated that bonus releases in 10$ increments. After getting enough points for 20$ I emailed support to explain me why my 20$ (by that moment) weren't released. Reply was something like 10$ increments releasing is for (I guess) later reload bonuses while 1st-deposit ones release in one lump sum. Liars!! After I quickly realized that by playing at my present stakes will not be possible to clear before it expires, I withdrew everything - never to come back. After a month they emailed me that I have 5$ waiting to claim. Yeah right :). I didn't even bother. A week ago, right after 5$ expired, I got another mail that 15$ are waiting to claim (hehehe). My conclusion was that was probably their best offer so I logged in and got 15$. Not yet sure what to do with it.



 

Mental monologue

How often did we hear: "I wasn't on my A game", even from some top pros. For sure, we all have our moments of tilt and irrational donk-ness. No one is immune. And it's one of the most (if not THE most) often given advice: "Always play your A game". But aside from overall knowledge and full concentration, what exactly it takes to be an A? More specifically: what mind frame 'A' player has?

I just happened to find what I was doing when playing my best. It happened almost accidentally and I'm surprised I didn't realize it earlier. Before starting the 'insightful' session I was in a good mood, willing to enter the arena and fight, fully confident in my own skills. I played well, was concentrated when it stroke me: I had a mental monologue (and yes I'm sane, thank you :)). It was like mentally talking to yourself. I was stating anything I could see, ex. 'this guy likes to slowplay', 'this guy pays dearly to see the flop but gives up unimproved', 'this one can't fold TP irrelevant kicker', 'this will fold to second barrel'; then concerning my image: 'I was too tight for last 20 or so hands, so this is a good spot to steal blinds from weak tight', 'I was very active in last ten hands, so I'm folding AT against blind who likes to play back' and finally: I was anticipating action and adjusting the best I could. It really felt like having a coach, standing behind your shoulders and telling you everything he considers important and what to do with rationale behind any move. I WAS THINKING LOUD AND CLEAR. It wasn't some ordinary robotic session. And this led to even better concentration and more clear thinking - thus better judgement.

I'm sure good players do this subconsciously. But we, aspiring students need to pay attention to such details and exercise until it becomes our second nature.

Oh, did I mention I finished the session waaay up :) 

:( I now better than that

Here's another hand from aforementioned night that I played like level-1 moron

NL10
Effective stacks: 130BB
VILLAIN - loose unimaginative

2 limpers, I(CO) raise 6BB w/ AKo, 1 (limper) calls (pot:15BB)
FLOP: A Q 4 rainbow
VILLAIN bets 14BB, I raise 40BB, VILLAIN calls (pot:95BB)
TURN: 7
VILLAIN checks, I bet 84BB AI, VILLAIN calls
RIVER: 5
VILLAIN wins (Q,4)

This flop action is one of those way ahead/way behind situations (WA/WB). If one spends some time reading Poker forums he'll notice that the general consensus is that playing WA/WB properly pretty much means playing passively. First, unimaginative player that played preflop really weak all of a sudden leads into me, preflop raiser, strong. In my poker career I've seen it a lot. Sometimes, when flop comes all rags this might be a steal. Sometimes, they'll call your PFR with worse hand (worse kicker) and make this weird play. Sometimes it'll be semibluff. But as I remember, more often than not it meant strong hand - certainly strong enough to beat TPTK.

In his book Harrington advocates raising 'for information' which I did, but many people disagree for good reasons. With raising you get the worst of both worlds: if you're WA you make them fold, if WB you loose more. There are places where this is good move (after all Harrington's book is about tourneys), but this one was not.

Correct play? Well, folding is, given what I knew about VILLAIN, probably not that bad, but not really optimal - what's the point of raise in that case. No, correct was (especially in position) to call and then reevaluate on turn. If he keeps betting strong then give him a credit and fold. Otherwise go for a cheap showdown. Standard. I knew that already, played this way million times and yet misplayed it.

Turn I screwed as well. Harrington's idea of raising for info means to give up or at least proceed VERY carefully if he doesn't fold. Well, I raised for info, got the info and finally ignored it completely. Checking behind and going for cheap showdown was mandatory. Old saying:"Never make a bet that'll only get called if you are beat".

Not to mention that I managed to forget that all I had was just one pair. Beneath this problem there's even bigger one: too many months have I played 6max and HU and this particular hand was from Full ring. Actual problem is that I didn't readjust my standards and tended to overvalue hands.

And more mistakes: too often my strategy was to buy-in short - 50BB and play tight, thus giving my OPPs bad implied odds. I never learned to play with deep stack. Playing deep properly means playing carefully.

Finally, I wasn't thinking at all. Played too tired. Played mechanically and for some reason decided that it's time to be aggressive. Just like that. On impulse.

:( I know better than that

Low 2P any different than TPTK ?

Here's the hand I played:

4 limpers, SB folds, I (BB) check w/ 72o
FLOP: Qs 8s 2
checked around
TURN: 7
I bet (pot-size), 1 caller (loose player)
RIVER: A
I bet 2/3 pot, VILLAIN min-raises, I ...?

Sure enough I called with ~ 3-to-1 odds only to find out that VILLAIN was slowplaying from the beginning his flopped top 2P (Q,8). Despite his vary bad play (slowplaying on a draw heavy board), I found it strange that I fell in love with my low 2P cause, well it's 2 pairs. That night I wasn't definitely playing my A game, was tired and didn't pay attention. Had I thought at least a little I would have tried to firure out what hand might he been raising with AND what possible hand that raises the river I could beat. Not many (if any). It's funny that his bad play was almost perfect strategy against careful player like me holding what I did. Had he bet the flop or raised the turn or river strong I would have probably folded. This way he milked me the best he could.

And this is a lesson to remember. Is there really any difference between mediocre 2P and TPTK when it comes to real pressure. When faced with river raise (and you are sure it's not a bluff) what hands that typically raise rivers are you beating with low or mediocre 2 pairs. And that's the problem with these: unlike TPTKs, weak 2 pairs are so hard to dump. And there is no real difference.

Also, from most and especially bad players MIN-raise usually means that he wants to be called. Somehow I forgot that.

Odds: set over set

After being stacked when my set ran into a bigger set I decided to do a little math and see what are the chances of being that 'lucky'.



For the sake of simplicity we'll assume that every PP will pay to see the flop.

Also note that when I say Full Ring (FR), I mean 9 opponents and accordingly 6max means 5 OPPs.



1) Chances to get PP:

there are (52*51)/2=1326 theoretically possible holdings, 13 PPs and 6 ways to be dealt each which leads to 13*6/1326=0.058823 or 5.88% or (1-to-17) 1/17.



2) Chances that at least one of your opponents has different PP himself:

first we must take 2 (your hole) cards out of the deck so there are (50*49)/2=1225 possible holdings and remaining 12 PPs, 6 ways to be dealt each -> 12*6/1225=0.058775 or 1/17.01 AGAINST 1 OPPONENT (HU).
With 9 OPPs (FR): (1 - (16/17)^9) = 1/2.38
With 5 OPPs (6m): (1 - (16/17)^5) = 1/3.82

By now we have two different PPs preflop. Since we want to know how often will our OPP have the better one (OBV half of the time), we need to divide these with 2 ->

HU: (1/2)*(1/17.01)= 1/34.02
6m: (1/2)*(1/3.82)= 1/7.64
FR: (1/2)*(1/2.38)= 1/4.76



3) Chances of you flopping a set:

first we must take 4 known (hole) cards out of the deck -> 1-((46/48)*(45/47)*(44/46))=0.12234 or 1/8.17



4) Chances of your OPP flopping a set:

now we must take 5 known cards out of the deck: 4 hole cards and one flop card that brought us a set which also means there are 2 remaining flop cards that OPP might hit set with -> 1-((45/47)*(44/46))=0.084181 or 1/11.88



5) Putting it all together:

now we just have to multiply all of the above:

(HU) (1/17)*(1/34.02)*(1/8.17)*(1/11.88)= 1/56133
(6m) (1/17)*(1/7.64)*(1/8.17)*(1/11.88)= 1/12606
(FR) (1/17)*(1/4.76)*(1/8.17)*(1/11.88)= 1/7854


***************************************************************


SYNOPSIS:



On average, how often will it happen that you flop a set AND your opponent flops a bigger set?

Roughly about ...

HU: once in 56.1K hands
6m: once in 12.6K hands
FR: once in 7.8K hands