Beating micro's thought #1

IMO most people who struggle to beat the micros have a common leak. They win small pots and lose big ones.

Rather than just mindlessly mashing buttons because its fun, spend some time thinking about how to win big pots and lose small ones. If you use a HH db (PT, HM, etc) sort through your biggest losers and think what you could have done differently. If you dont, then note down your holecards right after losing a big pot and go through your HH after your session and do the same. Also spend some time going through the hands you did win, and consider if there were different ways to play them that might have won you more money (without putting you in a spot to lose a big pot if your hand isnt that strong).

when i'm on tilt (which happens less now, but is still the number one reason i lose money) this is the first thing that goes to pieces.

I put heaps and heaps of money into the pot with TPGK. All ideas about pot control go out the window as i try to win back what's mine.

BIG HAND BIG POT, SMALL HAND SMALL POT. This mantra is something i must say to myself 20 times a session.

Originally Posted by bjsaust

IMO most people who struggle to beat the micros have a common leak. They win small pots and lose big ones.

Rather than just mindlessly mashing buttons because its fun, spend some time thinking about how to win big pots and lose small ones. If you use a HH db (PT, HM, etc) sort through your biggest losers and think what you could have done differently. If you dont, then note down your holecards right after losing a big pot and go through your HH after your session and do the same. Also spend some time going through the hands you did win, and consider if there were different ways to play them that might have won you more money (without putting you in a spot to lose a big pot if your hand isnt that strong).

did this awhile ago and it helped my game so much that i couldn't believe that i didnt do it beforehand. nicepost bj

Originally Posted by bjsaust

If you use a HH db (PT, HM, etc) sort through your biggest losers and think what you could have done differently.

Been SOP for me for the last 5-6 months. It makes perfect sense when you realize that your bb/100 win rate is pretty much determined by these big hands... and that you can blow sh!t to hell real quick by just f-in up these key decision points.

It also can be reassuring when you realize you did everything right on review and blew out 4 buy-ins as the equity favorite. Helps you not only deal with the variance, but be a little less results oriented 'cause it reinforces focus on "how played" instead of "how won" -- which is why it's equally critical to review your big wins as well as big losses. Winning a buy-in 'cause you donked a 2-outter as the balls out underdog is not the key to long-term success... whereas losing a buyin 'cause you got your stack in good and the villain sucked out his is.

Originally Posted by bjsaust

IMO most people who struggle to beat the micros have a common leak. They win small pots and lose big ones.

It's not just about laying down one pair hands. Heck, that becomes less of a problem as you move up. The problem I see with most players is that they suck monkey balls at planning out a hand and building a big pot when there is a pretty good chance they're going to want to play a big pot.

I like using post-it notes for things like this as a reminder to myself. My latest one to go on my monitor is "Don't bloat pots with marginal hands".

Originally Posted by Trashcona

I like using post-it notes for things like this as a reminder to myself. My latest one to go on my monitor is "Don't bloat pots with marginal hands".

unless villain is likely to have worse.

Bumped because I think this is really important to keep in mind.

nice post think will go out and by a stack of postit" notes . seeing how im just one of them that just plays the hand and doesnt think about why i lost it. got to improve on this game .

I have a post-it note pad stuck to the top of my monitor. Before each session I peel one off, then I take a post it note off and write the focus point for the session on it. Some of my notes:

- Don't marry pf monsters
- Range range range
- Position position position
- Plan the hand before you VPIP (based around likeliest flop)
And my latest one: nits don't bluff.

what's the number one determinant in achieving this thought/goal?

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

what's the number one determinant in achieving this thought/goal?

I love the way you encourage us all to think, spenda. On this occasion though, I don't think any of the answers in my head are close to the one you're looking for

My guess would be 'planning ahead'?

just ask yourself what makes pot-size manipulation easy/hard?

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

just ask yourself what makes pot-size manipulation easy/hard?

My other guess was 'position'

Don't let iopq or ragnar4 see that question though...

Think of one easy way to make the pot bigger, and one easy way to try to keep it small.

Then think about when its easiest to do either with success.

this is fun

Bet sizing?

Originally Posted by bjsaust

Think of one easy way to make the pot bigger

Bet.

Originally Posted by bjsaust

and one easy way to try to keep it small.

Check.

door#2 luco

swish

I think Spendas actually thinking a bit beyond my initial point when I made this thread. Basically I see a lot of new players either slowplay their big hands, or make little teaser bets trying to get value from weak hands. Conversely they're happy to bet/call big with their weaker hands. So you'll see people bet 1/3 pot or even check with top set, but bet pot and call a raise with top pair. Thats backwards poker.

So the real basics is, to build a big pot, bet and raise, to keep a pot small, dont.

To go beyond that, position makes it MUCH easier to control this stuff. Obviously. You can check OOP and dammit the other guy bets, whereas if you're IP you get the most control.

Probably after that comes bet sizing. I think a lot of people think like "how small do I need to bet to get called by their weak hands", when they'd win more money overall if they asked "how much can I bet and still get called by a lot of hands?"

Heres a good example to demonstrate from my Op recently:

No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (6 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

MP ($24.48)
Hero (CO) ($99.50)
Button ($100)
SB ($226.40)
BB ($113.34)
UTG ($95)

Preflop: Hero is CO with 8, 8
UTG bets $3.50, MP calls $3.50, Hero calls $3.50, 3 folds

Flop: ($12) 3, 5, 8 (3 players)
UTG checks, MP checks, Hero bets $8, UTG calls $8, 1 fold

Turn: ($28) 4 (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero checks

River: ($28) 3 (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $20, UTG calls $20

Total pot: $68

Results:
UTG didn't show {he had QQ with the Q of clubs}
Hero had 8, 8 (full house, eights over threes).
Outcome: Hero won $65


Obviously (I hope) the guy was a bit weak/tight, but look at how the hand played out. He wanted to see a turn free/cheaply so checked, I wanted to build a pot while I was likely ahead so bet (probably should have been a bit bigger, maybe $10). On turn he hits, but doesnt want to give away the strength so checks hoping I'll bet. I think he likely has the flush so choose to take a free card to improve. River he's scared he might not be best and wants to see a cheap showdown so checks, I have the near nuts so make a decent bet. At every stage in the hand (postflop anyway), I got money in while I was ahead, and he got all his money in while behind and no money in while he was ahead.

I think I made a mistake on the river though. This is a spot where he either calls almost any bet, or folds. I doubt he'll fold any flush or call with anything else. He'd probably fold to some kind of overbet, but he'd call pot or close to I think. In a spot where he either calls or he doesnt regardless of betsize, when you're fairly sure you're ahead you should obviously bet big.

This fits in nicely with a convo I had with BooG690 yesterday, about how we both need to man up and overbet the pot sometimes if we think we will get called by worse. It's not something I do very often, even though there are times when I'm fairly sure I could get away with it. Bet as big as you can get away with when you're ahead.

Originally Posted by Lucothefish

This fits in nicely with a convo I had with BooG690 yesterday, about how we both need to man up and overbet the pot sometimes if we think we will get called by worse. It's not something I do very often, even though there are times when I'm fairly sure I could get away with it. Bet as big as you can get away with when you're ahead.

You'll be surprised how often you'll get called when you overbet, especially at 10nl and 25nl. And think of it this way. Suppose we have BJ's hand above without the 4 clubs - no flush possible on the river.

Option A: Bet 1/2 pot.
Option B: Bet 1.5 x pot.

Suppose the Option A bet gets called half the time by this villain. How often does he have to call the overbet to make the overbet more profitable?

I'm exaggerating a bit to make a point - I don't overbet all that much (and didn't when I was at 10nl). I think BJ has pointed out a much more pervasive leak-spot: betting the river 2/5's when 90% of the hands he calls with would have called a 4/5's psb, which tons of micro-players do. I still see this from opponents at 100nl (thank goodness). My point is that you should run the math and realize you don't have to get looked up as often as you think to make the bigger bet MUCH more profitable than the smaller one.

Originally Posted by bjsaust

I think a lot of people think like "how small do I need to bet to get called by their weak hands", when they'd win more money overall if they asked "how much can I bet and still get called by a lot of hands?"

Crucial point. It is not about maximizing the chances of your value bet getting called (or vice versa your bluff not getting called), but to maximize your overall EV.

A bet of $1 may get you 95% calls, while betting $10 only works 10%. Yes, it´s frustrating when people fold 9/10 rivers when u boated up, but still betting $10 would be correct.

Originally Posted by Lucothefish

This fits in nicely with a convo I had with BooG690 yesterday, about how we both need to man up and overbet the pot sometimes if we think we will get called by worse. It's not something I do very often, even though there are times when I'm fairly sure I could get away with it. Bet as big as you can get away with when you're ahead.

Sweet. I got mentioned in a thread. But yes...tis true, overbetting the pot is not something I generally think about...but something that CAN work to create a big pot (especially if you feel that they hit a hand capable of calling a large bet).

A HUGE problem I've had with Big hands, big pots," is dealing with sets. I get to fancy with them. I try to slowplay them. Stacks explained it to me simply as, "Bet/bet/bet." It really is that simple. I shouldn't be worried about blowing them off their hand. If they simply fold after my bet, there probably wasn't much money to be won in the first place!

Originally Posted by bjsaust

If you use a HH db (PT, HM, etc) sort through your biggest losers and think what you could have done differently.

I did this awhile back for the first time. I went over all my biggest losers and biggest winners. It was a real eye opener to see were I was losing. As some have said aready weak hands small pots, big hands big pots. I was betting too much and making the pot to big with weak hands.

Originally Posted by BooG690

Originally Posted by Lucothefish

This fits in nicely with a convo I had with BooG690 yesterday, about how we both need to man up and overbet the pot sometimes if we think we will get called by worse. It's not something I do very often, even though there are times when I'm fairly sure I could get away with it. Bet as big as you can get away with when you're ahead.

Sweet. I got mentioned in a thread. But yes...tis true, overbetting the pot is not something I generally think about...but something that CAN work to create a big pot (especially if you feel that they hit a hand capable of calling a large bet).

I think lots of villains who call think it's a bluff, so you'll see a bunch of medium-strength hands here. Don't try to estimate "what they're capable of" calling - you're gonna be surprised what garbage looks up your big river bets and your psb 3-barrels.

Originally Posted by BooG690

A HUGE problem I've had with Big hands, big pots," is dealing with sets. I get to fancy with them. I try to slowplay them. Stacks explained it to me simply as, "Bet/bet/bet." It really is that simple. I shouldn't be worried about blowing them off their hand. If they simply fold after my bet, there probably wasn't much money to be won in the first place!

Bold part VERY true.

Yeah, something I read in a book, forget which one. If we have a big hand, we want to play a big pot. The only way we can do that, is if opponent wants to play a big pot. So we should assume he has a hand that he'll play a big pot with and play accordingly.

I believe Sklansky wrote this in "Theory and Practice." He says to play sets as if they had aces or kings. If they flopped a higher set, we're simply destined to get stacked. If he has two pair, he's destined to get stacked. If anything else, there is almost no way for us to create a big pot (Page 28 of "Theory and Practice").