Personal Thoughts

This is going to be a rather lengthy post, so I apologize in advance to those of you who bother to read it lol.

I've been experiencing a great deal of problems during the past few weeks in online ring play. This isn't meant to be another bad beat sob story, but it is sort of a poker catharsis for myself, so please bear with me. I'll start at the beginning...

I discovered NLHE near the end of Summer 2004 through... guess what? Television. I had known about poker/gambling/etc for years but had never been interested in that subject. However, learning Hold'em from a few of my friends was quite an enjoyable experience for me. I consider myself a very competitive gamer, and had made shifts from video games (Starcraft, Counterstrike) to Chess to Magic the Gathering etc etc etc. It didn't take long before I realized that I was hooked on Hold'em, and conveniently plenty of the regulars I played video games with were as well. It also didn't take long for me to realized that I sucked. A lot.

During the end of that year, I started reading a few books. I remember lounging in the Barnes 'n' Noble cafe, devouring poker book after poker book: Super System, assorted McEvoy books, Caro's book of Tells, Theory of Poker and so on. It started as a hobby but soon became a mild obsession. After a few home games and putting those books to good use, I started winning those home tournaments. It felt great, but of course I wanted more.

Enter the internet. My first site was Pokerstars (with a $100 deposit) in early January 2005. Although I did not have a huge commitment to the game at the time and I felt pressured by school and work, I started playing a bunch of Sit 'n' Go's. I went up a few hundred, I went down a few hundred, but over the course of that year, I was even. At first I thought my natural hunting ground was SNG's but eventually they became "boring" and "frustrating" to me. I mean, who wants to play for a good hour, bubble out, and have to start all over again, right? Boy was I being undisciplined.

I thoroughly studied (and I still do) HOH1&2 near the end of Summer 2005. I mention this because it helped me a lot in SNG's and I feel alot of my "moves" have their origins in tournament strategies. However, I wanted to make the move to cash games. And that's where this site comes into place.

I discoverd FTR in April 2004. No other resource on the subject of poker has been as informative and helpful to me. I loved the SNG strategies but the popularity of ring games intrigued me and I thought tourney strategy was becoming kinda dull (All-in moves PF when blinds are huge etc). It seemed to me that ring was the next step.

Now, it's 2006, and I made a commitment at the beginning of the year to playing yet even better poker. I properly bankrolled myself for 25NL and started slugging it out. But I've hit a major rut in the last few weeks.

It's probably nothing but variance, but a)that's an excuse and b)my mental state concerning poker is on the line. I feel like I keep getting outplayed, at the 25NL tables! It seems everytime I hit a set and win, it's just the flop pot or maybe an extra bet or two. When I lose with a set, I pay a lot of money off to a guy who gets a straight or flush. I also tend to pay off sets more than I should when I hold an overpair. Trust me, I've been making lots, and I mean lots of folds in marginal situations where I've felt that I have the worst of it. I know that's important, but still, being pushed around never really feels great.

I also paid off AA with KK preflop TWICE today. Both times I raised 3-4bb and some guy went all-in. I really thought they had the aces, but I can't make this fold at 25NL, can I? Jeez, I sound like a donk lol. I've read all the threads of KK vs AA. I know how silly it is to worry about AA with KK preflop at a 25nl table. But once again, seeing those dreaded rockets pop up and my stack disappearing doesn't make me feel any better.

I do take the game very seriously, and when I play live shorthanded games, I feel like I can read and outplay anyone in the world. Of course I'm not a real egomaniac, but making reads, running a bluff, selling the nuts, and just plain ol' making money... what can I say? I love it.

This hasn't been too much of a specific "hey how do I not suck at NLHE" thread but a reflection, as I previously mentioned. I got poker tracker, I'm trying to find leaks in my game, I started a poker journal a few months ago, and I'lldefinitely be posting more here. I have plenty of HH's that I need you guys to analyze. I've been lurking this site for over a year and learning a wealth of information, but now I'd like to put some interaction into it.

On an ending note, I can't stress how important discipline is. I remember months ago whenever a big hand of mine would get cracked, I would yell and swear at the computer. Now, my recent poker games haven't exactly made me happy, but now I'm able to resist punching my monitor! I've learned this skill (and many others!) from you guys, and I'd like to say thanks a bunch!

I look forward to seeking advice and feedback in the immediate future. In fact, just writing this has made me feel 100x better.

When did you move from SNGs to ring? It was a difficult transition for me at first. I read plenty of poker stuff - mostly on here. However, I didn't apply myself to improving my game and fixing leaks as I should have. I just read a bunch of posts about raising preflop and dropping the hammer with the nuts. What about the other 90% of the hands? Well...50% of those I shouldn't even be seeeing the flop with. I got Poker Tracker and found leaks and went through every hand history to figure out where I was wasting money. Then I came up with a gameplan based on AOK's posts. It was hard to stick to the gameplan at first but I persevered. The alternative was to quit because it was a waste of money.

I'm still not very good, but I'm bettter than the break-evens and I'm crushing the constant turnover of fish. I try to hang around those groups. You'd be surprise how many of the good and profitable players on FTR fit that description. Many of them are on there way to being able to beat the good players and sharks as well.

You are probably somewhere between fish and break-even (closer to break-even?). Apply yourself. Fix a couple leaks and things could change. Then fix a couple more and come join me.

The battle for the blinds/antes is the instigator of all action in poker. Well at least that's the theory. Without the blinds no one would open without Aces, no one would call and there would be no game.

The current 100bb full ring NLHE forces very little action. Most of the action is artificially created by the players. Those blinds are just giving people permission to play hands other than pairs. In reality the live ones is the blind.

The reason someone like Ripptyde or Micheal1123 has a hope of making money in a cash game (playing the way they do) is that they win more than their fair share of the sucker blinds that are out and instigate the other players to play worse than them!

One final tip. Image if every hand had a random amount of blind money out between $1 and $20, but you only had to post a $1 blind. What would ideal pre-flop play look like in that game?

Fuck, I said too much...

I don't get it...imagine that everyone was postin a blind between $1-20? and try to steal it? or just limp. please say more lol

I would never lay down a big overpair at NL25 unless I'm up against someone I know is tight and good, the board is paired, the board very likely hit someone with two pair, or the board has a 3flush or 4straight. Similarly, never lay down KK PF at NL25 unless you have a strong read that the guy is a rock and would not make that play w/out KK or AA.

Krieg, good play to you and your future.

I really like your confidence for live games and your Stu Ungar (I think it's Stu Ungar) like confidence in reading people. If you know what your opponent hold, it doesn't matter what you were dealt.

That being said, have confidence in your transition to ring games. There are many benefits that are not as prevelant as in SnG's/MTT's. Namely time - You can profit and quit after playing for 5 minutes.

Just like you, I started out the same way in September 2004 - watching it on TV and playing the home game with my roommates (who took $$ from my game for over a year)... fucking assholes. But I guess you learn the hard way

I can relate. About a month ago I had a week where I won $600 during the day on Monday, $300 in a tourney that night, $500 on Tuesday, $850 on Wednesday, then lost $400 on Thursday and another $400 on Friday. Saturday I didn't even show up to play... my confidence was shot because of two bad days. I play very aggressive, so confidence is key, but variance is unavoidable. The following Wednesday I won a bar tourney and killed the live game afterward, and I was back. The experience put me up another level. There's nothing like a nasty run to get you getting better.

nice post.. something I wanted to point out like I always do.

do take the game very seriously, and when I play live shorthanded games, I feel like I can read and outplay anyone in the world. Of course I'm not a real egomaniac, but making reads, running a bluff, selling the nuts, and just plain ol' making money... what can I say? I love it.

I agree with you here (especially in short-handed games).. it's a part of poker. Just don't take this attitude too far. Consistently trying to take a couple cards and just using your 'skill' (aka agression) to win hands is just a recipe for disaster in no limit holdem. See my next post...

Also, sorry I missed your IM the other night. I just leave AIM up 24/7 with no away msg so if you don't get a response, it's b/c I'm not there.

The current 100bb full ring NLHE forces very little action. Most of the action is artificially created by the players. Those blinds are just giving people permission to play hands other than pairs. In reality the live ones is the blind.

yes, absolutely true. This reminds me of sklansky's posts in the HSNL forum at 2+2. He got flamed a lot in those threads, but what he was referring to couldn't be any more true.

As Fnord has talked about in the past (correct me if I'm wrong Fnord), the reason to loosen up isn't because it's the theoretically correct way to play deep stacked NLHE, but to put yourself into more situations to win money against poor players. Basically by loosening up, you put yourself into favorite spots against donks then say, a tight, solid player would.

Lately I have been experimenting with 8-9 tabling while playing a very tight game. Truthfully, for improving your game or beating tough games, I certainly do not recommend it. But there are enough players that make so many mistakes preflop (essentially by playing too loose, especially in raised pots), that I can just play a pretty uncreative, very tight game, only occasionally making moves or 'mixup' plays, and beat the games for solid winrates. While playing 4 tables, I feel I'd be able to loosen up, push more marginal edges, and put myself up against the 'live' ones more to make more money per table, but probably not more overall (at least at this time, this could always change).

Originally Posted by Lukie

The current 100bb full ring NLHE forces very little action. Most of the action is artificially created by the players. Those blinds are just giving people permission to play hands other than pairs. In reality the live ones is the blind.

yes, absolutely true. This reminds me of sklansky's posts in the HSNL forum at 2+2. He got flamed a lot in those threads, but what he was referring to couldn't be any more true.

As Fnord has talked about in the past (correct me if I'm wrong Fnord), the reason to loosen up isn't because it's the theoretically correct way to play deep stacked NLHE, but to put yourself into more situations to win money against poor players. Basically by loosening up, you put yourself into favorite spots against donks then say, a tight, solid player would.

Lately I have been experimenting with 8-9 tabling while playing a very tight game. Truthfully, for improving your game or beating tough games, I certainly do not recommend it. But there are enough players that make so many mistakes preflop (essentially by playing too loose, especially in raised pots), that I can just play a pretty uncreative, very tight game, only occasionally making moves or 'mixup' plays, and beat the games for solid winrates. While playing 4 tables, I feel I'd be able to loosen up, push more marginal edges, and put myself up against the 'live' ones more to make more money per table, but probably not more overall (at least at this time, this could always change).

Thanks a lot for the feedback.

I probably should have rephrased what I said. I don't think I'm the best player ever at these live games, but I remember how ridiculously awful I used to be, and how much I've improved. I actually have a very modest mouth at the poker table. I don't say "bla bla bla I knew you had AQ" or "how man what a great read I just made". Most importantly, I don't tap the glass.

Once again thanks alot for the advice guys.

Very interesting thread. I'm still trying to digest everything in Fnord's post (esp about the random blind table) but now I understand why playing low and microlimit NLHE should be so basic - ie, DTFH.

my interpretation:

In small stakes NLHE, your opps make so many mistakes that you can simply profit off them by beating them with cards (ie, opps chasing a draw without odds; opps calling a large PFR with absolute trash; limp-calling with SCs OOP). You can give up "edges" of deception because these people won't see the deception, and the fundamental card edge you have over them is so easy to exploit.

At higher levels, I guess there are fewer exploitable people so you have to help your opps make errors, or fundamentally disguise your hand. Your cards are no longer your edge as disciplined, skilled opps will know when their cards are good and when they're not...

I'm just regurgitating Fnord's post really, but I'm starting to understand. .. Theoretically anyways - why at higher levels "you play your most profitably when you play opposite your normal style". You have immediate deception due to your table image, which could make your opps make false assumptions about you - helping them make the wrong decision about your hand. They probably won't be making the wrong decision about their cards, so your edge has to come from somewhere else.

Originally Posted by Blinky

I'm just regurgitating Fnord's post really, but I'm starting to understand. .. Theoretically anyways - why at higher levels "you play your most profitably when you play opposite your normal style". You have immediate deception due to your table image, which could make your opps make false assumptions about you - helping them make the wrong decision about your hand. They probably won't be making the wrong decision about their cards, so your edge has to come from somewhere else.

Yea I guess the point is that if you assume there is a theoretically 'correct' way to play any given hand in any situation then your profit can be defined as the difference between your mistakes (EV you lose) and your opponents mistakes (EV you gain).
It becomes obvious that in a game where your opponents are constantly making big mistakes by themselves, your profit is maximised when you play as correctly as you can and dont worry about mixing it up (i.e. bluffing, slowplaying etc.).

In a game where your opponents tend to play correctly you need to deviate from correct strategy so that they alter their play. You will make a profit when their forced mistakes are bigger than your (delberate) mistakes.

The way I see it, if you can understand which opponents can be manipulated through active, aggressive play--and how that play affects their decision making--you can maximize your profits by forcing opponents to make more difficult decisions that you. So, when in doubt, the process is:
(1) raise
(2) play it hard
(3) adjust to opponent

What I'll also say is that many players can make a handsome, low risk profit applying this aggressive style to pre-flop and flop action. However...the real artists extend this approach to turn and river play through great reads and creative play.

The net for you right now is that 25NL doesn't even require GREAT reads or creativity to build wealth...naked aggression and basic player profiling will suffice for nice profits.

P.S. - Demiparadigm should help here (see quote below)...some good posts from Demi on this subject if you search around on FTR.

GL,
CK

You know, the more I read this thread and the various thoughts, the more I realize I MUST read TOP.

The funny thing is that typing out the above is a lot more meaningful than having passively read it...

Originally Posted by Blinky

Very interesting thread. I'm still trying to digest everything in Fnord's post (esp about the random blind table) but now I understand why playing low and microlimit NLHE should be so basic - ie, DTFH.

my interpretation:

In small stakes NLHE, your opps make so many mistakes that you can simply profit off them by beating them with cards (ie, opps chasing a draw without odds; opps calling a large PFR with absolute trash; limp-calling with SCs OOP). You can give up "edges" of deception because these people won't see the deception, and the fundamental card edge you have over them is so easy to exploit.

At higher levels, I guess there are fewer exploitable people so you have to help your opps make errors, or fundamentally disguise your hand. Your cards are no longer your edge as disciplined, skilled opps will know when their cards are good and when they're not...

I'm just regurgitating Fnord's post really, but I'm starting to understand. .. Theoretically anyways - why at higher levels "you play your most profitably when you play opposite your normal style". You have immediate deception due to your table image, which could make your opps make false assumptions about you - helping them make the wrong decision about your hand. They probably won't be making the wrong decision about their cards, so your edge has to come from somewhere else.

This is something I've been thinking about a lot as well. In HOH, Harrington states that in an online tourney, he would ALWAYS raise with AA preflop. In a game-theoretical sense, always raising with aces preflop is the correct, optimal strategy. In most online arenas, you just won't run into the same opponents as often, and there is not as much need to mix it up. Against a really good observant opponent however (like those at the big live events), Harrington suggests open raising with big pairs like AA KK QQ 80% of the time and open limping 20% of the time.

Although Harrington's strategy applies to tournament play, it's easy to see the relation to this "deception" issue we're talking about. Most opponents at 25NL just aren't paying enough attention to warrant mixing it up. At higher levels, deviating occasionaly from the "correct play" is essential for longer term EV and directly correlates with the Fundamental Theorem of Poker. At 25NL though, I'm always popping PF with rockets.

Fnord-> to answer your question: I'm not sure, because it's 2:00 am now lol and my brain isn't at full power. I'm going to guess that playing only insane hands would be correct? Other players, on average, would be posting higher blinds than yourself, so getting invovled with marginal or even speculative drawing hands would seem to be -EV. The average of 1-20 is 10.5, which is a little bit over ten times your blind. I'm assuming this would mean playing a certain percentage of hands, but I fail to see where I'm going with this rofl. I have a hunch though...