|
|
 Please read my hand (exercise)
I haven't really thought this through yet, so not sure how it'll turn out.
It occurred to me more and more recently that I tend to look at poker from the wrong perspective.
I should first understand my opponents tendencies - understand how he plays certain types of hands, when that is balanced, unbalanced, game theory optimal, exploitative, if/when he adjusts, how he can adjust, if he ever overadjusts, if he bluffs a lot, bets for thin value etc - and understand what the weaknesses in his poker is. That's first.
Second, I should look at his actions in the hand (and if there are multiple villains as there tends to be pre-flop, do the equivalent for all of them) and decide where his weaknesses are and what types of hands I want to play against him in and out of position, and in the current situation define a range of hands that I want to continue with and how I want to continue with them, and what kind of plan I want on different types of flops, knowing which hands I'll want to play against this opponent to extract value and which types of hands I'll play hoping to bluff and steal etc.
Third, I'll glance at my cards, determine what part of the range it's in, and most likely fold. Or do whatever is right against the opponent, but the point is that just because most pocket holdings end up being correct to fold pre-flop doesn't mean I should look at my cards first.
This process needs to repeat on every decision. I need to emphasise the parts of my opponents range I think will have acted in exactly this way and discount the parts of his range that will only have acted this way some of the time or rarely. Then I need to consider the hand combinations in each part of that range, my equity against the part of the range, weight it by emphasised/discounted hand combinations, approximate the EV of all possible hands in my hand range against each of these ranges, define some hand ranges for me to commit, pot control, bet for value, bet as bluff/semi-bluff, check/call, fold etc and THEN - only then - glance at my cards, determine which part of the range they're in and take the action for that hand range.
I've been looking at my cards first. I'm doing it all wrong.
In the spirit of encouraging the above (and keeping myself on track in pursuing the above and thinking about the above) I will in hand range analyses and responses from now on try to ignore the actual hand and focus instead of ranges and instead of commenting on the actual play of the hand I will instead state which part of the hero's range I expect is most likely correct to play that way on every street. If I'm right, there's a lesson there if you've played a hand that doesn't merit that line/plan in the hand. If I'm wrong, which is considerably more likely, hopefully someone will point out the error of my ways and I'll improve.
To get back to our entertainment, I thought I'd start out with a couple of hands that I think are perhaps interesting to start this kind of thing with. I thought at the time I played them particularly well (massive ego, immensely pleased with myself, pulling my arm out of my socket patting myself on the back). I'll return to the thread a couple of times both to supply my own hand range analysis for myself and also if there is any interest to say what I actually played here, even though for now I'll try to start thinking of that as results oriented.
Hand 1:
I have been at this table for about 30 hands during which I've raised pre-flop 7 or so times and generally played aggressive poker and taken down some big pots, one of them AA that got played aggressively pre-flop and slow-played on a K-high flushy (flush completed on turn) where I correctly read the opponent as not having the K or the flush (he had QQ) and stacked him. Another was AQ that saw a 77T flop and a 7 turn and went all-in against a short stack (which called with QJ). I have never before limped or called pre-flop. I probably seem like an aggressive gambler. (although both those big pots were solidly supported by reads)
Both villains in the hand have been at the table for as long as I have (longer) and have witnessed this. Both villains have stats of 15/3 or so and have raised pre-flop exactly once before.
PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (5 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
SB ($11.20)
BB ($12.85)
UTG ($14.10)
MP ($11.30)
Hero (Button) ($28.55)
Preflop: Hero is Button with two cards
1 fold, MP raises to $0.40, Hero calls $0.40, 1 fold, BB raises to $1.20, MP calls $0.80, Hero calls $0.80
Flop: ($3.65) J , 6 , 2 (3 players)
BB checks, MP checks, Hero checks
Turn: ($3.65) 4 (3 players)
BB checks, MP bets $1.20, Hero raises to $4.50, 2 folds
Hand 2:
This hand is from a week ago, so I don't remember all the table dynamics. I had about 10 hands on MP running something like 30/0/1 and I had a 50ish hands on SB who runs something like 25/3/1.5 playing relatively straightforwardly and on multiple tables. On the BTN here I widened my calling range to include some speculative hands because the stacks were deep and I would be in position.
PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (6 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
SB ($10)
BB ($16.80)
UTG ($10.15)
MP ($15.30)
CO ($13.55)
Hero (Button) ($16.25)
Preflop: Hero is Button with two cards
UTG raises to $0.40, MP calls $0.40, 1 fold, Hero calls $0.40, SB calls $0.35, 1 fold
Flop: ($1.70) 8, 7 , 6 (4 players)
SB checks, UTG checks, MP checks, Hero bets $1.20, SB calls $1.20, 1 fold, MP raises to $5, Hero raises to $15.85 (All-In), 1 fold, MP calls $9.90 (All-In)
Turn: ($32.70) K (2 players, 2 all-in)
River: ($32.70) 3 (2 players, 2 all-in)
I think the common theme for the two hands is this: Yes, you would play this way with the nuts. What other hands are correctly playing this way?
(Edited to correct which villain the profile in hand 2 refers to)
|
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by bigspenda73
