Hey guys, after some further losing sessions of my most lovely student (still a solid combination of running bad and tilting) I decided to record a video of myself playing four tables on NL10, trying to identify and exploit the leaks of my opponents.
Please enjoy - and comment anything you find questionnable / not understandable:
- Tack -
OK, dear fellowers of my blog, we made another theory lesson - topic:
Cbetting (board textures) / betsizes
As you could see from the graphs my girlfriend maintains a very aggressive playing style, which is obviously good due to her tight preflop play. If you play few hands you have to be even more aggressive to maintain a constant payout. Problems arise obviously when we cbet "blindly", regardless of board textures, player´s tendencies etc. and / or use betsizes that narrow the range of our opponents to a range that we´re likely behind against or at least not doing well.
So, step-by-step: what are the parameters to take into account when cbetting? I made the following list (in descending order of importance):
Decision factors for cbetting:
1) Opponent type
2) Board texture
4) Own hand
Explanation In further detail:
1) Opponent type: this is the most easiest part of the decision process. If you´re up against a calling station you want to be less bluffing and more valuebetting. If you raised QJs preflop from the BTN and you miss the board completely but know that your opponent won´t go anywhere with A-high, you don´t want to bluff your chips away. In contrast, if you know your opponent plays completely fit-or-fold, you´re much more inclined to cbet (up to any two).
2) Board texture: the board texture gives you an idea how good / bad it connected with your opponents likely preflop-calling-range and how good / bad it connected with your perceived range. Obviously, the better the board is for your range as preflop-raiser (= worse for the range of the preflop-caller), the more inclined you want to be to cbet. Boards that hit the range of the preflop-caller way more often than the range of the pfr are obviously bad boards to cbet.
We put up some classes for board textures (guided by Foucault and others):
Class 1: Uncoordinated high card boards (HC - MC - LC), i.e. K73r
Class 2: Paired boards (PC - LC), i.e. QQ2r
Class 3: monotone boards, i.e. Q82m
Class 4: Semi-coordinated high card boards (HC - HC - LC), i.e. KQ2r
Class 5: Semi-coordinated middle card boards (MC - LC - LC), i.e. T52r
Class 6: Coordinated middle / low card boards (MC - MC - MC), i.e. T87s
It´s obvious that the less the board hit our perceived range the less we want to cbet with air because our fold equity goes way down and it´s not profitable in a vacuum to triple-barrel overcards on a T87s board to get Villain "to fold his draws". That said, class 1-3 are "no-brainer" cbet-boards in most cases, class 4-5 are dependant on other factors, class 6 is mostly a c/f (without a hand).
3) Position: another factor that should influence our decision. If we´re in position with a hand that might be best but we don´t want get c/r (like AK on a T82r board) because we have outs that we don´t want to forfeit against a possible drawing hand it often is best to just check behind. Same goes for marginal hands we want to pot control with. If we´re oop we often should be more inclined to take the aggressive line and barrel because often our hand is not good enough to c/c. Like c/c AQ on a T82r board doesn´t seem to sexy.
4) Own hand: last but not least we want to judge our own hand and take into account how important it is for our holding to see the turn card. Imagine you have AKo on a QJ4s board. It would be a total desaster for us to cbet and get c/r-ed. Instead we want to take the pot control line and check behind to realize the equity we have against Villains range. Same goes oop. So, as a rule of thumb, the more often the turn card improves our range (and the less often it improves Villains range) the more often we should cbet. In contrast, if turn cards are more likely to help Villain´s range instead our our own - the more inclined we should be to cbet (i.e. with Q9 on BTN on a T65r board we should ovbviously be cbetting because there are little turn cards that really improve our holding but many that are good for Villain).
Our betsize obviously depends on two things (in general): the ratio between bluffs / value hands and the importance of protection. Our actual holding (in case we decide to cbet) is from less importance because we don´t want to give away any betsizing tells.
In general we want to bet smaller (like 1/2 - 2/3 pot) if our bluff-value-ratio is high (like we opened from BTN and the board comes K72r) and we want to bet bigger (like 3/4 - full pot) if our bluff-value-ratio is low (i.e. we raised from UTG and cbet on a T87s-board) which generally includes most often that we want to protect our hand against dangerous turn cards and charge possible draws.
If we´re against unobservant opponents we can indeed bet slightly bigger for value and slightly less as a bluff. Additionally, the more stationary Villain is, the more we can bet with our value-hands obviously.
If we plan to barrel multiple streets we should bet smaller. Reason for multiple barrels mostly is that we think we can create dead money and take it down on further streets. To do this we should keep some ammunition left for our "final shot".
Before we cbet we should briefly go through the decision factors: opponent type, board texture, position, own hand.
Every single factor in and off itself increases / decreases our willingness to cbet. After analyzing all factors and summarizing them we can decide if we want to cbet or not:
PRO: weak-tight opponent, dry board that hits our perceived range, out of position, weak / vulnerable hand (that´s unlikely to gain from further streets)
CONTRA: loose, stationy opponent, coordinated / low board , in position, hand that got tons of outs to improve
After we decided to cbet we should plan the betsize. The more often we want to be able to bluff (even multi-barrel) the less we should bet, the more often we´re "expected" to valuebet (and still expect to get called by worse, i.e. draws) the more we should bet.
Fair enough, with this "lesson" under her belt my sweetie started immediately to book some nice winnings on NL10. The last three days made in summary like $90. In the next blog I´ll add some example hands for the above mentioned theory. So, as always - stay tuned!
sorry again for the delay between the posts. Reason for that, besides me being overly busy at the moment was a lack of interesting stuff to talk about. The most interesting (albeit not pleasant) fact is that my girlfriend somehow doesn´t succeed on NL10 so far. She took several shots at NL10 once she got $400, at one point she was even up to $550 but somehow she had some big losing sessions in between which regularly hit her back in the higher 300´s.
Once she dropped below 400 she stepped back and grinded some days on NL5 (where she does pretty well still) and then took another shot at NL10. So far it didn´t show the results we hoped for.
What are the reasons?
First and foremost I think it´s due to mental problems. NL10 develops to a kind of mental hurdle for her (and I think many of you know what I´m talking about). Remember, it´s not the first time she played on NL10 and in her "former life", the one where she played the way she thought it was right to do, she lost a huge amount of money on NL10, an experience that she obviously can´t simply shrug off.
So, I guess there´s some kind of mental blocker which she has to overcome. Unfortunately this is sth. where I´m probably the worst to help her with. :(
The second thing is actually some running bad. I saw a bunch of hands (way more than on NL5) where she played perfectly, still got sucked out on by incredible holdings. Nothing you can do about it - other than shrug your shoulders, sigh and continue. Although (you can imagine) that´s nothing that is easy for her. Which regularly results in even worse decisions for the rest of the session. And before I even notice or can pull her off the tables, 2-3 buy-ins are flushed down the toilet.
But it doesn´t help - we´ll keep working and I´m still confident that I can eliminate the habits of "non-believing the fish", so she´d stop bet, bet-call, check-call with TP, no kicker against the 75% VPIP. :)
No hands for today, as there wasn´t really much stuff that was different from what I already told you. If there´s stuff you´re particularly interested in, let me know - as always, otherwise I´ll keep you updated about the progress.
- Tack -
PS: I had an idea today: I placed a little bag aside from her (so she can see it when she plays) and for any hand she makes one of her incredible river-calls again, she has to put in 1 EUR. I plan on taking a trip to Ireland next eastern to play the Irish Open with her from the money we "earned" until then. :)
Hey guys, here´s an interesting hand that came up today. Please analyze what´s going on and how you´d play the turn:
Villain is a 19/14 over ~100 hands, we have no solid reads on his 3bet-calling-range yet.
Full Tilt Poker $0.05/$0.10 No Limit Hold'em - 5 players
Hero (BB): $10.00
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is BB with Q Q
1 fold, CO raises to $0.30, 2 folds, Hero raises to $1.10, CO requests TIME, CO calls $0.80
Flop: ($2.25) 7 J J(2 players)
Hero bets $1.30, CO calls $1.30
Turn: ($4.85) A(2 players)
sorry for having let you waiting quite some time for the new blog entry. For some reason NL10 hasn´t been as easy-going as NL5 so far, my sweetie struggles a bit. Part of it is actually running bad for a good portion, the other part is a mixture of missed value and "non-believing" (= calling too much). :D
OK, as always, let´s get into some hands, covering the above-mentioned mixture of calling too much / not value-betting enough:
Villain was a huge fish with a VPIP of significantly > 50%.
Hero (BB): $15.38
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is BB with J K
3 folds, BTN calls $0.10, SB calls $0.05, Hero checks
Flop: ($0.30) T T J(3 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $0.20, BTN folds, SB calls $0.20
Turn: ($0.70) 9(2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $0.40, SB raises to $1.20, Hero calls $0.80
River: ($3.10) Q(2 players)
SB bets $2.90, Hero calls $2.90
This hand pretty well illustrates what I mean with "non-believing". Although Villain is super-loose player that doesn´t mean that he can´t hit a huge hand. And by him c/c the flop he pretty much tells us that he has some hand =/= air. So, what non-air-type hand c/r the turn? We´re crushed. Period. Even the 4 outs to our gs aren´t clean, so there´s essentially no different decision than folding. It sucks if we see fish sitting on 4 buy-ins and taking another pot from us - but it doesn´t help. ;)
Again, Villain was a bad player, loose preflop, semi-aggressive postflop.
Hero (BTN): $10.30
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is BTN with J A
2 folds, Hero raises to $0.30, SB calls $0.25, 1 fold
Flop: ($0.70) Q T 3(2 players)
SB checks, Hero checks
Turn: ($0.70) K(2 players)
SB bets $0.40, Hero calls $0.40
River: ($1.50) 6(2 players)
SB bets $3, Hero calls $3
The turn is a very clear illustration of missed valuebetting - and a huge mistake. We turn the nuts against a range that is most likely either air-heavy or good enough to pay big time. By flatting we gain nothing. There´s almost no rivercard that improves Villain to a worse 2nd-best hand (making him inclined to pay off in case he intended to b/f the turn) but there are tons of cards either crushing us / killing action or split the pot. So, the turn is a crystal-clear value-raise and flatting is a giant mistake.
You guess it - Villain was a fish, pretty active on flop / turn, more honestly on the river. :D
Hero (UTG): $10.00
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is UTG with K K
Hero raises to $0.40, 1 fold, CO calls $0.40, 3 folds
Flop: ($0.95) 3 3 K(2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $0.55, Hero calls $0.55
Turn: ($2.05) 6(2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $1.15, Hero calls $1.15
River: ($4.35) 4(2 players)
Hero bets $1.60, CO calls $1.45 all in
Flop is perfect, top-set on a super-dry board is most likely not a huge money-maker as we absorb all the oxygene from the room, so c/c with the intention to let Villain catch up to a good 2nd-best hand.
That said, checking the turn is the logical consequence. But when Villain bets, it´s time to get the money in. The "risk" is that Villain sits on nothing but a draw and might simply give up on the river if he misses - where he´ll never fold a draw to a c/r on the turn. Ship it.
Here´s another example for missed value on the river:
Hero (UTG): $10.15
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is UTG with Q Q
Hero raises to $0.30, 3 folds, BB calls $0.20
Flop: ($0.65) 5 3 Q(2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.40, BB calls $0.40
Turn: ($1.45) 4(2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $1.30, BB calls $1.30
River: ($4.05) 6(2 players)
BB checks, Hero checks
We check behind the river because there´s a 4-card straight on the board. But think back to the flop and recap the action: Villain c/c the Q53s-flop. How many 2s/7s are actually in his range? I´d say 76s, 77 and that pretty much is it - nine combos. Didn´t we expect Villain to c/r the turn with the nuts though? So, let´s go with six combos. Too little to be expect to have less than 50% against his calling-range. So, the river is a very clear value-shove. We´ll definitely get called by any Qx, 53, 54, 65 and what not.
Finally a hand that was played perfectly - Villain was another bad aggro fish:
Hero (CO): $14.85
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is CO with K 8
1 fold, Hero raises to $0.40, BTN calls $0.40, 2 folds
Flop: ($0.95) 7 K 6(2 players)
Hero bets $0.50, BTN calls $0.50
Turn: ($1.95) 9(2 players)
Hero bets $1.60, BTN calls $1.60
River: ($5.15) A(2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets $5.15, Hero calls $5.15
The reason why c/c the river is way superior than b/f is that our hand isn´t quite strong against a range that consists most likely of busted flush draws (some of which hit the A), better Kings and all types of air / middle pairs that most likely won´t call the third barrel when the A hit.
The reason for c/c the river was twofold:
1) The huge riverbet looks more like a bluff with a busted draw than a valuebet with 2p+.
2) Most Villains lack valuebetting for thin river, so I had expected Villain to check behind with a weak A or Kx, weighting his range even more towards bluffs.
OK, you see, our main working topics remain valuebetting and being able to fold in spots we´re likely beaten. Bankroll has not developed much since my last blog, due to some bad sessions it dipped slightly below 500 again, still we´re 200 ahead of our starting stack - so hang in and wish us luck. :)
I promise (as one demanded), in the next blog I´ll add more hands that were played well, so stay tuned.
- Tack -
Welcome back everybody!
First of all the current status: actual stake is still NL10, current BR is close to $500.
As I promised you, today we´re talking about situations in which we instrumentalize hand reading and board textures to make good valuebets and demonstrate the idea of bet/folding (for value).
Hero (CO): $10.39
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is CO with A K
1 fold, Hero raises to $0.30, BTN raises to $0.90, 2 folds, Hero calls $0.60
Flop: ($1.95) T T K(2 players)
Hero checks, BTN checks
Turn: ($1.95) 8(2 players)
Hero bets $1.50, BTN calls $1.50
River: ($4.95) 8(2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets $3.66, Hero calls $3.66
We have TPTK but obviously we´re not overly happy with it. What hands is Villain legitimately 3betting preflop, checking behind the flop and calling the turn with? It might be a slowplayed monster or some kind of middle pair.
Nevertheless, he won´t bluff the river, so bluffcatching makes no sense. Said this, if we think we have the best hand (that´s why we check-called), we should bet ourselves - and naturally fold if we get raised on (we lost against KK by the way).
Hero (BB): $10.45
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is BB with J 5
2 folds, CO calls $0.10, 2 folds, Hero checks
Flop: ($0.25) A Q 7(2 players)
Hero checks, CO checks
Turn: ($0.25) K(2 players)
Hero bets $0.20, CO calls $0.20
River: ($0.65) 7(2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $0.40, Hero calls $0.40
In this hand we flop a J-high flush draw HU on the A-high board in a limped pot against a pretty loose callingstation. First of all, we should immediately bet out on the flop. The limper is pretty unlikely to have a big A (or an A at all), so we should have sufficient fold equity. Combined with our outs, this is a pretty clear bet.
The turn brings the gin card and we get the 2nd nuts. We clearly bet for value.
Now, the river pairs the board and we go into c/c-mode. That´s plain wrong. We´re beaten only by A-high flushes, boats and quads. To have an A-high flush Villain had to check behind the flop with TP. Really? To have a boat he had to limp with QQ+. Mmmh ... and to have quads ... ah, screw it. :) Bet for value - and don´t fold against a raise (due to the reasons stated above)!!!
Hero (SB): $14.84
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is SB with 7 7
3 folds, BTN raises to $0.20, Hero raises to $0.80, 1 fold, BTN calls $0.60
Flop: ($1.70) 6 3 7(2 players)
Hero bets $1, BTN calls $1
Turn: ($3.70) 2(2 players)
Hero bets $2.60, BTN calls $2.60
River: ($8.90) 4(2 players)
Hero checks, BTN checks
OK, another hand where we get overly concerned with the threatening board. The river brings a 4-card straight on the board, and we check our top-set.
But if we think about it, there´s only one card for the straight - the 5. Although it´s not impossible (or even unlikely) that Villain called the flop (and maybe even the turn) with a naked gutshot, maybe along with A-high or a weak pair, there still are myriads of other combos in his range, like worse sets, 2-pairs, medium overpairs (88/99) and what not, so we still have the best hand more often than not. Will we get called by worse? Bet on it!!
As I doubt that Villain will raise the river with a worse set, we could be pretty sure that he has it if we barrel the river and get raised, so we don´t risk to get bluffed off the best hand, which - again - makes this spot a clear value-bet spot with the intention to fold to a raise.
Here´s an example where it worked perfectly fine (in a pretty similar situation):
Hero (CO): $10.00
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is CO with A Q
1 fold, MP calls $0.10, Hero raises to $0.80, 3 folds, MP calls $0.70
Flop: ($1.75) Q 5 3(2 players)
MP checks, Hero bets $1.40, MP calls $1.40
Turn: ($4.55) 4(2 players)
MP checks, Hero bets $3.60, MP calls $3.60
River: ($11.75) 7(2 players)
MP checks, Hero bets $4.20 all in, MP calls $4.20
Final Pot: $20.15
Hero shows A Q (a pair of Queens)
MP mucks 4 A
Hero wins $18.81
And one more example where everything went right (besides that we should´ve raised preflop :)):
Hero (BB): $11.62
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is BB with J K
3 folds, SB calls $0.05, Hero checks
Flop: ($0.20) K T 5(2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $0.10, SB calls $0.10
Turn: ($0.40) T(2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $0.30, SB folds
We shouldn´t get scared by the T pairing the board, we have TP with good kicker and Villain can have tons of worse hands he´ll call with (any worse K, underpairs, QJ and what not). If we get raised - well, you know the rest. :)
And a last example for a thin-looking (despite not being thin at all) valuebet on the river -with the plan to fold to a raise:
Hero (UTG): $11.55
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is UTG with 9 9
Hero raises to $0.40, 2 folds, BTN calls $0.40, 2 folds
Flop: ($0.95) K 4 3(2 players)
Hero bets $0.70, BTN calls $0.70
Turn: ($2.35) K(2 players)
Hero bets $1.70, BTN calls $1.70
River: ($5.75) K(2 players)
Hero bets $3.50, BTN calls $3.50
When you think about it, Villain´s range is most likely pairs below 99 (as he didn´t 3bet preflop) - and he´ll never fold the river (thanks to zeebo :)), so it´s time for valuetown again. Well played (Villain called with 33).
OK, guys, you´ve done it, hope you enjoyed it, and as always, stay tuned and let me know what you miss!
PS: Just found this hand and had to add just for the fun of it - look at the holding BTN calls the shove on the flop, this guy had a lot of "hope". :-D
Hero (UTG): $11.63
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is UTG with J J
Hero raises to $0.40, 1 fold, CO raises to $1.20, BTN calls $1.20, 2 folds, Hero calls $0.80
Flop: ($3.75) J 7 Q(3 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $2.40, BTN calls $2.40, Hero raises to $10.43 all in, CO requests TIME, CO calls $8.03, BTN calls $1.68 all in
Turn: ($28.69) 7(3 players - 2 are all in)
River: ($28.69) 3(3 players - 2 are all in)
Final Pot: $28.69
BTN shows 9 3 (two pair, Sevens and Threes)
Hero shows J J (a full house, Jacks full of Sevens)
CO shows Q A (two pair, Queens and Sevens)
Hero wins $11.85
Hero wins $14.93
OK guys, I hope at least some of you still follow my blog, I´d be happy if you leave me some life signs, feedback / information on what you want to get cleared, discussed deeper.
I mentioned last time, that - with ~$70 in winnings (14 buy-ins on NL5) - we decided to take a strictly controlled shot at NL10. We agreed to set a stop loss of 4 buy-ins. That means, we virtually put $40 from our roll aside and played with that $40 at NL10. If she won, she´d be able to take further shots / leave NL5 behind, if she lost, well than it´s time to rebuild on NL5.
So she did - and lost the 4 buy-ins at the same evening. :)
The bad thing is that she took some bad beats at the beginning of the sessions, which - combined with some real badly played hands - put her on tilt and made her playing her C-game for the rest of the session, included leaving behind most of what we learned / agreed upon so far.
The good thing though (hey, she´s still my little girl!!) was that she stuck to our agreement and insta-leaved when she hit the $40-loss-mark.
That threw her bankroll back to $330 and it was time to sit back and grind on NL5 again.
Anyway, here are some key hands that caught my attention after analyzing the session:
Villain in this hand is a very bad, very loose player (64/12).
Hero (BTN): $10.00
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is BTN with A K
UTG raises to $0.20, 2 folds, Hero raises to $0.70, 2 folds, UTG calls $0.50
Flop: ($1.55) T 6 J(2 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $1.40, UTG calls $1.40
Turn: ($4.35) 8(2 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $3.10, UTG calls $3.02 all in
River: ($10.39) J(2 players - 1 is all in)
Final Pot: $10.39
Hero shows A K (a pair of Jacks)
UTG shows 9 T (two pair, Jacks and Tens)
UTG wins $9.70
What went wrong? The turnbet is the mistake. We have position and we either have the best hand (unlikely, but possible) or we have 10 outs. If we´re behind it´s unlikely (up to impossible against this guy) that we get him to fold. So, why betting? The loyal readers already know what´s coming - the ever part #2 of the framework:
THINK ABOUT WHY YOU´RE DOING WHAT YOU´RE DOING.
SB in this hand was another giant fish (65/12, my sweetie has an amazing table-selection :)), BB was a nitty 12/8 (playing ABC postflop).
Hero (BTN): $14.87
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is BTN with A K
2 folds, Hero raises to $0.40, SB calls $0.35, BB calls $0.30
Flop: ($1.20) A J 3(3 players)
SB bets $0.10, BB raises to $0.70, Hero raises to $14.47 all in, SB calls $14.37, BB calls $11.58 all in
Turn: ($42.42) J(3 players - 2 are all in)
River: ($42.42) 4(3 players - 2 are all in)
Final Pot: $42.42
Hero shows A K (two pair, Aces and Jacks)
SB shows 5 A (two pair, Aces and Jacks)
BB shows 3 3 (a full house, Threes full of Jacks)
Hero wins $4.38
BB wins $36.04
Again, what went wrong? Correct, the flop is a fold! Yes, we can easily release TPTK in this spot, because the nitty BB generously put his hand / range pretty much face up. What else than a set should he raise an A-high super-dry board with when the super-fish donks into two players (probably with Ax) and pfr is still active?
Villain in this hand was another ABC-playing TAG, playing 17/12. The rest are the regular way-to-loose fish.
Hero (MP): $11.45
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is MP with A Q
1 fold, Hero raises to $0.30, CO calls $0.30, 1 fold, SB calls $0.25, BB calls $0.20
Flop: ($1.20) 3 5 Q(4 players)
SB bets $0.80, BB folds, Hero raises to $4.20, CO raises to $10.30 all in, SB folds, Hero calls $6.10
Turn: ($22.60) T(2 players - 1 is all in)
River: ($22.60) 2(2 players - 1 is all in)
Final Pot: $22.60
Hero shows A Q (a pair of Queens)
CO shows 5 5 (three of a kind, Fives)
CO wins $21.10
Another spot where we overplay TPK. Raising the fish´s donkbet is fine - though the raise-size is atrocious. But, once we got cold-3bet by the ABC-tag it´s definitely time to say "good bye". Never, and I mean actually never this is a naked flush draw. We´re drawing dead against sets and we´re at most very slightly ahead of any combo draw. The problem that we´re almost committed solely derives from the bad betsize, so it´s no excuse. :)
Villain is an aggro guy (66/23), taking almost every opportunity to bluff.
Hero (BTN): $43.22
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is BTN with A 7
1 fold, Hero raises to $0.40, 1 fold, BB calls $0.30
Flop: ($0.85) 6 5 7(2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.60, BB raises to $1.20, Hero raises to $2.60, BB calls $1.40
Turn: ($6.05) 9(2 players)
BB checks, Hero checks
River: ($6.05) 6(2 players)
BB bets $4.35, Hero calls $4.35
Final Pot: $14.75
Hero shows A 7 (two pair, Sevens and Sixes)
BB shows Q 3 (a pair of Sixes)
Hero wins $13.77
My girlfriend (correctly in my book) had expected Villain to raise way bigger with a flush - and as well with any made hand he´s trying to protect. That leaves his range being overly bluff-heavy.
We 3bet to charge him with hands that contain a single diamond (and maximize value this way).
So, Villain doesn´t come over the top but calls and checks the turn. That makes flushes unlikely, leaving his range ultrawide with loads of air (probably with a single diamond). Even though 8x is possible, it´s not overly likely, which gives us good enough reason to bet again (I still expect him to call with a naked diamond, so I kind of dislike the check behind).
As played, the river is an "easy" bluffcatcher, though.
Well played. :)
Hero (CO): $20.83
Pre Flop: ($0.15) Hero is CO with Q Q
UTG raises to $0.40, Hero raises to $1.30, 1 fold, SB calls $1.25, BB raises to $3, 1 fold, Hero calls $1.70, SB calls $1.70
Another hand where we can learn an important lesson from: pay attention to any single information we´re having at hand - not only the most obvious one!
UTG raises and we reraise with QQ from the CO. BTN folds, SB calls - and now the BB 3bets.
My sweetie glanced at his stats, recognized him being a 55/15 and called, because she felt she was too deep to shove. So far anything looks fine.
The essential thing though was the plan for the flop. Certainly she planned to stack off on any non-A/K-flop. But that had been a giant mistake!
At the second glance on Villain´s stats (and if she had played 3-4 tables, instead of 8 - lol) she could´ve seen that Villain never ever 3bet once before (over a decent sample size)! Given that fact, combined with the small - sucky - 3bet-size, almost only one single hand comes to question. And QQ does not do well against that hand.
Eventually things ran out good, we flopped the Q and stacked the dreaded Aces. Easy game. :)
So, we made another thorough analysis together and again corrected some flaws / lacks in her thought process. One thing we were (and still are) consistently working on was her ability to fold. :D
She made a good job though and within the next ~5k hands on NL5 she managed to recover all of the losses from NL10. Add some rakeback and her bankroll was back at $410 - so she could take another shot at NL10. And this time it worked - so she hopefully never has to look back again:
Bankroll actually stands at $456.
=> Next post (as promised) will be dedicated to bet-folding. :) Stay tuned (and as mentioned, please leave some information on what you think / what you´re interested in.
I already warned you, it´s getting ugly today. :)
My sweetie probably went on some form of "winner´s tilt" and started playing hands she shouldn´t and consequently put herself in marginal situations she couldn´t handle well.
Before we look at single hands to see what caused this desaster, here´s the graph of the following two days:
So, we analyzed again what went wrong and I found several hands that were played pretty horribly. And again, my sweetie had a rough 1.5 hours with me (but hey, she wants to break through, right?).
What caught my attention (besides singular mistakes) that made up for a pattern?
(1) Deviating from the SHC (again) *).
(2) Ignoring part 2) of the framework, namely having a good reason for anything we do (again) *).
(3) That was the new part - playing passively with marginal hands oop against fish (goes along with (2) though).
*) If you´re new to my blog I suggest to read part 1 where the framework (incl. SHC) is explained.
You see, it always can be broken down to the same basic problems (who wonders?).
Especially part (3) was interesting (and I see it on the forums as well) - it´s caused by the permanent disbelieve in the fish having anything.
"They are all constantly bluffing me. He can´t have anything. He´s cbetting with his entire range, so my AJ rates to be good."
That all may be correct, still we have to have a plan. Let´s go into some details and you´ll see what I mean.
BTN was a giant fish (51/0), Villain was a solid-looking TAG.
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is SB with 5 4
3 folds, BTN calls $0.05, Hero calls $0.03, BB checks
Flop: ($0.15) 5 5 2(3 players)
Hero bets $0.10, BB calls $0.10, BTN calls $0.10
Turn: ($0.45) J(3 players)
Hero bets $0.45, BB raises to $2, BTN folds, Hero raises to $4.87, BB calls $2.87
First of all, 54s is not the best hand to complete the SB. I had preferred to either fold or raise and isolate the fish (with the intention to take it down postflop). If we can´t have position we should at least strive to get the initiative!
OK, with that said, we see a flop and hit trips - which is obviously nice, esp. with the possible flush draw - which could gain us some more money on an otherwise super-dry board. We correctly lead out (as nobody showed interest in the pot it would be a huge mistake to check and give a freecard). We get called twice and the turn is the J.
We bet again - obviously for value - and now we get raised from the TAG. All alarm bells should go off. What worse hands is the solid TAG calling the flop (3way) and then raising on the turn?
Remember, he got a free check in the BB, so his range is almost any two. As he didn´t raise preflop I think we can rule out hands like AJ and overpairs.
To me this move looks extraordinarily strong.
What hands do we beat? If we properly think about it we beat nothing. Is he bluffing? Doesn´t look like, he´s raising into a loose callingstation and oop-aggressor who barreled twice - furthermore he has committed himself.
All that said, I think this is a safe fold. We can´t call (because we´re committed) and if we think about it we´ll never get called by worse if we shove.
Villain in this hand is a loose-aggressive guy.
Hero (BB): $5.21
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is BB with K 8
1 fold, BTN raises to $0.15, 1 fold, Hero calls $0.10
Flop: ($0.32) 4 6 7(2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets $0.25, Hero calls $0.25
Turn: ($0.82) 6(2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets $0.50, Hero folds
Another hand where we deviate from the SHC. K8s in the BB is either a 3bet (when the situation is right) or a fold. What good comes from calling a hand that is either dominated or won´t get paid off when we´re oop - even against an aggressive fish? Exactly. Nothing.
We hit as best of a flop we can imagine, with two overcards, the gutshot and the backdoor flush draw. Additionally it´s a board that very rarely hit Villain. It´s time to turn up the heat. So, either lead out - or even better - c/r him (because NL5-players tend to cbet too much in general). We´ll get a ton of folds and will have sufficient outs to improve / create barreling opportunities if we´re behind.
Instead my sweetie elected to c/c - which is the worst option we have! As I said, if we don´t have position we should at least strive to take the initiative. c/c on this board is just burning money. The fold on the turn (although the right move as played) proves that.
Villain in this hand was a 37/16, playing rather passive postflop.
Hero (UTG): $5.15
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is UTG with K Q
Hero raises to $0.15, 1 fold, BTN calls $0.15, 1 fold, BB calls $0.10
Flop: ($0.47) 8 3 Q(3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.30, BTN folds, BB calls $0.30
Turn: ($1.07) J(2 players)
BB bets $0.60, Hero raises to $4.70
We open KQo UTG (which again deviates from the starting hand chart - for good reasons on NL5!) and three players see the flop. We flop TP and naturally make the cbet (for value, we´ll get called by tons of worse Q´s, 8´s, Ax-hands and what not). BTN folds and BB calls oop. He can have a wide range (as already mentioned).
Now the J comes on the turn and the passive (!) BB donks the turn. What does that tell us? I don´t know. The J is not the best card in the world as it completes QJ (a likely holding in this case), but it´s not the worst card as well. We don´t have to automatically assume that we´re behind. The price is probably good enough to call with the plan to fold if Villain makes a substantial bet on the river.
But what happens now? My sweetie raises. And again - the part (2) of the framework raises it´s ugly head and asks:
"Sweetheart, what the f*** are you doing there? Why are you raising? For value? What worse hands ... ".
You know the rest (otherwise I´d suggest to read part (1) of this blog). Burnt money again (we lost against 33).
Villain in this hand is basically unknown.
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is SB with Q Q
3 folds, BTN raises to $0.15, Hero raises to $0.50, 1 fold, BTN calls $0.35
Flop: ($1.05) 3 J 3(2 players)
Hero bets $0.85, BTN calls $0.85
Turn: ($2.75) K(2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets $1.50, Hero raises to $3.67
This is a good illustration how to NOT play oop.
We 3bet QQ oop (which is completely fine) and get called. We see a dry J33-board. Villains range should not be ultrawide but we can´t say too much about it. In a vacuum I´d assume a range like 22-JJ, AJ-AQ, KQs etc.
The cbet is perfectly fine, but the turn is where it gets interesting. Imho, we have only two options: b/f or c/f.
Against an unknown b/f is completely standard. We have no reason to assume that we´re suddenly behind and the K - albeit a scarecard for Villain as we can have AK - shouldn´t prevent us from betting. We want to barrel air on this board as well, so we should keep the pedal down. Reasons for c/f would be that we assume Villain to check behind with worse hands (like 77) almost always but never call another barrel.
But what could be reasons to c/c or c/r? c/c is almost out of discussion as we´re committed anyway so we should close the shop. c/r indeed is not a good idea for exactly the same reasons we would c/f (if we elected to check). What worse hands (that called the flop!) will bet this turn and commit themselves to the pot? I can´t imagine (m)any. So, the turn is a clear b/f in my book.
The reason why she probably played the hand this way is easy (and I assume it´s a common one): she HATES bet-folding. ;) That´s something we´re actively working on - and maybe I´ll dedicate my next post to exactly that topic.
Villain in this hand was a very bad 35/18-player.
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is MP with A A
1 fold, Hero raises to $0.15, CO calls $0.15, 3 folds
Flop: ($0.37) 2 6 4(2 players)
Hero bets $0.30, CO calls $0.30
Turn: ($0.97) 4(2 players)
Hero bets $0.85, CO calls $0.85
River: ($2.67) 5(2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $2.40, Hero calls $2.40
This is a very good spot to illustrate missing value on the river. Villain has tons of worse hands he can call with, so we´re clearly missing value! If we´re planning to c/c the river anyway we should bet ourselves. Again - you know why she didn´t bet herself but c/c? Right, she wasn´t prepared to b/f the river - which indeed would have been the correct play (we lost against 54s btw).
Villain in this hand was a TAG.
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is BB with A K
2 folds, CO raises to $0.15, 2 folds, Hero raises to $0.45, CO calls $0.30
Flop: ($0.92) J J 3(2 players)
Hero bets $0.65, CO raises to $1.50, Hero calls $0.85
Turn: ($3.92) 9(2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $2.82, Hero folds
Another illustration of disbelieve.
"Villain could´ve easily bluffed me - what should I give him on this board? Is he actually raising a J?!".
And I answer as calm as possible:
We don´t know sweetie, but there´s nothing we can do about. Just fold and move on."
Some wise man once postulated "oop = out of power".
SB was a super-loose and bad player (41/0), BB was a tight reg.
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is UTG with J J
Hero raises to $0.15, 3 folds, SB calls $0.13, BB raises to $0.60, Hero raises to $5.07, 1 fold, BB calls $4.47
This one shows how important it is to properly think about ranges and image. We´re a super-tight UTG-raiser (sth. in the ballpark of 13/11) and get called by the super-loose and stationary SB. What range do we expect BB to squeeze with in that situation (not to mention his stack-off-range)?
We should call for setmine (due to the super-strong range of BB and the fish likely coming along). Nothing good ever comes from shoving (obviously we lost against AA).
OK, somebody in my first blog entry asked for examples for protecting a hand. Here is one (UTG-raiser is unknown, BB is a loose and bad player):
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is CO with K K
UTG raises to $0.10, 1 fold, Hero raises to $0.35, 2 folds, BB calls $0.30, UTG calls $0.25
Flop: ($1.07) 3 T J(3 players)
BB checks, UTG bets $0.60, Hero raises to $1.65, BB calls $1.65, UTG calls $0.80 all in
Turn: ($5.77) 5(3 players - 1 is all in)
BB checks, Hero bets $4.08, BB calls $3 all in
We have no reason to assume that we´re behind against the donk-range of the UTG-raiser but we don´t want to flat this board 3way, so raising (and stacking off) is the only option.
Another, more subtle example for protecting a hand in combination with valuebetting. Villain was a loose, bad player, aggressive with stabbing at orphaned pots but passive on river:
Hero (BB): $5.36
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is BB with A 8
1 fold, CO raises to $0.15, 2 folds, Hero calls $0.10
Flop: ($0.32) T 8 8(2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $0.20, Hero calls $0.20
Turn: ($0.72) 6(2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $0.50, Hero calls $0.50
River: ($1.72) J(2 players)
Hero checks, CO checks
The turn is a super-easy c/r for value. Villain can have tons of overcards and stuff like that (he´s willing to stack off with) but he most likely won´t bluff the river with air. So we don´t gain anything from c/c the turn - besides that some action killing cards could hit the river or Villain sucks out on us.
OK, and another one for protection purposes (obviously combined with value). Villain is a super-loose, very bad player:
Hero (UTG): $5.12
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is UTG with T T
Hero raises to $0.15, CO calls $0.15, 3 folds
Flop: ($0.37) 8 7 5(2 players)
Hero bets $0.30, CO calls $0.30
Turn: ($0.97) K(2 players)
Hero bets $0.85, CO folds
Again, there´s essentially no single reason for checking the turn. We have to protect our hand against all kind of stuff that can hit the river and suck out on us.
And here´s a final example of an excellent play with a speculative hand we (mistakenly) elect to call preflop with (Villain is opening super-wide and cbetting way too often):
Hero (BTN): $5.09
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is BTN with K T
CO raises to $0.15, Hero calls $0.15, 2 folds
Flop: ($0.37) 7 3 A(2 players)
CO bets $0.37, Hero raises to $1.20, CO folds
Final Pot: $1.11
Hero wins $1.04
Villain´s range is superwide and he rarely has a hand that he´s able to continue with against the raise.
The good news was, that after our thorough analysis (I think we worked through like 30-40 hands together) the next sessions looked like the following:
Bankroll was up to $370 now (we started with $300) with a winrate of like 3.5 PTBB/100 over ~20k hands, so we felt like we could afford to take a strictly controlled shot at NL10 (within a very conservative frame).
=> More about that in the next blog.
OK guys, yesterday I told you about the framework I set up for my girlfriend to start on NL5. It was time now to get the feet wet. Unfortunately (but not competely unexpected) the first few sessions weren´t that good:
So we analyzed what went wrong and identified two major faults:
(1) Deviating from the SHC.
(2) Ignoring part 2) of the framework, namely having a good reason for anything we do.
Here are some examples to demonstrate what I mean:
Hero (UTG): $5.66
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is UTG with Q A
Hero raises to $0.15, 4 folds, BB raises to $0.47, Hero raises to $5.66 all in, BB calls $5.19
Flop: ($11.34) 9 7 6(2 players - 1 is all in)
Turn: ($11.34) 3(2 players - 1 is all in)
River: ($11.34) 3(2 players - 1 is all in)
Final Pot: $11.34
Hero shows Q A (a pair of Threes)
BB shows K A (a pair of Threes)
BB wins $10.59
It´s pretty obvious that nothing good comes from shoving AQo over a 3bettor who 3bets a tight (!!) UTG-raiser. So, AQo in this case is a clear fold (=> look at SHC).
Hero (CO): $6.71
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is CO with T 9
2 folds, Hero raises to $0.15, 2 folds, BB calls $0.10
Flop: ($0.32) T 3 4(2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.20, BB raises to $0.65, Hero raises to $1.40, BB calls $0.75
Turn: ($3.12) 6(2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $2.80, BB raises to $4.48 all in, Hero calls $1.68
River: ($12.08) A(2 players - 1 is all in)
Final Pot: $12.08
Hero shows T 9 (a pair of Tens)
BB shows T Q (a pair of Tens)
BB wins $11.28
Two things are strikening in this hand:
a) Another deviation from the SHC, T9o is a fold from CO. The SHC should help to prevent us from habitually getting into marginal situations where we´re more likely to make mistakes than our opponent. This hand clearly demonstrates why.
b) After we get c/r by the BB we should re-evaluate the situation. The 3bet clearly can´t be explained according to the part 2) of the framework. Do we raise for value? Which worse hands likely call us? Do we raise as a bluff? Hardly, what better hands (than TP) should fold? Do we protect? Against what? So the 3bet is clearly a mistake. Same obviously goes for the turn. Firing another barrel (after Villain called the 3bet) and then calling off is simply suicide. My sweetie had to listen to some tough words from me.
Hero (BTN): $6.21
Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is BTN with T T
UTG raises to $0.20, 2 folds, Hero calls $0.20, 2 folds
Flop: ($0.47) 5 2 7(2 players)
UTG bets $0.35, Hero raises to $0.90, UTG raises to $1.80, Hero raises to $6.01 all in, UTG calls $3.42 all in
Turn: ($10.91) 6(2 players - 2 are all in)
River: ($10.91) 5(2 players - 2 are all in)
Final Pot: $10.91
UTG shows Q Q (two pair, Queens and Fives)
Hero shows T T (two pair, Tens and Fives)
UTG wins $10.19
Another one where we clearly can see the ignorance of part 2 of the framework. Not as obvious as in hand #2, but still existent. We call an UTG-raiser who cbets on a super-dry board. We raise our overpair in position. What´s the reason? For value? Which worse hands in Villains range (!) can call us? As a bluff? Hell, no. For protection? Could be an argument, to prevent us from giving Villain a freecard with his overcards. Still, if we think about it, we have position, so we give him ONE freecard, not two. But when we get min3bet, the hand is over. We still have an overpair, but our relative hand strength against the line of Villain just got flushed down the toilet. It´s a clear fold. The shove can´t be legitimately explained. Another bad play.
So, we took some effort to get that clear and reinforced part 2 of the framework, because it´s probably THE most essential instrument to crush the micros:
Always think about why you do what you do!
I bet ...
... ... for value (what worse hands will call?).
... ... as a bluff (what better hands will fold?).
... ... for protection (against what hands, how many outs?).
The results of our hand analysis, combined with the reinforcement of the above mentioned mantra (and some running good as well) were respectable:
=> Next post will be about another very bad session with a lot of work and tons of things to learn from, especially about aggression and playing marginal hands oop. :) Stay tuned.