Beyond that, your response really makes me wonder if I'll ever be good enough at the key elements of this game (e.g. hand-reading, note-taking) to be successful. I feel like an absolute beginner compared to you!
I think that many of us question our abilities at various points in our development. Keep your chin up Oba, this is absolutely normal. I'm certainly not omniscient when it comes to hand reading. I actually have a piece of paper posted next to my computer that reads:
Before you bet ask yourself:
"Am I value betting or bluffing?"
If you're value betting: "What worse hands can call?"
If you're bluffing: "What better hands will fold?"
Do Not mindlessly barrel off!
Do Not call down with weak hands when a passive player puts in significant action!
So clearly I still need reminders of how to handle certain situations. But asking myself these questions before I make a bet certainly helps to point me in the right direction regarding if betting is actually correct in a situation. And, if you look at the last two lines there, can you tell that I was a total barrel and SD monkey for a while?
Also, when it comes to hand reading (like I said, I'm not omniscient) I got to where I am now by being wrong a lot...and I'm still wrong a lot, but I don't feel bad about being wrong...I just treat it as information to use later and as something to learn from. Also, I listen to how other, more seasoned, LHE players (DD, Entity, OTR, Mikefut, LQ, Hood, etc...just to name a few) think about a hand and try to understand/incorporate the way they see things into my own game...and doing this has helped tremendously. Another thing, don't compare where you are in your development to where other people are..compare where you are today to where you were a week/month/year ago. For example: I just started playing 6m LHE almost exactly a year ago and if I look at how I was then and compare it to where I am now I can see definitive progress. But I also know that I am not at the level of many of the players mentioned above.
Also, good note taking takes practice...but if you practice it often it will become a habit. I never used to take notes until I watched a series (I think it was The Peanut Collector) with BBB and PH and then I realized how useful notes can be!
I don't know if you've watched TEPTPE but in one episode Tommy talks about changing the object of the game (e.g making the object of the game table/seat selection, quitting, etc...rather than the object of the game being to make money) perhaps take a session or two a week and making the object of the game taking good notes (this would be your focus for that session) would help you in developing good note taking habits.
Also, I noticed that your notes are pretty verbose when you do take them...this may be somewhat of a deterrent for you as well, try using your own form of shorthand (something that makes sense to you). I'll use an example of how I would do this using a hand from your session.
We'll use the hand where you isoed with 98o for the example (I'll try to put it in a quasi HH format:
Hero is dealt 98
UTG calls, MP folds, Hero raises, BTN folds, SB folds, BB calls, UTG calls
BB checks, UTG checks, Hero bets, BB folds, UTG raises, Hero calls
UTG checks, Hero bets, UTG calls
UTG checks, Hero bets, UTG calls
UTG shows A[heart]3[heart]
My typical format for note taking is: preflop action/hand, postflop action [f][t][r], board (draw notes in parenthesis)
So I would note the way the hand played out in the following way against this villain: OL UTG/cISO A3s, xr xc xc, 987tt(NFD)4o 7o
The english version would be: open limp UTG/call ISO A3s, xr(flop) xc(turn) xc(river), 987tt (Nut flush draw) 4o 2o.
If I get a few similar notes, I condense them into a single note such as as follows: xr big draws on flop, xcd A high UI
Let's say we see him check raise the flop with draws and continue to bet turns and rivers when he hits, but just xcd when he misses...then the note would be: xr big flopped draws, b b (hit), xc xc (miss, Ahi UI) when we converge notes like that it gives us a clearer picture of how we should play our hands against this type of villain (seems pretty easy doesn't it?). Similarly, if we find out he also check/raises made hands on the flop and continues to bet them, folding becomes easier when we have a hand that can only beat a bluff since he doesn't barrel off all of his draws. This particular type of villain is about as easy as they come in terms of exploitability.
In a similar vein, I will respectfully ignore some of your advice about opening wider (A3o 16:16) and calling down lighter (K5 11:41) for the time being. When I can read villains/hands as well as you, I'll try to incorporate these points.
This is fine, if you're not comfortable making plays like this don't do them (opening A3o here was something I would only do with a foldy BTN since it could become very difficult to play if BTN, SB, and BB are all loose/cally players). What's your typical A high opening range in the CO?
As far as the K5s hand goes, that was based more on our/his actions and if the board ran out in a brick-ish fashion (not say calling a bet there is correct, just that I would be tempted to call in some cases against some opponents). Something I have been kind of fiddling around with is inducing bluffs from my opponents in situations where they really can't call a bet with worse hands (mmm extracting bets I can't otherwise win...yummy!). The basic idea is that by taking a passive action on the turn, your opponent's bluffing range gets wider than it would be otherwise (e.g. I check the turn with a hand I want to take to SD, the river bricks, they bet because I showed "weakness" in a spot that they would have only folded worse and only called or raised with better...so maybe now I am getting 3:1 on a call but I think that their bluffing range has expanded to maybe being about 30% of their bets so I gain some fractions of a BB on the call where I would have been putting a bet in bad when he calls, does that make sense?).
Stats shown are Fold SB to Steal first then Fold BB to Steal. I think the difference in our stats is just a convergence issue. For this villain I had 13 samples for SB and 15 samples for BB.
Nah, I just misread your HUD...those numbers are almost exactly what I have...I thought the number immediately to the right of FtS: was the BB#, I don't have the SB# in my HUD because if a player frequently calls or raises out of the SB I notice it and if he calls super often in the BB he also usually plays the SB far too loose (by calling) as well.
I would give up UI on the turn (except possibly represent an Ace) and think about getting away from my hand if the board turned nasty (more hearts, straightening) and/or I got heat from either player.
Personally, I would bet the turn on a lot of cards (not sure that it'd be correct) against just one caller, against two callers I'd be giving up almost always. Against one caller I'd probably be betting any A, K, Q, T, or 8 and part of me wants to keep betting a 9 or 6 (I think the 6 is a lot closer than a 9) but I'm having a hard time thinking about what better hands will fold on those two cards(all pairs probably call).
With two pair (one top pair) on this very co-ordinated board, I'm only folding to runner runner hearts - at least vs this villain.
I will bet/call for value on any turn card that doesn't improve me to a full house.
I think your thinking is close on this one.
I would raise/call any non-heart turn for value.
I like it!
That's about the sum-total of my thought process at this point.
Should I find a more reasons to fold the river if he continues to bring heat on the turn - maybe the cards that complete the most straight draws e.g. T and 6?
In this spot I think in terms of what cards are just awful for my hand. The J comes to mind, closely followed by 6 as the absolute worst cards in the deck for us (both complete all of the big draws against us). I'm also not loving the other J's, 6's, and hearts. I'm not fist pumping against an offsuit T or 5, but if they come and the river is a total brick I think a call would be fine.
Ironically I'd already decided this villain was playing "odd" in the last hand but didn't make any notes and then completely forgot in the space of 30 seconds (fish?).
Yeah, it was an odd play on the part of the villain. I mean, yeah...you lost some value in the hand by not raising, but got the same amount as you would have if he check/called down and it's kind of a puke/call spot if he 3 bets and then leads the river. That was actually what I was thinking when I was reviewing the video as well...but man, I still really wanted to punch the raise button for you!
This is a good example of the type of hand that Entity called me out on and I'd say it's the main reason I've been losing for months.
You know why I played this hand? Because my mind was focused on the last hand and my fingers auto-opened pretty 98o.
I don't mind opening 98o in the CO, the problem was that there was a limper in front of you. I understand getting a bit distracted from time to time, it happens. How about a compromise when it comes to opening up the replayer to review a hand? Rather than opening it to see the results of a hand, try making a commitment to only open it if you are intending to take a note on the hand and then follow through on taking the notes? You can kill 2 birds with one stone that way...you get to satisfy your curiosity and develop your reads and note taking skills. TBH, if you're just checking to see the results of a hand without gaining any real information from it you are doing yourself a disservice since you aren't really gaining anything from it and you are taking your attention away from what is happening right at that moment.
Honestly... whilst I'm sure somewhere in my head I could tell there were plenty of draws, I bet the turn on this hand mainly because I was annoyed.
Ahh yes, the frustration bet...we all make those too from time to time. At least they aren't as spewy as a frustration raise!
so, THANK YOU DRGRIP!
I will think long and hard about my note-taking habits and also my ability to follow the action. Both you and LQ have named and shamed me in this thread!
Not a problem Oba, this was a good/useful exercise for me as well given that my volume was super low over the past couple weeks. The intent wasn't to shame you (I know that you know that) but to help you while you are struggling...and I hope we've managed to do that.
One more note: A couple months ago I was losing massively (actually wiped out all of my earnings for the year in 3 months) one thing that helped me was a good in depth review of my play in a couple of sessions. One session was from when I was doing well and the other was from when I was doing poorly. I went through and reviewed every single hand from both sessions by typing out the hole cards, actions, and pot sizes(even hands I folded preflop...well, my hole cards anyways) and then wrote notes (including equity calcs) by hand in the margins to help identify leaks in my game. I then classified those leaks as passive and aggressive. When I compared the notes from both sessions to each other (both were chosen at random, but I did specify that one had to be a winning session and the other a losing one) I found that many of the leaks were the same, the only difference was that I was falling victim to those leaks much more frequently in my losing session than my winning one. It helped me to at least reduce the leakage in my game to a trickle rather than being a torrent. It was a massively time consuming exercise (I think the total time involved was something like 12 hours) but well worth it IMO. This exercise also helped me think in terms of hand ranges and how those ranges interact with boards. Perhaps a similar (but maybe not as intense) exercise would do your game some good as well.
Sheesh...in person I am a quiet guy, but oddly enough I am rarely at a loss for words as evidenced in my two posts here.