Fuck micro stakes

Table selection: the act of sitting at a table where you are most likely to make the largest profit.

Typical poker theory suggests a pretty basic premise of table selection that says if you can find bad players, profit will follow. But I prefer to look at it as a table where players are most likely to make the biggest mistakes vs YOU, not just poker in general. Mistakes which you yourself can most profitably capitalize on at ALL times, not just the mistake of someone going allin preflop with AQ when you have AA. I think table selection can go beyond just finding the "fishiest" table out there.

For a true grinder, this simply means counting on the laws of poker to come in your favor over the long haul. A player can only limp ace rag so many times before he finally hits 2 pair out of position in a raised pot vs your set. Your job is simply that of a sniper, waiting until the wind is just right so as not to send your bullet off mark, and BAM! You got em. But this can take quite a while, and even then sometimes the natural laws of poker variance will ruin your shot that you have been ever so patiently waiting for.

For everyone else, theres "your edge". Your abilities as a player to know how to get your opponent to do the wrong thing, be that folding when he shouldnt, raising, or even better, calling. This is the definition of a good player and must be learned eventually, at least if your desire is to make it to the top. How you decide to accomplish this is up to you. You can go through the natural poker progression, simply having the information absorbed into your psyche through playing hundreds of thousands to millions of hands, simply picking it up as you go along. Or you can actively seek to attain this knowledge, by putting yourself in the situations that require it, and remembering what happened so it stays in your arsenal of knowledge. Like choosing to pick up a book and learn a language, or simply moving to Japan and listening to people talk, this is my goal.

You see I have neither the time nor patience to try method number one. I also have some inherent beliefs that it’s simply not necessary, and potentially disastrous for your learning (i.e. becoming robotic and having a hard time unlearning and readjusting to radically different play at higher stakes). To achieve this I have thrusted myself into multi-level thinking by playing exclusively one table at a time, focusing on every single hand, even hands I am not playing in, and then using what I observe to play as many pots as possible against people. You know, the whole "play the man, not your cards" thing. Of course having a good hand helps, because sometimes somebody just aint foldin, and thats where you want to capitalize on this.

So how does this all relate to table selection? Well, as mentioned earlier, a typical grinder may seek out the easiest table to play at, where he can rely more on his cards and an opponents inability to play correctly vs them. However if your goal is to strictly play the player, and use your cards only as backup when things dont go your way, your criteria for finding a table changes dramatically. To date, I have had my best success at tables consisting mostly of nits and tags, with the least amount of "fish" possible. If I'm going to play a certain way against a certain player just because it's him, I have to be able to predict what he's going to do. Unlike other forms of competition where you lack information such as STARCRAFT, predicting someone's action and knowing what hand they have can still result in a loss. In starcraft, if you play against a newbie who puts one scv on each mineral patch only, it doesnt matter what he might accidentally end up doing with his strategy, you will simply beat him every time, no matter what. There is no variance, there is no luck, mathematically an inferior player of this magnitude simply cannot win. In poker this is not the case. There is an element of chance. So problem with this lies in the fact that certain players simply NEVER rely on chance. These are the players you can actually play against. The other guys require you to have a hand, which requires you to wait, and which requires you to have money to sustain losses when the best hand doesn’t win.

Due to this standard archetype for playing poker, questions of how much money you really need come in to question. It has been proven many times that one can mathematically play perfect poker, meaning their hand is statistically likely to win, and lose 20 times in a row. Well if this is possible you better be able to reload 20 times at a table. However if you ignore the math, and simply play based upon what you expect your opponent to do, you are less likely to lose as often, simply because if you are right, you win the hand, plain and simple. It doesn’t matter what your hand is, if you KNOW he is going to fold, and I mean know it like a Jamaican psychic, then you are playing perfect poker. Now you can still find yourself in a situation where you know both that your hand is the statistical favorite, AND your opponent will go allin, and still lose, but this will not happen frequently since the odds of a perfect setup occurring at the same time you know what your opponent will do are far more rare. And the times in which you do lose can be easily offset from all the future hands that you will play perfectly.

So back to table selection, if you intend to try to control the outcome of a hand based upon your actions rather than the strength of your cards, you need to find a table where players can be herded around the stable at your discretion. What I have finally figured out shockingly enough, is that this is NOT the fish! I have perpetually held to the accepted advise that I should want to play vs fish so they make mistakes. Unfortunately the kind of mistakes they make are not the kind of mistakes I need them to make in order to win! I need players to fold, or play back at me, not call me to the river with any pair, because clearly I cant win the hand at showdown if I am bluffing and was looking for a fold, the fold another type of player can be expected to make.
There are two types of poker players in this world. Those who care about money, and those who don’t. The players that just don’t care about losing are the players I will not be able to beat, at least not very often. My perfect storm will still come on occasion and I will turn the nut flush vs their straight and win just like anybody else can. But I will lose far too many pots in between battling it out with them as I have no control.

Table selection for me from now on shall consist of one thing and one thing only, table control. If I lose control of the table, I must leave. If I cannot get players to perform a certain action, then I am now playing my cards and my cards only, and if my cards suck I am in some serious trouble. Every few days I sit down at a table which looks juicy, and then mr. maniac fish comes along averaging out 80% vpip for over an hour. My initial thought has been “yesss!!”, and yet every single time I lose to them, and lose BAD. Consider the following show of results today:

Hi, my name is yallan and I play 100% vpip for the first 98 hands. I finally cooled off to a paltry 75.5% vpip as players adjusted to me.

These situations simply do not happen vs thinking players. You will almost never find yourself involved in spots like these vs someone who you know is actually making serious attempts to win the game. While these spots favored me, I was unlucky and I cant have that right now. I am far less likely to have “unlucky” setups against thinking players. With the above hands I had no ability to dictate his actions, I lost my ability to know when I even had the best hand. As a result, I was flying blind. Flying blind can be ok if you are capable of sustaining significant losses. Flying blind with a bad hand is probably not a good idea no matter how big your bankroll. But flying blind without the ability to let poker variance fuck you is a recipe for disaster. You simply cannot count on your ability to survive 6 or 7 flips in a row if that is all you can afford, which is why I put myself in situations that will hardly ever result in a flipping scenario.

So, as I continue to show impressive results one day, and then scratch my head in disbelief as an obvious fish rapes me the next day, I think I have finally figured out what I need to do. And that is AVOID THE FISH. That’s right, tuck my tail between my legs and run away to find another table. Because ultimately it has nothing to do with him playing poorly, it has everything to do with me playing properly. If some experienced pro gives you trouble at the table, there is nothing wrong with leaving. The table is –EV for you, regardless of the reason. I find playing against 70+ vpip maniacs to be –EV for me. Not because I refuse to tighten up, but because even if I do tighten up I can still lose, repeatedly, and I cannot afford that. So I will find another table, a +EV table. For me +EV will mean a table in which I feel I have a grasp on player tendencies, I know what they will do given a certain line of action, and then I can use that to control the hand. I don’t care if Phil Ivey sits at my table, if he folds every time I check-raise then I am in control and know what to do when he doesn’t fold. But if I am at a table with a fish and he just plays completely random, I can only play the best hands to insure my likelihood of winning, and even then, as said countless times by now, I might not win.
So the moral of this story is that I will make serious attempts like never before to actively and precisely table select at ALL times during the game. Not just find a table and stick with it forever. The moment I notice a shift in the game, one in which I cannot or do not want to adapt to, I simply must find another table. This will probably happen far more frequently that most people switch tables. I can end up switching tables every 60-80 hands, whereas most people put in around 200-300 before deciding maybe they should move on.

0 votes

Comments (7)

I was starting to get worried that I might actually go pro at this game. I'll let this blog serve as a reminder of how badly I can fuck up.

0 votes

Comments (8)

Well I havent updated my blog in forever, having mostly kept to myself as far as poker theory goes, perhaps because I'm on to a few ideas I dont want to talk about, perhaps to save myself the embarrassment of more fail posts. Regardless, what makes this update special is the fact that I'm actually posting results. This is a first for me, because until now I have never had results worth posting. I started this blog after reading about Daniel embarking on this 5 buyin bankroll strategy as a personal challenge just to see if he could do it. The idea being that since he only plays 1 table, 500 big blinds is plenty to play with. Well I also only play one table, so I figured what the hell, gives me new purpose in poker life.

Now I havent exactly kept true to this BRM strategy until this month, basically because every time I had some limited success I would take my newfound roll and use it for other things. Like suddenly abandoning the challenge and putting in time at the SNG's, or just taking the roll and making a legitimate attempt at grinding the micro's properly.

But before I go on to that, lets get on with business. My first ever results post! Why? Because it's the first month I have shown any profit! EVER!






Now I'm sure i'll get some *eyes roll* responses because this hardly seems legendary. But 5000 hands playing a single table at a time actually take some work! So I WILL sit here and be proud of this as if I have accomplished something and I WILL consider this sustainable after a 30 day run.... FUCK YOU, LET ME HAVE THIS!@

And now, the coup d'état, drum roll please. My lifetime graph results. Rather than having much to say, I'll just let the graph do the talking. The captions pretty much sum everything up.



And lastly, the awesome sauce in all of this is that I'm almost out of my poker deficit. I had never lost sight of the fact that technically, I'm still down. I swore I would never let myself put on the horse blinders and forget about where I'm really at as I all too often see from those who have never shown a profit yet think they are the shiznit during their single good run of the week at one table.

So where do I go from here? Well, to be honest, I'm pick pocketing my own account here as I desperately need to pad my real life bankroll due to such shitty economic circumstances these days. I've had my salary cut a whopping 35% this year, and of course every other expense has gone nowhere but up. I'm grateful to still have a job, no doubt the result of simply being friends with upper management, since we have laid off about 30% of our workforce and they could let go of me if they wanted. The good thing is, at the stakes I'm playing, a single good session gives me all the cashout I need. The bad thing is, a single bad session means a drop in limits, or potentially blowing my poker career. I have an opportunity right now. I could embark on some training, make a real case for myself and play NL100. People can practically make a living at NL100. Or I could donk it up a little with fewer tables at NL200 even. But neigh, I feel the planets are aligning, fate is descending upon me, and that I have a rare opportunity here to thrust myself to a level where I can become financially secure just in the nick of time, like when my company collapses. I'm going to continue on this run, and hope to do something amazing here, beat Daniel to the punch, and get myself out of this rat hole called every day life.

So here's to another silly graph next month. If you dont hear from me by then, I probably blew it.

0 votes

Comments (2)

So I havent had a roll on stars in awhile after moving to FTP for rakeback. My g/f has been steady grinding some cash she traded in from play money, and decided that I too would like to goof around stress free for little while with a challenge I made myself. Back when I used to withdraw money instead of depositing, I would always play with 1 buyin at a time. Meaning even though I had the bank account to roll myself for NL100 or so, I would instead just deposit $200 and play with that at an NL200 game. Something about the pressure of having it all on the table kept me in line. I figured it would be no different with $200 or $2, so I had my g/f ship me $2 for a new stars roll. Since I play LAG, I decided that I dont really need 100BB's to play effectively, even at NL2. In fact especially at NL2. You can get away with so much murder there as fish are typically folding or calling regardless of your bet size. I can literally bet .10 into a 90 cent pot and they will fold if they have nothing. So off I went, playing somewhere around 44/35/5 game, trying to stick and move, build my stack, wield it, then move up again.

Results thus far:



Haaaaaaaaaahhh!! Pretty fun actually. I love little challenges. Naturally playing this way I got gayed by some nit AKs vs his AQs, which is gonna happen on occasion. Regardless, I still have a few bucks left so on to round two!

0 votes

Comments (5)

If you go flying back through time and you see somebody else flying forward into the future, it's probably best to avoid eye contact--

And now on to some other deep thoughts,

So a week ago I decided that I would force myself to finally break through the penny stakes barrier by simply putting in a massive volume of hands, relying on +EV moves to make up for all the bad beats and let long term statistics prove me the victor. But gosh darnit I just kept getting so tilted at all the bullshit that I finally said fuck it, I refuse to play with people who do not care about money. I need my opponents to give a damn about losing 20 bucks, it's the only way I can play. So I decided on the lowest limit this would be found at, which I feel is NL25. Oh there are still people who flat out dont give a shit, but for the most part these guys dont consider a $25 stack to be play money. Or least the majority of the table doesnt, which means I'm not facing 5 morons who just go "lol awww in!" with random bluffs and shit b/c they enjoy the thrill.

So I continue to embark upon my one-table strategy of making intimate reads and very player dependent bets in every single round, even hands Im not in I continue to observe and think about what they have. One good thing about playing LAG at one-table is that the pace of my learning seems to be 10x greater than that of multi-tabling where I cant really focus and have to see the same thing happen 50x before it finally sticks in my head. Each day I continue to fine tune my game, and learn something new.

So far of all the major player archetypes, the only one left that is giving me real problems are the calling stations and maniac fish. I find there are 3 levels of fish out there.

1) Loose passive - this is the easiest type. Usually runs around 25/5 game. Limps mostly, occasionally calling preflop raises, but for whatever reason is very timid on the flop, possibly even when hitting pairs. Cbetting works fantastic against them.

2) Calling station - this fish is of medium difficulty. They call so many cbets and random flops its really hard to put them on a range. Sometimes it's with a random pair or PP and they just "dont believe you", and will shutdown on the turn. Sometimes it's a draw, sometimes it's pure float. I havent quite figured out yet if these players can be played that aggressively against or not. You can certainly do well against them playing tight, but I dont want to have to completely change my table play based upon one player.

3) Loose maniac - mind you, this is not the typical raising maniac who is on tilt or gambling. This is the guy who literally calls preflop raises of ANY size with ANY TWO CARDS no matter what. You would believe it is their first time playing and that they dont even understand hand ranking. They do not fold any pair, they often dont fold ace high, king high, even ten high. They are usually playing at least 80% vpip. Some of them mix up a lot of preflop minraising in their game giving them a maniacal looking 85/55 stat, but in reality the minraises dont suggest they are a true maniac who is going banana's with JTo etc. These guys are still minraising the same trash they call with preflop, T5o, 23o, anything. This has been my nemesis for the past few months. These are the guys I blog about when I try to raise hands that are higher on the ole starting hand chart, albeit not that much higher.

I have severe tilt issues that only recently I have finally began learning how to control, the biggest of which is adapting to table conditions. Since playing lag pretty much puts you at the top giving you the freedom to do what you want, taking it down a notch and tightening up has always been hard for me, especially when i know how someone else is playing. So for the first time lately, I finally chilled out, met the #3 fish, and did the only thing I havent done yet in my trials, and that is just play straight up tag. Fold fold fold everything, make standard value raises with my good hands, if AK misses then it misses, and pot 3 streets when I hit. While I do potentially miss out on opportunities, and someone else may stack him before me, i have found it to be the only thing possible to do against a 80vpip person. This is a breakthrough for me. No outplaying, no FPS, no iso-raising and 4betting, just play ABC. This is the only player I play ABC against, and it may be necessary to employ vs level 2 fish as well, we will have to see what I can get away with there.

Regardless, I have been violently swinging my NL25 bankroll up and down, but mostly just fine tuning imo. I feel very proud of my play, and my only losses this week have come purely from the level 3 fish. Now that I think I finally have some control of the situation, which means either leaving the table completely or adapting, I hope to see my swings level out, and hope to push it up to NL50 at some point in june. NL2? Done with it. NL5? Done with that too. NL10 you can actually make some pocket change with if you are content cashing out 50 bucks every few days. But I want more. I need to reach a point where I can cover my g/f's portion of the rent, protect myself from getting laid off from work, and reach the point where I can tell my faggot boss to fuck off and live off poker for good.

0 votes

Comments (1)

I have set for myself a new goal: To make $1000 per day.

However since I am currently incapable of this, I shall go for an alternative goal of 1000 hands per day. Poker, much like life, is better played with goals in mind. Goals have a particular ability to make people perform better. This is actually my first ever poker goal.

I have long grimaced at the act of playing micro stakes, as the variance and looseness of it all strays so far from classic poker. I have long since been unwilling to conform to their standards, holding strong to the belief that the best hand should always win, and if they're going to limp Q3o well then I'm going to raise A3o goddamnit. Whatever misgivings I have, there is one conclusion I am fast drawing upon, and that is micro stakes is all about volume of play. The game CAN be a bit variance heavy depending upon how you play, but either way what it really takes to drudge through it is sheer numbers in hands played.

If you play a super nit FR game, while you may hardly lose a hand, it will take thousands of hands to actually show a solid profit. And if you are daring enough to play a LAG game, the variance will kill you without again, tons of hands to survive through it. My entire poker career has spanned just barely over 100k hands. The last few months have consisted of maybe 2-4k hands each month. My goal is to play 1000 hands every single day for a month straight, to get 30k hands per month, a solid monthly sample which should show a gradual increase in bankroll. I am hoping to quickly move up to 2000 hands once my bankroll is large enough to allow for more tables at a time. I am simply going to count on the math of the game to say that playing in a +EV way WILL yield profit. Maybe not at the end of the day, maybe not the end of the week, but surely by the end of the month. Hopefully this becomes habit forming, but I feel being able to play as many hands in my entire poker lifetime in a matter of months should break me in to being able to be a full time poker player.

0 votes

Comments (10)

In the words of the great Borat, Wowwweee wowow!! So as I desperately try to self-analyze my HH's and sessions, my mood at the time (I tilt so easily), and what I remember from the CR videos I downloaded, after my 150k lifetime losing streak, there has been only 1 constant whenever I have done well. And that has been playing just ONE TABLE AT A TIME boys. Im not gonna lie, when the concept of multi-tabling was first revealed to me I simply assumed I could do it. Rather than starting off slow like everyone says, I just immediately loaded up about 18 tables. I didnt find it particularly hard to focus per se, I simply played a 10/7/3.5 game or so. I had a brief run of success at this but for whatever reason deemed it a waste of time and focused on a more LAG game and fewer tables. I have progressively continued to drop tables as I continue to get hammered, all the way down to 4, where I again just assumed this was plenty low enough to focus. But you know, I still find myself completely forgetting about 1-2 tables as I just auto-fold everything that isnt obviously raise worthy. Then I'll catch myself doing this, suddenly start trying to play looser at the table, but without any reads since I havent been paying attention I fail. I'll try to make some range estimation based on villain stats and go for a c/r allin or flop 3bet, and then get all pissed off when they call with some weird draw/PP and hit and feel like I got sucked out on, when I probably wouldnt have played the hand like that anyway if I had been focused.

So I took my shattered bankroll and decided to do the most boring thing on earth, grind 1 table of NL2. And for the last 3 days have actually been up. I've also played a silly 35/25/3 game, but my EV is in line and I have had the best hands. With one table running I find myself constantly analyzing every single action and trying to figure out what I can and cant get away with. I think I have a fundamental misunderstanding of how to read player stats, so I've been keeping them to a minimum to all but the most very telling ones. How often they limp or raise, do they ever 3bet, and how often they steal. This basically defines when they have a good hand vs when they have mediocre crap you can probably take away from them with on the flop.

You know my hero Daniel swears by one table poker. Whatever my fishy obsession with his style is (even though I dont think ive ever seen him win money), he too confesses that he just cant hack it at more than one table. So if I can run 30BB/100 playing 1 table, maybe I can offset the hourly earnings that some of you get when you mass-table at 6BB/100.

There is one last tidbit to consider regarding this "style". And that is enjoyment factor. I am ultra competitive, and I play to win, not for money. So even a game like NL2 can send me into a fury since I dont like losing, even though it's only $2 here or there. Whenver I multi-table I find myself tilting very easily. There is not 1 second of the game I even enjoy. I feel like it's some sort of damn chore that I'm being forced to do if I ever want to be able to make a living at this. But, whenever I one table, I thoroughly enjoy it the whole time, even when I lose. Usually I'm only losing when I'm trying some fancy, so when it doesnt work, I blame myself. When I mass-table I genuinely try to play straight forward, so when I lose, I feel I got cheated and get pissed.

I know everyone starts off at one table, so maybe Im just simply not ready for more yet. I might, MIGHT try loading up 2 tables just to see if I feel as involved or if I start staring at one table like a deer in headlights.

0 votes

Comments (2)

Threw some tokens at the FTP slot machine today. Man this game just puts my stomach in knots so bad. I literally get chills every time I go to sit down, even at NL2. It's not the money, it's just the shame of losing it. I'm an extremely competitive person. I dunno if these are coolers are what. I mean how can I put these donks at NL2 on the nuts every single time? Theres no way I cant expect these fish to have soooo much worse in every one of these scenario's. If this happened at NL200 or above, I'd be out a 24" flatscreen, a keyboard, and down at Lowe's buying some spackle for the new holes in the wall. I have issues.



Submitted by : NewbSaibot

Full Tilt Poker Game #12202954884: Table Access (6 max) - $0.02/$0.05 - No Limit Hold'em - 19:41:38 ET - 2009/05/13
Seat 1: Hero ($5)
Seat 2: eightnine89 ($5)
Seat 3: xmvc ($5.16)
Seat 4: Mukimaki ($7.50)
Seat 5: pytys ($0.25)
Seat 6: Mucka_Mucker ($6.89)
Mucka_Mucker posts the small blind of $0.02
Hero posts the big blind of $0.05
The button is in seat #5

Holecards
Dealt to Hero
eightnine89 raises to $0.15
xmvc folds
Mukimaki folds
pytys has been disconnected
pytys has reconnected
pytys has 15 seconds left to act
pytys calls $0.15
Mucka_Mucker calls $0.13
Hero calls $0.10

Flop (Pot : $0.60)

   
Mucka_Mucker checks
Hero checks
eightnine89 bets $0.45
pytys calls $0.10, and is all in
Mucka_Mucker folds
Hero calls $0.45

Turn (Pot : $1.60)

   
Hero checks
eightnine89 has 15 seconds left to act
eightnine89 checks

River (Pot : $1.60)

   
Hero bets $0.50
eightnine89 has 15 seconds left to act
eightnine89 raises to $1.65
Hero raises to $4.40, and is all in
eightnine89 has 15 seconds left to act
eightnine89 calls $2.75, and is all in

Showdown
Hero shows three of a kind, Fives
eightnine89 shows a flush, Jack high
eightnine89 wins the side pot ($8.87) with a flush, Jack high
pytys mucks
eightnine89 wins the main pot ($0.84) with a flush, Jack high
Hero is sitting out
pytys is sitting out

Summary
Total pot $10.40 Main pot $0.90. Side pot $9.50. | Rake $0.69
Board:
Seat 1: Hero (big blind) showed and lost with three of a kind, Fives
Seat 2: eightnine89 showed and won ($9.71) with a flush, Jack high
Seat 3: xmvc didn't bet (folded)
Seat 4: Mukimaki didn't bet (folded)
Seat 5: pytys (button) mucked - Ace King high
Seat 6: Mucka_Mucker (small blind) folded on the Flop
Full Tilt Poker Game #12203197402: Table Requa (6 max, deep) - $0.01/$0.02 - No Limit Hold'em - 19:55:54 ET - 2009/05/13
Seat 1: Jazzride ($4.44)
Seat 2: Rhythms ($2), is sitting out
Seat 3: Hero ($2.06)
Seat 4: ReverseTwilight ($4.07)
Seat 5: CjEnKsFL0PaA ($2.01)
Seat 6: ACRVC ($7.83)
ACRVC posts the small blind of $0.01
Jazzride posts the big blind of $0.02
The button is in seat #5

Holecards
Dealt to Hero
Hero raises to $0.10
ReverseTwilight folds
CjEnKsFL0PaA folds
ACRVC raises to $0.32
Jazzride folds
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero raises to $0.75
ACRVC has 15 seconds left to act
ACRVC raises to $7.83, and is all in
Hero calls $1.31, and is all in
ACRVC shows
Hero shows
Uncalled bet of $5.77 returned to ACRVC

Flop (Pot : $9.14)

   

Turn (Pot : $10.14)

   

River (Pot : $10.14)

   
ACRVC shows two pair, Aces and Sixes
Hero shows two pair, Jacks and Sixes
ACRVC wins the pot ($3.87) with two pair, Aces and Sixes
Hero adds $2

Summary
Total pot $4.14 | Rake $0.27
Board:
Seat 1: Jazzride (big blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 2: Rhythms is sitting out
Seat 3: Hero showed and lost with two pair, Jacks and Sixes
Seat 4: ReverseTwilight didn't bet (folded)
Seat 5: CjEnKsFL0PaA (button) didn't bet (folded)
Seat 6: ACRVC (small blind) showed and won ($3.87) with two pair, Aces and Sixes
Full Tilt Poker Game #12203196227: Table News (6 max) - $0.01/$0.02 - No Limit Hold'em - 19:55:49 ET - 2009/05/13
Seat 1: connmanJ ($2.11)
Seat 2: Hero ($2)
Seat 3: minirake ($2.04), is sitting out
Seat 4: go1975 ($3.82)
Seat 5: kefiros ($0.76)
Seat 6: ksantillie ($2.02)
connmanJ posts the small blind of $0.01
Hero posts the big blind of $0.02
The button is in seat #6

Holecards
Dealt to Hero
go1975 folds
kefiros folds
ksantillie calls $0.02
connmanJ folds
Hero checks

Flop (Pot : $9.19)

   
Hero checks
ksantillie bets $0.02
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero raises to $0.11
ksantillie calls $0.09

Turn (Pot : $10.41)

   
minirake has returned
Hero bets $0.27
ksantillie calls $0.27

River (Pot : $10.95)

   
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero bets $1.60, and is all in
ksantillie calls $1.60

Showdown
Hero shows two pair, Aces and Fives
ksantillie shows a flush, Ace high
ksantillie wins the pot ($3.75) with a flush, Ace high
Hero adds $2

Summary
Total pot $4.01 | Rake $0.26
Board:
Seat 1: connmanJ (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 2: Hero (big blind) showed and lost with two pair, Aces and Fives
Seat 3: minirake is sitting out
Seat 4: go1975 didn't bet (folded)
Seat 5: kefiros didn't bet (folded)
Seat 6: ksantillie (button) showed and won ($3.75) with a flush, Ace high
Full Tilt Poker Game #12203140312: Table Epson (6 max) - $0.01/$0.02 - No Limit Hold'em - 19:52:22 ET - 2009/05/13
Seat 1: Erycka23 ($2.16)
Seat 2: Hero ($2.53)
Seat 3: Scabo ($0.80)
Seat 5: jphaynes4 ($2.30)
Seat 6: lilradar21 ($0.43)
Erycka23 posts the small blind of $0.01
Hero posts the big blind of $0.02
Scabo posts $0.02
The button is in seat #6

Holecards
Dealt to Hero
Scabo checks
jphaynes4 folds
lilradar21 calls $0.02
Haleb sits down
Haleb adds $0.80
Erycka23 has 15 seconds left to act
Erycka23 folds
Hero checks

Flop (Pot : $10.84)

   
Hero checks
Scabo checks
lilradar21 checks

Turn (Pot : $12.06)

   
Hero has 15 seconds left to act
Hero bets $0.07
Scabo folds
lilradar21 calls $0.07

River (Pot : $12.74)

   
Hero bets $0.21
lilradar21 raises to $0.34, and is all in
Hero calls $0.13

Showdown
lilradar21 shows three of a kind, Sevens
Hero mucks
lilradar21 wins the pot ($0.84) with three of a kind, Sevens

Summary
Total pot $0.89 | Rake $0.05
Board:
Seat 1: Erycka23 (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 2: Hero (big blind) mucked - two pair, Eights and Sevens
Seat 3: Scabo folded on the Turn
Seat 5: jphaynes4 didn't bet (folded)
Seat 6: lilradar21 (button) showed and won ($0.84) with three of a kind, Sevens

0 votes

So before I tilted off the last of my roll furiously attacking micro stakes players with the false assumption that if my hand is 2% better than theirs then I stand a good chance of winning at showdown, I decided to do something even more stupid, play HU baby. Now HU has always fascinated me, even though I have like a total of 500 hands in my lifetime at it. What few adventures I have stepped in have left me feeling like this could be my bread and butter one day, mainly because I get so hyper involved in every hand (which is what tilts me) that a game like HU feeds off my desire to really probe each and every single hand played. I had been warned the game is a variance fest, and now I see why. I decided to take my 3 BI's to the NL50 HU tables, and I courageously grinded my way up to 1.2 BI's vs some guy, feeling like I was doing everything right. Unfortunately I got coolered to hell twice in a row and BAM, bye bye chiplead. Wow, all your opponent need do is double up once, and suddenly he is a tremendous threat to your stack. So I left with like 9 bucks to my name, however not depressed. Whenever I blow my roll like this I suddenly get this new found level of respect for the game, and a sudden desire to regrind from the bottom up.

So back I am at NL2. I'm only playing 4 tables sine well, thats all I can afford heh. I definitely looked over the responses to my last blog, looked at what I was doing, and literally just straight out reversed it. Everyone basically said "do the exact opposite of everything youre doing now". Interestingly I'm not finding myself getting bored, nor am I pissed when I see ATo was the best hand in a 4 way pot against a bunch of idiots who got it allin on a gutshot and bottom pair. I simply abide by the motto of JLIG, "just let it go". I've had 5 winning sessions since, most of which are less than 1 BI days, however this also does not bother me. I used to be obsessed with the idea that I needed to piledrive my way through the limits the way you 10k hand-a-day grinders do it. Now I am simply satisified if I had a winning session. I even quit after a few hundred hands only being up about 15-20BB's, and oddly I felt proud about this. My goal at this point is to simply have winning session's.

So I've doubled my mighty bankroll to $18, which I guess if you think about it is pretty oustanding, because it's DOUBLE my bankroll. And im not shortstacking or anything like that. If I could double my bankroll at NL200 in a week that would be pretty brag worthy, so why not at NL2? Oh well. With a certain rakeback affiliate I use they now autocash your RB to your account every week regardless of the amount. At NL2 this is a godsend as it really helps replenish those micro losses. I should probably keep this to myself, but I also intend to embark back on that Negreanu 5 BI strategy where I move up every 5-6 BI's at the low limits. This could result in another "humbling blog update" in a few weeks but heh, so be it. I think as long as I can keep chill, and realize better hands in better spots will come better days, I can stay afloat.

That, is all....

0 votes

Comments (1)

The following recent history of losses is a prime example of the legitimacy of moving up limits where players respect your raises. This is how I have lost most of my roll at NL2 recently. These are the hands that beat me.



This is why I cant beat NL2. Keep in mind I rarely limp, so these are all raised pots, meaning this is what is calling me preflop. Im sorry but this is just too damn loose. Who can compete against this? If this isnt a legitimate reason to move up limits where people respect your raises then I dont know what is. Cmon, not even Durrr shows up with this trash. #1 answer given when I ask someone about their hand "this is 1/2cent man". This isnt poker. I dunno what the hell you call this, but it sure as hell aint poker. Funny, I'm down like 2 grand in my lifetime playing NL2-NL50, and I'm up $1200 at NL200.

Oh, and LOL at newbs trying to slowplay AA/AK.

0 votes

Comments (12)