Monday, December 20, 2004

Omaha Instructional

YTD: +$40199.56

One of the significant weaknesses I see in many player's games is the overplaying of draws against a made hand, especially when a pot is small. This is a flaw which I see in the very best of the 5-10 game to the ok players in the 2-4. Because they "know" that they are probably no worse than 6:4 dogs, and they are getting 2:1 on the action, they then proceed to lump in their stack against what surely must be a made hand. But these can be very -EV plays. Perhaps an example will make it clear. In a 2-4 game, unraised pot, I flop top trips on a 2TJ rainbow flop. My opponent bets the flop, I raise, he reraises, repeat till his $317 stack has gone :-)

So what has happened here, EV-wise? He has put in $317 to win $341 strange. This is 1.08 to 1 money odds. His "wrap" was just the top cards AKQ and I had a blocker in the 9. So his chance of winning was 1.67 to 1. The whole play has a -EV of about 20% and continually playing like this will soon send him to the poker hospital.

So how do you play it then?

Just call. You will have the right odds, or near enough in most cases, to call a blank turn. And if it pairs up you can pass. Also if you do hit the turn with your draw, you can bet and make him potentially make a very bad call to fill up.

Aggression is good, but not when it drives you to bankroll extinction.

Tuesday, December 14, 2004

Odds and Sods

YTD: +$41033.96

Well I thought I would kick off with one of the amusing PLO hands I have had of late. No not the one where I won a showdown pot for $800 with a pair of twos (?) but the following:

I check raise from UTG with AA double suited and get one caller, the original mini-raiser. The flop comes Kh 4h 8h - which is my suit - so I bet about 3/4 of the pot. The turn pairs the four and I bet the pot, which he calls and he calls the river with his remaining small change when a rag 9 comes. And what does he have? 4c 6s 7d 7h . That's right he called on the flop to hit a middle pin against a potential already made flush and then proceeded to flush his whole stack down with it. Sometimes I do wonder how much longer this kind of madness can continue.

On some miscellaneous topics:

Doyle's Poker Room and the VC skins

Ok...I wanted the book :-) At the table the VC software is ok, but it is too buggy and you can only play two games at once. The games are fantastic however. Several times, playing 10-20 holdem, I had to double check I wasn't playing some kind of free money game. The action made Party look like Stars, mostly fuelled by clueless Brits. The PLO and PLO8b, whilst a bit small, were similar mindless. Never has so much been given by so many with so little.

The Hendon Mob Forum

I've sacked it now. I may post when I want something, like today, but no more for anymore. The incident with Mad Marty in the UK Championship and the responses it drew were just mind boggling. After all the tourney drones wittering on about the importance of the integrity of the game for it to become a sport they then, by and large, just shrug their shoulders when *one of the fundamental rules of poker is broken on TV* It was a bit like a forward scoring a goal and the referee awarding it to the opposition.

On a more amusing note, has been the comments about Grumpy, sorry "Burnley", John. Fair play to the guy winning a big chunk of life changing change. But all the nonsense about what a great player he is and what a breakthrough year he's having, by people who have never played with him, is taking Doyle Disease to dizzy new heights. I have played with John for a reasonable period of time. It wouldn't be rude to say that prior to his win, he was one of many subsistence players that you see on the circuit. And unless he has suddenly metamorphosed his play, I can't imagine he gets people's knees quaking when he sits at the table either.

Card Player


The battle of the giants continues; who can produce the worse poker "journalism" in a month - Rob V or Allyn J? Its tough this month, I just can't separate them.

The Poker Bastard

After a promising start he seems to be flagging. Telling us that poker players are cunts is not breaking news. Saying that THM is the best poker site on the web shows a fierce lack of judgment. Where was the expose, long overdue, of chronic Bolivian Marching Powder use amongst the tourney "faces" that he alluded to? He seems to have gone all toothless.

Coming soon this month...a state of the nation review and detailed win rates for all my games! Woo hoo!

Wednesday, December 08, 2004

Right to Retort

YTD: +$40559.14

My Faithful Reader may remember my critical view on a Rolf Slotbloom article that I found on the web. I talk about it at

I guess Rolf heard about this from some of the guys from the Amsterdam game I was losing money to in the Stars PLO love-fest and he recently wrote me a reply. Here it is in full:

"Hi Dave,

A while ago, someone mentioned your blog, and told me that you commented on one my my works. So, as it turns out I am about a month or three late, but anyway, here's my response.

First of all, thanks for calling me "one of the favourites" - I don't get compliments that often. :) Now, as to the KKxx hand in question. The only time I have written about this hand, was not in an article, but in the "What's Happening" section on my site. You are 100% correct that in the situation described here (deep money / multiway pot) going all-in with kings single-suited is a very marginal decision. In fact, if you read some of my older PLO articles I have more than once shown the dangers of moving in with KK. And in this case the situation was even more dangerous: not just was I up against three players, my kings were very crappy, so even if my reads on my three opponents were excellent, then I would still be ahead by just a fairly slight margin. In fact, no player that I know would have made the final (massive) raise with a hand this weak, because they would have reasoned "with so much action, someone must have aces"- they would either have called or folded. So, I was proud that I had the courage to trust my read and be correct, being a clear favorite against the person with the second-largest stack, who had QQ22 double-suited, while if I remember correctly one other player had JJ22 and another QQxx - meaning that for a large side pot I was in fact an (unexpected) large favorite, and for the main pot I was in good shape as well, no one even holding a single ace or king (!). More than all this, if you read my piece, you will notice the word "fortunately" on more than one occasion, because I *had* been very fortunate. But I had also made a daring but correct decision to not just flatcall to see a flop, but to come back over the top of not just one, not two, but THREE raises with nothing more than crappy kings, and I was obviously proud of that decision. Wouldn't you be proud if you trust your read so much, that you know that if your read is right, you will probably be ahead by just a slight margin, but if it's wrong you will be a massive dog - now, if you still trust your read in a difficult situation like this and you turn out to be right, wouldn't *you* be proud?

I will discuss this entire night of poker into depth in one of my upcoming CardPlayer articles, including this final hand. I have sent over the article already and I cannot make any changes now, so I'll just hope that indeed I have acknowledged how lucky I had been! :) Anyway, Dave, just thought I'd send you a reply, also to compliment you on your blog: it is well-written and contains some excellent info. Keep up the good work, man.

Rolf Slotboom"

Firstly, thanks for the response and the kind words. You were/are one of my preferred writers and I am prepared to forgive this one "lapse" :-)

I guess I would like to add two further points. I still don't like him referring to a short stacked approach as a successful style in PLO; I'm not convinced it can be a good approach except in very unusual conditions and moreover it's a style that will limit a player's ability to develop his game longterm.

More importantly I think that in such highly marginal decisions "backing my judgment and I was right" is not enough; those of you who went through my plo8b example earlier in my blog will see why that is flawed thinking. The reason is that for this play to be correct he probably has to be 40-60% certain that the hands he is against are so bad and so counterfeited. Any permutation of either an AA in there or just better hands as a whole, with an A flush in there, make his hand very much weaker. This means that on the balance of probabilities he is at best zero EV or even losing money on the coup, unless he has a very large headsup sidepot involved, which would affect matters somewhat and this was not mentioned in the original article. Sometimes the weight of mathematics outweigh instinct.

Thursday, December 02, 2004

A Taste of the New Part 2

YTD: +$41029.90

I guess you all prefer PLO hands then! Thanks for Simon for his thoughts on the hand...here's my reasoning through the streets:

Party Poker 15/30 Hold'em (10 handed)

Preflop: Hero is dealt Ks As

UTG raises, SB calls, Hero calls.

The standard play here would be to reraise. However I have no clue as to how these two foes play. More than likely I will still end up with three players to the flop, but with my hand more exposed and caught in a sandwich between the SB and the UTG. Normally I would follow the typical pound, pound, pound Abdulian strategy, but in this spot I would be somewhat exposed to tricky plays from either side. So I am sacrificing some short-term EV and gaining some deception by just calling instead.

Flop: (1.66 SB) Qd, 5h, 8s (3 players)

SB checks, Hero checks, UTG bets, SB calls, Hero calls.

I may have check raised here if headsup. I want to see what the SB *really* has.

Turn: (2.33 BB) 5c (3 players)

SB checks, Hero checks, UTG bets, SB folds, Hero raises, UTG calls.

Now the SB is gone I can spring my trap. By check raising here it puts real pressure on nonsense no pair hands and *may*, although very unlikely, make an AK or small pair pass.

River: (6.33 BB) 2d (2 players)

Hero bets
, UTG folds.

I'm committed now. It's very hard for him to cling to AK in this spot, which is his most likely holding.

Final Pot: 7.33 BB

The nice thing about this play is that I end up losing about the same against a stubborn pocket pair, but also give him the chance to pass a hand that splits the pot. Also the % increase of him passing that underpair is now significant, as opposed to the "I'm putting him on AK so I'm calling all the way down" which mostly happens.

Friday, November 26, 2004

A Taste of the New

YTD: +$42030.62

Here's a limit hand for discussion. No clue as to how the opponents play, except that they are on Party :-) FWIW I really liked it. See what you think and I will share my thoughts later.

***For some reason this hand didn't come through properly originally - it has now been ammended***

Party Poker 15/30 Hold'em (10 handed)

Preflop: Hero is dealt Ks As

UTG raises, SB calls, Hero calls.

Flop: (1.66 SB) Qd, 5h, 8s (3 players)

SB checks, Hero checks, UTG bets, SB calls, Hero calls.

Turn: (2.33 BB) 5c (3 players)

SB checks, Hero checks, UTG bets, SB folds, Hero raises, UTG calls.

River: (6.33 BB) 2d (2 players)

Hero bets
, UTG folds.

Final Pot: 7.33 BB

Friday, November 19, 2004

Paid in Full

YTD +$42552.12

I'm having a little rush on Party. One of the benefits of Poker Tracker is that you can see these rushes in action. I know that 6BB/100 is not my *usual* win rate. One of the beauties of limit holdem is that bad players are transparent. Playing PLO, it is easy to get completely the wrong view on a player as you end up being focused on showdowns, which may not be the whole story. Several players that I had initially labeled as maniacs actually proved to be fine players, and embarrassingly, also turned out to be playing less hands before the flop than me too.

But in a ring limit holdem game, bad players are transparent. They stick out like beacons in the fog, or glints of gold in the darkness. If a guy calls UTG with K7o - bad player; if he is playing 35% of his hands - bad player; if he keeps calling raises cold, or even better, RE-raises cold - bad player.

And Party is absolutely full of them. There was some scaremongering on 2+2 that the 15-30 was tougher, and whilst more aggressive, this in itself is not "tough" and is easy to handle. But some of the play is mind-boggling bad. Two examples:

3 to the flop in an unraised flop. I have QJ in the BB and bet out into a rainbow Q34. Limper folds, SB check raises. I make it 3 bets, he makes it 4 bets and bets the turn of 6 and the river of 7. He has T5o.

The next one amazed me. The player, according to 100 hands in PT is tight sensible, playing 20% of his hands and raising 6-7% of them. He raises midd-late and I defend the BB with 55. The flop comes 866 (2 spades) and I check raise him (no 5 of spades). He calls. The river comes 4 of spades and gritting my teeth I bet out. He calls again. What does this seemingly solid player have?

KQ of diamonds. No draw. No pair. Not even A high. And all his pairing chances could put a four flush on the board.

Party is goot!

Thursday, November 18, 2004

Fear of a Black Planet

YTD: +$39399.12

I’ve been taking a cursory look at other people’s blogs again. By and large, with some noticeable exceptions, I don’t really enjoy them. This is mostly because they are about life, the universe and everything 80% of the time, and poker maybe 20% of the time. This does not mean that they aren’t well written and interesting; it’s just that I don’t have a huge desire to read about the personal lives of poker playing strangers. Sorry.

But one topic that piqued my interest on a newbie’s blog was that of poker bots destroying online poker. Now the concept of a poker bot has been around now for some time, with whispers and rumors around the edges of the poker community like old scary fairy tales to frighten children. For example, Neverlose on the 100-200 game on Stars is alleged to be a bot. These scaremongers cite the cases of Chess and Backgammon and how computers have “solved” those games, and predict poker Armageddon when the rise of the robots marches into poker. Bullshit.

The reason Chess has proven so amenable to computing is that it is a game that can be beaten if you can process through all the future permutations successfully. Kasporov wasn’t outthought; he was “ground out” by a processing engine with huge capabilities and had been programmed to understand his style. Similarly, backgammon just happened to be a game that fitted a neural net approach, whereas neural nets have not been anywhere near as successful in other games.

To my mind, one of the issues will that will prevent computers tackling high level poker play is that so many situations are very flexible – for example the compensations and differences between playing a hand against many or just one player. Another major factor is the necessary combination of lots of money, technical ability and poker excellence. As Darse Billings put it, as the inventor of the leading HU poker bot, the problem with poker versus the other types of game is that the computer has to think. This is something computers have a long history of not being very good at.

Beating low limit games on a rule-based basis, maybe. Becoming excellent at headsup play, probably. Being able to beat all-comers in a ring environment, I think not.

Saturday, November 13, 2004

Interlude...Sound and Fury

YTD: +$slightly up, but can't be bothered to update :-(

I am trying to play a little less poker and be a bit more balanced, but in doing so I seem to be unbalancing things on the poker writing front :-) Of course I am referring to the THM thing. Although I was pissed initially, mostly through my own confusion, I wasn't surprised by their reaction to my post in the end. In some ways it's even flattering. However I think I am done there now. As Chaos puts it, its become a place to hang out for no real reason. If I post there, its just for vanity, and I've got enough vanity and ego wrapped up in this place thank you very much :-) Its also good to see a little storm of discontent kick up amongst the Doyle Disease types. That Ambassadors of Poker crap always stuck in my craw and smacked of hypocrisy. But I'll leave it to other to elaborate.

Wednesday, November 10, 2004

May the Last Become the First

YTD: +$38518.61

I liked my play in this one....any comments? Beside the one that the completion preflop was a little loose :-) BTW the foe was v v loose aggressive.

PokerStars 30/60 Hold'em (10 handed)



Preflop: Hero is SB with 7d, 2d.

4 folds, MP2 calls, 3 folds, Hero completes, BB checks.

Flop: (3 SB) As, 2c, Ac (3 players)

Hero checks, BB checks, MP2 bets, Hero calls, BB folds.

Turn: (2.50 BB) 4s (2 players)

Hero checks, MP2 bets, Hero raises, MP2 3-bets, Hero calls.

River: (8.50 BB) Kh (2 players)

Hero checks, MP2 bets, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 10.50 BB

Hero has 7d 2d (two pair, aces and twos).

MP2 has Td 8c (one pair, aces).

Outcome: Hero wins 10.50 BB.

Tuesday, November 09, 2004

The Best of Bronski

YTD +$39953.81

Can you tell me why I seem compelled to fall into the same traps again and again and again?

The Eternal Recurrence?

Having finally fought into profit for the month I proceed to sit in a big hilo limit game, which was great. But I wasn't. As usual I tilted into needing to get lucky and the Gods of Poker didn't disappoint me.

Then I decided to multitable up to four tables of holdem, even though long experience has taught me that two is my maximum, three at a very short push.

Back in the red, then.

Does anyone else have similar repetitive destructive habits of the poker variety?

Look for a repeat of this post sometime soon...

Friday, November 05, 2004

The Boys are Back in Town

YTD: +$40803.31

By a strange set of circumstances that I can't explain, suddenly the 30-60 Holdem on Stars has turned into a good game. Admittedly, I am not winning in it yet, but it is far from the rock fest it usually is. How about this one:

An UTG and middle position limper. I raise in the cutoff with AA, all call. The flop comes T86, two spades. I have the A of Spades. Everyone checks and only the UTG limper calls. Turn a rag 2 - check-bet-call. River another 2. Suddenly the UTG springs to life and bets. I raise, he just calls.

And shows 32 of clubs.

I don't think this one needs analysis, rather just praise to god :-)

Tuesday, November 02, 2004

OK, Alright, You Win

YTD: +$Back, but not played yet

A word of advice, don't go on night flights of 4+ hours with small children!

Thanks for all the comments on the hand. I think the answers are fairly clear cut. A6, suited or not, is always a raise. I too, like my friend Chaos, do not like the thinking behind the call play as advocated by Sklansky. The 87, suited or not, *should* always be a pass, although like Aksu, sometimes you feel tempted to raise by "accident". FWIW, I think that this is one of the big leaks of people coming to limit holdem from a big bet tourney perspective, like many UK players do.

Lastly, and surprisingly, no one mentioned the call play with AA. If you raise here and they both pass then this is a disaster, as AA is worth more than 4 times the blinds here. Admittedly, the chances of them both passing are not high, but the trap call play also has some additional positive side effects as it often causes players to go "off on one" with your perceived weakness. In a Party 15-30 game I think that this play is so effective that it should be used at least a good % of the time. If the game was just a bit tighter, or even much tighter like the 10-20 on Stars, then this shoots up as being by far the best play.

Thursday, October 28, 2004

Much Ado About Nothing

YTD: +$STILL ON VACATION!!

As I am going back to limit holdem it struck me that some posts on the game might be useful. This seems doublely so as reading THM, it seems that some posters there, especially Brits, do not necessarily have a good grasp of some of the basics of the game. On reflection, I think that this is a consequence of playing PL Holdem in tourneys, which whilst great fun, resembles limit holdem only as far as oranges resemble apples.

In the limit game, how you play against the blinds and in the blinds can be a huge factor in your hourly earn. Let´s look at a brief quiz to test your knowledge about stealing blinds:

You are in a 15-30 ring game on Party Poker. Everyone passes to you on the button. Assume the blinds are Party typical, i.e., too loose, too aggressive in spots, and unaware.

What is your action with (a)AA (b)87o (c)A6o. How does this change if your hand is suited in (b) and (c)?

Monday, October 25, 2004

Club Tropicana

YTD: +$VACATION!!!

Cocktails by the pool while my family pitter-patter around me. All-inclusive luxury in searingly hot Gran Canaria. All paid for by poker! In this dark and dismal October, poker-wise, thinking that all this holiday is f.o.c is very sweet.

So just a quick thought for today. The jackpot game on Party, how bad is it really? I´ve been thinking that as -EV bets go, some selected play of the 15-30 jackpot holdem game may be quite a good one. Even winning just one of the "other seats"`may pay for selected participation for the jackpot for another four years, and that isn´t including other meta game factors too.

What do you all think?

Friday, October 22, 2004

Doyle Disease

YTD: +$41282.46

I first invented the term Doyle Disease some time again. Little did I know it would become an epidemic! For a while I checked out the WPT forum on 2+2, mostly to see Paul Phillips being mischievous. Now 2+2 has always been a bit sycophantic, but the idol worshiping cluelessness that goes on there beggars belief. My recent favourite was actually on the PLO forum, where somewhere said "When Ray Zee criticizes your play, don't defend yourself, just learn." I dimly remember the said Ray Z advocating timeout cheating online if your foes were doing it. Learn at the feet of a master I guess.

However my favourite DDism of late must be on the THM forum where someone referred to Harry D as Harry 'the lionheart' Demetriou. WTF? I almost puked in my shoes. And no one seemed to care or notice. I guess it is only right that a perpetrator of many Doyle Disease-isms should indeed find himself on that holy altar himself.

For my Constant Readers, I will be on my hols for the next week or so, so please be patient. I will try and put some posts up, hotel technology permitting.

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

Poker Writing Redux

YTD: +$40627.47

Internet journalism has been a reoccurring theme here. It never ceases to surprise me. Clicking onto Pokerpages today I was fascinated to see a section titled “Top European Poker Players”. Well it was worth a click. There are some strange names there to put it mildly. And some strange omissions. A couple of the players, whilst European in origin, play almost exclusively in the US. One of the players, “The Nugget” I used to know very well. I am sure that he wouldn’t describe himself as a tournament player, or at least I hope he doesn’t. He has had some nice results of late, but his primary focus and ability has always been cash games. Yet one of the most successful big tournament players is not included. I am of course referring to Julian Gardner. Even when you take out his WSOP 2nd, his record across Europe in the late 90s was phenomenal and his winnings turn the Nugget into fool’s gold. But let’s not let the facts get in the way of some pretty pictures. Let’s have some more stuff by Paul S!

Thursday, October 14, 2004

Tournaments Part Deux

YTD: +$44122.93

On the subject of tournaments, or rather whilst other people have been discussing them and I have been mangling my numbers :-), I have played a few recently. Small losses in headsup; a 3rd place in a plo8b on Stars; and also some turbo satellites for the Sunday night $215 tourney. I quite like the fun fast pace of these things but the poorness of the play is truly incredible. It is very common to see people playing the dying stages of these things completely and utterly wrong. I am convinced that a good tourney player could make a nice ROI on these things, even assuming a 10% vig for selling on the entries. Here are some of the terrible plays I saw last time:

I’ve Got a Hand, So I Must Play

We were on the bubble and the big blind completely swallowed up my stack, bar a few hundred $. Everyone passed to the cutoff, who went allin for an amount less than the big blind with TT. This is insane play. There was a maybe a 1% chance he was going to be compelled to post a blind and he could have safely passed his way into the money. But instead he sees an ok hand and automaton like decides he must play it, even though he cannot make anyone pass and must win the hand to showdown.

I’m Table Captain, But I Don’t Know How


In the very same hand the small blind, he had enough chips to take us both out comfortably, decides this is a great spot to finish off the tourney and makes up the blinds. That’s right he doesn’t put me all-in! If he had raised there I probably have to call but it is by no means certain in this very unique situation. He gives me a free shot on the pot which I duly take. Although the TT takes the main pot.

I’m Table Captain Again, But I STILL Don’t Know How


It’s a few hands later and the running ante has taken my last few chips. On four tables there are at least 4 people who will have to go allin on this hand and break the bubble. What’s the correct play here for people who aren’t involved? Pass any hand. It’s that easy. AK – pass; KK – pass; AA – pass. If you are not being compelled to play by the blinds then with only one player to go there is no reason to play any hand. But the table captain from the hand described above sprang into life from late mid position. With players still to act behind him you would expect him to have a monster…but no…he had 87s! Which duly went on to knock out both me and the blind that was also all in. Truly terrible play.

Monday, October 11, 2004

Now for Something Completely Different

YTD: + $43726.21

We've been having some swell comments in one of my posts about SnG play. Chaos and Andy W believe that you should pass up small edges early on even to double up. I, Paul Phillip's like, don't agree. Here are my stats for why...please feel free to poke big holes in them: (We are assuming 9 handed, $109 entry; if you pass you still have the same chance of getting into the money as you normally do; if you double up you knock out a player)

Finish…Net $...% Place…EV……%P x2…..EV x 2
1………341…....0.16…......53.04….....0.19…..64.41
2………161…....0.14…......23.26….....0.17…..27.37
3………71……..0.16…......11.04….....0.19…..13.41
4……..-109…...0.11….....-12.11…....0.13…..-14.17
5……..-109…...0.10….....-10.9…......0.09…..-9.81
6……..-109…...0.10….....-10.9…......0.08…..-8.72
7……..-109…...0.08….....-8.48…......0.08…..-8.48
8……..-109…...0.08….....-8.48…......0.08…..-8.48
9……..-109…...0.08….....-8.48

This makes the EV for not doubling up in the SNG to be +$28 with a ROI of 26%...very respectable. But after the double up this leaps to an EV of $55.54 with a ROI of 51%. Clearly you have to be very very sure it is a marginal edge if you want to pass it up.

Wednesday, October 06, 2004

The Madness of Crowds

YTD: +$47452.03

One of the hardest things to do in Poker is to accept failure.

It is very hard, when you have played the biggest game in town, as it were, to step down to the next level. As the film says, “That’s pride fuckin wit ya.” But the truth is my game is still quite wobbly and results have not improved much. I am still $15k-ish down from my high point. But as the commenter Chaos nicely put it in perspective, considering I only play part-time, I have had a fantastic set of results, even now. I have taken $25k out of that game, in what would only be less than a month’s play to a full-time pro. And yes I am boasting because Christ I need the morale boosting :-)

But I’ve spent the winnings and my virtual bankroll is now kinda thin for this kind of action.

However.

It’s still hard to move down. The 5-10 on Stars is very soft at the moment, as a certain player is hemorrhaging money at an alarming rate. One source said he lost $50k in 24hours, and this is not hard to believe when the average pot is $1-2k.

But the game whilst soft technically is dangerous soft, like quicksand. As the action gets looser so do I, in a mad spiral of ever decreasing edge. The other day I lost a 4k pot to a guy who insists on ram-jamming at any sign of weakness. He plays like The Choirboy on speed and acid :-) Bizarrely he thought he was bluffing but he actually had the best hand, although my draws meant I was 50:50 and 55:45 on the flop and turn respectively.

In theory, this is a great spot to be, taking better than even money on 2:1 shots. But not if I miss. And also this isn’t the way to murder aggressive players; rather in PLO you can wait and catch them drawing thin, instead of tossing a wonky coin.

Another frustration I have noticed is watching the fish win big. I’m grinding away, feeling frustrated, whilst a guy playing 70% of his hands, nearly all of them badly, turns $400 to $7k in an hour. Exasperation and jealousy do not make easy bedfellows.

So I am moving back down to $2-4 PLO (the $3-6 has basically disappeared.) I am worried that the action may burn out of the big game but the truth is that my online BR can’t stomach any more swings at that level.

Back to grinding :-)

“… Fuck pride! Pride only hurts, it never helps.”

Friday, October 01, 2004

Lucky in Love

YTD: +$49741.28

I’ve tried playing through the bad patch like last time but it’s hard. Hard because I am playing bad, especially in critical, very large pots. Hard because I am being fucking unlucky. In the space of a couple of hours the other day I lost $8500 in pots, three in total, when I was more than even money to win all three. I was actually about 650 to 1 to lose all three. I seem good at hitting these 500+ longshots :(

Just to show that I post the ugly as well as the beautiful, here is a hand I really chewed up:

PokerStars Pot-Limit Omaha High, $10 BB (8 handed)

saw flop|saw showdown



MP2 ($2938)

CO ($1104.25)

Button ($1221.75)

SB ($892.50)

BB ($735.50)

UTG ($517)

UTG+1 ($536)

Hero ($2924.25)



Preflop: Hero is MP1 with 9s, 4s, 8h, 7h.

UTG calls $10, 1 fold, Hero raises to $30, MP2 calls $30, 2 folds, SB raises to $140, 1 fold, UTG calls $130, Hero calls $110, MP2 calls $110.

This was a loose gambling raise by me here. If I am thinking str8 I should really pass to the reraise as although the reraiser is marked as AA, the other two guys are likely to have hands that seriously interfere with mine.

Flop: ($570) 9d, Tc, 3c (4 players)

SB bets $567
, UTG calls $377 (All-In), Hero raises to $1134, MP2 raises to $2798, SB calls $185.50 (All-In), Hero calls $1650.25 (All-In).

This is just madness. I'm drawing far to weak here for multi-way action. Although I convinced myself if I could just get out the guy behind me I would be in good shape, the reality is that even then I am probably drawing to 6 ish outs based on the action in front. And if he does call, I am probably drawing next to dead - which was the case.

Turn: ($7281.75) Kh (4 players, 3 all-in)

River: ($7281.75) 7s (4 players, 3 all-in)

Final Pot: $7281.75

Main Pot: $2078, between MP2, SB, UTG and Hero.Pot won by UTG ($2078)

Pot 2: $1126.50, between MP2, SB and Hero.Pot won by MP2 ($1126.50)

Pot 3: $4063.50, between MP2 and Hero.Pot won by MP2 ($4063.50)
Pot 4: $13.75, returned to MP2.


SB has Ks Ac Ah Qc (one pair, aces).

UTG has 8d Js Qd 9h (straight, king high).

Hero has 9s 4s 8h 7h (two pair, nines and sevens).

MP2 has 6c 4h 9c Th (two pair, tens and nines)

Outcome: MP2 wins $5203.75. UTG wins $2078.