Syndicate

Syndicate content

Poker Faction Articles

  • Hand Analysis #2: Timing tell and maximizing trips

     Hand Analysis #2: Timing tell and maximizing trips
    by: Valek
     
     
    Context: We're playing a regular $100 HU sng, and the blinds are at 30/60. When MERIDENKID checks rapidly on the flop, he has nothing. When he hesitates, or takes a few seconds more than usual, he has a piece of the flop. At this point in the match, I have used the timing tell successfully several times.

    Seat 1: Lord Kinbote (2,035)
    Seat 2: MERIDENKID (965)
    Lord Kinbote posts the small blind of 30
    MERIDENKID posts the big blind of 60
    The button is in seat #1
    *** HOLE CARDS ***
    Dealt to Lord Kinbote [4h 4c]
    Lord Kinbote raises to 150
    MERIDENKID calls 90
    *** FLOP *** [6h Ac 9d]
    MERIDENKID checks
    Lord Kinbote checks
    *** TURN *** [6h Ac 9d] [4d]
    MERIDENKID checks
    Lord Kinbote checks
    *** RIVER *** [6h Ac 9d 4d] [3d]
    MERIDENKID bets 240
    Lord Kinbote raises to 1,885, and is all in
    MERIDENKID calls 575, and is all in
    Uncalled bet of 1,070 returned to Lord Kinbote
    *** SHOW DOWN ***
    Lord Kinbote shows [4h 4c] three of a kind, Fours
    MERIDENKID mucks
    Lord Kinbote wins the pot (1,930) with three of a kind, Fours
    MERIDENKID stands up
    Lord Kinbote stands up
    *** SUMMARY ***
    Total pot 1,930 | Rake 0
    Board: [6h Ac 9d 4d 3d]
    Seat 1: Lord Kinbote (small blind) showed [4h 4c] and won (1,930) with three of a kind, Fours
    Seat 2: MERIDENKID (big blind) mucked [Ah 3s] - two pair, Aces and Threes

    On the flop, I perceived an hesitation before he checked, so I knew there wasn't any value in c-betting since I was probably beat. On the turn, I got lucky and hit trips four. He checked again, and I mistakingly concluded that he might not have the ace at all, or anything, so I checked again. I really wanted a bet from him. In hindsight, I think it was a mistake to check back, and I will discuss this further towards the end of the article.

    First, let me write about my thought process on the river. He gave me exactly what I wanted. Unfortunately, the river also completes the flush, so the question becomes: Is there any value in going all-in on the river? After running the different possibilities in my head, I decided to go with my initial read that he caught something on the flop, probably the ace, and I went all-in.

    Here's my reasoning: On the flop, if he had the ace, the nine, the eight-seven for the open-ended straight draw, or trips, than the only hands that beat me now are the ace-high flush, trips 6 and 9. I can't be afraid of the straight if I think my read is accurate. Also, I can argue that he probably would have bet top pair and flush draw on turn since he would want to maximize the value of his hand. So I think I beat his range of possible hands.

    In addition, I had been dominating him for the whole game and getting good cards. He had been a short stack for more than 80% of the time, and my image was definitely that of an aggressive player. All of above lead me to believe that he would pay me off often enough to make the move profitable.

    What's more, if I lose this hand, I don't lose the game. And if I call the bet and win, he'll have about ten big blinds for a stack, which means that I would be using mostly a push/fold strategy from that point on. Odds are I would be gambling anyway, so gambling on this hand makes even more sense right now.

    Here's what I should have done, though:

    I should have trusted my initial read, and bet the turn for more value. I knew he was probably holding an ace, or maybe a 9, so if I bet the turn, I'm almost certain he wouldn't respect my bet. He's more likely to think that I'm trying to take down this pot, rather than to think that I have a pair of aces, two pairs, or trips. There's 300 chips in the pot, so betting 150 on the turn makes a lot of sense. It's all about building up the pot for a bigger value bet on the river, not to mention that I would actually have protected my hand against the possible flush and straight draws, if my read happens to be wrong.

    To conclude, everything I have written in this analysis is based entirely on my initial read. It really helps me to narrow down his range, and without it, my decision might or might not have been optimal. Every tiny details matter when you're playing poker, and it can dramatically change your perspective on a hand. The better you are at incorporating these small details into your decision making process, the more profitable you'll become in the long run.

  • Dealing with a losing streak

    Dealing with a losing streak

    Written by: Valek
    For PokerFaction.com

    Being in the midst of an important losing streak can be devastating both financially and emotionally. Whether you approach poker as a hobby or as a professional endeavor, sooner or later, you will get on the negative side of variance.

    I've been playing HU sngs for the past 4 years, and I've made quite a bit of money playing them, but for the last 6 months or so, I've been on the losing end of variance(and I've been tilting a little bit too). Put simply, I initially lost about $10,000 during an abrupt downturn, then, I lost some more little by little, and now, I've been more or less breaking even. HU is my best game, so it's been particularly aggravating to me, but it's also been a great learning experience.

    Obviously, the first thing I did when everything started going amiss was taking a break, like most players would have done. For me, taking a break meant not playing for a few days. Avoiding tilt is actually one of the most profitable thing you can do as a poker player, and not playing is the best remedy for tilt. This will often do the trick.

    But what if you keep losing afterwards? This is when you need to start reevaluating your game; you need to play less and think more. Easy, isn't it?

    At first, I decided to stop multi-tabling so that I could really concentrate on every situation, and try to put every bit of information into context to maximize the value of every hands. Also, I started saving every game-defining hands of every match, so that I could revisit them later on.

    This process led me to three conclusions:

    (1)I was definitely running below average; (2)My game was actually improving; (3)And what I would describe as subtle tilt was negatively affecting my game.

    I knew I was running below average because I was putting my money in while ahead the vast majority of the time(you can run your hands in any odds calculator, including PokerStove for accurate odds). What's more, I knew I was improving since I was doing things I hadn't been doing before, like inducing action in specific situations to maximize the value of my hands. Here's a simple example:

    I had a timing tell that indicated he was very weak on the flop. Instead of the standard c-bet to protect my hand, I checked back to induce a bet on the turn.

    Seat 1: Lord Kinbote (1,740)
    Seat 2: MAXSHARK (1,260)
    Lord Kinbote posts the small blind of 15
    MAXSHARK posts the big blind of 30
    The button is in seat #1
    *** HOLE CARDS ***
    Dealt to Lord Kinbote [Ac 7c]
    Lord Kinbote raises to 75
    MAXSHARK calls 45
    *** FLOP *** [Ad Jc 8d]
    MAXSHARK has 15 seconds left to act
    MAXSHARK checks
    Lord Kinbote checks
    *** TURN *** [Ad Jc 8d] [Ks]
    MAXSHARK bets 150
    Lord Kinbote raises to 420
    MAXSHARK has 15 seconds left to act
    MAXSHARK folds
    Uncalled bet of 270 returned to Lord Kinbote
    Lord Kinbote mucks
    Lord Kinbote wins the pot (450)

    As far as tilt goes, I don't think I was tilting in the conventional sense of the term. Losing wasn't causing me to be out-of-control, or causing me to play awful poker, or even causing me to play big stakes that I couldn't afford, which, undoubtedly, would have made me lose larger amounts of money very quickly. Instead, I would describe it as being far more subtle and insidious.

    I would make small crying calls more often, I would become irritated if I lost a few matches in the beginning of a session, I would become impatient if things weren't going my way, etc. All of these little things added together ended up costing me valuable EV in the long run. When losing, I would stop playing because of my discipline, but I wouldn't work on my game because of my impatience and my laziness, instead choosing to spend my time cruising Internet forums or watching movies. I became unproductive. I became uninvolved in my game. And I was using it as an excuse to keep the status quo.

    I didn't come to all of these conclusions at the same time. The discovery(or the acknowledgment) that I was making small errors due to my psychological state of mind came later on. So, after my initial downturn, I kept losing money, little by little. I wasn't getting any break. I was working on my game, and it was improving, but I wasn't working on the psychology aspects of my game. I needed to delve deeper if I was to fix the problem.

    My solution, and it remains to be seen whether or not it will work, is to accumulate more data. When I save a hand history, I include notes about the game and about the opponent in order to better understand the situation when I analyze it afterwards. Now, I also include notes about my thought process and about my feelings when I make decisions. If I know exactly which emotions are influencing my game negatively, I will be better equipped to deal with them in the future.

    In addition, I started seeking feedback more often. I am fortunate enough to know and trust a very good player, and I send him hand histories of my sessions. This serves two purposes: To get another mind to find weaknesses in my game, and to promote discussions into my different strategies, which always leads to a better understanding of the game. If you don't have a poker buddy, you can always use Internet forums, which are just as good, if not better.

    To conclude, my goal is to become a better and more profitable poker player when variance starts to tilt my way. When facing a crippling downswing, I think the most important thing to remember is simply to play less and think more. I wrote it in bold at the beginning of this article because I think it's that important. Likewise, instead of complaining or feeling like a victim, one should invest time and effort in loss. That's how you really improve.

  • Hand analysis # 1: All-in with flush draw

     Hand Analysis #1: All-in with Flush Draw
    by: Valek
     
     
    Context: We're playing a regular 200$ HU sng. The blinds are 25/50, and they're about to go up to 30/60 in a minute or so. We're playing against a good winning opponent who's playing a standard tight/aggressive game.

    Hero: 850 chips
    Opponent: 2150 chips

    Hero is in position and posts the small blind, and Opponent posts the big blind. Hero raises to 125 with KcJc, opponent calls. Flop comes Qc 7c 4d. Opponent checks, and Hero bets 180 into a 250 pot. Opponent raises to 220 to 400. Hero has 520 chips left.

    What's the best play in this situation?

    There are now 830 chips in the pot. We are fairly certain that if we call, our opponent is going to put us all-in on the turn no matter what. Also, we know that if we push we have absolutely no fold equity because our opponent wouldn't raise there unless he has a decent hand. Actually, we put him on KQ, KQs, QJ-Q7, QJs-Q7s, 109s, 108s, 98s, A10s-A2s, 77 and 44. We don't think he has AA, KK, QQ, AKs, AQs or AQ because he would most likely have raised pre-flop.

    Given the range of hands we just assigned to our opponent, I think it's fairly obvious that this is a push/fold decision, mostly because the blinds are already high, and they're about to get even higher. If we call, we only have 300 chips left, at which point our stack is worth close to nothing in comparison to the blinds, so we would absolutely call the river even if we are a slight underdog. Since we know he doesn't fold if we push, it's like saying that we need to put 520 chips to win a pot of 1700 chips, which means we need to win at least 30.58% of the time for this to be profitable.

    I think the decision is fairly obvious here since we know that the flush draw alone gives us 36% chances of winning after the flop, and we have a possible top pair draw. Not to mention the fact that if we fold, our chip stack is crippled while the blinds are increasing. We would end up with close to 10 BB, which is very low.

    I did some calculation with PokerStove, and we actually have about 48% equity with KJs against our opponent's range. It's a very profitable push. Basically, you have pot odds to call the pot, but pushing is the better play since you would have to call on the river anyway.

    The reason why I wanted to analyze this hand was that I had a very similar situation happen to me last week. My opponent told me I made a -EV play, but it seemed obvious to me at the time that it was in fact a +EV play. I simply wanted to make sure I was right. Basically, it got me thinking about if it's sometime correct to make a -EV play in a sng when you know you're going to be crippled if you fold because the blinds are increasing. When does it become +EV to make a seemingly -EV play? There is a lot game theory involved here, and that's why it's very hard to analyze.

  • Having a balanced life and being the best

    Having a balanced life and being the best

    Written by: Valek
    For PokerFaction.com

     

    It's a recurring topic; how a poker player should have a balanced life. Family, friends, social life, poker, hobbies, physical activity are all important aspects of one's life, and none of them should become so significant that it undermines the others. Right? Ok. Maybe if your goal is to be an average to above average player. What if you want to be the best or at least one of the best?

    The truth is that being the best and having a balanced life doesn't always go hand in hand. Beethoven wasn't one of the best composers of all time because he had such a good and balanced life. In fact, he was exploited by his father, forced to play music for hours as a child and had a tumultuous life full of ups and downs. Tiger Woods literally sacrificed his childhood to become the greatest golfer of all time. Had he decided only to play golf as a hobby, certainly he wouldn't be as good as he is today. Being talented is one thing, but you need to nurture that talent. In order to develop into a great poker player, you need to be totally immersed in it. You have to read about poker, to think about poker, to discuss strategies with others, to play countless hands and sessions, to analyze situation after situation, and only then can you become a superior player. A good example is Annette_15. She plays almost excessively and it's one of the reasons why she's one of the best MTT players on the web.

    If you really want to be one of the best, you need to make sacrifices and it's undeniable that it's going to affect (sometimes negatively) other aspects of your life. Most likely, you won't have as much time as others to watch television, to go out with your friends, to study for university, to spend time with your family, etc. For some people, simply managing their time a little better would be enough. It's especially funny to me how people always say they're so busy (I say that all the time) when in reality, they're simply mismanaging their time. Personally, by cutting off some binge drinking, by cutting off the disproportionate watching of complete seasons of TV shows and by being more productive when I do actually work, I'd be able to allocate more time to poker and to everything else.

    There are many poker players right now that balance their life and poker quite well. Green Plastic would be an obvious example. If any of you know a little about him, and/or read his blog, you would know that he's one of the best high stakes cash game player on the internet. He does that while managing a succesful internet business(Cardrunners.com), and while still having a very active social life. But I'm willing to bet that his life wasn't always so balanced, and that there was a time when he spent a very important amount of time playing, thinking, studying and discussing poker. My point is that when you reach a certain level, you don't necessarily have to play as much, but to get to that level you need to work your ass off. Even now, I bet Green Plastic is spending more quality time working on his game than the average winning player.

    Also, when you play higher stakes, being a good player may not be enough. For example, I've been playing a lot of heads up poker at the 500$ level on UB and the skill level is frequently above average. Usually, these players have a good background strategically and they make money playing poker. If you want to beat them, you need to be at least slightly better. If both players have roughly the same level of talent, it often boils down to which player makes the most effort, and that's the time consuming part. You need to learn everything you can about them, and try to immerse yourself in their strategies, and their way of thinking. You need to formulate strategies that could potentially beat theirs. You need to change gears and adapt faster than they do. You have to become aware of their tendencies (Are they multi-tabling? Have they been playing for an extended period of time? Are they on tilt?). All of this will enable you to have an edge against the vast majority of players, but again, it's time consuming.

    In the end, if you're satisfied with making a steady, sometime quite large profit from poker while not wanting to put the extra time it would take to become one of the best, then by all means do it. Just remember that in order to be one the finest, you need to put in more work, more time, more effort and ultimately make more sacrifices than your typical player.

Play online poker with thousands of real people for FREE