<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Micro Stakes Holdem</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.microstackesholdem.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.microstackesholdem.com</link>
	<description>This is the blog about NL/PL texas holdem with micro stakes.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 16:21:31 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Carpal Tunnel Essay: A Framework for Poker Study</title>
		<link>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/12/carpal-tunnel-essay-a-framework-for-poker-study/</link>
		<comments>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/12/carpal-tunnel-essay-a-framework-for-poker-study/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 16:21:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[NL Texas Holdem]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[how to play poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[learn poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[poker stusy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.microstackesholdem.com/?p=31</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Below is an essay I&#8217;ve written for my Carpal Tunnel post. It&#8217;s long (&#62; 2500 words for a 2500th post, I guess). I&#8217;m posting it in MTT, where I spent most of my time since joining 2p2, and in MSNL, where I have spent more time lately.
Introduction
Recently I have put some thought into strategies for [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="post">Below is an essay I&#8217;ve written for my Carpal Tunnel post. It&#8217;s long (&gt; 2500 words for a 2500th post, I guess). I&#8217;m posting it in MTT, where I spent most of my time since joining 2p2, and in MSNL, where I have spent more time lately.</p>
<p><strong>Introduction</strong></p>
<p>Recently I have put some thought into strategies for studying poker, in particular NLHE. It is frequently said that there are too many variables involved in the play of a hand for anything resembling a formulaic, component-by-component analysis to be practical. I agree with this, and agree that in even the simplest cases (short-stack push/fold calculations, for example), there is a significant margin for error in the final result which is due to necessarily imprecise assumptions about an opponent’s ranges.</p>
<p>So even if a poker hand is one giant math problem, complete with game theoretic opponents who do a, b, and c x%, y%, and z% of the time, it’s an unsolvable problem. That said, I think a lot can be learned from thinking about poker hands in terms of their component variables, from thinking about the structure of that giant math problem and how it could be solved if it were solvable. This essay is my attempt to categorize and analyze those components. I call it a framework for poker study, because I think that one good approach to getting better is to spend time away from the table focused on these component variables one at a time, in order to be better prepared to think through all of the relevant information when faced with decisions at the table.</p>
<p><strong>Core Ideas</strong></p>
<p>There are three core ideas with which I assume everyone is familiar – the concepts of pot equity and Expected Value (EV), Sklansky’s Fundamental Theorem of Poker, and what I will call “hand range calculus.”</p>
<p>Pot equity and EV are functions of basic probability and govern every action in a poker game. Your hand has some % chance of winning the pot, the pot contains some amount of money, so you have a claim of some part of the pot. Every bet you make is an investment; you should bet when your expected return from the bet is larger than the cost of the bet. The FTOP formalizes how to maximize your return in the special case of complete information; every time you make a bet that maximizes expectation versus your opponent’s actual hand, you win, every time your opponent fails to maximize his expectation given your actual hand, you win. “Hand range calculus”, which is the form most analyses take on these forums, acknowledges that poker is actually a game of incomplete information, and attempts to define best actions in terms of maximizing expectation versus the range of possible hands your opponent could have, in light of the range of hands it is likely he thinks you have.</p>
<p>Because in every case, both you and your opponent have a specific hand, the FTOP is still the final theoretical measure of what is profitable or unprofitable action. In practice, however, we work with incomplete information; thus poker skill is a combination of the ability to make best decisions within the context of “hand range calculus” and the ability to read your opponents’ ranges better than they read yours. </span><span id="more-31"></span><br />
<span class="post"><br />
<strong>Situational Factors</strong></p>
<p>We all know that the proper play of a hand and the correct read on an opponent’s range depends on a lot of situational factors. I think we are accustomed to thinking about these factors in the context of whatever particular hand we are playing or analyzing, where many relatively small factors accumulate to a read and a decision. The framework for study that I suggest in this essay (and which I am following myself) is to separate the most important situational factors and analyze them individually. The factors I want to talk about are position, board texture, betting patterns, betting frequencies, pot size in relation to stack size (there are two others I’m not going to cover but that I want to mention – table image, and bet sizing, table image because it is obviously so important, and bet sizing because I find it interesting. Maybe another time, this will be long enough as is). All of these factors are interrelated, but by isolating them I hope to get a better sense of the role each plays in the core goal we&#8217;re all seeking - to maximize EV versus an opponent’s range and know his range better than he knows yours.</p>
<p><strong>Position</strong></p>
<p>The most familiar, most analyzed, and easiest to understand situational factor is position. Hand ranges automatically widen with better position. Not only does someone in position have fewer people left to act and more information on that particular round, they and their out-of-position opponents have the knowledge that the player with position on this round will have position on future rounds. So CO and Button preflop raising ranges are much wider, and in-position bettors on the postflop streets usually have wider ranges. A 20/12 is 7/5 UTG and 40/25 on the button, or whatever; if you check the flop first to act in a three way pot, independent of any other knowledge, the Button is more likely to bet than the guy in the middle; etc. I don’t think much more needs to be said about this, as it is already built into every thought any of us has about the game. If position was all I had to talk about, this essay wouldn’t be very useful. Onward.</p>
<p><strong>Board Texture</strong></p>
<p>This one is more interesting, and might make clearer what I’m getting at with the “isolating situational factors” idea. Imagine a heads up raised pot with a dry ace-high flop, Axy rainbow. You’ve probably played hundreds of hands that fit this description, thousands, maybe. What percentage of the time does one of the two players have an ace? How often can one of them beat AK? How often does someone bet this flop with less than an ace? If you are called the raise and are in position, what percentage of the time should you expect an honest opponent to bet into you? How much more frequently than honest does he have to bet before you can exploit him by representing the ace? There’s a whole game theory problem right here, on this simple board where the only hands people “should” have to continue are TPTK-TPGK, sets, pocket pairs, and the rare two pair.</p>
<p>What about a medium two-tone flop, the kind with straight draws (T85 or 974). Now there are lots of draws, combo draws, still sets, there are always sets, but now if you get action that looks like a set, it might be a draw instead. What does a bet mean on this flop? How different is that from what a bet means on an A-high flop? How often does someone betting this flop have no pair? Compare a raiser betting this flop to the A-high flop – how often should he bet, how often should he get called, raised?</p>
<p>Raised pot again, now K-high. Raiser is going to rep the K a lot, but have it less often than he has the A on the A-high flop. How often should an “honest” raiser bet the flop, allowing for bluffing as long as it isn’t done too frequently? How frequently is that?</p>
<p>Paired board, like J88, or JJ8. Now there are only 5 cards that could have hit the board, instead of 9. Pocket pairs are stronger, the monsters are in plain sight. Same questions - how often should this flop be bet, by what hands, how easy or hard is it to push someone off a mediocre hand? Etc. etc.</p>
<p>How many flop textures are there? Dozens, hundreds even, and they all blend into each other, but questions like “how often should the preflop raiser bet the ace”, and “how fast should JJ play on a T85 two tone board” are things that are partly determined simply by the kinds and number of hands that can like a given flop.</p>
<p><strong>Betting Patterns</strong></p>
<p>Because NLHE is a game where you can bet any amount at any time, it could feel like there are a ton of ways to build a pot. In fact, especially among decent players, the same patterns repeat themselves over and over. Think about how often a hand plays out like this: preflop raise, call. Raiser bets, call. Raiser checks, caller bets, raiser folds. Or, raiser in position, checked to the raiser, bet/call, turn goes check/check, OOP bets, raiser folds. Or, raiser OOP, bet/call, check/check, bet/fold. Or bet/call, check/check, bet/call. Or bet/raise/call, check/bet/fold. Or, checked to raiser, raiser bets, check-raise, raiser folds.</p>
<p>It’s easiest to categorize headsup pots this way, but patterns repeat themselves in multiway pots also. Some patterns are more common than others. What I suggest is that thinking about these patterns and the frequency with which they occur is instructive, for two reasons. One, the patterns that occur most frequently are also the patterns that match the most frequently occurring situations (weak to moderately strong hands building and contesting a small to medium-sized pot). Two, the majority of profit comes from creating large pots with big hands, which is easiest to get away with if done quietly. Especially against good players, this can be very difficult.</p>
<p><strong>Betting Frequencies</strong></p>
<p>Under “betting patterns” I was talking about an observer’s view of all participants in a hand, here I’m referring to the frequency with which individuals bet, call, fold, and raise. There are big meta-theory questions here, like what % of the time should a preflop raiser bet the flop (or optimal frequencies for any action sequence), but I am more talking about things like “what % of the time do I (or this opponent, or that opponent) bet the turn after having bet the flop and being called? What % do I bet three streets in a row? What % do I bet two streets then check/fold? What % of the time do I check-raise the flop, then bet the turn? Do I ever check-raise the flop, then check the turn? How often do I call three barrels? How often do I follow up my turn bet with a river bet?</p>
<p>Clearly, the board often changes from flop to turn and turn to river. If the draw hits, and you know 100% that your opponent was drawing, you should check/fold, and no frequency mumbo-jumbo changes that. But since some of the time you should bet the flop with that obvious draw and some of the time your opponent is calling without it, then some of the time, you should follow up when it hits on the turn (whether you have it or not). Etc. These are the things you start thinking about when you think about action frequencies.</p>
<p>Are there optimal frequencies for all of these? Maybe, sort of, in a game-theoretic, perfectly-playing opponent sense. Pots grow exponentially, so maybe in theory we should bet the flop 75% of the time we raise, bet the turn 25% of the times we’re called and 50% of the time the flop checks through, and bet the river 10% of the time the turn is called and 20% of the time the turn checks through, all with appropriate bluffs mixed in. In practice, we set these frequencies to exploit specific opponents, but I think analyzing these questions in general can help us understand how to do that.</p>
<p><strong>Pot Size/Stack Size Dynamic</strong></p>
<p>100xBB stacks. Limpy McLimper limps in front of you. He does this with 20% of his hands and he never raises. You have two cards and raise. He calls and you see a flop with 9 BB in the pot. How strong a hand do you need to play for 100BB? For 50? For 25? Too broad a question? Dependent on too many other factors? Yes, of course. But contrast: Same 100xBB stacks. Raisy McRaiser raises in front of you. He does this with 20% of his hands and he never limps. You reraise with the same two cards, he calls (he calls raises as often as Limpy). 27 BB in the pot. Now how strong do you have to be to play for it all? What size pot should you play, on average, with one pair? With a big draw?</p>
<p>The only difference is that the pot is a bigger percentage of the stack. With more to fight for, people’s ranges for postflop actions necessarily should change toward being more aggressive. If your opponents don’t make this adjustment, exploit them – reraise a lot, then play aggressively, let them fold too much. If they do make this adjustment, you have to adjust with them in reraised pots. Go broke with AA against Limpy, you’re usually a fish, against Raisy, probably not.</p>
<p>The point is not that there is a formula for proper size pot with xx on flop abc in terms of preflop pot size “AA is worth 3x preflop pot size”. Clearly there isn’t. There may be times to fold a set in a reraised pot and times to felt middle pair in a limped pot. But on every flop, you should be able to look at the pot size, look at the stack sizes, and have some general idea of what kind of hands should be willing to play for how much. Sure, that general idea has to be adjusted based on all of the other situational factors, but it plays its role too.</p>
<p>Obviously, in MTT’s, pot/stack dynamic is always present because of increasing blinds and variance in the size of opponent’s stacks. I find the 30-40xBB range particularly interesting, because it is a time when raisers with one pair have a hard time folding, but callers with speculative hands still have odds to call and try to outflop (also because allin reraises are too overaggressive in this stage and easily exploitable). This generates a cat-and-mouse game where you have to accompany the raising hands you do plan to go broke with hands you don’t plan to go broke with in order to deny implied odds to speculative hands. But do too much of this, and you become vulnerable to preflop reraises. Also, in MTT&#8217;s, a significant shift in pot size/stack size ratio happens when antes are introduced. There is more to fight for, so ranges change and more aggressive play is rewarded. In cash games, where stacks are usually 100x and there aren&#8217;t antes, this dynamic shows up more in the differences between limped pots, raised pots, and reraised pots.</p>
<p><strong>All this theory in practice</strong></p>
<p>A short, simple example. Someone raises UTG+1, Button calls, you call in the BB with 55. The flop contains a 5. Before you say “lead” or “check,” you have to consider</p>
<p>-the range the raiser raises from that position<br />
-how likely the particular flop is to have hit that range (AQ5? T85? 522?)<br />
-what betting pattern is most likely to create a large pot without tipping anyone off that you want a large pot<br />
-how likely the raiser is bet the flop if checked to, raise if bet into, how likely the other caller is to be trapped with a marginal hand, how often the raiser will follow up on the turn with a marginal hand, how often he’ll give up the lead if you show flop aggression, etc., etc.<br />
-what the stack sizes are and how likely your opponents are to have a hand that is willing to play a large pot.</p>
<p>All I am arguing in this essay is you will be better prepared to make the best decisions if you have thought independently about how different board textures play, about the amount of strength different betting patterns represent, about how to play versus different betting frequencies, about how ranges and betting frequencies change in vs out of position, and so on.</p>
<p>Clearly, there are plenty of other factors that I didn’t discuss, like table image, what various bet sizes mean, how sure you are that you&#8217;re ahead (or behind), how easily you can improve, how vulnerable your hand is to the type of hands that are willing to play with you, how likely you are to end up paying off a second best hand if someone catches you. I don’t pretend this covers everything it could cover, or even close, but this is what I’m thinking about right now.</p>
<p>I hope this is useful/thought-provoking to some of you, and that some of the many of you who are better than me will take the time to comment. </span></p>
<p>By <strong><a title="Member # 37204" href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showprofile.php?Cat=0&amp;User=37204&amp;Number=6482406&amp;Board=tourn&amp;what=showflat&amp;page=0&amp;fpart=1&amp;vc=1">LearnedfromTV</a></strong> for 2+2 <a href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=tourn&amp;Number=6482406&amp;fpart=1&amp;PHPSESSID=">Forums</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/12/carpal-tunnel-essay-a-framework-for-poker-study/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Taking stealing the blinds to next level</title>
		<link>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/08/taking-stealing-the-blinds-to-next-level/</link>
		<comments>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/08/taking-stealing-the-blinds-to-next-level/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 13:01:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[NL Texas Holdem]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[blind stealing]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[no limit poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[online poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[poker strategy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[texas holdem]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/08/taking-stealing-the-blinds-to-next-level/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Unlike blind stealing, you don&#8217;t HAVE to do this to play optimal poker. I know that a lot of good players/respected posters do this already and some don&#8217;t like it at all.
OK, what you have to realise is quite how +EV blind stealing is. Check you BB/100 when blind stealing in PT. I&#8217;m sure that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unlike blind stealing, you don&#8217;t HAVE to do this to play optimal poker. I know that a lot of good players/respected posters do this already and some don&#8217;t like it at all.</p>
<p>OK, what you have to realise is quite how +EV blind stealing is. Check you BB/100 when blind stealing in PT. I&#8217;m sure that for most of you it&#8217;s bigger than 60 PTBB/100, now that a hell of a lot of $$$$!!!! The reason for this is in a way, NLTH is a badly structured game in the way that when you play without antes, the blinds are at such a disadvantage, they have to post their blind without even seeing their hand. Now considering that a good TAG player will normally only play about 20% of their hands, this means that on the BB , they&#8217;re losing 4BB every 5 hands, that they normally wouldn&#8217;t put in.</p>
<p><span id="more-30"></span></p>
<p>OK, so lets say you&#8217;re on the button and MP limps to you. You have K <img alt="" src="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/images/graemlins/heart.gif" />2 <img alt="" src="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/images/graemlins/heart.gif" />, what should you normally do? Well folding certainly doesn&#8217;t look too bad. We&#8217;ve got a poor hand after all. What do I think you should do? RAISE THAT [censored]!!!</p>
<p>Reasons:</p>
<p>1) now, yourblind steal doen&#8217;t even look like a blind steal, so it&#8217;s less likely the blinds will see it as that and play back at you.</p>
<p>2) It&#8217;s scary the amount of times that I&#8217;ve seen people limp/fold preflop, even from CO. It kinda baffles me realy!! What kind of hand can they have?</p>
<p>3) What do you opponents limp with? This is a very important consideration. Normally, either trash/SC/PP. These hands miss the flop very often. So even if you do get called, they won&#8217;t continue after your flop cbet very often.</p>
<p>4) When we take it down preflop, we now win 2.5BB. Thats over 100PTBB/100&#8230;..freakdaddy, we&#8217;ll catch you yet <img alt="" src="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/images/graemlins/wink.gif" /></p>
<p>5) We&#8217;ll get paid off more on our big hands.</p>
<p>6) Our oppponents are plays sub-optimally by open limping. So by raising, we are punishing that mistake.</p>
<p>Next, lets think about what will happen after we make this play a few times. Well, either you&#8217;re at a table of mega mega unobservant fish and you just keep raking in the money from their limps. Or maybe you&#8217;re sitting at a table of just mega unobservant fish, and they realise what you&#8217;re doing and they stop limping. Well, is this a good thing or a bad thing? I think in a way, its a VERY good thing. It means 1) they will be folding more, so you can steal the blinds more, which as we&#8217;ve already discussed is $$$$$$. 2) They will be raising more and will be out of their comfort zone. This means they will usually make even bigger mistakes than usual as they try to adjust</p>
<p>Next, what hands should you be doing this with? After how many limpers? After what sort of limpers.</p>
<p>IMO, you should do it with your normal blind stealing range, so SC, unsuited connectors, suited 1 gappers, Axs, Kxs, low PP etc etc.</p>
<p>No. of limpers: normally 1 or 2, but sometimes more if conditions allow   <br />The type of limpers: the ones that like to fold, eihter preflop or 2 cbets.</p>
<p>Lastly, the problems with this:</p>
<p>1) If you do this too often, you&#8217;ll find that you open up your game tooo much and start raising poor hands OOP too and get into trouble.</p>
<p>2) watch out for LRR</p>
<p>3) You&#8217;ll be put in a lot more marginal situations post-flop, so you need to make sure your reasing skills are goot.</p>
<p>IMO, playing a huge range of hands from the button after 0 or 1 (and even 2 limpers), raising them all and then from all other positions just play pairs/big aces/KQ is a simpleish but very profitable strategy </p>
<p>By Dan Bitel for <a href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Number=6073737">2+2 Forums</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/08/taking-stealing-the-blinds-to-next-level/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Optimal Play at $25NL</title>
		<link>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/07/optimal-play-at-25nl/</link>
		<comments>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/07/optimal-play-at-25nl/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 11:53:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[NL Texas Holdem]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[holdem poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nl poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nl texas]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[no limit poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[online poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[poker strategy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[texas holdem]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/07/optimal-play-at-25nl/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;m just trying to grow beyond basic TAG strategy and need a little help. 
Not to be discouraging, but what you suggest isn&#8217;t beyond basic TAG strategy; it&#8217;s part of basic TAG strategy. As Ed Miller brilliantly put it in his recent 2+2 magazine article:
Total all the dollars you&#8217;ve ever bet playing poker. The large [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I&#8217;m just trying to grow beyond basic TAG strategy and need a little help. </p></blockquote>
<p>Not to be discouraging, but what you suggest isn&#8217;t <b>beyond</b> basic TAG strategy; it&#8217;s <b>part of</b> basic TAG strategy. As Ed Miller brilliantly put it in his <a href="http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/current/miller0206.html">recent 2+2 magazine article</a>:<br />
<blockquote>Total all the dollars you&#8217;ve ever bet playing poker. The large majority of those dollars should have been bet from late position. Only a small percentage of your total handle should have been bet from up front.</p></blockquote>
<p>To implement this idea, you should be: </p>
<p>1. Playing more hands from LP.    <br />2. Raising more hands from LP. </p>
<p><span id="more-29"></span></p>
<p>The concept is called &quot;positional awareness,&quot; and it&#8217;s a fundamental building-block of good poker strategy. My general rule-of-thumb on positional play is that if I look at my VPIP from each position, it should be decreasing as I move farther from the button (blinds are a whole separate category &#8212; ignore them for now). I&#8217;d love to see my &quot;VPIP from Button&quot; at double my &quot;VPIP from UTG&quot; in a full-ring game, but if your Button VPIP isn&#8217;t at LEAST 50% larger than your UTG VPIP, you&#8217;re not playing a sufficiently positionally aware game. </p>
<p>My preflop aggression rule-of-thumb is that I want my PFR% to be at least half of my VPIP. If I&#8217;m not raising it up with at LEAST half the hands I pay to see, I&#8217;m either too passive or too loose preflop. </p>
<p>So; how can we implement this &quot;positionally aware&quot; strategy? Here are some suggestions: </p>
<p>1. From EP, play tighter-than-tight. I play any pocket pair, AK, AQ, maybe AJ and KQ (depending on the table and my image); that&#8217;s it. I&#8217;m raising with AA-TT and AK, AQ, AJ, and KQ (if I play them). Sometimes I&#8217;ll raise 99 and 88 as well. </p>
<p>2. From MP, I don&#8217;t open-limp. If the hand is good enough to play, it&#8217;s good enough to raise as the first player in. I&#8217;ll add suited connectors down to T9s into my lineup, and unsuited QJ or JT. I&#8217;ll also consider open-raising any two if my table image is tight and the players behind me are tight preflop and/or horrible (or even just weak-tight) postflop. </p>
<p>3. From LP, if it&#8217;s folded to me, I&#8217;m open-raising with any pair, any ace, any king, any two honors, any suited connectors down to 54s, any unsuited connectors down to 87o. I make steal attempts a bit over 1/3 of the time, and it&#8217;s wildly profitable. I also follow up ANY steal attempt with a continuation bet, regardless of the board or my hand. I will, however, quickly release a garbage hand if I&#8217;m reraised preflop or bet into on the flop; there&#8217;s no reason to stick around if you get caught stealing. </p>
<p>4. From LP after limpers, I tighten up a bit on my raising standards but still play very loose: I&#8217;ll raise any suited ace, any pair AA-TT, AK, AQ, AJ, KQ, and QJ; I&#8217;ll add in any other pair and suited or unsuited connectors if I&#8217;m feeling frisky and my image is tight. I&#8217;ll at least limp with suited connectors and any pair regardless. </p>
<p>Position is a powerful advantage in no-limit hold&#8217;em; if you don&#8217;t use it, you&#8217;re costing yourself money. The best way to use it is to play reasonably loose from LP (barring a preflop raise in front of you) and reasonably tight from EP. Just make sure you stay aggressive &#8212; you&#8217;ve got to raise at least half of these hands preflop. That means there are plenty of hands that you wouldn&#8217;t even play from EP that are worth a raise in LP, even after limpers. </p>
<p>By <b><a href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showprofile.php?Cat=0&amp;User=30271&amp;Number=4901122&amp;Board=ssplnlpoker&amp;what=showflat&amp;page=0&amp;fpart=1&amp;vc=1">Pokey</a></b> for 2<a href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=4900832&amp;page=0&amp;fpart=1&amp;vc=1">+2 Forums</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/07/optimal-play-at-25nl/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>4xBB + 1 per limper&#8230; why?</title>
		<link>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/06/4xbb-1-per-limper-why/</link>
		<comments>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/06/4xbb-1-per-limper-why/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 10:57:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[NL Texas Holdem]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[4bb]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nlth]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[no limit poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[texas holdem]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/06/4xbb-1-per-limper-why/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By NewUser2006:
In the SSNL FAQ, Skeme has a section that recommends raising 3-4BBs + 1 per limper in order to &#34;protect your hand&#34; and some other mumbo jumbo.
It seems to me that raise size only works optimally when there are a ton of limpers already in the pot, or you have a hand that it [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>By NewUser2006:</b></p>
<p>In the SSNL FAQ, Skeme has a section that recommends raising 3-4BBs + 1 per limper in order to &quot;protect your hand&quot; and some other mumbo jumbo.</p>
<p>It seems to me that raise size only works optimally when there are a ton of limpers already in the pot, or you have a hand that it is hard to get stacked with.</p>
<p>For other hands, like AK,AA,KK,and QQ, it seems to me like opening for 4BBs is a HORRIBLE opening size. Not only does it not get _much_ value out of the hands that call, but it also chases out hands that you WANT in the pot with you (other aces or hands like K8o) and encourages hands like 55 or 76s to try to stack you.</p>
<p><span id="more-28"></span></p>
<p>Can someone explain why 4BBs is a standard opener with your big hands and not something like 7 or 8 BBs, assuming you have at least 100BB?</p>
<p>I understand that you don&#8217;t need to raise SUPER big all of the time in order to give no one the correct implied odds because you&#8217;re not going to get stacked all of the time, but let&#8217;s face it, you are going to get stacked once in a while when you&#8217;ve got an overpair and someone has a set, especially against a very aggressive opponent.</p>
<p>4BBs just seems way too small to me for an opener. Thoughts? </p>
<p><b>By Pokey:</b></p>
<p>Conventional wisdom dictates that a 4xBB+1/limper raise is very good at getting the pot heads-up on the flop, which, for most hands, is the optimal number of opponents. The problem with preflop raising is that you want to do it often enough to disguise your holdings (raises from you shouldn&#8217;t automatically mean AA/KK/AK) and gain the initiative in the hand (it&#8217;s MUCH easier to win after raising than after limping). </p>
<p>If you make your standard raise bigger &#8212; say, 8xBB &#8212; then the opposition can defend against you EXTREMELY effectively by tightening up and only playing back when they have monsters of their own. You&#8217;re basically risking too much to win too little (blinds total only 1.5 BBs), and a savvy opponent can easily take advantage of that. On the other hand, if you raise less, like a minraise to 2xBB, you don&#8217;t exert enough pressure and wind up playing many hands multiway. </p>
<p>This is deadly, especially OOP, and it will cause you to lose many more hands than you otherwise would. Worse yet, you&#8217;ll commit much more money before you know you&#8217;re beaten by a stray two pair or some such holding.</p>
<p>Ideally, we&#8217;d like to vary our preflop raises to reflect the strength of our hand &#8212; raising more when we&#8217;ve got a super-premium hand, raising less when we&#8217;ve got mediocre holdings. Unfortunately, our opponents have this ridiculous idea that THEY want to win money at the game, and they have the unnerving habit of watching how we play and adjusting to it. </p>
<p>If our preflop raise size indicates the strength of our holdings, we&#8217;re giving away FAR too much information. As a result, all our preflop raises need to be the same size, whether they are blind steals with garbage or value bets with AA. </p>
<p>for <a href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=ssplnlpoker&amp;Number=6166757&amp;fpart=1&amp;PHPSESSID=">2+2 Forum</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/06/4xbb-1-per-limper-why/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to use Poker Tracker</title>
		<link>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/05/how-to-use-poker-tracker-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/05/how-to-use-poker-tracker-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 05:17:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Poker Stats]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[poker tracker]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/05/how-to-use-poker-tracker-2/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is a how-to post, but it doesn&#8217;t belong in the software forum; it&#8217;s to teach people how they can use the Poker Tracker data to find flaws in their game.
Not a week goes by that someone doesn&#8217;t ask if they are playing the game right. In that post, they include a dozen numbers from [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a how-to post, but it doesn&#8217;t belong in the software forum; it&#8217;s to teach people how they can use the Poker Tracker data to find flaws in their game.</p>
<p>Not a week goes by that someone doesn&#8217;t ask if they are playing the game right. In that post, they include a dozen numbers from Poker Tracker and hope that the old-timers on SSNL can fix all their holes. While it&#8217;s true that Poker Tracker can help find problems, this is not the way to approach it.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m going to try to give you a rough guide for the things you can do to check on your game. These are all just my opinion; they&#8217;re all subject to interpretation, and other people may disagree with me strongly. The best way to play is usually player-specific, but these strike me as some things you can check on that are frequent flaws in the small-stakes player&#8217;s game.</p>
<p><span id="more-27"></span></p>
<p><b>1. Do you have sufficient preflop aggression?</b> To answer this question, open up your ring game statistics and go to the &quot;position stats&quot; page. For each position other than the small blind, divide the &quot;PF Raise %&quot; by the &quot;Vol. Put $ In Pot.&quot; If you get a number smaller than 0.5, you&#8217;re not aggressive enough out of that position. See, aggression is a relative term; it should be a function of your level of looseness. You can be a consistently winning player at SSNL with a VPIP of 12%, and you can be a consistently winning player at SSNL with a VPIP of 30%, but only if you are sufficiently aggressive. My general guideline is that you should raise at least half the hands you play, from every position on the table.</p>
<p><b>2. Are you positionally aware?</b> Positional awareness means that you understand <a href="http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/issue14/miller0206.html">Ed Miller&#8217;s comment</a> when he said:</p>
<blockquote><p>Quote:<br />
<hr />Total all the dollars you&#8217;ve ever bet playing poker. The large majority of those dollars should have been bet from late position. Only a small percentage of your total handle should have been bet from up front.<br />
<hr /></blockquote>
<p>To test this, go to the Position Stats and look down the list of VPIP from Button to UTG. You should see that VPIP steadily dropping the farther you get from the button. I&#8217;d love to see my button VPIP at double my UTG VPIP, but if my Button VPIP is at least 50% larger than my UTG VPIP, I&#8217;m happy with the situation.</p>
<p><b>3. How&#8217;s my stealing?</b> To check on your performance when trying a blind steal, go to the General Info. tab. Where it says &quot;Att. To Steal Blinds&quot; I&#8217;d like to see that number at LEAST 20%. (Personally, I like mine to be over 30%, but I&#8217;m very aggressive in these situations. If you&#8217;re trying to steal the blinds less than 20% of the time, you&#8217;re leaving lots of money on the table.) Now click on &quot;Filters&#8230;&quot; and under &quot;Chance to Steal Blinds&quot; click &quot;Chance to Steal &amp; Raised.&quot; Select OK and look at the numbers. This shows every time you&#8217;ve tried to steal the blinds, and how the attempt turned out for you. Under &quot;Totals&quot; see the &quot;BB/Hand&quot; statistic. That shows your per-hand winrate on blind steals. If you multiply this number by 100, it should be at least double your &quot;PTBB/100&quot; average winrate. If it&#8217;s much less than that and you have a decent sample size, you have a hole in your game when it comes to blind stealing. This should be an exceedingly profitable thing to do when you try it; if it&#8217;s not, you need to work on your strategy.</p>
<p><b>4. Defending the blinds.</b> Click on &quot;Turn Filter Off,&quot; and then click on &quot;Filters&#8230;&quot; again. Under &quot;Blind Status&quot; click on &quot;Either Blind.&quot; Now under &quot;Vol. Put $ In Pot&quot; click on &quot;Put Money In.&quot; This shows you if you&#8217;re bleeding money out of the blinds. A &quot;BB/Hand&quot; of about -0.375 would indicate that you were no better off putting money into the pot than if you had folded. If your &quot;BB/Hand&quot; is larger than that, then you typically win back some of your blind money when you put money into the pot from the blinds. That&#8217;s all you can really hope for. If you click on &quot;Filters&#8230;&quot; again and go under &quot;Steal Attempted Against Your Blind&quot; and click on &quot;Steal Attempted.&quot; After you click &quot;OK&quot; you&#8217;ll now see how you did when you chose to defend against a blind steal. Again, the magic number is for your &quot;BB/Hand&quot; to be bigger than -0.375; that means you&#8217;re making back some of your blinds when you try to defend against a steal. If either of these numbers is lower than -0.375, you&#8217;d lose less money by always folding rather than doing what you&#8217;re doing.</p>
<p><b>5. Heads-up play.</b> Click on “Turn Filter Off,” then click on “Filters…” again. Under “Hands With Between…Players Seeing The Flop” change the range from “0 to 10 players” to “2 to 2 players.” Hit “OK” and see what comes up. This shows you how you’ve done when you were heads-up preflop, but a flop was dealt. See how you’ve done in these situations. If things look OK, go back to “Filters…” and under “Pre-flop Raise” select “No Raise.” This will show you how you’ve done when you didn’t raise preflop, but the hand was heads-up on the flop (this includes pure limping and when someone ELSE raised preflop, but not when you were the preflop raiser). Is this number positive? If not, it could be an indicator that you have trouble when you are not the aggressor preflop, especially without padding in the pot.</p>
<p><b>6. Multiway pots.</b> Clear the filter and go back under filters. Change “Hands With Between…Players Seeing The Flop” to “3 to 10 players.” This shows you how you do in multiway pots. If things look good, go back and select “No Raise” under “Pre-flop Raise.” Is it still positive? If so, you’re selecting good times to play/limp multiway pots, and you’re playing them well postflop.</p>
<p><b>7. Pocket pairs.</b> Under “Filters…” change the “Type of Hole Cards” to “Pairs.” This will show you how you generally play and perform with pocket pairs. Your Total VPIP with these should be EXTREMELY high; unless you play at highly unusual tables, I’d be surprised to see this number below 85%. Pocket pairs make extremely powerful hands that are extremely well-hidden; if you’re not playing them almost all the time, you’re leaving money on the table. Also, your Total PFR% with these hands should be rather high &#8212; at least 1/3 of your VPIP, if not 1/2. Some people have this number higher still, and I don’t have a problem with that, especially at short-handed tables. If you have enough hands, I’d expect every one of these lines to be positive, and reasonably significantly so. If you have any glaringly negative numbers, especially AA-88, it may indicate bad play. Look over individual hands where you lose lots of money and see if you played too timidly early in the hand, or if you went too far unimproved in the face of resistance. Also, look at the hands where you won to see if you played too timidly, or if you routinely forced weaker hands out when you should have been milking them for profits.</p>
<p><b>8. Suited connectors.</b> Under “Filters…” change “Type of Hole Cards” to “Suited Connectors.” I’m much less likely to play suited connectors than pocket pairs, but some people play them religiously. As a result, I don’t really have a good suggestion as to how high your VPIP or PFR should be. However, your BB/hand should be positive; if it’s not, you’re probably not playing your suited connectors well. Remember: these hands play best in a multiway, unraised pot, or as a steal move. In the “Filters…” change “Vol. Put $ In Pot” to “Cold-Called.” When you hit OK, you should have almost no entries to view. Of the times you cold-called, you should be able to come up with a specific explanation for why you did so in each and every one of them. Review the hand histories; if you can’t come up with a really good reason why you thought it better to cold-call, rather than raise or fold, you need to rethink your suited connector strategy. Good explanations: the raise was very small, villain is passive post-flop, I had position on villain, villain and I are both extremely deep-stacked, villain is incredibly aggressive preflop, my suited connectors are particularly strong, there are several cold-callers in front of me, etc. I’m not saying you shouldn’t ever cold-call with suited connectors; rather, I’m saying you shouldn’t AUTOMATICALLY do so. Your default play here should be to fold weak suited connectors and reraise strong ones.</p>
<p><b>9. Unsuited connectors.</b> Clear the filter and then go back into it. Change “Type of Hole Cards” to “Off-Suited Connectors.” Your VPIP for these hands should be noticeably smaller than your VPIP for suited connectors. Check your winrate and make sure it’s positive. Filter for cold-calling and see if you had good reasons for doing so, keeping in mind that the reasons need to be even stronger than for suited connectors. </p>
<p><b>10. Postflop aggression.</b> Clear the filter. Select the “More Detail…” button above the “Filters…” button. Scroll down. There is a section marked “First Action on Flop After A Pre-flop Raise.” This shows your likelihood of continuation betting. If you add Bet and Raise, the total should be at least 40%. If it’s not, you’re probably giving up too soon on your good hands, and that will cost you money in the long run. Remember: people who cold-call a preflop bet are often in fit-or-fold mode. If you don’t bet, you don’t give them a chance to fold. The pot is already decent-sized, and there’s no reason to give some donk a free look at a turn card that could sink you. If you raised preflop, you need a good reason NOT to raise the flop. Continuation betting should be your default play. Scroll down a bit farther to “Aggression Factor.” Your total aggression factor should be at LEAST 2. No-limit is not a game where you can call frequently and turn a profit. You should always be looking to see if you can raise or fold; only if you have a good reason why you CANNOT raise or fold should you call. As a result, calling should be an infrequent occurrence in your play, which gives you a large aggression factor.</p>
<p><b>11. Check-raising.</b> Some people never check-raise; others check-raise infrequently. I personally like to check-raise at least once in awhile; 1% would be fine, 0.5% would be acceptable. The goal of the check-raise is to remind your opponents that just because you checked does NOT mean that you don’t have a hand. However, circumstances need to be very specific for a check-raise to be appropriate. Typically, I check-raise on the flop when OOP against a preflop raiser, or on the turn when OOP against a flop bettor/raiser who was clearly not on a draw (uncoordinated flop). If you are check raising much more than 2% of the time, you’re being entirely too tricky for a SSNL table, and straightforward play would probably be more profitable for you.    </p>
<p>All of this is just an introduction to the kinds of self-analysis you can/should do with Poker Tracker statistics. Notice how much more in-depth it is than just glancing at a few VPIP numbers. Typically, the only person who can truly do a “check-up” on your playing style and ability is YOU. As always, if in your searching you find hands that indicate you may have a flaw in your poker reasoning, post them up (one at a time, of course). Tell us the problem you are worried you might have, and why you think this hand might indicate the problem. Then, open the discussion up to see if 2+2ers agree or disagree. </p>
<p>By <b><a href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showprofile.php?Cat=0&amp;User=30271&amp;Number=4946669&amp;Board=ssplnlpoker&amp;what=showflat&amp;page=0&amp;fpart=1&amp;vc=1">Pokey</a></b> for <a href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=ssplnlpoker&amp;Number=4946669&amp;fpart=1&amp;PHPSESSID=">2+2 Forums</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/05/how-to-use-poker-tracker-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Value betting</title>
		<link>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/04/value-betting/</link>
		<comments>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/04/value-betting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 09:01:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[NL Texas Holdem]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[hand reading]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nl poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nlth]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[no limit]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nolimit poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[value bet]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.microstackesholdem.com/?p=26</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are only a half-dozen reasons why we bet:
Value - Villain will call with worse hands.
Protection - To make it incorrect for villain to chase draws.
Bluff - Villain will fold hands that beat us.
Semi-Bluff - Our hand has equity, however we&#8217;d be happy just to win the pot now.
Information - Villain&#8217;s reaction tells us where [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are only a half-dozen reasons why we bet:</p>
<p><strong>V</strong>alue - Villain will call with worse hands.<br />
<strong>P</strong>rotection - To make it incorrect for villain to chase draws.<br />
<strong>B</strong>luff - Villain will fold hands that beat us.<br />
<strong>S</strong>emi-Bluff - Our hand has equity, however we&#8217;d be happy just to win the pot now.<br />
<strong>I</strong>nformation - Villain&#8217;s reaction tells us where we are.<br />
<strong>D</strong>eception - Merge your range, yo. Shania loves you.</p>
<p><strong>VPBSID</strong> - Say it with me, VPBSID. Rolls right off the tongue, doesn&#8217;t it? Now that you have an easy, memorable acronym, you&#8217;ll never forget!</p>
<p>The post will deal primarily with betting for value. This is a key component of play in the micros. Being effective with your value bets is incredibly important against loose passive players (calling stations). The kinds of players that are very common in micro stakes.<span id="more-26"></span></p>
<p><strong>What is a value bet?</strong></p>
<p>A value bet is any bet where you expect to be called <em>mostly</em> by worse hands and the value gained from worse hands calling exceeds the loss incurred when you actually <em>don&#8217;t</em> have the best hand <em>or</em> you&#8217;re otherwise forced to fold before showdown.</p>
<p>When value betting with less than a monster, we often can&#8217;t call a raise. So when we value bet we do not want to see a raise. And when he does call we don&#8217;t want him to have a better hand. If he has a better hand then betting is just costing us money and we shouldn&#8217;t be betting.</p>
<p>We need to be enough ahead of his calling range to make up for the times he raises. If we&#8217;re in a situation where he&#8217;s going to raise our bet a lot (ie; an aggressive player, a board where he either has the nuts or air) then we have to be way ahead of his calling range in order to make betting profitable. When value betting, we don&#8217;t want to have to bet/fold very often.</p>
<p>When you value bet, you want your opponent to call. And when he <em>does call</em> you want it to be with a worse hand. If he doesn&#8217;t usually have a worse hand or if he&#8217;s not going to be able to call with a worse hand, <em>you can&#8217;t bet</em>.</p>
<p>Value betting and especially value betting thin often involves TPNK and middle pair type hands. Betting big hands, 2pairs, sets, straights, flushes is usually an easy decision. The ones we really have to think about are the more marginal hands. Especially against stations who will call with anything. Sometimes things get tricky with sets on coordinated boards, low straights or small flushes. But the majority of these situations are one pair hands.</p>
<p><strong>Hand Reading</strong></p>
<p>The fundamental theorem of poker states:</p>
<div style="margin: 5px 20px 20px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom: 2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="10" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset;">Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponents&#8217; cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose. Conversely, every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have if they could see all your cards, you gain; and every time they play their hands the same way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you lose.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p>If you can read hands you can overcome the disadvantage of incomplete information. If you are able to deduce your opponent&#8217;s hand, you gain a tremendous advantage.</p>
<p>In order value bet effectively, you need to be good at <a href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=8629256&amp;page=0&amp;fpart=all&amp;vc=1" target="_blank">hand reading</a>. This also involves being able to <a href="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/78/micro-stakes-full-ring/concept-week-8-evaluating-board-texture-442027/" target="_blank">evaluate board texture</a>.</p>
<p>You may remember this scene from Rounders (yeah, I&#8217;m referencing Rounders, it&#8217;s called pandering. Deal with it!)</p>
<p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv2C_m0D-gY" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv2C_m0D-gY</a></p>
<p>Yes, this is a typical Hollywood setup, and there&#8217;s some real BS (representing trips by checking? WTF?) but at it&#8217;s core you need to be like Mike.</p>
<p>You need to be able to put people on ranges and ideally hands. Eventually you should be doing this automatically for every hand.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s more, putting your opponent on a range <em>isn&#8217;t enough</em>. If you&#8217;re going to valuetown people you need to <em>also</em> put them on <strong>calling ranges</strong>.</p>
<p>If you can&#8217;t do this, you are going to spew. You&#8217;re going to miss bets a better player would make. And you&#8217;re going to be turning hands into bluffs when you should just be taking showdowns.</p>
<p>You need to practice. You need to learn the common patterns used by the various types of players. If you want to be a good player you need to be able to routinely put people on hands.</p>
<p>This is one of <em>the</em> fundamental skills in poker. You can get away with auto-betting in the micros, especially the nano-stakes where everyone is so bad it doesn&#8217;t matter. However, if you can&#8217;t hand read it&#8217;s going to catch up to you and you&#8217;re going to suffer as you try to climb out of the micros and you can&#8217;t just feast on donks all day while avoiding the other decent players.</p>
<p><strong>Know your enemy</strong></p>
<p>Value betting, especially thin value bets, are most useful against calling stations and other players who call too much (ie; TAGs who aren&#8217;t very good).</p>
<p>Value bets are not very useful against LAGs. LAGs don&#8217;t call down very much. They bet and raise when they have a hand (and when they don&#8217;t). The way to beat LAGs is to trap and sometimes call down a little light. Avoid value betting LAGs - They&#8217;re just going to raise you and then you&#8217;re screwed.</p>
<p>Against TAGs and good sLAGs you will want to use a combination of value betting and trapping along with other weapons in your arsenal (ie; bluffing).</p>
<p><strong>Use position</strong></p>
<p>Position is important in value betting because position is an important tool in hand reading. When we are able to act after our opponent we are much more able to judge when he doesn&#8217;t have a strong hand. When it is checked to us unless he&#8217;s slowplaying or intending to check/raise it usually means his hand doesn&#8217;t have a lot of value.</p>
<p>When out of position it is much more difficult to judge an opponent&#8217;s hand strength. It is also much more difficult to get value since our OOP bets will be perceived as much stronger. A positionally aware player will need a much stronger hand to call us down than when we are betting with position.</p>
<p>Be more inclined to make thin value bets when you have position and you can use the knowledge gained by position to your benefit. Be less inclined to value bet OOP. In particular, if a tight player has already called a bet be wary of continuing to bet into him unless you have a strong hand. You&#8217;re just not going to get more than one or two streets of value OOP from a tight player with less than a monster.</p>
<p><strong>Use your image</strong></p>
<p>Your image is very important in putting your opponent&#8217;s on a calling range. If you have a loose and/or aggressive image, your opponents will be much more inclined to call you down with their more marginal hands.</p>
<p>If you have a tight and/or passive image, your opponents will tighten up their calling range because they will tend to put you on better hands.</p>
<p>So if you are LAG or sLAG be more inclined to value bet thin. Which leads to a self-fulfilling cycle. The more LAG you are, the more you should value bet. The more you value bet, the more LAG you will appear.</p>
<p>If you are nitty or passive, be less inclined to value bet thing because you&#8217;re not going to get calls from weak hands. Consider instead starting to open up your play a little so you can start to get more value from marginal situations.</p>
<p><strong>Bet size can influence calling range</strong></p>
<p>The size of your bet can influence your opponent&#8217;s calling range. If your opponent is on the tight side and you think he&#8217;s going to fold too much of this range, try a 1/2 pot bet instead of a 3/4 pot bet. On the other hand, if your opponent is a serious station consider maximizing value you by making pot-sized bets all the way. Always remember you want worse hands to call. You&#8217;re not trying to force a fold when you value bet. <strong>When you&#8217;re value betting and your opponent folds it means you&#8217;ve made a mistake.</strong> You either made a mistake in their range/calling range or you bet too much and pushed them off their hand.</p>
<p><strong>Don&#8217;t turn hands with showdown value into bluffs</strong></p>
<p>If your opponent can&#8217;t call you with a worse hand then you&#8217;re not value betting. You are bluffing. This is where board texture really becomes important. Most players are not calling multiple streets on A-high boards without an ace. Many players shut down when obvious draws hit unless they were chasing. Most players aren&#8217;t calling down on very scary boards (four-flush, four to a straight) without a big hand. Keep this in mind. If the four-flush hits on the river and you don&#8217;t have a decent flush you&#8217;re not betting for value because your opponent is seldom calling with a worse hand. Bluffing there may be a good idea, but know that you are bluffing, not value betting. You&#8217;re often better off checking behind.</p>
<p><strong>Beware of polarized ranges</strong></p>
<p>Be aware of when your opponent&#8217;s range is polarized to the extent that he&#8217;s almost always either raising (or slowplaying) or folding. You want to value bet (thin) when your opponent&#8217;s hand is a bunch of squishy mid-range hands. Not when he either has a monster or air. When he has air, there&#8217;s no point in betting you&#8217;re not going to get any value. When he has a monster&#8230; Well, it should be obvious why you don&#8217;t want to be betting into monsters.</p>
<p><strong>Beware of chasers</strong></p>
<p>Many players, especially stations will chase draws. When these draws come in, you need to be able to assess the likelihood you&#8217;re still ahead or you&#8217;ve just been out-drawn. In many cases you&#8217;re no longer ahead of your opponent&#8217;s range let alone his calling range. This is particularly true against loose players who are good enough to fold hands like bottom pair but will chase draws. You may still be ahead of the ones who call with any pair but the ones who can fold will have polarized ranges if there aren&#8217;t many one pair/overpair type hands that you&#8217;re beating since the draw came in.</p>
<p>TAGs and LAGs are much less likely to chase draws without odds. They&#8217;ll usually either play these hands aggressively or fold. So you&#8217;re often still okay to value bet against these players when draws come in.</p>
<p><strong>Think ahead</strong></p>
<p>If we are value betting thin and getting called is going to get us into trouble on later streets because we&#8217;re not prepared to go after multiple streets of value consider checking this street instead of later streets. For example, if we&#8217;re going to value bet the flop thin and shut down if called we&#8217;re usually better off checking the flop, particularly OOP if we&#8217;re just going to give up when called. Especially against tricky opponents. That is, don&#8217;t give your opponents the opportunity to float you or call with a weak hand and then take the pot away from you on a later street when you obviously give up.</p>
<p><strong>Part of a well balanced attack</strong></p>
<p>Solid value betting is part of a well balanced attack. Go back to that list of reasons we bet. If your betting range is out of balance, you become easy to read. Easy to play against. If every time you bet it&#8217;s a value bet from a tight range then observant players will have an easy time adjusting to you. On the other hand, if you bluff much more than you value bet, people are going to start snapping off your bluffs with ace-high. Don&#8217;t become predictable, keep them guessing.</p>
<p><strong>A aggressive move that is break-even is +EV</strong></p>
<p>An aggressive move that is mathematically break-even (ie; A thin value bet where we are equally ahead and behind villain&#8217;s range) is actually +EV. When we bet, we give players an opportunity to make a mistake. An opponent may accidentally fold a hand he didn&#8217;t mean to (misclick). An opponent may misread the meaning of our aggression, especially if he doesn&#8217;t have a good read on us. In addition, aggressive players are much more difficult to play against, to adjust to. Players start wondering if maybe they <em>shouldn&#8217;t</em> be folding middle pair and they may start to make some bad calls. Or you may tilt someone as they get fed up with being run over even if we aren&#8217;t really being all that aggressive. Whenever you bet, there is a small Shania component. Bets and raises are much harder to read and play against than checks, calls and certainly folds.</p>
<p><strong>What happens when we fail to value bet?</strong></p>
<p>Otherwise known as, &#8220;I can&#8217;t win because they always suck out on me!&#8221;</p>
<p>First, the ideal situation. Three streets of value from a calling station:</p>
<p>Villain is 40/3/0.1 after 80 hands. His preflop limping range is huge. When he check/calls flop his range is something like A2/A3/A4/A6/A7/A8/AT/AJ/89/9T/56/45/67/78/55/99. AQ/A9/A5 are possible but you have to think even someone this passive is leading a lot of the time.</p>
<p>So we are well ahead of his calling range even though our kicker is marginal.</p>
<p>Full Tilt Poker $0.01/$0.02 No Limit Hold&#8217;em - 9 players</p>
<p>MP2: $1.32<br />
CO: $3.78<br />
BTN: $1.66<br />
SB: $0.77<br />
<strong>Hero (BB): $2.00</strong><br />
UTG: $2.04<br />
<strong>UTG+1: $2.00</strong><br />
UTG+2: $0.71<br />
MP1: $2.32</p>
<p><strong>Pre Flop:</strong> ($0.03) Hero is BB with A<img class="inlineimg" title="Spade" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/spade.gif" border="0" alt="" /> 8<img class="inlineimg" title="Club" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/club.gif" border="0" alt="" /><br />
UTG calls $0.02, UTG+1 calls $0.02, UTG+2 calls $0.02, <em>1 fold</em>, MP2 calls $0.02, CO calls $0.02, <em>2 folds</em>, Hero checks</p>
<p><strong>Flop:</strong> ($0.13) 5<img class="inlineimg" title="Spade" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/spade.gif" border="0" alt="" /> A<img class="inlineimg" title="Heart" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/heart.gif" border="0" alt="" /> 9<img class="inlineimg" title="Club" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/club.gif" border="0" alt="" /> <span style="color: blue;">(6 players)</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">Hero bets $0.10</span>, UTG folds, UTG+1 calls $0.10, UTG+2 folds, MP2 folds, CO folds</p>
<p><strong>Turn:</strong> ($0.33) 6<img class="inlineimg" title="Spade" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/spade.gif" border="0" alt="" /> <span style="color: blue;">(2 players)</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">Hero bets $.25</span>, UTG+1 calls</p>
<p><strong>River:</strong> ($0.83) J<img class="inlineimg" title="Heart" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/heart.gif" border="0" alt="" /> <span style="color: blue;">(2 players)</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">Hero bets $0.75</span>, UTG+1 calls</p>
<p>Final pot: $2.33 - $.12 rake</p>
<p>UTG+1 shows: A2<br />
Hero wins: $2.21 ($1.09 in profit)</p>
<p>According to PokerStove, our equity on the flop is almost 71% but we only win 54.08% of the time:</p>
<p>Board: 5s Ah 9c<br />
Dead:</p>
<p>equity 	win 	tie 	      pots won 	pots tied<br />
Hand 0: 	70.859%  	54.08% 	16.78% 	          4283 	     1329.00   { As8c }<br />
Hand 1: 	29.141%  	12.36% 	16.78% 	           979 	     1329.00   { A2s, A2o }</p>
<p>Please read that again - Even though we have a dominating hand and appear to be way ahead, we&#8217;re actually only winning 54.08% because we wind up splitting the pot 16.78% of the time. What&#8217;s more, <strong>the calling station will outdraw us almost 30% of the time!</strong></p>
<p>In a split pot, the worst case scenario is that stacks go in and we lose a full $.10 to the rake. For simplicity sake we&#8217;re just going to make this assumption that for any split pot we lose $.10.</p>
<p>54.08% of the time we win $1.09.<br />
16.78% of the time we lose $.10.<br />
29.14% of the time we lose ???.</p>
<p>So how much do we lose?</p>
<p>With TPNK against a calling station we are folding if he ever raises. He&#8217;s basically never raising with a worse hand and even when he has a monster he&#8217;s not always raising - Either because he&#8217;s slowplaying or just because he&#8217;s a station.</p>
<p>If he hits his 2pair on the turn and raises this hand costs us $.37.<br />
If he hits his 2pair on the river and raises (or slowplays the turn) this hand costs us $1.12. Whether he raises river or just calls out third barrel doesn&#8217;t matter. We lose the hand either way - by folding or at showdown.</p>
<p>So how often are we folding the turn and how often are we folding the river/losing showdown?</p>
<p>When he hits his 2pair, half the time he&#8217;s going to hit it on the turn and half the time on the river. However, he&#8217;s just calling the turn with 2pair a significant amount of the time. So I&#8217;m going to estimate that he raises the turn 25% of the time and we see the river the other 75% of the time.</p>
<p>So when we lose, we lose ($.37x.25+$1.12x.75) $.93.</p>
<p>54.08% of the time we win $1.09.<br />
16.78% of the time we lose $.10.<br />
29.14% of the time we lose $.93.</p>
<p>Our expected value from this hand is ($1.09x.5408-$.10x.1678-$.93x.2914)  $.30. On average we will make $.30 on this hand.</p>
<p>Except there&#8217;s one thing missing here. That&#8217;s when we <em>both</em> make 2pair. When this happens we&#8217;re going to win more than $1.09. But I&#8217;m not goign to go down this road because it requires a lot of assumptions about when a station will stack off. So instead just keep in mind that we actually average slightly more than $.30.</p>
<p>So that&#8217;s what happens when we keep our foot on the gas and that our opponent on a ride to valuetown.</p>
<p>What happens when we blink?</p>
<p>Full Tilt Poker $0.01/$0.02 No Limit Hold&#8217;em - 9 players</p>
<p>MP2: $1.32<br />
CO: $3.78<br />
BTN: $1.66<br />
SB: $0.77<br />
<strong>Hero (BB): $2.00</strong><br />
UTG: $2.04<br />
<strong>UTG+1: $2.00</strong><br />
UTG+2: $0.71<br />
MP1: $2.32</p>
<p><strong>Pre Flop:</strong> ($0.03) Hero is BB with A<img class="inlineimg" title="Spade" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/spade.gif" border="0" alt="" /> 8<img class="inlineimg" title="Club" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/club.gif" border="0" alt="" /><br />
UTG calls $0.02, UTG+1 calls $0.02, UTG+2 calls $0.02, <em>1 fold</em>, MP2 calls $0.02, CO calls $0.02, <em>2 folds</em>, Hero checks</p>
<p><strong>Flop:</strong> ($0.13) 5<img class="inlineimg" title="Spade" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/spade.gif" border="0" alt="" /> A<img class="inlineimg" title="Heart" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/heart.gif" border="0" alt="" /> 9<img class="inlineimg" title="Club" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/club.gif" border="0" alt="" /> <span style="color: blue;">(6 players)</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">Hero bets $0.10</span>, UTG folds, UTG+1 calls $0.10, UTG+2 folds, MP2 folds, CO folds</p>
<p><strong>Turn:</strong> ($0.33) 6<img class="inlineimg" title="Spade" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/spade.gif" border="0" alt="" /> <span style="color: blue;">(2 players)</span><br />
Hero checks, UTG+1 checks</p>
<p><strong>River:</strong> ($0.33) J<img class="inlineimg" title="Heart" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/heart.gif" border="0" alt="" /> <span style="color: blue;">(2 players)</span><br />
Hero checks, UTG+1 checks</p>
<p>Final pot: $.33 rake $.01</p>
<p>UTG+1 shows: A2<br />
Hero wins: $.32 ($.20 in profit)</p>
<p>This is a really simplified case. We&#8217;ve assumed that villain checks it through here as well, <em>even when he hits 2pair</em>. Even the worst calling stations will bet there when they river 2pair. They&#8217;re also betting their one pair hands sometimes after we check two streets. And of course we will hit out 2pair sometimes too.</p>
<p>Even though villain cooperates by checking it down, we&#8217;re still only winning 54.08% of the time. However, because we&#8217;ve kept the pot small, I&#8217;m going to estimate that we only lose $.05 to a split pot as villain isn&#8217;t going to stack off nearly as often. And of course we still lose 29.14% of the time.</p>
<p>54.08% of the time we win $.20.<br />
16.78% of the time we lose $.05.<br />
29.14% of the time we lose $.12.</p>
<p>Our expected value from this hand is ($.20x.5408-$.05x.1678-$.12x.2914)  $.06. On average we will make $.06 on this hand.</p>
<p>Again, we&#8217;ve basically ignored the effects of 2pair over 2pair. But we&#8217;re going to ignore it in all cases because it&#8217;s difficult to model accurately (how often do we play for stacks?) and they should (more or less) cancel each other out because they occur just as often in all these cases.</p>
<p>Full Tilt Poker $0.01/$0.02 No Limit Hold&#8217;em - 9 players</p>
<p>MP2: $1.32<br />
CO: $3.78<br />
BTN: $1.66<br />
SB: $0.77<br />
<strong>Hero (BB): $2.00</strong><br />
UTG: $2.04<br />
<strong>UTG+1: $2.00</strong><br />
UTG+2: $0.71<br />
MP1: $2.32</p>
<p><strong>Pre Flop:</strong> ($0.03) Hero is BB with A<img class="inlineimg" title="Spade" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/spade.gif" border="0" alt="" /> 8<img class="inlineimg" title="Club" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/club.gif" border="0" alt="" /><br />
UTG calls $0.02, UTG+1 calls $0.02, UTG+2 calls $0.02, <em>1 fold</em>, MP2 calls $0.02, CO calls $0.02, <em>2 folds</em>, Hero checks</p>
<p><strong>Flop:</strong> ($0.13) 5<img class="inlineimg" title="Spade" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/spade.gif" border="0" alt="" /> A<img class="inlineimg" title="Heart" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/heart.gif" border="0" alt="" /> 9<img class="inlineimg" title="Club" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/club.gif" border="0" alt="" /> <span style="color: blue;">(6 players)</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">Hero bets $0.10</span>, UTG folds, UTG+1 calls $0.10, UTG+2 folds, MP2 folds, CO folds</p>
<p><strong>Turn:</strong> ($0.33) 6<img class="inlineimg" title="Spade" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/spade.gif" border="0" alt="" /> <span style="color: blue;">(2 players)</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">Hero bets $.25</span>, UTG+1 calls</p>
<p><strong>River:</strong> ($0.83) J<img class="inlineimg" title="Heart" src="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/smilies/heart.gif" border="0" alt="" /> <span style="color: blue;">(2 players)</span><br />
Hero checks, UTG+1 checks</p>
<p>Final pot: $.83 rake $.04</p>
<p>UTG+1 shows: A2<br />
Hero wins: $.79 ($.42 in profit)</p>
<p>This is a really simplified case. We&#8217;ve assumed that villain checks it through here as well, <em>even when he hits 2pair</em>. Even the worst calling stations will bet there when they river 2pair. They&#8217;re also betting their one pair hands sometimes after we check two streets. And of course we will hit out 2pair sometimes too.</p>
<p>Even though villain cooperates by checking it down, we&#8217;re still only winning 54.08% of the time. However, because we&#8217;ve kept the pot small, I&#8217;m going to estimate that we only lose $.07 to a split pot as villain isn&#8217;t going to stack off nearly as often. And of course we still lose 29.14% of the time.</p>
<p>54.08% of the time we win $.42.<br />
16.78% of the time we lose $.07.<br />
29.14% of the time we lose $.37.</p>
<p>Our expected value from this hand is ($.42x.5408-$.07x.1678-$.37x.2914)  $.11. On average we will make $.11 on this hand.</p>
<p><strong>In summary</strong>, our EV in these hands when we:<br />
Bet all three streets: $.30<br />
Bet two streets and check it through: $.11<br />
Bet flop and then check it down: $.06</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve only analyzed three very simple cases. Obviously this hand is potentially much more complex. ie; when villain raises or bets somewhere after we take our foot off the gas. When we hit our two pair and get more value than checking it through two streets. However, I&#8217;m not going to delve into all these sub cases because I think I&#8217;ve made my point. That failing to value bet costs a ton of value and turns very profitable hands into marginal earners.</p>
<p>If you can&#8217;t win because the calling stations keep outdrawing you, it&#8217;s because you&#8217;re not making enough from the times they <em>don&#8217;t</em> out draw you. You&#8217;re actually usually <em>not that big a favorite</em> over the calling station so you need to squeeze every bit of profit out of them you can when your hands hold up. Otherwise these one pair hands turn into only marginal winners and you will have a hard time staying profitable.</p>
<p>There are some important things you should take away from all of this.</p>
<p>In all three cases, the amount of money we lose when we lose the hand is almost as much as the amount we win when our hand holds up. The real difference is in <strong>the frequency of wins</strong> versus the loses. We need to take advantage of when we are a favorite because otherwise the difference between winning and losing is not very big.</p>
<p>When we bet two streets instead of one, our EV only (about) doubles. However, when we go from two streets to three streets our EV <strong>almost triples</strong>. That&#8217;s the value of compound interest. That&#8217;s why we need to keep hammering these guys. Giving up a street of value is absolutely huge because <strong>that third street is by far the most profitable street</strong>.</p>
<p>The real key is that the kinds of valuetown hands happen extremely regularly. People like to post about folding KK preflop or folding sets but these situations are relatively uncommon. Marginal one pair hand type situations occur again and again and again. If you are not rigorously exploiting your opponents you are giving up tremendous value over many, many hands. Anyone can bet, bet, bet with a flopped set on a dry board. Anyone can get value from their monsters. It&#8217;s being able to capitalize on these very common situations that really distinguishes the marginal winners from the good players.</p>
<p>By <a class="bigusername" href="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/members/10615/"><strong>Cry Me A River</strong></a> for <a href="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/78/micro-stakes-full-ring/concept-week-10-value-betting-454494/">2+2 forums</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/04/value-betting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Limit Texas Holdem Lingo and Abbreviations</title>
		<link>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/03/no-limit-texas-holdem-lingo-and-abbreviations/</link>
		<comments>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/03/no-limit-texas-holdem-lingo-and-abbreviations/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:06:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[NL Texas Holdem]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nl poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nlth]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[no limit]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[no limit poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[poker lingo]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[texas holdem]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.microstackesholdem.com/?p=25</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s a list of common terms and abbreviations used in the NL forums.

AKQJT - Ace, King, Queen, Jack, Ten
UTG - Under the Gun, first player to act preflop
UTG+1 - Under the Gun plus one, second player to act preflop
EP - early position
MP - middle position
LP - late position
OTB - On The Button
CO - Cut off, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="post">Here&#8217;s a list of common terms and abbreviations used in the NL forums.</span><span id="more-25"></span><br />
<span class="post"><br />
AKQJT - Ace, King, Queen, Jack, Ten</span></p>
<p>UTG - Under the Gun, first player to act preflop<br />
UTG+1 - Under the Gun plus one, second player to act preflop<br />
EP - early position<br />
MP - middle position<br />
LP - late position<br />
OTB - On The Button<br />
CO - Cut off, player one seat to the right of button<br />
HJ - Hijack, player two seats to the right of button<br />
SB - small blind<br />
BB - big blind</p>
<p>c/c - check/call<br />
c/f - check/fold<br />
c/r - check/raise<br />
b/f - bet and fold to a raise<br />
3-bet - a bet, a raise, and then another raise.  The third action is a 3-bet.<br />
b3b - Hero&#8217;s plan is to bet, and then 3-bet if raised.<br />
reraise - raising the PFR</p>
<p>VB - value bet<br />
CB - continuation bet<br />
PSB - pot-sized bet<br />
PSR - pot-sized raise<br />
PFR - preflop raise or preflop raiser</p>
<p>overbet - a bet amount larger than the current pot<br />
check behind - to check when it&#8217;s been checked to you, usually after betting action on previous street<br />
donkbet - either to lead into the PFR on the flop, or a tiny bet made in relation to the pot<br />
thin value bet - usually a river bet made when it&#8217;s unclear if you are ahead or not</p>
<p>Monotone - a flop of all the same suit<br />
Rainbow - a flop of all different suits<br />
Overpair - having a pair in your hand higher than the biggest card on the board<br />
gutshot - an inside straight draw</p>
<p>TPTK - top pair top kicker<br />
TPWK - top pair weak kicker<br />
TPGK - top pair good kicker<br />
TP2K - top pair 2nd best kicker&#8211;You have KQ, flop K72, you have top pair, 2nd best kicker (the Q)<br />
TPCK - top pair crap kicker<br />
TPBK - top pair bad kicker</p>
<p>9To - Nine Ten offsuit<br />
KJs - King Jack suited<br />
Ax - An Ace with any second card<br />
Kxx - refers to a King high flop<br />
Q73r - r = rainbow flop</p>
<p>OESD - open ended straight draw<br />
OESFD - open ended straight flush draw<br />
pp - pocket pair<br />
sc - suited connector<br />
EV - Expected Value<br />
OOP - out of position<br />
FE - fold equity<br />
AI - all-in<br />
ATC - any two cards<br />
UI - unimproved</p>
<p>TAG - tight aggressive<br />
LAG - loose aggressive<br />
LAP - loose passive<br />
sLAG - slightly loose aggressive</p>
<p>MHIG - my hand is good<br />
MHING - my hand is no good<br />
WA/WB - way ahead, way behind</p>
<p>IMO - In my opinion<br />
IMHO - In my humble opinion<br />
JMO - Just my opinion<br />
FYP - fixed your post<br />
OP - original post or poster</p>
<p>tl;dr - too long; didn&#8217;t read<br />
QFT - quoted for truth<br />
x-post - post made in more than one forum at one time<br />
OT - off topic<br />
lc - low content<br />
nc - no content</p>
<p>goot - good<br />
moran - moron<br />
nh - nice hand<br />
meh - the sound you make when you shrug your shoulders signaling indifference; not great, not terrible.<br />
pwned - owned or pawned.  Usually means you got outplayed.</p>
<p>BB/100 - # of bb&#8217;s won per 100 hands played<br />
PTBB/100 - poker tracker big blinds won per 100 hands played.  A PTBB is 2xBB.<br />
~$7 - around $7 or about $7<br />
FPS - fancy play syndrome<br />
aggro - aggressive</p>
<p>SSNL - small stakes no limit<br />
MSNL - mid stakes no limit<br />
HSNL - high stakes no limit<br />
NLHE - no limit hold &#8216;em<br />
LHE - limit hold &#8216;em<br />
BBV - the Beats, Brags, and Variance forum</p>
<p>PT - Pokertracker<br />
VPIP - voluntarily put money in the pot<br />
AF - aggression factor<br />
Villian is 24/10/3(98)- Pokertracker stats indicating VPIP/PFR%/AF (with preflop aggression taken out) over 98 hands</p>
<p>GT+ - Gametime Plus<br />
PA - PokerAce<br />
PAHUD - PokerAce Heads Up Display<br />
PP - Party Poker<br />
PS, Stars - PokerStars<br />
FT - Full Tilt<br />
UB - Ultimate Bet</p>
<p>PL - pot limit<br />
PF - pre-flop<br />
HH - hand history<br />
HU - heads up<br />
FR - full ring<br />
FT - full table<br />
6m - 6-max<br />
NL100 - number indicates the buy-in; this is No Limit, with $1 BB&#8217;s</p>
<p>Stop-n-Go - You bet, get raised, you call closing the action on that street, then lead out on the next street.<br />
Float - You call a bet with a marginal hand or draw, usually on the flop while in position, with the intent of stealing the pot on a later street.<br />
Semi-bluff - betting/raising when you have a draw.<br />
Stealing blinds - openraising in late position with less than premium hands.<br />
blocking bet - often a river bet made OOP when an obvious draw hits on the end, where you bet and fold to a raise<br />
effective stack - the smallest stack amongst the players remaining in the hand.</p>
<p>trips - flop is JJ8, you hold KJ, you have trips<br />
set - flop is K42, you hold 44, you have a set<br />
pot control - attempting to keep the pot small with a marginal holding<br />
minraise - raising the lowest amount possible</p>
<p>by <strong><a title="Member # 37848" href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showprofile.php?Cat=0&amp;User=37848&amp;Number=5988672&amp;Board=ssplnlpoker&amp;what=showflat&amp;page=0&amp;fpart=1&amp;vc=1">ajmargarine</a></strong> for <a href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Number=5988672">2+2 Forums</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2009/03/no-limit-texas-holdem-lingo-and-abbreviations/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Poker Combinatorics</title>
		<link>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2008/12/poker-combinatorics/</link>
		<comments>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2008/12/poker-combinatorics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:46:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[NL Texas Holdem]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nl poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[poker math]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.microstackesholdem.com/?p=24</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Chomp asked me to post about counting combos, so I have some time now.
For some (or most, I don’t know) this post might be obvious and second nature. But maybe for a few it will be helpful. While reading this, keep in mind that I have an IQ of about 20 or 30 in the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="post">Chomp asked me to post about counting combos, so I have some time now.</p>
<p>For some (or most, I don’t know) this post might be obvious and second nature. But maybe for a few it will be helpful. While reading this, keep in mind that I have an IQ of about 20 or 30 in the mornings and that I&#8217;m not a coach or anything, so if there are errors, please tear into me all you want. I like to learn.</span><span id="more-24"></span><br />
<span class="post"><br />
<strong>Combinations 101</strong></p>
<p>It’s easy to do.  Take the remaining cards and multiply them by each other.  Check Poker Stove to verify.</p>
<p>Example: Flop is A67.  You have QQ.</p>
<p>How many ways can the opponent have AK? 3 aces remaining multiplied by 4 kings remaining = 12 ways he can have AK. So 48 ways for AT+.</p>
<p>How about 67?  3 * 3 = 9 ways.</p>
<p>What you will notice after doing this after while is you’ll start to gain some insights. For example, there are a lot of straight draws on many flops. On A67, there are 48 ways he can have an OESD (16 ways of 98, 16 ways of 54, 16 ways of 85) 64 ways he can have a gutshot (16 ways of T9, 16 ways of 43, 16 ways of 84, and 16 ways of 95). That’s 112 ways he can have a straight draw (ok, 95, 84, and 85 aren’t very realistic, but you get the point).</p>
<p>Let’s try AA on a QJJr flop.  You are the pfr and bet.  He calls.</p>
<p>Are you generally ahead here?</p>
<p>Assume we put his pf range at 22+, A8+, K9+, Q9+, J9+, T8+, 98, 76.</p>
<p>The first thing you’ll notice is the ways he can have top pair. AQ = 6 ways (because 2 aces left and 3 queens left); KQ = 12 ways; QT = 12 ways; Q9 = 12 ways. So that’s 42 ways he can have TP.</p>
<p>What about straight draws? 32 ways he can have an OESD; 8 ways he can have AT; 8 ways for AK; 16 ways he have T8. And 16 ways he can have K9. 16 ways for 98. That’s 96 ways he can have a straight draw. Impressive, huh?</p>
<p>And trips or better? 4 ways he can have AJ; 8 ways he can have KJ; 3 ways he can have QQ; 6 ways for QJ; 1 way JJ; 8 ways for JT; 8 ways for J9. 38 ways he can have trips or better. That’s almost as many ways as he can have top pair.</p>
<p>The other hands: we’ll assume he folds 22-88/A8/A9 to the flop bet. So, that leaves 6 ways for KK, 6 ways for TT, and 6 ways for 99. 18 ways total.</p>
<p>Add it all up and we get:</p>
<p>We’re ahead of 156 combos.</p>
<p>We’re behind 38 combos.</p>
<p><strong>Range versus Combinations</strong></p>
<p>The example above is a bit more revealing (to me at least) of the reality of opponent’s distribution of hands than merely just saying he has X range.</p>
<p>If you are only using ranges, you are – to use an analogy - looking at a piece of bread, while those who use combinations are looking at that bread with a microscope and seeing all that constitutes it (maybe that’s a dumb analogy).</p>
<p><strong>Reads versus Combinations</strong></p>
<p>You might argue, “But I have my reads, man.  I don’t need to count no stinking combinations.”</p>
<p>Reads, in my opinion, have severe limitations and are not as good guideposts in assessing the strength of our opponent’s hand postflop as we think they are.</p>
<p>The reasons why might be obvious but I’ll discuss them anyway.</p>
<p>1)Sample size: Say you have 300 hands on an opponent (which is a lot of hands against a micro opponent since we are not playing the same people often, as opposed to MSNL/HSNL). Assume that opponent has a VPIP of 20 and WTSD of 25. That means – at best – you saw 15 showdowns where he put money in preflop (not checked his BB). So you have direct hand evidence of 15 hands. What do 15 hands tell you? Very little. See the next sections for why.</p>
<p>2)Preflop dynamics. Sometimes an opponent is the pf raiser, sometimes he is the caller. This affects how he plays his hands postflop. In other words, he might play TT different as the pf caller on a Qh6s7s flop than he would as the pf raiser.</p>
<p>3)Number of opponents posftlop: How an opponent plays top pair, a draw, or a monster multiway might differ how he plays it heads up.</p>
<p>4)Flop texture: There are roughly 17,000 flop combinations heads up (I think). Our reads are based on a tiny % of those flops that opponent has seen. Take opponent having a set for example. Will he play it the same on all flop combinations? Our read on how an opponent plays a set will probably come from only one or two flop combinations observed.</p>
<p>5)Position: How an opponent plays a hand out of position, on the button, or in good/bad relative position will likely affect how he plays his hands postflop. So, he might play a set different OOP than he would on the button or in good versus bad relative position.</p>
<p>6)Steal situations: An opponent might call more/be more aggressive in these situations than in non-steal hands.</p>
<p>7)Your image: This is very important from my experience. When I tightened up over my last 100k hands (my vpip dropped to about 14 or 15), I felt like I was getting coolered a lot. Maybe I was. But what was probably happening is opponents were playing their hands differently against me than they were against other opponents. So, while an opponent would play TPGK fast against another player, he was playing it slow and cautiously against me, but playing his sets fast against me.</p>
<p><strong>General Micro Plays/Theorems versus Combinations</strong></p>
<p>A lot of players at the micros make the same plays. They minraise with sets, slowplay the flopped nut flush, don’t c/r bluff the river, put you on AK, don’t fold full houses (Zeebo Theorem), raise turn with better than top pair (Baluga Theorem), etc.</p>
<p>So, for these situations, combo counting is of less value.</p>
<p><strong>The Not-So-Obvious Value of Combinatorics</strong></p>
<p>So, assuming you’ve made it this far in the thread, you might be thinking, “No way in hell am I doing all this counting at the table. I don’t have a time bank of 2 hours per hand.”</p>
<p>You want to review your hands in PT and apply combo counting to see if you made good decisions. After you do that for a while, counting will become much quicker and intuitive because you will have seen so many similar scenarios. So, counting top pair combos on the flop, for example, will require little thought.</p>
<p>Now, given this practice, you will start to gain quite a few insights. When you begin to apply these insights, you will become a much tougher player. What will begin to happen is that your game will start to lean towards a Game Theory-ish Optimal strategy.</p>
<p>True, you are exploiting your opponents based on the ways they can have a hand, but by doing that you start to make your plays less based on your own hand and more against the distribution of your opponents’ hands, which makes your opponent&#8217;s task of exploiting you very very difficult.</p>
<p>An example:</p>
<p>So, after spending way too much time analyzing PT hands, I noticed that I was doing a lot of this:</p>
<p>tag UTG/MP raises pf.  I call with a small pp for set value.</p>
<p>Heads up, the flop comes A62r.  I check, he c-bets.  I fold having not made my set.</p>
<p>But after playing around with combo stuff, I determined that they do not have a pair of aces or better on that flop the majority of the time. So I started to check-raise here or raise from LP (doing it in a way so that it is profitable based on pot size).</p>
<p>Now I was no longer playing my hand. Of course, if I do this 5 times in a row against him he will likely adjust, but I can flop sets/two pair/etc too.</p>
<p>And on turns and rivers, your play will naturally become much tougher. If I end up on a river, and given opponent’s play so far I assess that there are 70 ways he can have a better hand and 40 ways he can have a worse hand, but only 24 ways he can have a monster, I can play aggressive enough to cause him to fold more often than he should.</p>
<p>Also, by playing with Poker Stove, another insight you will likely gain is how few legitimate flush draws an opponent can have compared to other hands. For some reason our brain spots flush draws right away, despite the reality that they are often a tiny part of the ways he can have a hand.</p>
<p><strong>Weighting</strong></p>
<p>Just because someone has a range of XYZ, doesn’t mean X is as likely as Z. So, in Poker Stove, you go through a hand and reduce the ways he can have a hand so you can weight them appropriately. So, if KTo is in his range, but rarely so given pf and flop action, I’ll reduce it from say 12 combos to 2 combos by only selecting KcTd and KhTc, for example.</p>
<p><strong>Warning</strong></p>
<p>At 10nl or lower, where your opponents are rarely engaged in the process known as &#8220;thought&#8221;, be very careful about ever bluffing. At 25nl, there are a few tags, and at 50nl, there are alot of tags who do think. So, keep that in mind.</p>
<p>To see combo counting in action by one of th ebest, look up Bobbo Fittos&#8217; posts. This a good one (his analysis is towards the end of the thread): <a href="http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=ssplnlpoker&amp;Number=10376330&amp;Searchpage=1&amp;Main=10376330&amp;Words=%2Bmath+-re%3A&amp;topic=&amp;Search=true#Post10376330" target="_blank">Link</a></span></p>
<p>By <strong><a title="Member # 47573" href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showprofile.php?Cat=0&amp;User=47573&amp;Number=10760165&amp;Board=microplnl&amp;what=showflat&amp;page=40&amp;fpart=1&amp;vc=1">derosnec</a></strong> for 2+2 Forums</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2008/12/poker-combinatorics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Overestimating Implied Odds</title>
		<link>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2008/10/overestimating-implied-odds/</link>
		<comments>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2008/10/overestimating-implied-odds/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:09:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[NL Texas Holdem]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[implied odds]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nl poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[poker math]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.microstackesholdem.com/?p=23</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is probably a basic concept that many of you have thought about before. I&#8217;ve been thinking about this a lot lately and I thought I&#8217;d post about it.

Consider the following HH&#8230;
100BB stacks at x stakes
You have 67 in the BB.
UTG opens for 5BB, Button and SB call, and you in the BB call.
Flop 2 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="post">This is probably a basic concept that many of you have thought about before. I&#8217;ve been thinking about this a lot lately and I thought I&#8217;d post about it.</span><span id="more-23"></span><br />
<span class="post"><br />
Consider the following HH&#8230;</p>
<p>100BB stacks at x stakes</p>
<p>You have 6<img src="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/images/graemlins/heart.gif" alt="" />7<img src="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/images/graemlins/heart.gif" alt="" /> in the BB.</p>
<p>UTG opens for 5BB, Button and SB call, and you in the BB call.</p>
<p>Flop 2<img src="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/images/graemlins/spade.gif" alt="" /> 8<img src="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/images/graemlins/heart.gif" alt="" /> K<img src="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/images/graemlins/heart.gif" alt="" /> (20.5BB)</p>
<p>Checked to UTG who bets out 20, and its folded to you, do you call/raise/fold?</p>
<p>When it gets to you the pot is 40.5BB and its 20BB to call. According to pot odds you should fold, getting 2-1 on a 5-1 shot. However, many players call and justify it be saying they have the implied odds to make the call profitable.</p>
<p>But they they ever really think about it? How big exactly, are their implied odds? That&#8217;s the tricky part. It&#8217;s so dependant on many many things, but most importantly, your opponents tendencies.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s analyze it.</p>
<p>We are going to assume for this example that if we hit we will always have the best hand and never be outdrawn - which is not true but we need to assume it for our example.</p>
<p>We will hit one of our 9 outs, 9/47 times.  Or, approx 20% of the time.</p>
<p>So lets just say 1 out of every 5 times we call the bet, we will win the hand.</p>
<p>This means that 4 times we lost 20BB and 1 time we win 40.5BB + Implied Odds&#8230;</p>
<p>So our Profit&#8230;</p>
<p>x = implied odds value<br />
P = .8(-20) + .2(40.5 + x)</p>
<p>x is such a volitile value (meaning it has a wide range and is dependant on so many factors) that we should find the breakeven point to help us figure out the approx. value we need it to be on average.</p>
<p>So, solving for x when profit = 0 (breakeven)&#8230;</p>
<p>0 = -16 + .2x + 8.1<br />
-.2x = -7.9<br />
x = 39.5</p>
<p>So we need to, on average, extract exactly 39.5BB from our opponent every time we hit.</p>
<p>Considering the stack sizes in our example, the pot will be 60BB after you call and there will be 75BB remaning in each stack. Out of the 75BB in his stack we need to extract almost 40BB JUST TO BREAK EVEN. We need to do this every single time we hit (on average).</p>
<p>It&#8217;s going to be pretty clear to our opponent that a FD is in our range, and that if we come out betting when we hit, he may not pay us off often enough for our initial call to be profitable.</p>
<p>Against many non thinking players (and even many thinking players) we can usually do this on average because the pot is so big. But what if the effective stacks were smaller? Even slightly? What if the stacks were much bigger? What if we remove our assumption that we will always win, and include the % of times we are outdrawn or are already behind when we make our hand?</p>
<p>This is a marginal spot on the flop. If we hit our hand, we NEED to extract more than half of his stack EVERY TIME we hit or it&#8217;s just a bad call. We need to use our judgement to determine this, but if we overestimate our implied odds, we can be making bad calls left and right, and not even know it.</p>
<p>Sometimes, its ok to muck a flush draw. Do not overesimate the value of your implied odds. </span></p>
<p>By <strong><a title="Member # 58924" href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showprofile.php?Cat=0&amp;User=58924&amp;Number=7443252&amp;Board=ssplnlpoker&amp;what=showflat&amp;page=0&amp;fpart=1&amp;vc=1"><span class="modname">Tickner</span></a></strong> for <a href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=ssplnlpoker&amp;Number=7443252&amp;PHPSESSID=&amp;fpart=1#Post7443252">2+2 Forums</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2008/10/overestimating-implied-odds/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dealing with a downswing</title>
		<link>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2008/09/dealing-with-a-downswing/</link>
		<comments>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2008/09/dealing-with-a-downswing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:39:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Bankroll management]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[bankroll]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[downswing]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nl poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[no limit]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[poker]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[texas holdem]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.microstackesholdem.com/?p=22</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently I went through the type of bankroll destroying, confidence crushing downswing that I had previously only read about. The following are some lessons learned from my experience.

Don&#8217;t overestimate your short run edge.
I often sit down at a NL$100 table and see a minraise, min-reraise, 4 callers to the flop, and start counting my money. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="post">Recently I went through the type of bankroll destroying, confidence crushing downswing that I had previously only read about. The following are some lessons learned from my experience.</span><span id="more-22"></span><br />
<span class="post"><br />
<strong>Don&#8217;t overestimate your short run edge.</strong><br />
I often sit down at a NL$100 table and see a minraise, min-reraise, 4 callers to the flop, and start counting my money. This is a mistake. The truth is, you can sit at a table full of donks for 5 hours and get your ass completely handed to you on any given night. Once I accepted the fact that even though I am usually one of the best players at my table, I can still get pwned, it became much easier to handle variance. Many people seem to believe that if they play solid poker, it is their god given right to come out on the winning end of things. When these players run bad, their arrogance and complete disrespect for their opponents makes it very difficult for them to deal with losing. I&#8217;m not saying you shouldn&#8217;t be confident, just that you need to accept the fact that on any given night, you can get owned by horrible players.</p>
<p><strong>Don&#8217;t root for certain cards to come.</strong><br />
Much of the attraction to this game is the adrenaline rush that one gets from gambling. Many players love the feeling they get when they put their whole stack in on a draw, and watch 2 cards peel, hoping for that diamond to hit. While difficult to do, I think it is important for players to avoid this gambling &#8220;rush&#8221; as much as possible. The true grinder plays every hand with complete emotional indifference. They focus on making the most +EV decision in every single situation, and avoid getting caught up emotionally. Obviously, once you make a decision in poker, the results are completely out of your control. Though this is obvious, I see so many players get furious when their 17 out draw doesn&#8217;t hit, or when a player calls their big river bluff with bottom pair. Poker can be very frustrating at times, and the less you allow your emotions to impact your decisions, the better equipped you will be to deal with a cold run. Lastly, I think that players who enjoy the thrill of gambling tend to make decisions based on their desire to gambool rather than on the overall EV of the decision being made.</p>
<p><strong>Don&#8217;t spar in chat or &#8220;go after&#8221; a certain player.</strong><br />
Nothing puts me on tilt faster than having a fish talk [censored] in chat after rivering me, or having a table coach ridicule me for getting my stack in on the flop with 15+ outs. For this reason, I try to avoid chat at my tables. Of course you should read chat because you can gain lots of info on your opponents thought processes. My point is, don&#8217;t get suckered in to sparring wars/arguments with the players at your table, nothing good can come of it. This is particularly true if you multitable. While your talking [censored] in chat at one table, your missing action and valuable info at your other table. Also, don&#8217;t go out of your way to &#8220;get back&#8221; at a player. Anytime you play differently for reasons such as anger/revenge/etc, there is a good chance your play will not be optimal. What starts with trying to get your money back from a fish often ends with sending a couple more buyins to the said fish. Lastly, don&#8217;t tap the tank. I know it&#8217;s very difficult, but in the long run, pointing out the flaws in a players game will only result in all of us making less money.</p>
<p><strong>When your running bad, bluff less and play tighter.</strong><br />
Some will disagree with this, but I think it&#8217;s very important to pull back a bit when you sense that your running bad. I don&#8217;t mean to play weak tight, or to value bet less, or play your hands more passively. I am referring to situations which require fold equity. Typically, many players at your table are not paying as much attention as you. They aren&#8217;t checking hh&#8217;s to see whats being shown down or paying attention to how tight or loose their opponents are. Many players judge a players skill based on how much money they are winning or losing. If your running bad and the donks at your table are watching you ship stacks all over the place, they are more inclined to give you less respect. So when you fire two streets with whiffed overs, or bluff a busted draw on the river, they are more likely to look you up, because they think you suck. I also find this to be the case pre flop, if I&#8217;ve been running bad, my pre flop raises get much less respect. My normal game is 21/14, but when running like [censored], I tend to drift down to 16/10. Hands like A3suited or KJo, which are typically in my UTG opening range, are often folds for me in EP when I&#8217;m getting less respect and running bad. Pay attention to the feel of the table your at. Typically, if you tighten up, people don&#8217;t tend to notice until you start showing down some big hands, and then you get more respect and can open your game back up. It is amazing to me how many people will play even more aggressively when they are losing, which I believe goes against the logical solution.</p>
<p><strong>At some point, you will run worse than you ever thought possible.</strong><br />
I know, this saying is a tired cliche that we&#8217;ve all heard over and over. In all honesty, I never really understood what this meant until I experienced it myself. At NL $50, I ran breakeven for close to 25K hands, and thought that was my &#8220;running worse than I ever thought possible.&#8221; Boy was I wrong. I used to read BBV posts about someone dropping $900 at NL $50 and thought, dude, you suck at poker, find a new hobby. I never believed that a downswing of greater than 10 buyins was possible without some serious tilt/bad play/both. I&#8217;m here to tell you that it is. Obviously my game has some holes, and sometimes I make bad plays, as we all do. That said, I played fairly solid poker for a week and lost almost 19 buyins at NL$100. No ninja monkey tilt. No obvious spew. No drunken shots at $5/10. Just complete and utter destruction, day after day, for a week straight. There are many 2+2er&#8217;s who believe that a WR of less than 5PTBB&#8217;s is unacceptable, or that a 5 buyin downswing can&#8217;t happen to them because they are &#8220;too good.&#8221; If you are one of these players, and you hit a wicked downswing, it may be difficult to accept and busto could be the result. Just realize that no matter how bad you&#8217;ve run, a worse downswing is definitely possible. The crazy thing about poker is that there is absolutely no guarantee that you will win. While good play will win over the long run, there is no way to know for sure how long a short run losing streak can last. You can plug your stats into a BR calculator, and get comfort from standard deviations and confidence intervals that tell you +/- x buyins is likely based on your stats, but the truth is, you really need a huge sample size to really know how big of a swing you could encounter. Most of us don&#8217;t have a sample size large enough to confidently predict how bad of a run we can hit at some point.</p>
<p><strong>Don&#8217;t be shy about dropping down a level.</strong><br />
My downswing started playing NL $200 with a $3200 roll. It ended with playing NL$50 on a $1300 roll. Probably the biggest mistake I made was not moving down sooner. It is difficult to move down from a level that you have been a consistent winner at. I beat NL $100 for 7PTBB&#8217;s/100 over almost 100K hands before this swing. I kept thinking that eventually it would turn around, I am too good for NL $50, etc. Don&#8217;t make the same mistake. Even if you are rolled for the level your playing, if you start losing a lot, just move down until you start running better. There is no shame in it, and often the worse play at the level below can jump start your comeback and re-instill some confidence. I know it has for me.</p>
<p>Hopefully this has been helpful for some of you, holler back with a tl;dr and I&#8217;ll know my time was well spent <img src="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />. If anyone has additional advice for dealing with a cooler, throw it in here, I&#8217;d love to see some more tips. Good luck and see you all at the tables,<br />
AZ </span></p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=7194553&amp;an=&amp;page=&amp;vc=1">2+2 Forums</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.microstackesholdem.com/2008/09/dealing-with-a-downswing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
