Invitational Redux...aka how to make your draw and not live to enjoy it...aka Help me Work the Numbers [Station]
Here's how I busted Wil from WWdN tonight [that's right getting back-to-back naming rights - is that a first?]. This hand illustrates how my mentality has changed somewhat when it comes to our get togethers. I am willing to race for my stack for the early double now. I am also willing to get it in way behind if priced in, IF I have a stack that can afford the hit.
I finished 5th in MATH yesterday specifically because of two hands I accidentally priced myself into but could afford to lose. I won both, but would have been cool losing both as well. Similarly, I was running well in WWdN again until I was dumb enough to think a flopped set would be good even one of two times on Stars [payback is a bitch as my hand against Wil illustrates nicely]. I then lost pair over pair twice (as the over both times) and then tried a resteal shove with 33 against the button only to bust when called by TT without improvements. So yeah, I took Wil out in a strange way, but overall not unhappy with my play - getting it all in early once as a race and the other times way, way ahead (and covering them by a mile) only to have Pokerstars remind it is a verb as much as a noun. My bounce with the 3s I don't mind either - supershorty survival mode and I like TT's call of course too.
Also had a pretty good run at the 9k at 6pm on FT - 64th of 540ish. Chad was there, but don't think he saw me. Kitty was running great until an untimely exit. I had a huge stack which was crippled when I lost three races in two orbits and by goes me. I am not sure why I take losses at FT so much better than I do on Stars, but it reinforces for me how much perception dictates reality. I bounce on weird beats or lost races on FT and I don't even blink, just look for the next thing to play. On Stars it haunts me. Yet smokkee feels exactly the opposite way. We can't both be right, but we can both be wrong.
So on I go...
I think this hand is worth getting some thoughts on - yeah Hoy, including "You Donkey!" That would be fine too.
I am SB, Wil in position is BB. Folded around to me. Can't remember the level but it was early 50/100 I believe.
I find the Bloody Sasquatch: 34h. Yeah I just made that nickname up right here on the spot. I dedicate it to Eric, who I know loves a good hand nickname. Feel free to spread that one around, I know I'll be dropping it in conversation at every cocktail party I go to for the next month or so.
I 3X it figuring I'll make a play post-flop if the board looks scary. Wil smooth calls. [Pretty sure about this - if I am wrong correct me. Without tracker, I am at the mercy of my recollection which is notorious for focusing on my brilliance, bonhomie and all-round exemplification of all things wondrous, but sometimes to the exclusion of important details like facts.]
Next part of the story goes Jh6h3x.
It's on me with a baby flush draw and bottom pair. So this was my reasoning and I'd truly like your opinions on this analysis and my play. I know I took a while working this out so I am not just saying "here's what I thought" after the fact. This is more-or-less how the debate went: Here is an opportunity to race for the all elusive early big stack.
I did the odds here later, but you know how it is, by now we have a decent guess at most of these numbers anyway.
My guess as to Wil's range in the BB calling just 2x more to see the flop -
AK-AT, 22-AA (although I would really have expected a reraise with JJ-AA, I know Wil can get tricky and he knows I am trying a more aggro style these days, so he might have been willing to let me bet out of position on the flop), 89s-KQs. I ruled out the Hammah cause he didn't reraise preflop. This seems pretty reasonable in retrospect too.
Pot is something like 600. I bet nearly the pot trying to disguise my draw. Wil types in the chat: "you're full of bs." nice read indeed.
He Reverse Hoy's me - and he almost has me covered, so this is it. Normally I don't fuck around with a Hoy unless I am holding the stone cold nuts. I've been schooled a lot on the mystic powers of the Hoy and I don't play that way any longer. But this was actually exactly what I wanted.
If he's ready to die on this hand, it just screams overpair to me...but QQ, KK, AA should have reraised. 88,99,TT all seem likely here. I thought 77 or JJ are possible, but that's pretty much the worst of it: 2 hands where I'll jump in at 70/30. Holding a 3 I am not giving him credit for 33 there. I am also not giving him credit for two hearts with me holding two. One maybe, but not two.
So where does that leave us? Probably an overpair which is a true 50/50 to my holding. If he's got one heart it's just slightly better. If he's overplayed AK-AQ - very unlikely given what I know about his game and what he knows about mine he's dead to 80/20 - unless its AK/Qh which would be 50/50, but I already said I wasn't gonna give him credit for two hearts.
So basically I thought it as likely he was betting the killer sets as he was betting like a moron with AK/AQo. As in very mothafuckin unlikely. Potential sin that, but not one of omission. That left hands that I was a true race against given my baby flush and bottom pair.
No way did I think I was getting in way ahead. But I did think I was getting exactly what I wanted. 50/50 (almost) for a big early stack.
What did I get instead?
JJ for top set. 70 Wil v. 30 moi. nice read on my part no?
'Course I turned the flush to put a nail in our boy's coffin. I think to the table it looked like I called a push on a flush draw, without them noticing I had a pair too giving me 6 more all-important outs against an overpair. Against top set of course they were useless.
So like I said it prolly looked very donkish in real time to people, but I was personally ok with my approach to that hand and best of all have really stopped caring How Things Look.
But what I DO care about is: does this move make sense? I think by the numbers it works out okay (I got better than 2:1 on a coinflip) and it fit the bill for my strategy (favoring a race for the early stack). But I allow I could be way, way off on this one. If I am - be a pal and enlighten. I may not listen, but I am still interested.
Penultimately I will note that the icing was the back-to-back naming rights. Tell me that's a first.
Postpenultimately I should note how karma came round. My next flopped set was killed by a river straight on a pair(77 me)-over-pair (33), which is a MUCH worse pokerstarsing I think everyone will agree. And that was just the beginning of my downward spiral with pairs I got too above.
And ultimately, I have officially given up the belief I will ever win WWdN. The site has told me for a year it ain't gonna happen and today I have gotten the message.
Yeah, yeah... I will still keep trying.
Man's reach must excede his grasp; else what's a Heaven for?
Bastante.
I finished 5th in MATH yesterday specifically because of two hands I accidentally priced myself into but could afford to lose. I won both, but would have been cool losing both as well. Similarly, I was running well in WWdN again until I was dumb enough to think a flopped set would be good even one of two times on Stars [payback is a bitch as my hand against Wil illustrates nicely]. I then lost pair over pair twice (as the over both times) and then tried a resteal shove with 33 against the button only to bust when called by TT without improvements. So yeah, I took Wil out in a strange way, but overall not unhappy with my play - getting it all in early once as a race and the other times way, way ahead (and covering them by a mile) only to have Pokerstars remind it is a verb as much as a noun. My bounce with the 3s I don't mind either - supershorty survival mode and I like TT's call of course too.
Also had a pretty good run at the 9k at 6pm on FT - 64th of 540ish. Chad was there, but don't think he saw me. Kitty was running great until an untimely exit. I had a huge stack which was crippled when I lost three races in two orbits and by goes me. I am not sure why I take losses at FT so much better than I do on Stars, but it reinforces for me how much perception dictates reality. I bounce on weird beats or lost races on FT and I don't even blink, just look for the next thing to play. On Stars it haunts me. Yet smokkee feels exactly the opposite way. We can't both be right, but we can both be wrong.
So on I go...
I think this hand is worth getting some thoughts on - yeah Hoy, including "You Donkey!" That would be fine too.
I am SB, Wil in position is BB. Folded around to me. Can't remember the level but it was early 50/100 I believe.
I find the Bloody Sasquatch: 34h. Yeah I just made that nickname up right here on the spot. I dedicate it to Eric, who I know loves a good hand nickname. Feel free to spread that one around, I know I'll be dropping it in conversation at every cocktail party I go to for the next month or so.
I 3X it figuring I'll make a play post-flop if the board looks scary. Wil smooth calls. [Pretty sure about this - if I am wrong correct me. Without tracker, I am at the mercy of my recollection which is notorious for focusing on my brilliance, bonhomie and all-round exemplification of all things wondrous, but sometimes to the exclusion of important details like facts.]
Next part of the story goes Jh6h3x.
It's on me with a baby flush draw and bottom pair. So this was my reasoning and I'd truly like your opinions on this analysis and my play. I know I took a while working this out so I am not just saying "here's what I thought" after the fact. This is more-or-less how the debate went: Here is an opportunity to race for the all elusive early big stack.
I did the odds here later, but you know how it is, by now we have a decent guess at most of these numbers anyway.
My guess as to Wil's range in the BB calling just 2x more to see the flop -
AK-AT, 22-AA (although I would really have expected a reraise with JJ-AA, I know Wil can get tricky and he knows I am trying a more aggro style these days, so he might have been willing to let me bet out of position on the flop), 89s-KQs. I ruled out the Hammah cause he didn't reraise preflop. This seems pretty reasonable in retrospect too.
Pot is something like 600. I bet nearly the pot trying to disguise my draw. Wil types in the chat: "you're full of bs." nice read indeed.
He Reverse Hoy's me - and he almost has me covered, so this is it. Normally I don't fuck around with a Hoy unless I am holding the stone cold nuts. I've been schooled a lot on the mystic powers of the Hoy and I don't play that way any longer. But this was actually exactly what I wanted.
If he's ready to die on this hand, it just screams overpair to me...but QQ, KK, AA should have reraised. 88,99,TT all seem likely here. I thought 77 or JJ are possible, but that's pretty much the worst of it: 2 hands where I'll jump in at 70/30. Holding a 3 I am not giving him credit for 33 there. I am also not giving him credit for two hearts with me holding two. One maybe, but not two.
So where does that leave us? Probably an overpair which is a true 50/50 to my holding. If he's got one heart it's just slightly better. If he's overplayed AK-AQ - very unlikely given what I know about his game and what he knows about mine he's dead to 80/20 - unless its AK/Qh which would be 50/50, but I already said I wasn't gonna give him credit for two hearts.
So basically I thought it as likely he was betting the killer sets as he was betting like a moron with AK/AQo. As in very mothafuckin unlikely. Potential sin that, but not one of omission. That left hands that I was a true race against given my baby flush and bottom pair.
No way did I think I was getting in way ahead. But I did think I was getting exactly what I wanted. 50/50 (almost) for a big early stack.
What did I get instead?
JJ for top set. 70 Wil v. 30 moi. nice read on my part no?
'Course I turned the flush to put a nail in our boy's coffin. I think to the table it looked like I called a push on a flush draw, without them noticing I had a pair too giving me 6 more all-important outs against an overpair. Against top set of course they were useless.
So like I said it prolly looked very donkish in real time to people, but I was personally ok with my approach to that hand and best of all have really stopped caring How Things Look.
But what I DO care about is: does this move make sense? I think by the numbers it works out okay (I got better than 2:1 on a coinflip) and it fit the bill for my strategy (favoring a race for the early stack). But I allow I could be way, way off on this one. If I am - be a pal and enlighten. I may not listen, but I am still interested.
Penultimately I will note that the icing was the back-to-back naming rights. Tell me that's a first.
Postpenultimately I should note how karma came round. My next flopped set was killed by a river straight on a pair(77 me)-over-pair (33), which is a MUCH worse pokerstarsing I think everyone will agree. And that was just the beginning of my downward spiral with pairs I got too above.
And ultimately, I have officially given up the belief I will ever win WWdN. The site has told me for a year it ain't gonna happen and today I have gotten the message.
Yeah, yeah... I will still keep trying.
Man's reach must excede his grasp; else what's a Heaven for?
Bastante.
19 Comments:
This tournament repeating shit has to end.
you fucked up your read and misplayed the hand badly. However if you were right about his holdings then its not a bad push.. everyone makes mistakes..
fucked up and misplayed?
Nope......
lol...is it me or has this post brought a meaner than usual response? I actually found that hand interesting [and had insomnia late last night]...it's representative of a different way I am approaching things as I experiment with my MTT style.
Waffles, I'd agree I was wrong about what he held, but I've never been the kind of guy who tries to nail someone to one hand - I go by the put 'em on a range and work from there...all that's changing is that I think I'm interested in taking risks early if the likely range says I'm racing. Is that misplaying? Frankly I'm not sure, but I have to say I have gotten pretty good results to show for these adjustments in just about a month of tinkering [yeah I know...small sample etc. etc.]
It's actually a post about mindset and approach.
But Fuel makes a good point too. I should try to do something more substantive with my considerable gifts, no?
Bloody Sasquatch, love it. Wil play it often (pun inteneded), cause it does seem to have some mystical powers.
as for the hand, it is a blind fight gone bad.
Here's my thoughts, Iak. First of all, I think you are way off on your hand range for Wil here. Not that he'd call your 3x open--raise from the sb with anything shitty, but I put his range on most hands. At least the top 2/3 of his possible holdings, I think he would call you there. Your move smells exactly like a steal, you're a stealy kind of guy, so I'm calling you there (and I assume Wil is as well) with any hand like any Ace, any King, and any Queen, probably any Jack with an 8 kicker or better, any Ten with an 8 kicker or better, as well as any connected or suited cards. I assume Wil is about the same there. You're full of cripe as a rule in this spot, so you have to do some level 3 thinking and figure Wil to put you on a very, very wide range of hands here (case in point, you actually did raise it up with 43s). So I think your hand range for Wil was way, way too restrictive. You need to understand that people will put you on just about anything in this spot at this point in your life (again I point out what you actually held to make this raise here).
Secondly, as an aside, Waffles is pissed off these days, so that response from him is maybe a bit more mean-spirited than warranted. But obviously your read was wrong here, not that you're supposed to put the guy on pocket Jacks when he just smooth calls your steal-raise from your sb to his bb.
Anyways back to the hand. When Wil (reverse hoy) pushed on you, I think by all reason you have to put him on a made hand better than yours. I would be more apt to put him on a strong Jack (KJ, QJ, JT, something like that) than the overpairs you mentioned, which you know he has to think is best given that you stole your way into this hand from the sb to begin with. You basically have to know he is ahead here. Whether it's top pair or middle pair or an overpair doesn't actually matter from a pot odds perspective I don't think, just that you should definitely in my view put him on a made hand here (not even AK or AQ in my view, given the way that Wil plays and how sparingly he does tend to use the reverse hoy). To me that bet screams out "made hand" of some kind.
I don't believe you gave the exact bet size and pot sizes so it's hard to know exactly what your pot odds were when you made this call. In general you were probably looking at 9 heart outs, three more 4s as outs and two more 3s as outs, so I'm thinking you can figure you have 14 outs twice (I think you said it was 6 more outs due to your pair of 3s, but it's really 5 more I believe). Given all that and since he seems to have a made hand already, I would subtract probably 1 or 1.5 outs or so from that calculation, since all five of your "2 pair" outs are easily counterfeitable by any pair on the board since I have him for sure on a pair of 7s, pair of Jacks or an overpair.
That said, you're still basically looking at a coin flip. If you want to rely just on pot odds, and you say you were getting 2 to 1 on the call, then that seems like a pretty easy decision. I think your new approach of being willing to take a shot of doubling up early on a race situation is terrible tournament poker strategy IMO, but if that's the way you want to run it then it sounds like you made the right call. Of course you can't conceivably put him on the nutsy hand that he had here, so you can't kick yourself at all for not realizing that your 5 extra outs were not actually outs for your hand, so if you're into calling all your chips early in a race situation for a chance to either double early or go home early, then clearly you made the right call here if the pot was laying you 2 to 1 odds like you said in your post.
Much more curious to me though is why your new approach has you thinking that racing for a double or elimination is the smart way to play early in a poker tournament. Me, I will fold a 50-50 shot early in a tournament every time if the other guy is already allin so I don't have any fold equity with the push. I may happily push allin early in a tournament when I know I'm just 50-50, because I think the other guy should fold his hand. But calling allin on a 50-50 shot early in a tournament, where you've got a fine-sized stack going and everything, that makes no sense to me as a long-term tournament strategy.
Now, if you say you really wanted to take this shot to bust Wil and get back to back naming rights, so you went for the 50-50 race early on, that's entirely a different story for sure.
Btw the back to back naming rights has definitely been done before (sorry). Only I think once or twice. Fishy McDonk I'm pretty much positive pulled off the feat sometime last year, maybe in the summertime or something. It may even have been done one other time as well. Definitely not more than once or twice though, and in any event it is a very rarified group that this puts you in.
I've actually started taking races much earlier as well. Let's face it. The way the majority of the fields in larger MTTs play, even with small blinds the pots end up being a large part of your stack pretty often. So I will take those races early trying to chip up. That allows you to put more pressure on people in the middle stages of a tourney and be more able to withstand the swings of the races later on.
To me it goes with the style you want to play. Either cash a higher % of the time with less of a chance to go deep. Or cash less often with a higher chance to go deep. Hell you could go to the extreme either way and end up making the same amount of overall money. It's all about your mindset of being able to take the losses.
I know personally for the ROI that I have just in MTTs since October is great even though my cash % sucks. That's because I final table about half of my cashes. I fully credit that with becoming much more aggressive early.
"So like I said it prolly looked very donkish in real time to people, but I was personally ok with my approach to that hand and best of all have really stopped caring How Things Look."
Well said, I think there gets to be a little too much of that in some circles.
Bravo.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Well first of all, I love the Bloody Sasquatch. Is the name just valid for hearts or diamonds as well?
As is expected, I like Hoy's analysis of the play, particularly what he put Wil on and why folding should have been the move. That being said, I'm with P's take on your rationale..."I stopped caring How Things Look". As they say in the Guiness commercials, Brilliant!
The Bloody Sasquatch is only 34 Hearts NOT diamonds, for reasons that are as mystical as they are obscure.
The evolution of my career as a player is evidenced by the fact that I used to consider AJs my signature hand when I was a losing player. Now that I lay waste to every thing I see [insert slightly ironic intonation here], 34H is my Bloody Furmonger.
I'm going to echo P's sentiments as well. If doing something like that makes it so that your opponents don't respect your play that's an advantage if you know how to play it right.
Never care what an adversary thinks of your play, but always be aware of it.
Hey, keep your gheyness to yourself...Maybe there is more to Waffles story of your have dressed encounter after all.
Not showing up for the WWdN named back to back in your honor? What is the meaning of this?
Hey you made a read and it was wrong
you are allowed to make mistakes.
If I can win the Wwdn then so can you.
peace
wwonka
The reason this hand is so well loved is because you are not drawing dead against any hand. Daniel Negreanu went out of the Aussie Millions with the same hand vs two pair. He said it was a mistake - even with pot odds a player of his skill and with his stack has no reason to race. Increasing volatility without increasing equity is a no-no.
You overbet the flop. He is going to call with any jack, or any flush draw, and he will have position on you on the turn. If you miss and lead out, and he moves in on the turn you will be priced in. If you check he will move in and you are forced to fold. What are your reasons for c-betting this hand? I can't think of many. I would be check raising if I thought I could get him off his hand or check calling, just keeping the pot small until I had a better idea of where he was at. But as it's a short stack donkfest, I might favor the check-raise all in. That would probably get him to fold J9-JK, any 6, a 45 and pockets 7-10, maybe even KhQh or some other non-nut flush draw. Depends on your image and how tight he is. Your play generated no fold equity.
You forgot the 7th Commandment: Beware the speech. Flick through the Little Green Book again, or at least the audio version.
He was telling you he had a set, and that he didn't want to race against your flush, but hoping he can get you to call with tens or something. So you know you have the full 9 outs. A math problem. Don't forget his kill cards if you spike the turn. 2-1 were your pot odds, how was your position in the tournament if you folded? How about if you call and win?
By the way, why raise preflop? This hand usually results in your untimely exit, and you are left wondering why you called off all of your chips with 3h4h on a draw out of position.
Great stuff Mark...will be posting something new soon, but that was very interesting.
Check raising would have made more sense...I might have even gotten a free card, but most likely not. I definitely had the option to get away from this hand early, and absolutely I "should not" be raising with hands like this. On the other hand, since it's well known I do this, I do tend to get wanted action on big pairs in the midgame.
yOUTUBE. "You pay something for everything you do." ie "We intend on continuing the theater up there to ensure even frewer disfavoreds make it."
I think this, search engines and such are all for distraction purposes. Having endured such skewed searches I know personally the computer decides what hits I am allowed and which are prevented.
They say some trolls in chat rooms are the computer. Yes I suspect they have some ringers, likely some difsavoreds segmentted thinking they are earning, but ALL THIS INTERNET-BASED COMPUTER SHIT CAN ALL BE DONE BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.
Everyone is gone. 2000 was a big deal. Yahoo, Google are all filled with brain-less clones, doing the bidding of the gods. Unlike Hollywood their roles as monsters will wait until the next level, Planet Corporate, aka Purgatory.
What perplexes me is why the gods would remain so soft on pure tools, allowing for open doors for them to achieve a brain, achieving legitimacy? it seems as if clones without brains are the ultimate in disposability, anything else defeats the purpose.
They're not human. They're nothign. If AI stopped thinking through them they'd fall in a heap of flesh.
Things like free MP3 dwonloads hurt people because you are stealing. Search engines, youtube is for distraciton purposes, the god's attempt to consume peopel's attention to ensure they don't find the path and ascend.
Poker/gambling web sites are all controlled by the computer. Other players in the room can be the computer, role playing virtually, stealing the disfavored's money in real time. Other times the players are disfavored, granting them good cards so fat bastard never has to get a job, ensuring he has no chance in this life and has to be reincarnated for he never achieves decency.
But they CAN and DO use the computer to do ALL of this. The challenge is to see how many disfavoreds can disceive and use to segment into preying upon each other.
Before you abandon the web for Las Vegas understand they have the power to shuffle a deck of cards in the desired order as the dealer holds it in her hands.
Gambling is degenerate. As time has prgressed the gods have hurt people by making society declare it an acceptable evil, and the same is true for casual sex, pornography:::::::
Life has deteriorated hard in the last 40 years, for they are paving the way for The End.
iakaris, how do you attract this type of attention? Do you sell drugs to children? This is why you shouldn't mix acid with transformers.
Post a Comment
<< Home