So, machen wir heut mal wieder einige Handanalysen :-)
In der ersten Hand gehts um richtiges Bluffen.
PokerStars Game #8850786726: Hold'em No Limit ($10/$20) - 2007/03/11 - 14:16:54 (ET) Table 'Frisia II' 6-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 1: 
mcmpan ($2000 in chips) Seat 3: IfIHadItAll ($1928 in chips) Seat 4: rocko35 ($402.65 in chips)
Seat 5: floes ($2260 in chips) floes: posts small blind $10 mcmpan
: posts big blind $20
Holecards: Dealt to
mcmpan
[
mcmpan
[
]
FOLD IfIHadItAll FOLD rocko35
RAISE floes, $60 to $80
CALL mcmpan
, $60
Ein LAG (=loose aggressive) raised und ich calle nur. Da er recht loose ist, versuche ich ihn in den späteren Spielphasen auszuspielen.
Flop: (Pot: $160) [
]
BET floes, $ 120 CALL
mcmpan , $ 120
He makes a standard CBET. The flop does not look very dangerous.
I have at least a gut, but this is not so important. Because I do not think he has a good hand and disburse me, when I meet ne third , $60
Ein LAG (=loose aggressive) raised und ich calle nur. Da er recht loose ist, versuche ich ihn in den späteren Spielphasen auszuspielen.
Flop: (Pot: $160) [
]
BET floes, $ 120 CALL
mcmpan , $ 120
He makes a standard CBET. The flop does not look very dangerous.
Rather, I try to play off my position and represented a stronger hand, I slow play.
People know me as an aggressive player and while I do not raise, but only calle (also preflop ih've made no 3bet), they should be suspicious.
By the way, a move that brings in a lot of tournaments, especially if you think that your opponent will just steal the blinds.
Consider that this move only because of his position makes - 
d 
ie actual cards in hand, play no role .
Turn:
(Pot: $ 400) By the way, a move that brings in a lot of tournaments, especially if you think that your opponent will just steal the blinds.
Consider that this move only because of his position makes - d ie actual cards in hand, play no role .
Turn:
[
] []
CHECK floes: mcmpan
, $ 270 CALL floes, $ 270 Eine Dame und ein Kreuz ist eigentlich super. Solange er jetzt nicht selber die Dame oder einen Flush hat, kann er da schwer weiterspielen. Er checkt, ich biete und er callt.
Das sieht stark nach einem Flush Draw aus. Ein weiteres Kreuz und er wird wohl auch den River callen. Hätte er eine Dame, hätte er check-raised. Ebenso mit einem Flush und wahrscheinlich auch mit einem Full House.
River: 
(Pot: $940)
[
] [ ] CHECK floes:
BET mcmpan
, $610 River: (Pot: $940) [
] [ ] CHECK floes:
BET mcmpan
collected $938 from pot
mcmpan
: doesn't show hand
: doesn't show hand
Keine gefährliche Karte und er checkt. Der Check signalisiert Schwäche pur.
Jeder, der irgendeine gute Hand hätte (Dame, Flush), hätte auch geboten. Die Gefahr ist einfach zu groß, dass ich einfach hinter mir checke und er kein weiteres Geld mehr bekommt. Ein Check Raise mit einem Full House auf dem River sehe ich verdammt selten im Cash Game also schließe ich das aus.
Da ich die ganze Hand über entweder ein Draw oder ein Monster repräsentiert habe, kann ich einen Bluff starten, den er mit einer mittelmäßigen Hand nicht callen kann. 
works against a fish this train, because he did not pay attention to what I represent. A fish would have perhaps miit middle pair called.
For Bluffs have to bring together all the information: What he has probably obvious?
What he thinks I have on hand?
How much he will not call? You should already be safe, because is a bluff backfires, it can be costly.
SUMMARY:
Jeder, der irgendeine gute Hand hätte (Dame, Flush), hätte auch geboten. Die Gefahr ist einfach zu groß, dass ich einfach hinter mir checke und er kein weiteres Geld mehr bekommt. Ein Check Raise mit einem Full House auf dem River sehe ich verdammt selten im Cash Game also schließe ich das aus.
Da ich die ganze Hand über entweder ein Draw oder ein Monster repräsentiert habe, kann ich einen Bluff starten, den er mit einer mittelmäßigen Hand nicht callen kann. works against a fish this train, because he did not pay attention to what I represent. A fish would have perhaps miit middle pair called.
For Bluffs have to bring together all the information: What he has probably obvious?
What he thinks I have on hand?
How much he will not call? You should already be safe, because is a bluff backfires, it can be costly.
SUMMARY:
I think that something like this happens every schonmal and a real bad beat is.
Table 'Clorinda II' 6-max Seat # 1 is the button
Seat 1: Nza7682 ($ 162.90 in chips)
Seat 2: mcmpan Seat 1: Nza7682 ($ 162.90 in chips)
($ 582 in chips)
Seat 3 Ste @ mer ($ 935.40 in chips)
Seat 5: Sauce123 ($ 966.70 in chips) Seat 6 : mcmpan posts small blind $ 3
TalentedTom : Posts big blind $ 6
hole cards mcmpan
Dealt to [
] FOLD Ste @ mer
Dealt to [
] FOLD Ste @ mer
RAISE Sauce123, $ 18 to $ 24
FOLD Nza7682
FOLD TalentedTom
FOLD TalentedTom
mcmpan , $ 45 to $ 69
CALL Sauce123, $ 45
Typical Pan.
I know that there are many people who call a pocket pair in the flat position, which indeed it is also not wrong.
But I have learned that one against most of the better (mostly LAG) are not paid player in the situation
is when you actually flopped a set times.
I prefer to reraise and try his hand to stop now and
was a signal that you can not raise do when I'm sitting in the blinds . I also represented a very strong hand, because I reraise, even though I am the rest of the hand oop.
I get called, so I win quite often with a CBET the pot.
I meet a set and an opponent has a strong over-pair slowgeplayed, I get all the money in the middle (which is not necessarily de case, if I just call preflop - then in action is a set of expected). 
The game can of course only in certain situations make against the right opponent. is best against opponents who raise a lot preflop and not too often against them .
further advantage in this game: If I have time AA, I'll slowplay not, but can also re-raise and get called with bad cards, but because I make the move quite often.
Flop: (Pot: $ 141)
[
]
CALL Sauce123, $ 45
Typical Pan.
I know that there are many people who call a pocket pair in the flat position, which indeed it is also not wrong.
But I have learned that one against most of the better (mostly LAG) are not paid player in the situation
is when you actually flopped a set times.
I prefer to reraise and try his hand to stop now and
was a signal that you can not raise do when I'm sitting in the blinds . I also represented a very strong hand, because I reraise, even though I am the rest of the hand oop.
I get called, so I win quite often with a CBET the pot.
I meet a set and an opponent has a strong over-pair slowgeplayed, I get all the money in the middle (which is not necessarily de case, if I just call preflop - then in action is a set of expected). The game can of course only in certain situations make against the right opponent. is best against opponents who raise a lot preflop and not too often against them .
further advantage in this game: If I have time AA, I'll slowplay not, but can also re-raise and get called with bad cards, but because I make the move quite often.
Flop: (Pot: $ 141)
[
]
BET
, $ 96 CALL Sauce123, $ 96
Turn:
(Pot: $ 333) [ ] [
] mcmpan
CHECK: CHECK
Sauce123: 
Miracle Card. I point now to say that I'm afraid of the flop and checks.
Normally he would with any lady, 8 or flush draw offer, because I signaled weakness in the hand and am ready to give up.
] mcmpan
CHECK: CHECK
Sauce123: Miracle Card. I point now to say that I'm afraid of the flop and checks.
Normally he would with any lady, 8 or flush draw offer, because I signaled weakness in the hand and am ready to give up.
River: (Pot: $ 333) [
] []
] []
BET mcmpan
, $ 417 and is all-in CALL Sauce123, $ 417
standard. This Overbet is considered by many people as a bluff.
Oh, how much money I made with such moves already.
If the situation looks like a bluff, but I have a monster hand, then push all-in and you will get called by most players , $ 417 and is all-in
CALL Sauce123, $ 417 standard. This Overbet is considered by many people as a bluff.
Oh, how much money I made with such moves already.
(especially by good players, because the so smell a bluff).
mcmpan : shows [
] (a full house Eights full of Fives)
Sauce123: shows [ ] (a full house Kings full of Eights) Sauce123 collected $ 1164 from pot 
Eieiei.
zero chance to get out there. I think he would have my All-In also get called if he had AA instead of KK.
But that's nunmal ...
SUMMARY:
Total pot $ 1167 yesterday other
$ 4,000 lost :-( Here are the statistics since yesterday:
evil, right
Last night I was therefore quite depressed I've been thinking, should continue as I, and as?. first thing I came to mind: ". Stop with Cash Game Total pot $ 1167 yesterday other
$ 4,000 lost :-(
Here are the statistics since yesterday: evil, right
"
Such Swing Downs in height are hard, the easiest is to deal with it, they do not even allow the consequence would quit cash games, or plenty.. . niedrigerere blinds to play
I thought: " Before it gets worse, I stop, take the $ 50,000 profit with and bin froh, dass einmal was bei einem Hobby geldtechnisch rausgekommen ist Such Swing Downs in height are hard, the easiest is to deal with it, they do not even allow the consequence would quit cash games, or plenty.. . niedrigerere blinds to play
."
Nee :-) Dafür hab ich zu viel Zeit reininvestiert und mein ganzes Wissen und meine ganze Erfahrung wären nichts mehr wert. Was ist, wenn ich nur noch Turniere spielen würde?
Ja, Turniere machen Spass. Da wäre es auch nicht so schlimm, wenn man auf längerer Zeit nichts gewinnt. Außerdem hätte ich dafür so eine große Bankroll, dass ich für fast alle Onlineturniere die Minimum Bankroll Requirements für längere Zeit erfüllen würde (ich benutze die Minimum Bankroll Requirements von Arnold Snyder's Buch " The Poker Tournament Fourmula ". Leider habe ich found no link to the requirements ...).
After some time I have thought about why I have such a Swing Down, although I have no bad beats ? the session I went through again and I noticed that I had just against the other pros at the most action. And those were often situations in which I was either clear favorite, or (more often in these sessions) of high misfit.
Why so against the pros? After some time I have thought about why I have such a Swing Down, although I have no bad beats ? the session I went through again and I noticed that I had just against the other pros at the most action. And those were often situations in which I was either clear favorite, or (more often in these sessions) of high misfit.
If pros play against each other, with extremely high aggressiveness. I've rarely leaves against pros, where we come to the turn without having an all-in before. is the consequence of that hand against pros have a lot to do with luck and theoretically in the long run the house it makes a profit.
Through these thoughts I have come to the next point that struck me in my playing style: Lately I've only at the beginning of a session selected tables that looked good. There were actually even one or two fish to it.
But I was still sitting at the table, even if no fish was gone
.
I thought that there is just against pros an advantage when you sit at a table with a big stack. But that does not make sense, because
with a big stack can not be won against pros than with a small stack . I have just changed in a session no longer the tables.
The same I have done this before and even then I noticed that it did not work quite how I imagined it.
Bin then switched to table selection and promptly did it again works better.
following result can be deduced from the observation, to sit
The whole session at the same table is convenient, but if you to maximize profits I will walk you have all the time in the table selection mode is
.
This means that to change a table when no fish is sitting on it and select only tables with fish.
applied to my situation, I can see the following:
I'm in the Table Selection mode, I get good.
I have gained much, I think that it will work even without a table selection mode.
It does not work and I switch back to the mode. And there you go again.
As I go from here?
I will of course see if the above assertion is true and I will continue playing with table selection.
A good and quick indicator of a table with fish, the number of players who come to see the flop. In the future I will search for tables on which to look at least 30% the flop. This will mean that I will go and play only 3 / 6 and even 2 / 4, because at the higher stakes did not see so many players to the flop.
This is quite a high value, because earlier I chose tables where only 25% or even only 20% of the Flop thoughts. As a note yet: to this value, you can usually leave good, but only if you sit at the table, you can see how many fish are there. I had also often that looks a table, fishy, Sharks was full of ...
a little afraid I still for the future.
For what I have noticed yet:
When I played some time ago, mainly 3 / 6, it was not running at 2 / 4 well. And as I was more of 5 / 10, it was running at 3 / 6 is not good. Now when I first 3 / 6 and 2 / 4 grinde can it be that neither one nor the other is going well and continues to decline ... : - /
0 comments:
Post a Comment