UnderGround Forums
 

Cigars, Beer & Poker Ground >> I'm an idiot.


9/20/10 7:03 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 45893
Here we see the difference between someone who comes from a live (one table) background and someone who comes from a multitabling background.

When I raised from the button and he reraised me, I knew that he could be reraising light. It's a common enough play online (not so much live) that it could represent any two cards. The fact that he's played as many hands online as you stated only confirms my play. It also means that he expects me to raise, especially a "donkish" raise" with any two cards. He could have anything and I could have anything. Maybe not ANYthing, but his reraise doesnt mean a big hand or even any pair, and my raise on the button doesnt necessarily mean anything.

One thing I could know fairly certainly was that he didnt have a 9. Also, since he is putting me on any two cards (since a button raise is standard), he probably thought his jack is good. This was also a factor in that when he bet I felt strongly that he thought I missed completely and that by reraising I let him know that I hadnt missed (which was true). I suspect that is why he checked on the turn. My shove was clearly a fold for him, but I am certain he only called because he had top pair, thought there was a chance I missed, and only had a gutshot or possibly two pair as his remaining outs if he was wrong.

This play is too nuanced for someone who multitables. Sorry, but it's true. This is a line I take a lot live and it is profitable for me. Honestly, I crush internet players live. Seriously. They run over the table but I usually match up poorly for them. I have them pegged.

This is the closest you'll see me come to bragging because I know I'm outclassed by several people here, but when it comes to a single hand and a situation like this, I am certain my play is right and I brought the hand to a $5/$10 player I know who confirmed it for me. He disagreed with much of what you guys wrote.

(by the way, please dont misunderstand this as me thinking I suddenly know more than any of you. I am talking about this hand in isolation.)
9/20/10 7:58 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
stillmatic
27 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/20/08
Posts: 1441
This really has nothing to do with a live vs online background or multi-tabling. I started playing live btw and I didn't start multi-tabling until 4 years ago. I don't think your play was standard here, which is the point of contention. You did it randomly for no real reason. If you had bet this hand through for value and could explain why you thought you would get called, then you can say you played the hand great. The fact is you were not expecting a call and got fortunate that your opponent was just slightly weaker than you and called.

I don't think your line as a whole is absolutely terrible and in some instances, it's very good depending on your image. I just don't think that's the case when you have no read on your opponent at all other than a gut feeling. Really, it's your reasoning that I'm not agreeing with more than anything else.

I'm still curious whether you would have called a shove by the SB on the flop after you raised.




9/21/10 2:31 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
VectorWega
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/7/08
Posts: 13373
andre - 
When I raised from the button and he reraised me, I knew that he could be reraising light.
And thus you decided to call his 3-bet rather than 4-bet? Hmmmm.
One thing I could know fairly certainly was that he didnt have a 9.
Uhh..what kind of hands did you expect to call you on the flop?
Also, since he is putting me on any two cards (since a button raise is standard),
I don't think he thought you would call a big re-raise with any two cards.
I suspect that is why he checked on the turn.
Or maybe he didn't want to donkbet into the guy that just re-raised him. Maybe he didn't want to put 90+ bbs in the middle with a pair of jacks. Maybe he thought you would slow down if you had a Jack.
My shove was clearly a fold for him, but I am certain he only called because he had top pair and knew that in most instances I missed given the way I played the hand
FYP

Honestly, I crush internet players live. Seriously. They run over the table but I usually match up poorly for them. I have them pegged.
You really should move up to 10/20 because you are thinking levels above guys like the donkey in this hand.

I am certain my play is right and I brought the hand to a losing $5/$10 player I know who confirmed it for me.
FYP

The fact is that you failed to tell a good story and your semi-bluff failed.  I don't understand why you would decide to get crazy with QJ when playing at a new level.  Why not just play solid until you've played enough hands to have a better read of how people play certain hands?
9/21/10 2:51 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 45895
"And thus you decided to call his 3-bet rather than 4-bet? Hmmmm."

I'm not as good as you. That's why.

"Uhh..what kind of hands did you expect to call you on the flop?"

I'm not sure. I'm not as good as you.

"I don't think he thought you would call a big re-raise with any two cards."

You would know. You're better than I am.

"I don't think he thought you would call a big re-raise with any two cards. "

Exactly. But why would I slow down if I have the 9? But again...you know better.

"FYP"

But I didnt miss. You assume my bluff was called...but it was a semi bluff and in most cases it is good against one player who played the way he did.

"You really should move up to 10/20 because you are thinking levels above guys like the donkey in this hand. "

Obviously that's true since I outplayed him in one hand. But that just means you should be playing $20/$40 since you're at least twice as good as I am.

"FYP"

Cool. You even know that? Your reads are even better than I thought.

"Why not just play solid until you've played enough hands to have a better read of how people play certain hands? "

Predictable poker isnt solid. I went with my read and it is what it is. Sorry I cant see it that way, but I'm just not in your league yet. Someday, maybe.

Are you happy yet, brother? You're better than me. I'm done explaining. I was there in that moment and I made the play and I'm certain I'm right. Is it ABC poker? Standard play? No...I think it was better than that and I know that if you're multitabling this just isnt a common play. Live it is and it worked in this case because it wasnt a pure bluff, but a semi bluff with showdown value.

Let me put it this way. I'll give you that my preflop bet was weak. After that, I hit top pair and believed I had the best hand but couldnt be sure. I was only sure that since I didnt put him on a 9, I could apply maximum pressure and he would have a hard time calling. If I try to keep the pot small I run the risk of him leading the action and me not knowing if I'm good (especially if he shoves) and particularly if an overcard hits on the river. This way I allow him to make a mistake, which he did.
9/21/10 2:59 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 45896
stillmatic - This really has nothing to do with a live vs online background or multi-tabling. I started playing live btw and I didn't start multi-tabling until 4 years ago. I don't think your play was standard here, which is the point of contention. You did it randomly for no real reason. If you had bet this hand through for value and could explain why you thought you would get called, then you can say you played the hand great. The fact is you were not expecting a call and got fortunate that your opponent was just slightly weaker than you and called.

I don't think your line as a whole is absolutely terrible and in some instances, it's very good depending on your image. I just don't think that's the case when you have no read on your opponent at all other than a gut feeling. Really, it's your reasoning that I'm not agreeing with more than anything else.

I'm still curious whether you would have called a shove by the SB on the flop after you raised.






"The fact is you were not expecting a call and got fortunate that your opponent was just slightly weaker than you and called."

You keep saying that as if I didn't have a hand at all. There arent many hands that beat me, and if he thinks I'm making a play for the pot he may call with any pair in his hand, which was definitely within his range. He may even call thinking his ace high was good if he thinks Im a total nut, but the point is why not put him to the tough decision when it's likely that I have the best hand and if his hand is only marginally better he might lay it down. I concede that he's not folding an overpair, but I didnt put him on an overpair and if he had it, he had it. He didnt.

His 4bet preflop means nothing. If anything, my call of it meant strength. I played the hand strongly all the way through and I knew I had a hand with showdown value if I was wrong. While I wasnt certain I had the best hand, I also knew I beat most hands in that situation (given his bet on the flop). If he were stronger on the flop, why would he bet? Why not let me, the preflop raiser/caller make a stab at it so he can shove over me.

"I'm still curious whether you would have called a shove by the SB on the flop after you raised."

Frankly, I'm confused why you would ask me that. Of course I wouldn't. But you do agree that there is a difference between shoving and calling, right? I felt the shove held some fold equity if he was only marginally better. I thought, and perhaps I was wrong, that he'd have to consider folding even an overpair on the turn. That was probably a bit too hopeful, I'll acknowledge at least that much...

I guess we'll have to disagree. I appreciate the feedback. I disagree with much of it, but I appreciate it nonetheless.
9/21/10 3:02 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 45897
I shouldnt have to tell you guys this, but creative play is a hallmark of deepstack cash games. We both had nearly 100 BB and there is no reason I need to play like a nit against someone when internet players are notorious for 3-4-and even 5 betting light. My play hid my hand and you guys are criticizing me for not telegraphing it more clearly. The point is that my shove had several positive outcomes and only a few negative ones.
9/21/10 11:04 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
VectorWega
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/7/08
Posts: 13374
andre - 
There arent many hands that beat me, and if he thinks I'm making a play for the pot he may call with any pair in his hand, which was definitely within his range. He may even call thinking his ace high was good if he thinks Im a total nut, but the point is why not put him to the tough decision when it's likely that I have the best hand and if his hand is only marginally better he might lay it down. I concede that he's not folding an overpair, but I didnt put him on an overpair and if he had it, he had it. He didnt.

This is a really weird line of thinking. You seem to put your opponent on particular hands rather than a range of hands. Given the action preflop, I don't know how you couldn't consider an overpair a big percentage of his range.

His 4bet preflop means nothing. If anything, my call of it meant strength. I played the hand strongly all the way through
Your story doesn't make any sense. If you had played it so strongly, wouldn't you be extremely concerned about his call on the flop? Wouldn't that tell you that most likely you were beat? Yet you still shoved the turn? It makes no sense.

BTW, can someone that plays/played 2/4 let us know if it is generally a strong play to call a raise like that from the button? An overpair would rarely be in your range of hands at the level I play at. Neither would an AJ or A9.
If he were stronger on the flop, why would he bet? Why not let me, the preflop raiser/caller make a stab at it so he can shove over me.
He was the preflop raiser. He has to bet the flop. Otherwise he looks way too strong (ie 99, JJ, maybe AA). And if he was that strong he wouldn't want to shove over you anyways. He would hope you would get cute, which you did.
I felt the shove held some fold equity if he was only marginally better. I thought, and perhaps I was wrong, that he'd have to consider folding even an overpair on the turn. That was probably a bit too hopeful, I'll acknowledge at least that much...
The fact is that you have only played a limited # of hands at that level. You really have little idea of what people will call/fold there.
9/21/10 11:11 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
VectorWega
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/7/08
Posts: 13375
 The turn and river should have both been checked down by both parties?  Am I wrong?  Sick value bet with the Q kicker that Patrik Antonius couldn't even make.
9/21/10 11:51 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 45898
VW,

If I check after he checked on the turn, I give up the line I had taken from the start. That, in my opinion, gives him the chance to shove on the river (especially if an overcard comes) and I have a hard time calling. Like I said, it's a decision I didnt want to have to make, so I put it to him and let him choose incorrectly (or correctly).

It's not a value bet. It's an aggressive play that makes it difficult for the opponent to play correctly against, imo.
9/21/10 1:19 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
VectorWega
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/7/08
Posts: 13376
 He wouldn't have shoved a jack though.  You had an overcard yourself, so you shoved the turn scared of a King or ace hitting?  You both had showdown value.  I don't get the need to put all your moneys in.  Most of the hands in his range that can call your bet on the flop have you beat.
9/21/10 1:24 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
VectorWega
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/7/08
Posts: 13377
 Also, I have a hard time believing that he would shove the river after checking the turn.  That seems like a "I have the nuts, or I have nothing" play, and the story would make as little sense as the story you told in the hand and would tend to lead an opponent to call. 

BTW, before you mention it, he's obviously not calling the flop on a draw.
9/21/10 2:11 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 45900
I think we've exhausted this.

I played it badly. Cant say much else about it.
9/21/10 4:31 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
stillmatic
27 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/20/08
Posts: 1443
andre - 
stillmatic - This really has nothing to do with a live vs online background or multi-tabling. I started playing live btw and I didn't start multi-tabling until 4 years ago. I don't think your play was standard here, which is the point of contention. You did it randomly for no real reason. If you had bet this hand through for value and could explain why you thought you would get called, then you can say you played the hand great. The fact is you were not expecting a call and got fortunate that your opponent was just slightly weaker than you and called.

I don't think your line as a whole is absolutely terrible and in some instances, it's very good depending on your image. I just don't think that's the case when you have no read on your opponent at all other than a gut feeling. Really, it's your reasoning that I'm not agreeing with more than anything else.

I'm still curious whether you would have called a shove by the SB on the flop after you raised.






"The fact is you were not expecting a call and got fortunate that your opponent was just slightly weaker than you and called."

You keep saying that as if I didn't have a hand at all. There arent many hands that beat me, and if he thinks I'm making a play for the pot he may call with any pair in his hand, which was definitely within his range. He may even call thinking his ace high was good if he thinks Im a total nut, but the point is why not put him to the tough decision when it's likely that I have the best hand and if his hand is only marginally better he might lay it down. I concede that he's not folding an overpair, but I didnt put him on an overpair and if he had it, he had it. He didnt.

His 4bet preflop means nothing. If anything, my call of it meant strength. I played the hand strongly all the way through and I knew I had a hand with showdown value if I was wrong. While I wasnt certain I had the best hand, I also knew I beat most hands in that situation (given his bet on the flop). If he were stronger on the flop, why would he bet? Why not let me, the preflop raiser/caller make a stab at it so he can shove over me.

"I'm still curious whether you would have called a shove by the SB on the flop after you raised."

Frankly, I'm confused why you would ask me that. Of course I wouldn't. But you do agree that there is a difference between shoving and calling, right? I felt the shove held some fold equity if he was only marginally better. I thought, and perhaps I was wrong, that he'd have to consider folding even an overpair on the turn. That was probably a bit too hopeful, I'll acknowledge at least that much...

I guess we'll have to disagree. I appreciate the feedback. I disagree with much of it, but I appreciate it nonetheless.


It's all good man. People play hands differently in poker all the time and there's always going to be different ways to play a hand.

Personally I avoid playing big pots without a big hand. I also like chipping away and playing small pots. This gives me more information in every hand I play so I can make more better decisions. We just play differently, that's all.
9/28/10 11:55 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 46013
Thanks, stillmatic!

I just realized why the hand went the way it did and why I became so sure I played it correctly.

The live game I play at Hollywood Park has huge blinds relative to stack sizes. $3/$5 blinds, but you can only buy in for $200. This creates many, many hands in which you end up playing for stacks with hands that would be marginal if the stacks were deeper. I think that mentality affected me in that play, because I expected him to shove on any scare card the way one would shove at the live game I play in. The game I'm used to is much, much more aggressive than the online game, from what I can tell.
3/6/11 2:22 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
lydia12345
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/4/11
Posts: 0
Hello guys.

This is Lydia12345, the opponent in question in this hand.

I just stumbled upon this thread and what a discussion its been. Wow.

If the original posters are still around and interested I can post my point of view.

Let me know.

Nick
3/6/11 2:49 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
VectorWega
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/7/08
Posts: 14389
lydia12345 - Hello guys.

This is Lydia12345, the opponent in question in this hand.

I just stumbled upon this thread and what a discussion its been. Wow.

If the original posters are still around and interested I can post my point of view.

Let me know.

Nick
Every poster in this thread is still here.  We are all interested in what you have to say.  GO! GO! GO!
 
3/6/11 2:50 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 48230
Hey! If it's really you, thanks for joining!

Id love your thoughts on the hand. I need to reread the thread since it's been a while, but I'm curious to see if I was totally off. A lot has changed for me since then, so I will probably see things differently now.
3/6/11 2:56 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 48231
Ugh...now that Im reading the thread and calling his play "donkeyish" Im really embarrassed. Ugh...I was on the defensive! sorry...
3/6/11 11:30 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 48237
I contacted Nick via Facebook to confirm its him. It is. I want to thank him in advance for taking the time to do this.
3/7/11 1:20 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
lydia12345
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/07/11 1:24 AM
Member Since: 3/4/11
Posts: 1


well here are my thoughts.

As this hand happened quite some time ago, I obviously can not now say for sure what kind of player I had you marked as when this hand happened.

But seeing as I had raised you preflop with a suited connector, I probably did not pin you as a total maniac.

However several things did hint me to you were not a professional full time player when this hand happened that I can still see today.

1) you did not buy in for the full amount. You do not have auto top off on. You started the hand at $394.
2) I always check my stat on players when I get into a big pot. As of today, you call preflop 10% more then you raise. This should be much lower. I imagine this similar style existed when this hand happened.
3) You are new at the tables. I have hardly seen you before.


PokerStars Game #49838836178: Hold'em No Limit ($2/$4 USD) - 2010/09/19 4:52:51 ET
Table 'Venus II' 9-max Seat #8 is the button
Seat 1: 24kgilded ($566.70 in chips)
Seat 2: raysit ($352 in chips)
Seat 3: AlexanderT ($430.60 in chips)
Seat 4: masterland14 ($311.30 in chips)
Seat 5: MaLiTiCha ($337.20 in chips)
Seat 6: Huha'sgirl ($861.60 in chips)
Seat 7: Sparsi ($400 in chips)
Seat 8: Sbux Warrior ($394 in chips)
Seat 9: lydia12345 ($400 in chips)
lydia12345: posts small blind $2
24kgilded: posts big blind $4
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Sbux Warrior [Jh Qc]
raysit: folds
AlexanderT: folds
masterland14: folds
MaLiTiCha: folds
Huha'sgirl: folds
Sparsi: folds
Sbux Warrior: raises $4 to $8

Some discussion happened in the thread about the raise size here. It is totally standard to min raise on the button.

lydia12345: raises $24 to $32

Very standard raise by me to resteal your blind steal attempt. I respected that you are a player capable of making folds. If I had marked you as a much weaker player I would not have raised.

Also, the player in the big blind 24kgilded is someone I play with on a regular basis. If I just call your button steal attempt. He may raise for a squeeze in which case I would have to fold.

24kgilded: folds
Sbux Warrior: calls $24

You should fold everytime here without establishing a clear read and dynamics with me. For example, after this hand had happened, you know that I maybe restealing with a weaker hand.

*** FLOP *** [9s Jc 9d]
lydia12345: bets $40

Sbux Warrior: raises $95 to $135

I guess most of the discussion is around this line.

There are 3 reasons to raise in no limit holdem.
1) To get called by worse hands for value
2) To fold a better hand.
3) To shut down opponents's equity (chance to win) in the hand. Example: If I have AK and If I know my opponent has 22 then my goal is to get my opponent to put in a bunch of money then fold. So he can not see all 5 cards to realize his 50% chance to win. As ak is roughly 50/50 against 22.

Therefore:
1) There are not enough worse hands that will call your raise compared to the hands that will call but is better then your hand.
2) Try not to get hands such as these to fold in a reraised pot. KJ, AJ, QQ, KK, AA. 9x,
3) hardly any draws. AK is 6 outs. You dont need to take down the equity.

Avoid trying to accomplish #2 while hoping #1 would happen too.

lydia12345: calls $95

This is a tough spot for me. You sure can have AA KK QQ 9x Jx. It is overall a very neutral out come for me. May even be a slight negative return on investment to call.
Seeing this board is totally dry. No draw. If you had total monsters: 99, 9x, JJ. Most people would flat flop.
Not reraising me preflop with KK AA in a late position blind battle did not match your style, as you reraise preflop 5% of the time. (I would always check my data base for these stats at the time of the play)
It seemed a bluffy line.

*** TURN *** [9s Jc 9d] [7h]
lydia12345: checks

I think below 2 lines are just the same as above.
Sbux Warrior: bets $227 and is all-in
lydia12345: calls $227
*** RIVER *** [9s Jc 9d 7h] [3h]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
lydia12345: shows [Ts Js] (two pair, Jacks and Nines)
Sbux Warrior: shows [Jh Qc] (two pair, Jacks and Nines - Queen kicker)
Sbux Warrior collected $789 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $792 | Rake $3
Board [9s Jc 9d 7h 3h]
Seat 1: 24kgilded (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 2: raysit folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: AlexanderT folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: masterland14 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: MaLiTiCha folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: Huha'sgirl folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: Sparsi folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: Sbux Warrior (button) showed [Jh Qc] and won ($789) with two pair, Jacks and Nines
Seat 9: lydia12345 (small blind) showed [Ts Js] and lost with two pair, Jacks and Nines
3/7/11 1:42 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 48238
Nick,

Thank you so much for the input. You are describing an approach that I am completely unfamiliar with. As you've probably gathered from the thread, or perhaps others, I play live cash every day and tournaments online and live on occasion. I can't multitable, and even though I have PokerTracker, I hardly use it.

The factors that go into your decisions are almost non-existent at the live table (where I'm sure you have a lot of experience, as well), so I can see how my play flies in the face of the standard line one would take online.

I think one of the key things I see as extremely different between live and online is that live players tend to try to define specific hands the opponent could be holding, while online players establish a range and run their odds against that range and act accordingly. I think that when one multitables, that is essential. When one plays a single table, particularly live, I think one tries to make a more nuanced read.

I'm not talking about quality of play, just that I think the approach is different. I think that online players are superior to live players in most aspects of the game, so I'm desperately trying to learn from successful players like you and some of the ones who post here.

Thanks again for the input. I really appreciate the time you took to post such a thoughtful and detailed response.
3/7/11 9:11 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
VectorWega
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/7/08
Posts: 14390
andre - different between live and online is that live players tend to try to define specific hands the opponent could be holding, while online players establish a range and run their odds against that range and act accordingly. I think that when one multitables, that is essential. When one plays a single table, particularly live, I think one tries to make a more nuanced read.
 I'm not sure I follow exactly what you are saying, but it seems to me what you do is simply a sub-optimal version of what he does.  Optimally, you would be able to define every single possible hand the opponent could have, their likelihood of having each hand, and the odds against each of those hands.  This is more difficult to do in a live game than online with software but I still think it's more optimal than what you describe.
3/7/11 2:05 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 48243
VectorWega - 
andre - different between live and online is that live players tend to try to define specific hands the opponent could be holding, while online players establish a range and run their odds against that range and act accordingly. I think that when one multitables, that is essential. When one plays a single table, particularly live, I think one tries to make a more nuanced read.
 I'm not sure I follow exactly what you are saying, but it seems to me what you do is simply a sub-optimal version of what he does.  Optimally, you would be able to define every single possible hand the opponent could have, their likelihood of having each hand, and the odds against each of those hands.  This is more difficult to do in a live game than online with software but I still think it's more optimal than what you describe.



O.k., here is the only way I can express it, and I've been agonizing over how to post this without opening myself up to ridicule for mentioning Durr and myself in the same post. Obviously I dont have 1/1000th of his skill, but I'm simply trying to make a point about standard lines and multitabling.

In the video above, Dwan makes a play with 8-6 offsuit. Now, I know Lederer is an unimaginative nit, but taken in isolation you can say that Durr is taking a making a non-standard play and relying more heavily on his reading ability than on his equity vs a big hand in that spot.

Again, Im no Durr, but at the live cash table, this isn't out of the ordinary. I also realize that Durr is an online guy, but what makes him the "best", in my opinion, is that he has the nuance of a live player coupled with the incredible fundamentals of an online player.

Durr's play with 8-6 isnt something you can do, obviously, when you are playing 10+ tables at a time. But if I sit down at a single table and focus on only that game, I think you can make plays from position that will be profitable BECAUSE they are non-standard and more dependent on creativity and a more nuanced read.

Or, I could be wrong. I'm totally open to that. I'm just saying that if I sit down at a table pokerstars with an online pro and play a straightforward game, he'll read me like a book and then multitabling becomes the only way to be profitable.
3/7/11 2:11 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
andre
466 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 48245
Let me also preempt the discussion of the merits of 8-6 (two live cards) instead of QJ (possibly dominated) when making a play like Durrs's. I get it.
3/7/11 7:01 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
VectorWega
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/7/08
Posts: 14391
You couldn't find a hand any more different than the hand you played?

Durrrr, thinking like an online player raises preflop.  Howard and Andre, like live donks playing against far superior opponents both flat call preflop. 

After the flop, Durrrr slows down.  After the flop, Andre raises a guy that shows strength preflop and on the flop. 

On the turn, Durrrr hits a card and checks because he knows that it would be hard to take howard off a better hand, and if Howard has two over-cards, then Howard is drawing pretty thin.  On the turn, Andre puts it all in against a guy that showed strength preflop, and on the flop by calling a re-raise when the vast majority of hands that can do that have Andre beat.

I saw nothing from that hand that made me think that Durrrr was thinking any differently in that hand than he would in any other hand.  By watching the hand, we really don't have all of the information that Durrrr had.  However, I'm sure if he had put Howard on AK suited he would not have re-raised Howard. Despite being a nit, I'm sure that Howard's range was great than AK+ which is why Durrrr tried to make the play ( a play that he would certainly try while multi-tabling online)

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.