Mind Games

Yeah, could be.

Also, I'm playing at the lowest limit, and I might be thinking too much.

These guys limp everything, and raise only their pat hands, so it is REALLY hard to know how to play them -- other than if they raise, fold!

We'll see what the weekend brings...

5-Card Draw

Too soon to declare a reversal of fortune, but I did have a short but sweet session after supper tonight.

2nd day in a row I had a break-even day overall ( 650 hands, net loss 1/4 BB)

This hand caused a lot of comments at the table.
Hand of the day

I looked over my winning and losing sessions for the last two days, and there was a striking difference between the winning sessions and the losing sessions

The losing sessions had a v low vpip (15%), and a v low win rate (13%), and in the winning sessions, not only am I in more pots (20%) but I am winning more of them (17%) 4% difference over 300 hands means in my winning session I won 12 more pots than in the losing session.

I looked back over the last month, and this holds true.
Basically for the last month I have been:
♦  Not getting the cards
♦  Getting beaten when I do
♦  Overcompensating by bluffing too much.

I have control over #3

I have been playing at the low limit, and it is really necessary to keep the bluffing to a minimum against people who will call too widely.

Peace,
--VS

I am in a similar boat in the same pond , and love your blog. I dont use a HUD but find it very usefull to notefully distinguish weak limpers ( and callers ) who have inadequet equity for the pot odds , from strong ( or value ) limpers who limp when a raise is theoretically warrented . The latter are leaving value on the table predraw , presumably to recoup it postdraw ; but I am sure that proper strong limping is " unexpoitable" game-theoretically , and there does seem to be a few players profitably using that strategy. Best wishes on figuring out bluffing - bluffcatching.

Originally posted by norab
from strong ( or value ) limpers who limp when a raise is theoretically warrented . The latter are leaving value on the table predraw , presumably to recoup it postdraw ; but I am sure that proper strong limping is " unexpoitable" game-theoretically , and there does seem to be a few players profitably using that strategy.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me"

There is one player I have in mind.
He successfully mixes his limp-draw-two hands between AAxxx XXAxx and XXXxx hands

Such players are rare.
If I note this player -- or anyone slse doing this -- I try to play them in position only, and try to play only hands that are ahead of his combined range.

But there are easier fish to catch -- best to avoid them, really.

I had a fun time Friday.
I got a ride home from work, so arranged to meets Mrs Vorpal at the grocery store to catch a ride the rest of the way.

When I got to the store, I spotted here, and texted, "Where are you?"
She replied, "At the checkout, where are you?"
I texted back, "Right behind you"
By that time, she was at the till, so I stood out of sight while she paid for it all.
Then I walked right behind here as she was going out of the store.

She stopped when she remembered that she had not looked at the text message yet, and when she read it she naturally turned around.

I was SOOO tempted to shout Boo! and startle her, but she makes my dinner a lot, so I cut her some slack.

The rest of the weekend, not so good -- at least in the poker world.

My PokerStars client seems to think that it has the rights to any and all CPU cycles it wants. I've been working with P*s tech support to resolve the problem.

One of the things that they had me do was shut off absolutely every non-essential program and run the P*s client only.

So I wanted to play something that didn't need a HUD.
I started with 4 $0.25 45-man NLHE SnGs. Lost 3 right off the bat, so added 3 more, then lost the rest -- but at least on those ones I got closer to the bubble.

So chuck that.
I decided to play NL5 zoom, and dropped 8 BI over 600 hands before gaining 3 back. Brutal.
I lost 2 pair twice to rivered straights.
AQ > KK on a board of K34 followed by a 2 and a 5
I kept in it by stealing, 3-betting CBets and bluffing the river a few times, except that on at least 3 occasions I bluffed what villain had.

Today was much better finishing up 1/2 a BI over 500 hands.

So I'm about to reboot and get all my standard software back, at which point I'll play some 5-Card Draw to round out the day.

I can play for about 3 hours before I have to stop P*s and restart it.
That's about the right length for a session anyway.

Peace,
--VS

Oh well....

Not a lot to report.
Still running colder than ice.

I'm hanging on by my fingernails, collecting several small pots then losing it as my big hands get cracked.

The above applies to both 5-Card Draw and NLHE

Best of luck to you all.
--VS

That's a strange thing about the client, isn't it, not the usual complaint type. How odd. I hope you get that fixed or it could be a real pain.

Nice to see you're running so good to, I think it's a general malaise going round the gang lately.

Originally posted by gadget51
Nice to see you're running so good too, I think it's a general malaise going round the gang lately.

Whoever General Malaise is, he should know I'm a non-combatant.

I'm not sure what I said to leave the impression I was running "so good".
If everyone is running as bad as General Malaise, "hanging on by my fingernails" is pretty good I suspect.

I was playing NL4 non-zoom on William Hill, and stealing the blinds like a highway robber, only to get a half-decent hand the same time somebody else gets a full-decent one.

I did win two hands -- neither of which I "should have" won.

In the first, I'm pretty sure that I am ahead on the flop. Then it gets all silly...

In the second, I should have clued in that the turn check-raise meant business, but I had seen him do this W AK before, so I did the stupid thing and called.

The Mental Game of Poker says you are supposed to recognize when you played badly and got lucky.

I should print that hand and post it on my wall.

As a result of that last one, I finished the session up 1/2 BI.
HM2 says, I won 2.22 with an all-in EV of -3.33.

Peace,
--VS

Originally posted by VorpalF2F

As a result of that last one, I finished the session up 1/2 BI.
HM2 says, I won 2.22 with an all-in EV of -3.33.

If that's not 'running good', I don't know what is.

Oh, thanks.

Until now, I always thought that the "running" part implied more than 2 hands.

But OK, I'll accept that.

I decided to play my session of NL4 and not do anything spewy.

There were two blue whales at one table -- 45/33 and similar.

Took a few pots from them, but nothing major -- and nothing spewy either.

I realized that I'm in that form of tilt where I expect things, rather than just letting things be what they are.

I feel a weekend coming on...
--VS

5-Card Draw

I had an enjoyable evening.
Mrs Vorpal, my grandson and I went to see "Star Trek Into Darkness".
Enjoyed it. It wasn't just special effects and explosions -- although there certainly were enough of those. And there were certainly enough violations of the laws of physics to make me cringe several times, but overall it was fun.
It was saved by the stories about the people.

Poker was just a hoot, too.
Three short sessions, all with winrates above 3BB/100

Friday nights the gamblers love to gamble, so bluffing at a minimum, and then only in strategic situations.

I just wait till I'm ahead, and bet.
I was getting paid off by people calling with worse a lot -- this rarely happens playing vs regulars. The real trick is switching gears back and forth.

This hand is quite interesting for several reasons.
First, raising KKxxx from CO is pretty standard.
The 3Bet from SB leaves me w/ 6:1 pot odds for the call.
I'm pretty certain I'm behind at this point, but even Kings up is worth a check/call after-draw, and there is even more to be hand if I hit trips.

And then again...

Have a good weekend all...
--VS

Have a nice weekend V.

I will -- thanks.

I got a nice reply from the Pokerstars programming team:

Pokerstars -- via email
The issue you are having has been reported to our Programming
Team and they are currently working on a fix.

Unfortunately, we are currently unable to provide a time frame
for a resolution of this issue. However, we are aware how
important it is for this to be corrected and are working with
haste to get it fixed.

Yesterday, when I logged in there was an update, so after my session I let the client sit there logged in overnight.

No CPU usage problem.

Quick work, that

--VS

Originally posted by VorpalF2F
Yesterday, when I logged in there was an update, so after my session I let the client sit there logged in overnight.

Isn't this a bad idea? I've read that leaving the client logged in isn't very smart because of hackers? Well I never do it anyway.

And I think my stars logs me out after x-amount of time.

Regards

RasTweet

Originally posted by RasTweet

Originally posted by VorpalF2F
Yesterday, when I logged in there was an update, so after my session I let the client sit there logged in overnight.

Isn't this a bad idea? I've read that leaving the client logged in isn't very smart because of hackers? Well I never do it anyway.

And I think my stars logs me out after x-amount of time.

I don't normally stay logged in -- it was just that I had noticed a problem where my P*s client would take up all CPU cycles if it was running for more than a couple of hours. I have never noticed P*s log me out of the client -- they boot me off of tables, but I've never been logged out of the lobby.
Perhaps its a setting.

I'm not too worried about hackers, either, tbh.
I take the following precautions:
♦  I have a hardware (NAT) firewall between my home network and the internet
♦  I run a comprehensive anti-malware suite that takes care of virususes and spyware. It also has a firewall, and I periodically check the outbound traffic for processes I don't recognize -- I've never found one. If a new process wants to access the internet, I need to give my permission first. I've caught a few nasties that way -- usually installed along with something "legit". The unwanted programs are usually browser toolbars.
♦  I NEVER click a link in an email -- even from someone I know, unless they have explained the link and what it does. If they don't I check first.
♦  I NEVER respond to any offer in any advertisement without researching the company/service/whatever, then initiating contact myself.

Paranoid? Maybe. I have spent countless hours cleaning up messes for friends and family that weren't paranoid.

The most common trick that they fall for?
A popup tells them that some virus has been detected on their computer, and they have to "click here" to "fix it".

Yikes!

Well I have no clue what you just said ♦

For a fish like me logging out is all I can do to keep em out

This is going to get personal

I was born with Epidermolysis Bullosa

If you followed the link, please don't be dismayed. I have the milder of the two dystrophic forms, and over the years, I've become accustomed to it, and (I think) that it has actually diminished in severity.

All the time I was growing up, I hoped, dreamed and prayed for a cure. When I was little, we did not even have a name for it. Then when we found out it was genetic, any hope for a cure disappeared, because the cause of the condition lay in the nucleus of each and every cell of my body.

As part of the treatment in the modern era, children with the condition are essentially cocooned, which may minimize the number and severity of lesions or blisters, but at what cost? My brother and I participated in sports like the other kids, but at much higher cost. I think that it was harder on my mum that on either of us.

So imagine my reaction when I heard of a potential cure.

There is no possibility that such a procedure would do me any good.
But to think that other kids might be able to avoid "all that".

And to think that I would live to see the day...

Peace,
--VS

5-Card Draw

Two sessions tonight.
I was bound and determined to overcome my tendency toward impatience.

To me, this means folding when faced with the likelihood that I'm beaten.
In other words, "Pick your bluff-catch spots carefully"

For two hundred hands I succeeded. I was up 12 BB in that span.
I had folded several reasonable 2-pair hands pre-draw which is something I rarely did before.

Like this one:

So I was feeling pretty good about my game...

I was then dealt this:

I don't think I misplayed/overplayed the hand.
I have to call. Villain can do this with a worse flush. At this time of night, though I'm up against a fairly tough bunch on the whole.

At that point the wheels fell off.
I started getting my big hands cracked.
3 in a row vs the same player.

For the first time in a long, long, while, I found myself interjecting logic t combat tilt. Successfully.

"I realize that in poker this will happen. I also realize that I have had my turn in the luckbox, and will have another turn shortly. If I continue to play mathematically sound poker, adjusting for the opponents, I will win long term"

Yeah, right.

I finished the first session down 8 BB down in 500 hands.

I sat down after supper, and to my delight there were a couple more 40/5 players at the tables. I started off the same way -- up a whack and a half after 100 hands, then card dead for a long, long while, with a couple more bad beats in there, so that around 200 hands in, I was marginally ahead.

Then in the span of 8 hands, I went from about 3 BB to +9.5 where I ended the session.

This hand got the ball rolling:

In the last hand, I contemplated check/raising, but I didn't because CO is likely to check behind any busted flush draw, or low 2-pair hands.

I got me a new android tablet ( sounds like medicine for a robot) and I'll be able to re-read TMGP on the bus.

I've decided to hold off on the 2nd TGMP until after I have gone over the first one again.

Peace & tranquillity,
--VS

hey Bruce

OK, so I actually did have him beat, but if a guy is playing 44/5 and suddenly raises UTG, I think it is sensible to be cautious.

do think a guy playing 44/5 is positionaly aware?

I do however agree that if you have a decent sample over this opponent you fold to a 5% raise since you do not beat the top 5% combo (his range).

Originally posted by thazar
hey Bruce

OK, so I actually did have him beat, but if a guy is playing 44/5 and suddenly raises UTG, I think it is sensible to be cautious.

do think a guy playing 44/5 is positionaly aware?

I do however agree that if you have a decent sample over this opponent you fold to a 5% raise since you do not beat the top 5% combo (his range).

My RFI query doesn't have enough hands on him to really tell.
This was the first time in 120 hands he had raised from UTG pre-draw.
Most of his other open raises were in BTN and SB -- so possible he understands position.

These guys that have high vpip are limping two pair and trips a lot, calling the inevitable raises, then getting more action post-draw.

I've experimented with this, but in order to succeed, you need to limp pre-draw enough so they don't get suspicious. And I hate doing that.

So about once every so often I limp with crap just because.

Even if it is marginal, my hand has only 4 outs.
If the same player did this from the SB or BTN I would prob fold since top 5% starts at JJ99x

In the olden days, I might have called. I would certainly call vs a 33/20 type player.

The best players at this limit are in the neighbourhood of 20/15. I'm a wee bit tighter.

--BM