Non showdown vs Showdown winnings. What is a good value?

It would be nice if they were both positive.

I could try to answer your question, but this is the best and most complete answer I've ever run across.

Read that instead.

thanks for redirecting me!

Really good article

Edit: Just read the article. Its very informative as to why not to sacrifice one line for another but aim to always maximize your profits.

To be honest I never cared which line goes where as long as I am making a profit.

But I had a look at other peoples graphs and it seems mine has a huge difference of more than 3500 big blinds so I am assuming this is a leak.

Problem is I am not sure what is causing this.

I am thinking that maybe the fact that I am playing LAG style preflop makes for the plus red line.

But the negative blue line I am not sure. Maybe I just call to thin, or maybe I just force myself to be found in marginal situations post flop?

Not sure

Hi, Nick,

You didn't even know how cool you are before reading the article, did you?! ♦ Now we all know that you are cool ♠_cool:

On subject, imho, the fact that you find yourself in more marginal situations postflop alone does not affect your showdown winnings. Captain obvious tells me that you only affect the blue line when going to showdown.

What does it mean? In other words, your red line is high and the blue line is low not because you are playing loose preflop, but because you are overplaying your weak range postflop and take it to the showdown. In this way your red line is high (because not everyone is happy to go with you to the showdown just with anything), and your blue line is low (because when you do get there, you're probably up against a stronger hand).

Regards,

German

Hey German thanks for the post!

Sometimes I feel I am overthinking the game for the limits I play ♦

For example, if I was facing myself (from a villains perspective) in a pot, I would be prepared to go to showdown with a wide range. Since I would know that my opponent (me) is loose and can barrel multiple streets I would be prepared to take it to show down with top pair weak kicker and get paid for example.

Unfortunately regs at NL5/NL10 dont think like that ♠_cool: and even though I can be superagressive it doesnt seem to translate to looser calls from my opponents postflop. i.e they refuse to adapt to me even though I am giving them a hard time ♠_cool:

I made this "rule" and everytime I have a legitimate hand on the turn I will be betting 30-40% of the pot instead on 60-80% that I used to and see If I can induce more people calling at least two streets of value. Downside is that I should know when to lay down second best hand on the river.

Ideally I want to remain cool (redline) and at least over the next 10k hands reduce the difference on the blue line to 50% of what it is now.

I finally found it

My leak is not that I over value my hands.

It is the fact that I try to push people off their marginal hands.

When I achieve that, winning get added on my red line, when I dont the numbers go as a minus on my blue line ♠_mad:

And the critical question is:

Even though there is a huge difference, I am showing profit like this. Theoretically If I stop all of my river bluffs my blue line should eventually turn positive assuming that I go to showdown with the best hand more that 50% of the times. On the other side my red line will drop dramatically as well.
What is the best approach on the subject?

Remember the aim here has nothing to do with red or blue but maximizing winnings.

What do you think?

Remember the aim here has nothing to do with red or blue but maximizing winnings.

What do you think?

I wonder if there is an element in all this that depends on the player.

Today I was playing 5-Card Draw, and a player sat down on my right that liked to complete in the SB.

I like to raise in the BB when they do that.

I found that if I raised in the BB, drew 1 and cBet, he folded.
Every time.

Next time you play, have a look at the players and how they react.

When playing post flop, I have use SHOT to remind myself to take everything into consideration:

S = Stack / Stats / Size of Bet
H = Hand / Hole cards -- Mine as well as villains
O = Odds (include implied odds)
T = Texture of the board

Another similar idea was given to my by PokerStrategy.com member Raknyo

In (Inflating the pot, don't do it!)
The (Texture, is the board wet, would many hands be willing to call?)
Netherlands (Number of opponents, more than 2 then say no!)
People (Player types, don't bluff fish but be more willing to bluff tight players)
Drink (Draws, be more willing to bluff when your hand can improve)
Rum (Represent, can you actually represent a strong hand with a bet?)

I've been using both of them to cut down my post-flop spew.

Nice

Speaking of keywords, I think I finally managed to write down a guideline to cut one of my biggest leaks -- c-betting.

I don't c-bet flop when I have multiple opponents most of the time, but I really have troubles to check into one opponent, especially because in 95% cases I'm the preflop aggressor

I came up with:

No Equity + Wet Board = No C-bet

If you are really creative, you can spell it as NEWB NOT ♦

Now I keep saying NEWB NOT to myself when considering a c-bet, and I think it helps a bit.

sorry for bringing that up, but its the thread with best result for me. I am facing similar situation that you are/were just with the difference I am at "low" point of your graph posted back in dec.

What was your best solution to fix blue line going down and red up?

Hi tileng1,

One of our coaches made this great post!

"The Red Line Myth" by w34z3l

It should prove very useful to you!

Regards,
Gary.