Playing online for a living week 44

[davidross]

Another solid week of poker finished off a very successful February. I’ve run so well these past 4 weeks that the absolute low I hit in January is just a distant memory. My bankroll is as healthy as it’s ever been, I might even contemplate playing some 10/20 for the first time. There has been a fresh influx of players to the Party/Empire games despite the performance problems they have had lately, there were at least 2 nights this week with over 40,000 players. It was less than a year ago I was so impressed that Paradise had almost 3,000 players. The games seem very soft to me again, maybe just a function of running well, but I don’t think so. I have been surprised at how many family pots I have been involved in lately. Stealing the blinds is a very rare occurrence lately, and cold calling is rampant. It has suited my tighter, more aggressive playing style perfectly. Post-flop I have had to adjust and not push so hard if I miss the flop because someone is always chasing, staying to showdown. I find the games playing much like the 2/4 ring games used to, where you just waited for big hands and pushed them hard.

Running well presents its own set of problems, but much better problems than running bad does. My top priority is not to fall into the trap of loosening my pre-flop standards, as I’ve been known to do during past winning streaks. You really do start to believe you will hit your hand every time. Although I think I have improved my play somewhat lately, and the games do indeed seem softer, I can’t kid myself into not believing that most of this hot streak is due to a good run of cards. I’ve made over 10 grand during the 4 weeks of February, which is the 2nd best 4 week stretch I’ve ever had.

Empire added an extra WSOP qualifier last night to replace the one that was cancelled on me last weekend. We had a party to go to last night so I knew there was no point trying to qualify, so I played no tournaments this week. I hope to qualify for next Saturday’s semi final though. My share of last Saturdays cancelled prize pool was much higher than I had expected, over $520.

In my first full week of Empire only play(they allow 4 tables to be played now so I have not played under my Party ID in over a week) I started with a nice $504 win on Sunday. Monday was a struggle, and I gave back $359. I had been down a lot in the afternoon, but got some of it back overnight. Tuesday was another good day, up $624. On Wednesday my kids had an early dismissal day where they got out of school at lunch time, so instead of playing I took them skiing, or snowboarding to be more precise. I arranged a lesson for my boys as they are just starting to snowboard, while I skied with my youngest daughter. It was a gorgeous sunny day, but the hill was too crowded (everyone had the same idea I guess) and my older boy took ill around the end of his lesson and I had to call my wife to come and get him. I missed out on about 90 minutes of ski time. It became a very expensive day for the amount of skiing I actually got to do. But the poker gods rewarded me with a great run over the next two days, winning $458 on Wednesday night, and then a great run on Thursday brought in another $1,058. My bad run of Fridays continued, I lost $750 in the afternoon, and although I made a big run in the evening to get almost even for the day, I ran cold again and finished down $517 for the day. On Saturday we were invited to a private ski club by my little girls classmate. Skiing in Southern Ontario is pretty limited by our geography. We have the Niagara escarpment which provides us with Niagara falls and a uniform set of small ski hills all with a vertical drop of a couple of hundred feet. It’s great for beginners, but pretty tame for an experienced skier. I grew up in Montreal and we had access to some excellent ski areas in the Canadian Laurentians and Vermont. But this private club was wonderful. Uncrowded, with wonderful staff and facilities we skied all day, had a great lunch, and a short drive home. I can hardly walk today, indicating my total lack of physical fitness, something I need to take care of. I inquired as to the cost of joining this club and was informed that there was a waiting list about 5 years long, the initiation fee used to be $9,000, but that was 10 years ago, and the annual dues were $600 per person. I don’t think I’ll be joining any time soon. I got home just in time to leave for the birthday party we were invited to for the mother of yet another of my daughter’s classmates. It was her 10th birthday. In case you haven’t figured out how my daughters friend’s mother can be only 10, she is a February 29th baby, and only gets to celebrate every leap year. There were a lot of people I knew from the school, and from soccer, but none I knew very well. Her husband had arranged a presentation in the “This is your life” theme, and after an hour we were only at grade 8. I began to drink heavily. Fortunately for me my wife began to feel ill around 11:00 and we snuck out. I’m a little worried that this bug is working through the family and my older daughter and me are the only ones not to get it yet. I rarely get ill, and haven’t missed a day of playing due to sickness yet…knock wood. So after putting my wife to bed, and still pretty buzzed I decided to play poker. They say god looks out for drunks and small children and I guess it’s true because I won around $750 in half an hour. I should have quit right then, but I played for a couple of hours (I wasn’t really that drunk, I think I played fairly solidly, although I caught myself limping first in a couple of times) and ended up making the exact same amount I lost on Friday, $517. That left me with a win for the week of $2,285.

The influx of new blood at the tables has brought with it a lot of bad behavior again. Several times this week I played with obnoxious people berating everyone at the table for their play. They sure don’t complain when the guy chases the gutshot and pays him off on the river with bottom pair, but when he has the gall to actually hit, they are all over him. I still wonder how many of these poor players ever come back after a miserable night of being verbally abused.

My wife has a job interview next week at the hospital she wants to work at, in the Labour and delivery area, which is where she wants to work. She is very excited as she was told there was very little chance she could get into an L&D job right out of school. When Mrs Davidross is happy, davidross is happy.

A curious hand from this week. I open raised with KQo and got 3 bet from the button who’s handle was coldcall(I ever saw him coldcall). The SB called as well and I called. Flop comes out Ks 8h 4s and I bet. Button raised and SB cold called 2. I decided to just call. Turn was Ts putting the flush on the board. I had the Qs. Checked to the button who bet. We both called again. River was 4d. same betting pattern, button bets and we both call. All 3 of us had KQ. I was freerolling on the spade. I don’t ever remember a 3 way split like that.
Here’s what happens when you don’t know the players in the hand. UTG limps and I raise with Jc Jd. Idiot1 on my left cold calls and idiot2 on the button 3 bets. BB calls 2 cold, limper calls 2 cold and I just call. I wonder about capping a 5 way pot with JJ just in case I hit my set. I don’t think JJ will hold up unimproved very often in a 5 way pot, but capping might still be the right play. I just called. The flop is 9d 5d 5h. BB bets, limper calls and I raise. Idiot 1 3 bets, and idiot 2 caps it. SB folds but the rest of us call. Turn is 2s. Checked to idiot1 who bets and idiot2 who raises again. Limper folds and I think. I believe it’s going to cost me at least $30 to get to a showdown and probably more. The pot is very big though. I fold. Idiot 1 3 bets and idiot2 calls. River is 8c. Idiot1 bets and idiot2 calls. Idiot1 has 97o for his pair of nines and wins $240. idiot2 has Ad 8d for a busted flush draw. I quickly discover that these 2 go at each other every hand like this. Idiot 2 is on idiot1’s case constantly about his bad play, which there is plenty of. I take a lot of money off these 2 in the next 90 minutes, but this pot stung. I think I had to fold to the 4 bet on the flop, or call to the end on this hand.

I made this observation in a shorthanded post this week, but I think it’s worth repeating here. My variance, both positive and negative seems to be way down since I increased my aggression. My biggest loss in 3 weeks has been Fridays $517, and although I’m winning steadily, there have been far fewer huge wins as well. I would have expected the opposite to be true, by putting more money in the pot pre-flop, on bad days I would lose even more, but on good days I would make more. One poster theorized that the pre-flop raises limited the field, and made it less likely that you would lose 8 or 10 pots in a row, which is what causes the big losses. Maybe that’s it.

Have a good week everyone.

[Godfather80]

David, I have been reading about your progress for the past few months and I have nothing but respect for you. Your work ethic and hours logged at the tables combined with the fact that you share your garnered insights at this forum allow me to gain poker experience/knowledge that I would never be able to on my own. Keep up the good work.

[Spyder]

David,

When you say you increased your aggression, did you increase it pre-flop, post-flop, or evenly all around?

Spyder

[TylerD]

Is it wrong that I look forward to these posts each week? Good stuff david.

[Allan]

I made this observation in a shorthanded post this week, but I think it’s worth repeating here. My variance, both positive and negative seems to be way down since I increased my aggression. My biggest loss in 3 weeks has been Fridays $517, and although I’m winning steadily, there have been far fewer huge wins as well. I would have expected the opposite to be true, by putting more money in the pot pre-flop, on bad days I would lose even more, but on good days I would make more. One poster theorized that the pre-flop raises limited the field, and made it less likely that you would lose 8 or 10 pots in a row, which is what causes the big losses. Maybe that’s it

I don't follow these posts all that closely but I believe you're playing tighter now as well as more aggresively, right? So you may have dropped some of the marginal hands that ended up being payoff hands or chasers and are now entering the pot more selectively with a head start against your field. That seems as though it could point toward a decrease in SD and increase in win rate.

Allan

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
(I wasn’t really that drunk, I think I played fairly solidly, although I caught myself limping first in a couple of times)

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think that never limping first in is optimal.

~D

[Tosh]

David, Party are also allowing 4 tables to be played now.

[ZeeJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think that never limping first in is optimal.

~D

[/ QUOTE ]

Before saying something like this, are you aware he plays only 5/10 6 max at Party?
Almost every poker generalization is bad to commit to 100%, but would you still say it's wrong to open-raise 98% of the time you open a pot? If your answer is still yes, you are too passive.

[Jeremy'sSpoken]

LOL, TD I was just thinking how excited I am for the new "issue" to come out each week.

[1800GAMBLER]

Put me in the list of groupies too. I'm really looking forward to week 52, hopefully david will post this whole results for the year, each week, month, nice graph maybe, comment on how living from poker has been and anything else he wants to add.

Looking forward to each week.

[John Biggs]

First-grade stuff, I suppose, but here goes:

1) Holding a drawing hand in early position in a very loose-passive ring game, to entice other limpers to follow you in.

2) In a very tight ring game (or even a tight short-handed game), to keep from collecting just the blinds with KK or AA in early or middle position.

3) Playing for a set with a medium pair like 88 through TT in early position in a loose ring game where an early preflop raise won't knock out callers with hands like KJ, QT, Ax, etc., especially when they will call most flops regardless of whether they hit. This is really the same as number 1, except your pair is normally one you'd raise with in a typical game.

4) To build the pot preflop in a loose-aggressive ring game by planning to limp-reraise with AA, KK, or big suited cards such as AKs.

5) When sitting to the right of a maniac and holding a hand that does well headup, if he is the type who will frequently raise with inferior hands when limped into. This is a special case, but applies to both ring and short-handed.

[ZeeJustin]

I'm not trying to be rude, but David plays shorthanded, so points 1, 2 and 3, are completely invalid.

We have been over point 4 on these forums many times before, and most (if not all) of the SH posters agree that limp-reraising is not the way to go in the games on Party, although limp-reraising can be a fine tool in other places.

I suppose 5 is your only valid point, but should not account for anywhere near 2% of the times you are opening a pot unless you are dumb enough to habitually sit to the right of a maniac.

Edit: The reason I am being unforgiving here is because David was far too passive a month ago, and has made a great effort to make his game more aggressive. He has improved his winrate tremendously as a result, and now you are suggesting he is too aggressive. If he were to become more passive, he would be taking a huge step backward.

[ZeeJustin]

David, I love following your results. I started reading around week 25ish I guess, when you were still playing 3/6 full tables at party. Have you compiled all of these posts anywhere? I'd love to read weeks 1-10 without having to search for them on 2+2.

[HiatusOver]

"I suppose 5 is your only valid point, but should not account for anywhere near 2% of the times you are opening a pot unless you are DUMB ENOUGH to habitually sit to the right of a maniac."

ZeeJustin, before you call something or someone dumb you better make sure you know what you are talking about. Sitting to the right of the maniac is far from dumb, and this has been discussed many times on this forum and in 2+2 texts. The main reason to be on the LEFT of a maniac is to be able to consistently isolate him with marginal showdown hands and have the rest of the table oblige by rarely tagging along. If this can't happen then it is better to be on the RIGHT overall. I play 15-30 on party, not 5-10, but i would assume that if someone is ALMOST ALWAYS tagging along in the 15, they are there even more often in the 5-10. Also just the fact that you are in a game with the maniac in the first place is +EV, not dumb.

[ZeeJustin]

The operative word is habitually. That's not even my point though. My point is that open-limping before a maniac will account for only a small percentage of hands, and should not make an open-limp from a good player in these games a regular occurance by any means.

[davidross]

The adjustments I made were strictly pre-flop. I keep forgetting that most of that discussion took place in the shorthanded forum. I resolved to never open limp, and to never make the first cold-call.

[davidross]

Possibly correct. I have dropped some hands because they weren't worth a raise, so that could very well be a contributing factor.

[davidross]

I agree that always and never are words I shouldn't use, but in an effort to make adjustments I resolved to never open limp for a period of time, and in teh 5/10 shorthanded games I don't think that is far from an optimal strategy. Limping UTG results in being raised I believe 80% of the time, so limping to see a flop cheaply never seems to work. I used to limp-re-raise AA and KK, but I used to limp a lot so I believe they were well concealed. Now that I'm not limping at all, I am also raising AA and KK.

An interesting observation I made was that the first week I started open raising more often, I stole a lot of blinds, and had people fold a lot to my flop bets. I believe I had established a reputation among the regulars as a rock. It took about 10 days, but now I'm getting called down a lot more, which requires further adjustments. It never stops with this game.

If game conditions permit, I would love to open raise hands like QJs and T9s and 88 or 77. One of the problems with playing 4 tables though is that I'm not always aware of the exact game conditions, so by default I am going with the open-raise strategy. I do anticipate modifying it somewhat.

[davidross]

THere are a couple of posters who have compiled them at their BLOG sites. Unfortunately I no longer can find the links so hopefully one of them will post it here.

[davidross]

I have added the 4th EMpire table to increase the rebate for my affiliate sponsor, and to increase the Epoints I am earning in order to reap more rewards. I think it is better to accumulate them more at one site rather than to split them.

[slavic]

5) When sitting to the right of a maniac and holding a hand that does well headup, if he is the type who will frequently raise with inferior hands when limped into. This is a special case, but applies to both ring and short-handed.

I have found that short handed maniacs will re-raise many of the same hands they will raise with. If your hand is worth opening, I think you should open and let the maniac do what is natural to him. I would like to be on his left though, in that I find position critical headsup and having to make most of my choices in later rounds out of position just sucks.

[Tilted Litt]

David, thanks for posting, your posts have been informative and useful. Thanks again

For the person requesting where Davd's posts have been archived see... http://members.cox.net/cuff4u/index.htm

[Franchise (TTT)]

Hey David, I'm not a lawyer, but perhaps you should make anyone copying (and not linking) to your posts off this site post a small copyright notice saying you still own the rights to the material, since I recall you considering writing a book at some point.

Of course I have no idea how this would interact with the terms of service of this board, or implicit rights, or ... yadda yadda yadda.

Hopefully a lawyer will read this and give us all some insight.

[John Biggs]

Zee, I normally like your posts--I found your posting of excerpts from David Ross hands quite interesting in the short-handed section, for instance--but I think you are being a little too narrow here in your interpretation of what one may or may not say in a 2+2 thread.

I KNOW David Ross plays 5/10 on Party! I posted "reasons to open-limp" in the spirit of general discussion because I find it an interesting topic, not because I want to advise David Ross to become passive! You seem to feel that everyone should stick to the point you are hammering away at--but what is wrong with divergences within a thread? The very structure of a threaded discussion encourages them, which is why this forum is so successful.

If you didn't find what I had to say interesting, you could simply not have responded. Go back and read my post and you'll see that I gave fair warning it was simple stuff. You also seem to feel that there is a rule that if something has been discussed before in these forums, it should never be brought up again. That doesn't jibe with an open forum in which many posters will always be new to the scene--a constantly changing population.

As for the bit about sitting to the right of the maniac, please note that I qualified it as a "special case." I only mentioned it because it recently occurred to me and was extremely profitable. I'm not sure why this bothered you so much that you had to resort to the words "habitually" and "dumb" when neither fits the case.

Maybe you just had a hard day, Zee, or maybe your passion for helping David blinded you to the nuances. I do enjoy most of what you write, so I'm looking forward to your other posts as eagerly as ever.

[Bogatog]

Might not be my place, but I believe you were the second poster to talk about open-limping and full ring games. I believe that is why Zee was animated on the subject. I doubt Zee has any problem discussing the merits(however few) in 6-max games. I just think he wanted to make sure that nobody was giving full game advice to a shorthanded player.

[John Biggs]

... about rarely open-limping in shorthanded hold'em, which is my game of choice (although I have my ups and downs and consider myself still learning). The only times I'll open-limp are a) that extremely rare occurance with a maniac of that particular type--for all I know I'll never run into another just like him; normally if sitting to a maniac's right I'll raise into him, hoping he'll reraise, but he wasn't like that; and b) if it's a really tight game, I'll still go for the open-limp of AA and KK every now and then. Abdul-Jalib comments on his web site that winning only the blinds with AA and KK is a major disaster, and even though he was talking about a ring game, I think it applies to short-handed as well. Your only worry in this latter case is if you're up against tough, observant opponents--but at 5/10 this is usually not the case. Even if it were you could use a mixed strategy of also limp-reraising selected other hands.

All other times, I'm raising if I'm coming in. I don't even like limping after other limpers very much; if they're loose limpers who favor trash like big-little off, my preference is to wait for hands I can raise with after them--I think being picky pays off in the long run, rather than turning into a limping machine.

In a more general sense, however, I do think that an inability to adjust strategy for a particular table texture is a potential flaw--and this includes injunctions such as "always open-raise." If you're too focused on maxims and rules, you hurt your earn. This is even more true in short-handed than in ring, since a short-handed game changes its character so quickly and the individual opponents matter much more. This is one reason why I think that David Ross is playing too many tables--with 4 tables he can't adjust enough, he's too busy playing his own cards. Granted there is the argument that the volume overcomes this, but I still don't like it. I'd rather see him playing 3 tables and focusing more on his opponents. I bet his earn would actually improve rather than drop.

[Slacker13]

David, I have started many conversations with " I know this guy David Ross and he...."
Love your posts, keep up the great work!

[ZeeJustin]

If you want to post reasons for open-limping, that's fine, but you shouldn't have done this as a reply to my post. I assumed this was a rebuttal from you, but apparently I was wrong. I was hard on you because it seemed like you ignored everything I said and didn't even read the part about David not being a full-table player.

You could have been more clear by saying that you were not talking about the topic at hand, because your post strongly implied that you disagreed with me.

As for censorship, I am strongly against most forms of censorship. In the past week alone I have praised affiliates, denied the existence of god, talked about illegal activities, and have berated several people. If I was pro-censorship, I obviously would not do any of this. I was simply saying that your facts were wrong, rather than that you were out of line for posting that. (As I said before, your facts were not wrong, they just didn't pertain to the topic that I thought you were discussing)