Humble Pie

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

It's how you can learn from "grandstand" plays you read about here or see on TV (e.g.: Kurn's "fishy call" comes to mind)

FWIW, I think my J9s hand is much more a grandstand play than the 95s play. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[CrisBrown]

Hiya Kurn,

I agree, and please don't think I meant to single you out. I've posted a few "grandstand plays" of my own. One from yesterday comes to mind:

In in the BB with a middle stack, blinds are 25/50. UTG min-raises, MP and LP call, and it's to me with a measly 64o. I'm getting 9.5:1 on my call, and it's an easy hand to get away from, so I call.

The flop is 6-4-4.

I check, UTG goes all-in, EP calls, MP mucks, and I of course call. UTG has AA; EP has AK. I triple up and take a commanding chip lead, going on to win.

Now, I wouldn't take that as a license to call into a raised pot with 64o. In the BB, I think it was the right call, because of the pot odds and the fact it was SO easy to get off that hand if it missed. But you can burn up a lot of money calling raised pots with that kind of hand.

Cris

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

No offense taken. We never post the many standard ABC hands we play and fold every day. The grandstand plays have to be part of your arsenal, but it's just as important knowing when not to make them.

[Guy McSucker]

Great thread. Thanks for starting it, Doc!

And this honesty thing is catching on it seems...

Here are some facts about me, just to get things out in the open.

I read Theory of Poker before playing a single hand ever. I lost a few pennies in my first two home games, got ahead the third time I ever played, and have never been behind at live play since. I began online play in April 2000 at Paradise. I won $4 the first day which seemed like a fortune compared to the stakes I'd been playing before! Again, I've never been behind since.

So in a sense I became a "winning player" after two sessions, but of course that's not the whole story. I was a bit lucky. My opponents were terrible. And my wins were tiny.

I win nothing like $20/hr. I am quite dissatisfied with my win rate in fact. I am sure I could raise it if I played more on Party, but the software won't run well on my usual machine (Mac running Virtual PC) and I don't like the small stack NL games too much. So I'm sticking to Stars. I make about $7/hr overall, but that's an unholy mix of ring NLHE, PLO, sit and gos and multi table tournaments.

I am a mathematician and feel I have a good understanding of how to play poker, when I have time to think and analyse situations under no pressure. That's why I believe I can say useful things to people who post hands from time to time. However, I am a terrible player of games. Quick decisions are not my thing. When it comes to poker, I can't get inside my opponents' heads, don't adjust well to their playing styles, and make a lot of mistakes when I know better. Someone mentioned learning to pause and think before acting: that's going to be very important to me I think.

I also cash out rather than building a roll and moving up in stakes. This is probably a good thing for maintaining a consistent winning status, but not for improving, putting myself to the test, or raising my win rate.

My goals for 2004 are: build a bankroll rather than spending my winnings, and aim to move up in stakes; learn not to tilt (I lost $800 in a few hours on at least three occasions last year); learn to play better than weak-tight (see my posts about suited big blind trash in the PL/NL forum for some forays into this...); stop making mistakes I know are mistakes; and basically get better.

You are getting advice from people who play much better than I do, so I won't offer anything in addition. Listen to what the good people here say. They know!

Guy.

[DarkKnight]

Doc,

Some really good info in the posts above. Let me summarize what I think is important....

1) stick to one game. I'd suggest limit ring games. The problem w/ Sit N Go's is that they play like at least 2 seperate games. In the early stages its a full game then you need to shift in the middle to a short handed game.

Thats 2 different skill sets.

In a full ring game the strategy isn't really changing from hand to hand based on chip counts. Start there.

2) You're reading some great books but stick with the fundatmentals. I'm sure you've already read enough to become a winning player.

Put another way, save the fancy plays for later. You can and will win plenty with consistent boring poker.

3) Practice. I recommend Wilson's Turbo Holdem for practicing many hands quickly and getting immediate feedback.

DK

[triplc]

[ QUOTE ]
1) stick to one game. I'd suggest limit ring games. The problem w/ Sit N Go's is that they play like at least 2 seperate games. In the early stages its a full game then you need to shift in the middle to a short handed game.


[/ QUOTE ]

I respectfully disagree, DarkKnight. If you are going to stick to one game, you should pick a game that best fits your style of play and personality. I have the same level of expertise as our good Dr., and I am much more comfortable with my play in SnGs than I am in ring games, and I make more money there. Why? I guess I tend to be aggressive, and that tends to be rewarded more in NL. Maybe I should try NL ring games...hmmm...

That said, I think your advice is sound for those just getting started. I don't know anyone who started out playing SnGs (if someone's out there please correct me). Limit ring games are simpler only because your options are so much more limited than in NL. I can check, call, fold, or (min) raise. It's a fine place to start. But at some point, I think it's good for the brain to try NL, PL, tourneys. At some point...maybe I'll even branch out to Omaha, Stud or even Crazy Pineapple!

CCC

[eMarkM]

My Story:

I discovered online poker from a brief mention of it on a stock trading forum about 2 years ago. I always wanted to learn poker, so I took about $500 (at the time about what I'd be willing to lose at the craps table on a typical trip to the casino) and opened an account at Paradise (then easily the biggest site). Started with Stud because I knew the rules, but quickly gravitated to HE (because who wants to concentrate on discards?).

I also picked up the Jones LL book and started playing .5/1. I worked my way to playing some 1/2. And my hands would tremble when I dared venture into the daunting 2/4 game. I managed to go through the $500 and another $500 just playing the .5/1 and 1/2 tables. That's a lot of BBs. I sucked ass.

So I quit altogether, disgusted with myself, and didn't logon to my shattered account on PP at all for at least 4 months. But after awhile, the itch came back and it took another $500 deposit to PP to scratch it. By this time I had at least a half dozen pokers books, mostly 2+2. All the staples. I re-read them with yellow highlighter in hand. I concentrated solely on LL HE. I built that initial deposit up pretty quickly. I bought PokerStat and got into my stats pretty seriously. Tried to really analyze my play and find my faults. twodimes analysis and everything. Devoured the advice on this site, but concentrated almost exclusively on the HE forums. That work pays off.

I quickly moved up as I recovered my initial $1000 I blew on the first go round. I moved up to and was beating 3/6 pretty well. Everytime I had about 200BB for the next level I would move up. Finally, I had a nice roll for 8/16 and had just a blistering run there. So I thought I'd take a shot at the big boys on 20/40. First hand on 20/40, I dragged a $600 pot and that led to an amazing +100BB week long run. I now had a legit role for for 20/40 and thought I was the King of Poker. From the $500 deposit to this zenith of about $12K in around six months. If you looked at a chart of my cummulative winnings, it would look like an internet stock in '99.

If you looked at that same chart over the the next 2-3 months it would look like a net stock in '00. I got crushed by the pros at 20/40 and was soon back down to 8/16. Then 5/10. Then 3/6. Then 2/4. I was having a surreal run of bad cards, bad play, and bad tilt. I turned $500 into 12K back into 2K. Lesson here, don't jump up limits too quickly. Don't get too cocky, this game has a way of humbling you. You're not the only one. After this I was pretty demoralized and I took another break.

A couple months later I came back. By this time the WPT had started and the wave of fish came online. The Golden Age of Poker had begun and I've taken full advantage of it with my previous experience. I opened an account at Party and Neteller and started playing there with some of the roll I had left. Started winning right away and was absolutely flabbergasted at the appauling play I was seeing.

It was only after again I built my roll to something decent that I turned away from my bread-and-butter limit HE and started expanding to other games. I was determined to be a good all around player. Since then I've played literally everything. SNGs, PL games, NL, O8, Stud, Stud/8, and multitable tourneys. Not that I'm a big +EV in all these games, but I can hold my own I feel in any form of poker. Right now my bread and butter game is $100 and $200 NLHE on Party with some SNGs and multis at Stars on the side. I haven't played limit HE regularly for quite awhile now. But it undoubtedly prepared me for getting into different forms and being a success.

My first ever multi was the first Zoo tourney. Opened an account at Stars, deposited $100 and played with the Zoo. Later entered a PLHE tourney and took 3rd out of 194 and ballooned my account to +$1200. I had the tourney bug and nice roll to play with. 21 final tables later and I have a very, very nice tourney income and ROI.

Anyway, that brings us to today where I'm over the $20K mark in total winnings over the 2 1/2 year period I've been playing. Not enough to make a living, but I have a fulltime job and play for a few hours from 9-12PM, 3-5 times a week, so I think this is pretty good for a part-timer. Cetainly not beating the hourly rate that I make in the "real world", but I think I could pull a "davidross" if I was forced to. I feel there are three major reasons for my success:

1) I paid some dues while struggling to learn the game. But I concentrated on one form of poker and played it relentlessly until I felt I could beat it. It was only when I felt really comfortable in limit HE that I branched out to other forms of poker.

2) Being pretty obsessed with poker. I think about it constantly when not working or not with family. Probably a sad thing to say, but this is much of my social life. Maybe not such a good thing.

3) The Golden Age of Poker - part of my success is no doubt due to the fact I've been playing online for a good year and half before the "poker craze" really took off with the WPT and the 5th St book. So I was already a good player by the time all the newbies showed up. I think the popularity has some ways to go before it peaks, but peak it will, and when it's over it will be a lot harder to earn online than it is now.

So my advice to you would be to concentrate on basic LL limit HE poker before moving towards more speciality oriented SNGs. SNGs and multis not only do you need basic HE skills, but more specialized "tourney only" skills like paying attention to stack size, etc. I remember when I'd dip my toe in SNGs when PP first introduced them and I was a fish out of water. Only after a solid year or so did I play and start winning in them.

[DrPhysic]

First of all, let me thank everyone for the honest, valuable, and forthright responses. Poker players DO lie sometimes, that’s how we win, but this thread has drawn responses I did not expect. The value of your responses to me is as follows: Every post in this thread, from the newest newbe to William, has been saved to my computer, printed, and is in a 3 tab binder on my poker book shelf right beside several Sklansky books.

As may have been apparent, the original post was written about a week ago. I thought that long about whether to post it at all, and had a couple of you look at it to tell me if it would be of value to anybody, including me, or just make me look silly.

Since there are some questions as to “Who is the Doc?”, let me give you a little about me and mine. My wife graduated with a BS from USC and a MS from UCLA shortly before she married her first husband at the age of 17. The kids are grown, educated, and well employed. The youngest of the grandkids started Texas State U this fall, the next one is a sophomore in “Undeclared”, one is a soph at Texas in Business, one is a midshipman at the Naval Academy, and the granddaughter that recently made me a great grandpa is a 2nd year Med student at Texas A&M.

My education is in Physics, but it was a LONG time ago. Long enough that I am having to totally re-learn statistics. In addition to some teaching, I have spent most of my career in Industrial Engineering. For the last 20 years, I have owned a business that designs and builds industrial automation equipment. It is a very high liability business that I would like to be able to retire from someday. I will be 60 in April, and like many today, there is not enough in the retirement account. Rather than work until I fall over, I am looking seriously to see if poker can be a supplementary income as well as a hobby.

Now, regarding poker: All of your poker histories are interesting and, one would hope, educational to not only me, but all the learners out there. (Yes, lurkers, we know you’re there. Jump in. At least most of these guys don't bite.) Your suggestions regarding development as a player are even more valuable.

I am trying to learn HE first. I play some LHE and some ring because I want to learn them, but my long term interest, I think, is in NLHE tournament including SNGs. Despite its sometimes terrifying aspect, I just like NL better. I agree with thomastem that you have to really learn one game and I am working on that. I hope learning the differences in play with the others will help me learn the one. We will see how far I can go with it. Like everybody else, I think WPT and WSOP would be neat. I may or may not ever get that good. (Frankly, 99.5% of us never will.)

muzunga is right, there is some inclination simply to master the skill of playing the game.

Cris, I agree totally, but I think you have to play LOTS of hands to learn the norm, before you begin to distinguish the exception. Also, I really like your 2 grand a month target. It’s a long way off, but that’s a significant enough amount to be really worthwhile.

Shub314 could be right to an extent about the books. Sklansky, Malmuth, Zee, Brunson, etc, are not playing low limits, nor playing fish, so they write about a different level sometimes than what we play.

Kurn’s 5 point game plan will be extremely useful, especially after I think about how it applies to my game.

Stagemusic: Thank you. What’s an OIC?

Tim, Good concepts “slow down” which I need, and "use the music library" (I have about 400 cds, classical, jazz, show tunes, and the pre-war swing era), I play them sometimes when playing. I guess I better listen, I had one on during the win last night. Also, I do only play one table at a time. Not good enough to concentrate on two.

William, my special thanks for your post. In your business, it is not required that you share hard earned wisdom with the very people who are trying to learn to beat you. Doing so shows a graciousness that not all have. I liked your comment, which could have been a typo, but was best one ever if so, about “sitting in front of your SCREAM”. Yes, I do, all the time. Your comments about emotions and table feel are very real to me. I am just educated enough to recognize when I’m on a roll and intimidating at least some, and when I am being dominated. I have to learn how to do it intentionally and more often. I am astounded at anyone winning 17 big tournaments since Sept. Someday. Anyway, your post is the front one in my binder.

What am I doing now to try to improve?
Downloading hand histories, annotating them (this good, that bad, really stupid, should have pushed) then trading with another player. Scooterdoo has been kind enough to offer to help my learning process as has Al Capone Junior.
Watching: I try to spend a little time each day using player search on stars and simply watching William, or Cris, or Kurn, or thomastem (among others) play poker.
Playing a $5 -2 or 4 seat HU SNG every day or two. An area I need to improve.
Reading a lot of 2+2, mostly these two forums.
I do use twodimes also. I had a Khigh 4flush, 4straight (not stfl) that I bet hard into an obvious high pair the other day. Twodimes educated me as to how bad a raise that really was.

Why not, as some suggested, go to Party and go fishing? I clearly do need to improve the bankroll. My answer is, that I don’t think I will learn anything playing the fish. When I do play ring, I look for the table with the 29% flop. I like the tourns, because if you can stay in a while, you get to play some really better players. There was a real ulterior motive in volunteering to start the 2+2 SNG’s. It’s fun. Also very educational to get to play against the people there, who would otherwise be at limits I can’t afford. Yet.

Much of the above will change or be adjusted as I digest all of your posts.

I have one further question: How do you document your play, and how many use PokerTracker or some equivalent?, however I will make that a separate post.

My thanks for the excellent posts, suggestions, and somewhat unexpected brutal honesty.

Doc

[MicroBob]

ok. i've been reading a lot of responses here in-between my hands on 2 or 3 tables.

i didn't get all the way through the replies and i already know i'm repeating some info so apologies in advance.

1 - sng's on stars are nice with the software and the structure. but the players there are still generally tougher (even thought hey've been getting fishier lately) making for a less profitable game.

the party SNG's have a lousy structure that takes a bit of an adjustment period. but once you get comfortable with it they can become quite profitable. in a way, it's hard to play these things too fast....yet 75% of the players there do just that. i agree (with stagemusic??) that you should give these a try if only for a change of pace from the stars game.

2 - i find that after a couple of those 2+2 tournies on stars that my play has improved dramatically in the party 10+1 SNG's. i'm getting aggressive at more of the right times....and, more importantly, backing away when i smell danger. basically, i'm respecting the 'gap-concept' far more than i ever did before.

i was just playing in these 2+2 things for a little fun, and potential bragging rights if and when i don't embarrass myself too badly (finishing on the bubble yesterday qualifies as NOT embarassing myself, even though i had the chip lead heading into the final table).
even though i was playing a couple other games at the same time, i still noticed what was going on on the 2+2 table and i believe i have adopted my style of play in my party SNG's as a result.
this really doesn't qualify under the category of 'advice'....just an observation from my own play.

i probably owe some of you 2+2'ers a percentage of my next couple of first place finishes.....but i think my (usually) dead-money at the next event will have to suffice.

3 - i think there is no question that the internet has changed the amount of time it takes to become a winning player.
i win more than i lose...although i would not call my self a true 'winning' player quite yet. i think i have a decent grasp of math and probabilities, etc.
but it was exactly one-year ago that i first learned of the existence of internet-poker....had never played a hand of hold-em (much less knew the rules) and would probably not be able to tell you correctly whether a full-house beat a flush or vice-versa. a year later poker accounts for about half my income (maybe a little less....but it's on the rise rapidly).

more details in my upcoming post detailing my 'first year as a poker player'

4 - will probably listen to the advice here and hit the occasional O/8 limit (or maybe even PL) ring-game just for kicks. i also think that more TRUE beginners play stud just because they may not know the rules to hold-em (changing rapidly though because of TV coverage). it has been speculated before that there is plenty of money to be made in these games if you know how to play them properly. i would be willing to bet that these games are pretty beatable without even reading a book....just playing generally tight. will probably get the books for these games also sometime along the way but i have enough studying to do with my current library.

anyway, the basic point is....keep plugging away, look for adjustments to make, keep learning, studying, posting here, reading relevant threads here, etc. you'll get there...and i suspect i will too.

btw, if you can make it through to the final table in those 1500+ entry free-for-all $3 buy-in's on stars than i suspect you're probably pretty close.
i finished 26th out of 1420 in a $3 NL the other night and was pretty damn proud of myself, no matter how many suck-outs it took me to get there (got ousted when my KK got busted on river by QQ). my multi-table tourney play kind of sucks because i am waaaaaaaaaayyyyyy too tight. but the free-rolls and the cheapo-s on stars are helping me improve pretty darn fast i think.

[Cosimo]

I think there are three major reasons why it takes less time to become a winning player online than live:

* more hands played: Even playing only one table, an online player can get in twice as many hands per week as the live player. Minus the travel and waiting time, and the same time at the tables takes fewer hours out of your life, making it an easier hobby to get into. Not having to wait for Friday night also helps here: you can jump online on a Tuesday night after work and play for an hour, with maybe just 10 minutes of overhead.

* lower rake: making a living at B&M 3-6 has to be next to impossible. My local rakes $1 per $10 and takes another $1 for the jackpot, plus a tip of $1-2 per pot. UB takes 50c/$10 and nothing more. In a $30 pot, that's $1.5 out online vs $5 or more live. The result is that online games have a higher EV (all else being equal), lowering the bar for being a winning player.

* lower limits: it's easier to jump into the online pool. After beating the free game, you can move into the 1c/2c; then 25c/50c and 50c/$1. Tuition is lower, allowing more players to get their poker degree. The live player might burn through his bankroll before he learns enough, and then have to wait til he can save up enough to try again.