Re: Stats check.
My real question, I guess, is how I can have
A) a WSD% on the low side of normal and
B) a W$SD% below 50%.
I have two competing theories on this:
1) Waaaaaaaaah booooo hoooooo running baaaaaaad baaaaaad beeeeeats.
In all seriousness, I'm heavily influenced by Doyle Brunson (and fim, I guess) in that I favor playing strong draws fast. Looking over my PT stats, I see that my suited connectors are heavily in the red - and that I'm blanking more than my share of coinflips with the best of it.
Two days later, I remain shaken up by the following four-stacking sequence:
1)Lost 53/47 coinflip
2)Lost 45/55 coinflip
3)Lost to three-outer
4)Lost to one-outer.
This is, of course, nothing but pure frustration whining and is exactly what I want to hear.
2) There's something endemic in my style of betting or hand selection that causes me to tend to get action with the worst of it.
I don't see how I can be showing down any more hands. Quite the opposite, I think I should be tightening my turn and river calls.
[ QUOTE ]
Looks to me like OP is doing a lot of check/folding post flop.
[/ QUOTE ]
Should I not be doing a lot of check-folding post flop? I can't see how it's to my advantage to, say, bet a drawless king-high into a four-way pot, or, worse,check and call a ~potsized bet with a drawless king-high.
Three things I think I could start doing:
Attempting to steal more pots with position raises, holding nothing or next to nothing. That would seem to run counter to board wisdom on "what these guys will call with."
Bet-folding rather than give up when scare cards hit the turn or river. But, again - when you pot the flop and get two callers, how often will one of them not have that flush draw? I may be being robbed blind here by overestimating my hand-reading ability.
Learning how to get others to bet my hand for me. This is a style entirely counter to the one that Doyle & Co. have taught me. Generally speaking, I want control of the betting or I don't want to be in the hand, which seems like the right idea. Generally speaking, I will give specifically loose-aggressive players a chance to bluff me on the river where I can; otherwise it's bet-bet-bet.
Also: I do little checkraising. I've opined on this topic in other posts, but to me a check-raise is what you do with a hand you like, but not well enough to show down. Its scariness is precisely what makes it a sign of weakness. Obviously this applies to my own bets and not those of my opponents, who feel that checkraises rule the school. I'm either betting with the intention of getting it all in the middle, bet-folding, check-folding, and occasionally check-calling or bet-calling under the right circumstances.
I cop to being somewhat baffled here. My knowledge of NL theory is not extensive; my poker education has come at the hands of 2+2. I'd kill a man for an advance copy of "Theory and Practice of No-Limit Poker."
Anyway, get my winrate to the 8+ PTBB/100, world. $50-NL is supposed to be easy.
|