Realizing Your Own Leaks

[Jman28]

I thought that I'd share a couple of leaks in my game that I'm aware of in an attempt to

a) stop them
b) perhaps allow you to recognize some that we may share

So, Leak #1: I push often in situations where I know that my opponent would be incorrect to call without AA or KK.

What I need to realize is that most opponents have no idea that even KJs should be layed down in these situations and will call with many hands, which kills their $EV as well as my own.

Leak #2: I try to call too many bluffs on the flop and turn.

I consider picking off river bluffs to be one of the strengths of my game. I believe that I am very good at putting opponents on a range of hands, approximating my chances of being ahead, looking at the pot odds I'm getting and making a decision.

My problem is that I often smell a bluff on the flop or turn, and I call hoping that my opponent won't fire the second barrel and that I can either check it down and win with A high, or steal the pot from them. When they bet again, I find myself in a real tough spot.

I'm thinking the way to plug that is either to give up after their first bluff, or raise rather than just call.

Leak #3: I call too many all ins with pot odds in the BB.

Even though I do have the odds to call with almost any two, I too often call away chips that I need for my own folding equity.

Also, I realized that since I am a winning player, and therefore better than most of my opponents, I shouldn't take gambles that are about even in EV, even according to the ICM. Right?

So, that's what I came up with. I'm sure I have more leaks, but hopefully soon I'll have 3 less than right now.

Oh, also, when 6 handed with small to medium pocket pairs in EP and 8-12 times the BB, I am confused. I probably play them differently every time. What do you generally do?

So, please post any of your own leaks or common leaks that winning players, but not the best players, may have. Thanks.

-Jman28

[Slim Pickens]

[ QUOTE ]
What I need to realize is that most opponents have no idea that even KJs should be layed down in these situations and will call with many hands, which kills their $EV as well as my own.

[/ QUOTE ]

Humor my ignorance. How can it possibly do both at once?

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What I need to realize is that most opponents have no idea that even KJs should be layed down in these situations and will call with many hands, which kills their $EV as well as my own.

[/ QUOTE ]

Humor my ignorance. How can it possibly do both at once?

[/ QUOTE ]

No problem. Thank for asking the question. I'm gonna use an example similar to one presented in TPFAP by Sklansky.

Assuming equal skill, the stack size of a player in proportion to the total chips in play shows their chance of winning the tourney.

Let's say there are 3 people left in a tourney, all with 1000 chips.

1st place pays $5k, 2nd pays $3k, 3rd pays $2k.

That's 10k and three equal players with equal stacks. There expected winnings are ~$3.33k each.

Now, lets say players 1 and 2 go all in on a coin flip. Assume the outcome is exactly 50/50.

The winner of that hand will have 2k chips and player 3 will still have his 1k.

The hand winner (W) will win the tourney 2/3 of the time and get 2nd 1/3.

Expected winnings for W = 2/3 * 5k + 1/3 * 3k = $4.33k

Expected winnings for player 3 = 1/3 * 5k + 2/3 * 3k = $3.66k

Notice that player 3's expectancy went up from $3.33k to $3.66k.

Player 1 & 2 will get $2k half the time and $4.33k half the time for an average of ~$3.17k, a decrease from the $3.33k.

This example, I realize as I'm finished, does not show a huge difference in EV, but the more drastic the payout increase from 3rd to 2nd, the more pronounced this difference would be.

In addition, when 4th place is $0.00 as it is in SnGs on Party, the expectancy there changes a lot when you go all in with another player.

I don't want to do the math assuming 4 spots because that gets trickier, but this simpler design should at least show where the principle comes from.

In conclusion, calling all ins on the bubble or even ITM with a small edge = Bad. And thats assuming you're of equal skill to your opponents. If you're better than they are, it's even worse to gamble it up. If you're much worse, go for it.

-Jman28

[Slim Pickens]

Leak #1 in my game: Forgetting important fundamental concepts once I've think I've learned their application. Sometimes I think I should just quit while I'm ahead. Thanks for the reminder though.

[FishBurger]

[ QUOTE ]
In conclusion, calling all ins on the bubble or even ITM with a small edge = Bad. And thats assuming you're of equal skill to your opponents. If you're better than they are, it's even worse to gamble it up. If you're much worse, go for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know if this is true for SnGs where you are lucky to have 10xBB when it gets down to 3-4 handed. When I have less than 10xBB I'm very happy to make a call that puts me allin with a small edge. It's much better than waiting around and getting allin as a large dog.

[YourFoxyGrandma]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know if this is true for SnGs where you are lucky to have 10xBB when it gets down to 3-4 handed. When I have less than 10xBB I'm very happy to make a call that puts me allin with a small edge. It's much better than waiting around and getting allin as a large dog.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong because there is a huge difference between calling an all-in anad raising all-in, assuming you have some sort of fold equity.

[stillnotking]

[ QUOTE ]

In conclusion, calling all ins on the bubble or even ITM with a small edge = Bad. And thats assuming you're of equal skill to your opponents. If you're better than they are, it's even worse to gamble it up. If you're much worse, go for it.

-Jman28

[/ QUOTE ]

I have always had a problem with this reasoning. Let me explain why.

Let's take a case where a player will be incorrect to call an all-in bet with anything but AA or KK. His opponent knows this, and will push with any two cards. Therefore it immediately becomes correct for the first player to expand his range of calling hands. So I'm not sure that your opponents are actually making a mistake by calling with KJs, if they know that you know that they shouldn't call with anything but AA/KK. Make sense?

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

In conclusion, calling all ins on the bubble or even ITM with a small edge = Bad. And thats assuming you're of equal skill to your opponents. If you're better than they are, it's even worse to gamble it up. If you're much worse, go for it.

-Jman28

[/ QUOTE ]

I have always had a problem with this reasoning. Let me explain why.

Let's take a case where a player will be incorrect to call an all-in bet with anything but AA or KK. His opponent knows this, and will push with any two cards. Therefore it immediately becomes correct for the first player to expand his range of calling hands. So I'm not sure that your opponents are actually making a mistake by calling with KJs, if they know that you know that they shouldn't call with anything but AA/KK. Make sense?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it makes sense. However, I'm talking about situations where calling an all in with KJs would be wrong even if they knew I had something like 75s. These situations are rare, but they do happen.

-Jman28

P.S. - What happened to discussing our leaks?

[Laughingboy]

Great idea for a thread.

I've discovered over the last few days that I have several leaks that come down to simple greediness, and I've paid the price bigtime. They usually involve betting less than I should with a good hand, trying to get customers, followed by immediate punishment when one of them sucks out on me, often with a hand I probably could have made them fold if I'd bet more.

My normal strategy if I think I'm ahead is to assess a range of draws my opponents might have, then bet just enough to make it a bad deal for anyone to call. However, I think my calculations have been too simplistic. This strategy is all you need for side games (assuming the calculations are correct), but needs to be adjusted for SNGs, because a "bad deal" is defined differently.

Also, I don't think I'm properly taking implied odds into account. I think about them, but they are tricky in NL, because a player could bet his whole stack on any hand. Usually my thoughts revolve around the chances I might get his whole stack when I feel I have him beat. Greediness again. This is certainly a valid consideration, but I doubt it's sufficient.

So I address this question to my betters: where can I find a good, cogent discussion of dealing with implied odds in NL in general and SNGs in particular?

Thanks in advance.

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
Leak #3: I call too many all ins with pot odds in the BB.

Even though I do have the odds to call with almost any two, I too often call away chips that I need for my own folding equity.


[/ QUOTE ]

So far, still doing this one. I can't resist. Someone hit me or something.

Seat 2: MrSweets28 ( $2475 )
Seat 5: lilwinston44 ( $775 )
Seat 6: sufan7 ( $2305 )
Seat 9: badbeat2c ( $2445 )
Trny:9032546 Level:5
Blinds(100/200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to MrSweets28 [ 7s Td ]
lilwinston44 is all-In [775]
sufan7 folds.
badbeat2c folds.
MrSweets28 calls [575].