Foxwods Trip Report

[CountDuckula]

This was about my fourth visit to the poker room at FW, and I'd had a nice session a week earlier (Sat.) where I was up about $120 after 3 hours. I was feeling pretty good about my play then, having just read The Psychology of Poker, and I thought I applied it well that session; I had a loose-passive table, and I pretty much ran over them.

On to yesterday. I signed up for $2/4 around 1pm, and was seated within half an hour (they opened a new table, and I was about 5th on the list at that point). The first few hours went great, I bought in for $150, and by around 4:30, was up to $325. Table was loose-passive, and I caught decent cards, including having 42o in the BB, and catching another 42 on the flop, plus a third 4 on the turn for the boat; I bet out and raised at every opportunity, and the calling stations followed right along. A couple of people had straights or flushes and bet them hard on the turn and river, so I dragged a pretty decent pot from that.

Then reality set in. A few people left, and were replaced by tighter and more aggressive players. However, I was feeling cocky, and let my attention wander instead of paying attention to the changes in the personality of the table. I started losing a couple of tough ones, including making Broadway with AQo on the flop, and being rivered with a third diamond, and the only guy who hung in despite my raises showed 75d. Tilt city. And I was too stupid to realize it.

Long story short (too late!), I left that table with $59. Yup, that's right; after winning $175 in ~3 hours, I blew through $266 in the next ~3 hours, and left with my head hanging and my tail between my legs.

Lessons learned:

1. When my attention wanders, stop playing!

2. Notice when I'm moving toward the loose and passive ends of the scale, and either move back toward the tight and aggressive ends, or if I can't manage that, stop playing!

3. Freaking pay attention to the new players and get a read on them, instead of assuming that the whole table is still loose-passive.

4. Take breaks and think about my play more often.

5. When my attention wanders and I stop trying to read the other players, freaking stop playing!!!

Sigh.... Next try, the Taj, May 22-24. Let's see if I can remember and apply those lessons.

Thanks for the opportunity to vent.

-Mike, feeling very foolish and chastened the day after that bloodbath [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[daryn]

if you're really trying to "read the players" at 2-4 you might be doing more harm than good.

[toots]

Yah, it seems like when the average $2-4 player starts doing that "I've got a huge monster" chair-dance and chip anticipation thing, it means that they have an A6o and just flopped a 6.

[CountDuckula]

[ QUOTE ]
if you're really trying to "read the players" at 2-4 you might be doing more harm than good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, all I really meant was getting a good idea how loose/tight and passive/aggressive they were. There were a couple of players at the table who would consistently fold to my raises, after I showed down some good hands. Others would hang in until the river, and then fold if they didn't make their hands. It was pretty reliable that if they raised, they meant business; during my first few hours, I virtually never folded a hand to such a raise that would have won had I called (others would call, so I'd usually get to see what it was I folded to). In the first half of my session, I generally knew how much I could push it if I had the nuts, and avoided raising when all I would accomplish was getting them out of the pot (or raised when that was exactly what I wanted to accomplish -- those first few hours, I got a lot of respect from the other players, and if I floored it, most of them would get out of the pot) but would pick up more bets simply by calling and letting everyone stay in to see the showdown. I got into trouble when I forgot to pay attention to that sort of thing in the second half of my session. Of course, I also started to loosen up and become more passive as I started to lose chips, which contributed heavily toward my problems.

I think that for now, I'm going to limit myself to 3-4 hours, and try to watch myself toward the end and see if I start bleeding chips after getting a good pile. If that happens, I'll just get out, on the theory that I've lost my concentration and edge, and I'll come back later after I've given my brain some time to recharge. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

-Mike

[midas]

Mike:

Skip the 2-4 games at FW, with $150 you should be playing 4-8 games. Always try to avoid the lowest limit games - they will only frustrate you in the long run.

[daryn]

wh-wh-whaaa?

[JoeU]

Daryn,

I don't know exactly why, but I kinda agree with Midas on this one. I have all sorts of trouble at the 2-4 level for some reason, but not at the 4-8? I even have the results to back this up at home. It doesn't make sense, because the players at 2-4 are not any better. My data might also be a little short (less than 100 hours/game). But for some reason, I seem to be doing a little better at 4-8.

As far as I know, I haven't changed my style of play at either level. Maybe this is the problem. But I have been playing ABC poker at both levels with very different results.

Go figure?

Joe

[daryn]

the only thing i can think of is maybe the rake is too high? but it can't be... certainly the 2-4 at the woods is beatable.

[MMMMMM]

I tend to agree that really soft games should be beatable almost regardless of the rake* (*within reason). Consider though that the $2-4 with a $4 rake is like $20-40 with a $40 rake [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] In other words it had better be a really good game. How good would the $20-40 have to be before you would play it with a $40 rake?

[Joe Tall]

Yes, the rake is high/BB and that can be frustrating.

Peace,
Joe Tall