Just Keep Losing...

Thanks for the responses,

In that situation I raised to 2 dollars, which was 3x the blind (blind being .50). I try to vary the x so it can be a little more difficult to read.

The problem I have is in situations like that with two pair, and not even putting the guy on his cards. So I talked to my friend and he suggested I play even tighter, and that has worked. A few times I doubled up last night and seems to be the thing to do. I probably should play this style until I can start reading people better and realizing when I'm beat based on betting patterns. Although it's hard I admit still to see that guy on that set when I had two pair..

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the responses,

In that situation I raised to 2 dollars, which was 3x the blind (blind being .50). I try to vary the x so it can be a little more difficult to read.

[/ QUOTE ]

I may be misreading the hand, but your ATo hand says, "RAISE Sky1ane , $1" and "CALL Sky1ane , $2" -- not to be a nit, it really doesn't matter. Just understand that when you raise to 2x the blind, you're making it worthwhile for many more hands to stay in and catch cards to beat you.

Just to be clear, when I say raising to 3x I mean raising from $0.50 to $1.50. (Harrington isn't absolutely clear all the time on this point, but I take his usage to be the same.) 3x is occasionally fine, although in most loose NLHE games you can get away with raising more. The object is usually to raise enough to get it heads up against a possibly dominated hand. Harrington I does, in fairness, suggest occasionally raising to 2x for variation, but in most low-buyin online games you really don't need that much variation because you'll get action on your 4x and 5x raises too.

Also for your reference, in the ATo hand you lost to trips but not a set. In hold'em, a "set of sevens" occurs when pocket sevens catch a third seven on the board. Many people misuse "set" to mean any trips, and others would insist that both terms are different subsets of "three-of-a-kind", but the most readily understood usage is that a set is a subset of trips, which is synonymous with three-of-a-kind.

I dont even think about raising to less than 4xBB in NL cash, unless I pick up and good hand in late position and don't want a fold around, in which case i raise between 2-4xBB , but i never make it one big blind back to the limpers/blinds. (i.e. might raise to anywhere from $1.25-2.00 in .25/.50, depending on how many limpers).

Usually I find that the standard 4xBB + 1BB per limper/2 limpers (i would never raise to more than 6x however) works pretty well.

[bholdr]

Lotsa good responses, but i have just a couple things to add...


[ QUOTE ]
I would still put myself as a beginner, and the more and more that I think of it, probably the biggest fish alive for online poker play.

[/ QUOTE ]

i doubt it.

[ QUOTE ]
I play, to correct horrible..horrible calls that I make or bad reads. Or maybe I'm just not cut out for this game...

[/ QUOTE ]

...or, maybe, you've still got a lot to learn. Poker players aren't made overnight- after buckling down, it took me several months and some intense study to become a winning player, and i was decent before i got serious about it.

It's often said that the great majority of players are loosers- it's true. perhaps 5-10% of poker players are lifetime winners, another 10% break even... I doubt that even half of the players HERE (2+2) are long term winners- yes, i said it... it's HARD to become a winner, so don't get discouraged if you're not showing a profit yet...

just don't play with money you can't afford to lose, keep learning and striving to improve, listen to good players, post, discuss, maintain a bankroll... you'll get there.

...oh, and, most importantly, remember to have fun.

B

[Cooker]

[ QUOTE ]
Here is an example of one of my beats.. its like I just cant see that Im beat..

http://www.pokerhand.org/index.php?p...mp;hand=166608

with him calling $2 and being in not a great position I figured maybe AK or AQ, but I was confused if he did have these hands why not raise... I certainly didnt put him on 67 suited... ugh

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no beat in this hand. You probably have WAY the worst hand on every street. BAMABOB51 probably has a much better Ace or a big PP like KK-JJ to put you in terrible shape preflop. And the other guy flops trips to have you killed on every other street. This was an easy fold to the rereaise preflop, an easy fold to the raise on the flop, and an even easier fold to the all-in bet on the turn. People don't bluff that much, you need to give people more credit for the hand they are representing. His flop raise says,"I have a 7," and you chose not to believe him.

It seems to be your default play to not believe your opponents until you have a reason to suspect they are solid. Your default play should be to believe your opponents have the hands they are representing until you have a reason to suspect they are tricky or stupid or whatever they may be. This is what you should be noticing about your opponents. Take notes with the software features on the site you are playing. Notes should be like "this guy will put all his chips in with TPTK on the flop, so don't bluff and wait for an overpair or set to push hard", "this guy will go broke with any overpair and play very conservatively with AK, so feel free to consider his whole stack as implied odds to hit my set", "this guy never folds any pair, so don't bluff him", etc. Learn from your mistakes. I will rarely put all my chips in with just TPTK or an overpair unless I have a good read that my opponent will push very hard with many hands that I beat. There are many opponents that will and many that won't. This is a key thing you must learn about the players at the table.

Also, preflop if you raise, raise at least 3 times the previous bet. At a .50 BB table raise it to $2.00 when you bring it in for a raise. If someone raises to $2.00 before you and you look down at KK make the bet at least $8.00 ($2.00 call plus $6.00 raise). Here you will really be killing implied odds and picking up decent pots when people miss with 66 and such. On later streets, you should be betting a fraction of the pot between 1/3 to the full pot. 1/3 pot bets are mostly for when you flop a monster (Full House usually) and you would like someone to draw at a flush or straight. They are also good for bluffing bets when you miss with AK, but the board looks ragged enough that no one else will call. The upper end of pot sized bets are for when you have a strong but vulnerable hand like a set with 2 to a flush on the board. Now you would like to win or charge the flush draw too much to call correctly.

If I go on too much longer I might as well write a book and try to get it published, but you get the idea. By the way, seeing the flop on 20% of hands seems awfully high if you are going by Harrington's recommendations. I would expect this to be closer to 15%, so I think you are overvaluing trash like ATo and KJo. You should also only play one table at a time if you are a losing player. This will slow your losses and give you more time to pay attention to your opponents (an area that seems to need a bit of work). Work harder at collecting useful information about your opponents when you are out of hands at one table. Every shown hand is worth a good amount of money, so don't miss that information.

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems to be your default play to not believe your opponents until you have a reason to suspect they are solid. Your default play should be to believe your opponents have the hands they are representing until you have a reason to suspect they are tricky or stupid or whatever they may be.

[/ QUOTE ]

This single piece of advice is the most important thing I've had to learn in moving from LHE to NLHE. Yes, people bluff sometimes, but not that often -- and those who are compulsive bluffers usually make that fact obvious after a dozen hands.

The only nit I'd pick with your excellent post is that expressing rules when you should always bet 1/3 pot or always bet the full pot is going to give away too much info to observant opponents. You can probably make plenty of money from unobservant ones, but it makes sense that, as Harrington suggests, you should vary the size of your probe, continuation, and value/draw-odds-denying bets so that it's not immediately obvious which is which.

But thanks for a very good post.

[Cooker]

[ QUOTE ]


The only nit I'd pick with your excellent post is that expressing rules when you should always bet 1/3 pot or always bet the full pot is going to give away too much info to observant opponents. You can probably make plenty of money from unobservant ones, but it makes sense that, as Harrington suggests, you should vary the size of your probe, continuation, and value/draw-odds-denying bets so that it's not immediately obvious which is which.



[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this (notice I said mostly not always when talking about when to bet what amount). Those were meant as general guide lines for what a reasonable bet should be, and to give a feel for why I want to make a certain sized bet. All situations in poker are different, but the more you know what to think about, the better you will be able to analyze each situation.

hey sky? i'm planning a .5NLHE tourney next week. you want to come play?

you can sit next to me.

tlt.