You don't even play NLHE
lmao yeah I'm so sad I'm not flapping around in NL2 infinitely
Sept. 19, 2017 | 5:34 p.m.
I love how you just managed to have a really angry conversation with yourself, and completely change your opinion in the process
Sept. 19, 2017 | 1:15 a.m.
It was just an example of a chart that exists. I play PLO, no idea what you 2 card monkeys get up to nowadays. I do think the difference in EV from Upswing chart to slightly better chart, is incomparable to the EV difference between no chart and upswing chart. Use whatever you want, just use something that doesn't RFI 17% OTB or whatever it is
Aug. 28, 2017 | 8:57 p.m.
Aug. 28, 2017 | 9:30 a.m.
I'm not an NL player, but from general poker perspective, two things;
1) for bb/100 positionally, use EVbb/100 instead. Graph looks like you've ran pretty much at EV but that could be run really good UTG and then really bad BU to balance, etc.
2) " Assuming the same "profit", SB should be half the loss, yet it's not, so I'm doing something wrong." This assumes that play out of the SB and BB is identical which is not true. -27bb/100 out of small blind is good, -27bb out of big blind is very good. The problem in these numbers leading to the low winrates look like they're coming from BU+CO. I'd look at your RFIs for each position, looking at the stats I'm guessing they're a bit low from BU/CO.
For preflop ranges I can't help for NL, but I know upswing have preflop charts out and I've heard they're pretty good, so probably a good start
EDIT: just seen that the PFRs are on there. You're opening basically the same range from UTG as you are OTB. This is a big leak. UTG at around 15% looks fine but BU you want something closer to 50% of your hands (probably, assuming its similar to PLO). Have a look at some charts, they'll help out. Being in position is good, taking down the blinds more often is good, raising in later positions more is good
Aug. 28, 2017 | 8:41 a.m.
fuckin 1000 apparently
Aug. 16, 2017 | 8:58 a.m.
Tbh dude, achieving such a strong winrate over such a big sample, I'd think about skipping the stake and moving up
Aug. 15, 2017 | 10:42 p.m.
it seems like the more I work on my game the worse my results get
I think this is something most of us have experienced at some point. My theory behind why is that we start with an overall game plan that we've designed based on previous study and intuition, then we notice one thing we do in the plan is really bad so we change that one thing, but it leaves the rest unchanged and it creates a weird imbalance. Think there can be a similar thing that happens with short term coaching relationships. Best advice I could give to that would be to focus on one area of your game at a time and go hard on it, otherwise you end up with a patchy game. Which is why for me exclusively studying with things like play and explains may actually do more harm than good
May 5, 2017 | 10:14 p.m.
I think cbet is way too big. This is about as dry as boards get, it really doesn't hit a MP opening range - call 3bet range very well, he'll have some Jx but he won't have much low straight draws or J4 type stuff. Betting a lot smaller (I'd go 1/3 pot) gives our bluff a good price vs a weak range and it gives our value (typically quite far ahead of his calling range) a wider calling range that its going to play well against.
You talk about how you were expecting a xr. Not sure why. He shouldn't have any xr range on this board here I don't think. He has almost no draws, not very much value, just makes no sense. We're never folding, if he can get us to fold an overpair with a xr here on a board as dry as this then we're in big trouble balance wise
I don't fold to a wheel card, as he has quite few draws and the draws he does have (maybe some A3, A5 kind of stuff with some big cards) we block a lot with the aces.
Never folding turn picking up nfd.
Actually curious as to what he had. Since you posted I assume you lost
April 24, 2017 | 10:45 a.m.
I don't play stakes this high so take what I say with a pinch of salt but imo unless villain is insanely imbalanced here then this is a disastrous fold. If we fold this we only ever defend with the nuts. If he has Ah in his hand our river calling frequency here is 0. Mildly exploitable
April 20, 2017 | 12:52 p.m.
you need to be way more specific, there's no answers to any of this it's too vague
April 19, 2017 | 8:35 p.m.
Yes, the all-in adjusted is how much you "should" be winning. Eg if there's a pot for 1000 chips, you get all in with someone else and you have 60% equity, your all-in adjusted equity there is 600, when in reality you will win either 1000 or 0. It's a measure of a small amount of the variance you'll see. I wouldn't get too stuck to anything over a 10k hand sample though, if you want to be doing db analysis on yourself then its not gonna be accurate enough imo unless you're looking at the less spot specific stats (such as WWSF as has been mentioned).
March 29, 2017 | 12:03 p.m.
OOP going to a turn there's a lot of cards that are ew and kill your action, I'd just shove and take the monstrous equity advantage vs his range. He probably isnt gonna be outright bluffing here (we block the shit out of reasonable complete blocker bluff combos) and his semibluffs (nfd, QJT etc type stuff) are gonna be priced in to call to the shove anyway. Pretty straightforward masturbate-with-one-hand-shove-with-the-other spot