Don't really want to disclose what it is, but by bankroll has eclipsed a high water mark that I've flirted with before, but never been able to attain.
I've only played about 6.5k hands of cash this month, but I've been playing well at beating the $200 buy in game on Absolute for a pretty good rate. If I can keep playing this well, I'm going to take a shot at the $400 game soon.
I also found out that I somehow-- most likely from when I moved money from UB-- got $250 in bonus money on Full Tilt. So I have almost $600 in bonuses that is waiting to be unlocked. Unfortunately, the Full Tilt bonus expires sometime in August, so I'm going to have to start playing there more often. Not that that's a problem, per se, but I've been doing so well in the Absolute games that I'd prefer to not move if I don't have to.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Sunday, June 24, 2007
This Charming Man (He Knows So Much About These Things)
I haven't played too much recently. This past week I've played less than 500 hands, which is rare for me. My game's been decent, but I find myself occasionally making big mistakes, realizing it, but following through with them anyway.
I've been four-tabling the $200 buy-in games on Absolute the past couple weeks, and it's a pretty good game. I'm definitely not beating it at a solid enough clip to be copacetic, but it's definitely been profitable.
I've found both my aggression factor and my preflop raise %'s decrease slightly after switching my site-of-choice from UB and FTP to Absolute. This is mainly a function of three very specific things-- 1) people are limping a lot more, which allows me to limp in behind with position more often (obviously, I'm raising behind a lot too) which is also helped by the stacks being twice as deep, 2) people seem to donk bet much more often, and specifically, they will make smaller bets throughout the hand. I raise these a lot too, but I'm calling more than I would on another site. Third, people min-raise a lot more so I'm calling much more loosely from the blinds.
Speaking of acting behind limpers, Andy Bloch's section in the new Full Tilt book brought up something that I hadn't considered much before-- he says that when you have position and people limp in front of you, you should be more apt to limp behind than to raise. His reason is that by raising, you're punishing them, but eventually they realize they shouldn't be limping and adjust to a raise-or-fold mentality, which is obviously bad for us because it's a more correct way to play. This is contradictory to the way I see a lot of the higher stakes pros play, especially in Cardrunners videos (Taylor and Brian especially). During this month, my limp with previous callers WR and my WR for any hands I VP$IP are nearly identical. My "any raise" WR is double this rate, but there are obvious differences between these things. I haven't been able to filter out raising limpers, so if anyone knows how to do it, let me know.
It's definitely an interesting problem. In a vacuum, I would nearly always prefer raising over limping, especially if we're 200+BB deep. Since we aren't, however, it would be nice to figure out a way to be able to play aggressively and take the lead in hands, while at the same time not deter people from playing weakly preflop.
In other news, I'm quitting my job at Coleman. Tuesday night is my last night. One of the reasons I haven't played much lately is because I've been working for my dad more, which has more regular hours, similar pay and a shorter drive than Coleman. Of course, I have to get up early in the morning and can't manage to go to sleep until late, so I've been too tired to want to play cards too much, especially if I'm already making small mistakes.
I also got an apartment in Ravenna. I'll probably put up some pics once I get some. I'm moving in on July 15th. In the meantime, this is as good as I've got:
This pic is actually an inversion of what the place looks like, but whatever. It's smallish, but it's nice and close to school. I can't wait to move in.
I've been four-tabling the $200 buy-in games on Absolute the past couple weeks, and it's a pretty good game. I'm definitely not beating it at a solid enough clip to be copacetic, but it's definitely been profitable.
I've found both my aggression factor and my preflop raise %'s decrease slightly after switching my site-of-choice from UB and FTP to Absolute. This is mainly a function of three very specific things-- 1) people are limping a lot more, which allows me to limp in behind with position more often (obviously, I'm raising behind a lot too) which is also helped by the stacks being twice as deep, 2) people seem to donk bet much more often, and specifically, they will make smaller bets throughout the hand. I raise these a lot too, but I'm calling more than I would on another site. Third, people min-raise a lot more so I'm calling much more loosely from the blinds.
Speaking of acting behind limpers, Andy Bloch's section in the new Full Tilt book brought up something that I hadn't considered much before-- he says that when you have position and people limp in front of you, you should be more apt to limp behind than to raise. His reason is that by raising, you're punishing them, but eventually they realize they shouldn't be limping and adjust to a raise-or-fold mentality, which is obviously bad for us because it's a more correct way to play. This is contradictory to the way I see a lot of the higher stakes pros play, especially in Cardrunners videos (Taylor and Brian especially). During this month, my limp with previous callers WR and my WR for any hands I VP$IP are nearly identical. My "any raise" WR is double this rate, but there are obvious differences between these things. I haven't been able to filter out raising limpers, so if anyone knows how to do it, let me know.
It's definitely an interesting problem. In a vacuum, I would nearly always prefer raising over limping, especially if we're 200+BB deep. Since we aren't, however, it would be nice to figure out a way to be able to play aggressively and take the lead in hands, while at the same time not deter people from playing weakly preflop.
In other news, I'm quitting my job at Coleman. Tuesday night is my last night. One of the reasons I haven't played much lately is because I've been working for my dad more, which has more regular hours, similar pay and a shorter drive than Coleman. Of course, I have to get up early in the morning and can't manage to go to sleep until late, so I've been too tired to want to play cards too much, especially if I'm already making small mistakes.
I also got an apartment in Ravenna. I'll probably put up some pics once I get some. I'm moving in on July 15th. In the meantime, this is as good as I've got:
This pic is actually an inversion of what the place looks like, but whatever. It's smallish, but it's nice and close to school. I can't wait to move in.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Best/Worst Hands from TV
I thought I'd try something new and post the top three best and top three worst hands I've seen played on TV. Unfortunately, I couldn't find all of them on youtube, so bear with me on the other three.
The Best:
1) Ivey Puts in the 5th bet with no pair, no draw.
2) DiMichele four-bets all in with king high.
3) Negreanu bluffs Deeb.
I don't have the video, and I feel like this hand has been written about ad nauseum.
The Worst:
1) Jennifer Tilly Fears Quads
2) Tommy Reed Folds A Set
Don't remember how the action took place exactly, but if I remember correctly, he called on the flop with a pair of tens, hit his set on the turn and folded when facing a bet and a call. If anyone can find it online, let me know-- it was from the Circuit Event that Lisandro beat Ivey heads up in.
3) Kanter Doubles Barch Drawing Dead
Don't recall exactly, but I remember listening to the Cardplayer broadcast when this hand took place. I'd already concluded (justifiably or not) that Kanter was an over-aggressive donk after the hand that crippled Greg Raymer. So I, along with Phil Hellmuth from the broadcast, was waiting for Kanter to blow up.
On this hand, Joe Hachem limped in, Kanter limped in the small blind and Tex Barch checked in the big blind.
The flop came KT7 and it was checked to Hachem who bet with QJ I believe. I think his bet was somewhere in the 350k range. Kanter, with K5, then checkraised to 1 million. Tex Barch, with K7 then raised it again to two million. Hachem sighs and folds (he would've sucked out to win the hand, but it worked out for him anyway). Now it gets back to Kanter who thinks for like five minutes and then jams.
I'm not really a believer in most adages, but this is definitely a spot where "not going broke in a limped pot" should obviously apply. More importantly, putting in the fourth raise against a solid player who's put in the third raise with one pair and no kicker is just a god-awful play. I think Kanter probably just talked himself into thinking that Barch had either 89 or QJ. I doubt he does this very often, if ever, with either of those hands at that point in the tournament (I think it was five handed). In my opinion, Barch almost always has one of only four hands there: K7, T7, KT and the occasional 77.
In non-poker news, I put in my two weeks notice at my job. That's about all for now.
The Best:
1) Ivey Puts in the 5th bet with no pair, no draw.
This hand will probably go down as the sickest hand ever played. When I first saw this, I just laughed. I will never be that good, and can't analyze the hand because there's no way I can comprehend how the hell Ivey managed to pull this off.
2) DiMichele four-bets all in with king high.
I think this one I can attempt to analyze. The preflop action by DiMichele is standard. The 68s call behind is questionable-- I don't really play this way, but some people do and are successful with it (in spite of themselves, in my opinion). The flop check is difficult to analyze without knowing how he plays, but it's possible and likely that on such a static board, DiMichelle didn't want to continuation bet and set himself up for being bluff-raised, as a flop like 229r hits very little of his range.
Personally, I think Crane should've bet the flop.
On the turn, he checks again. Crane semibluffs his draw and gets checkraised. Given DiMichelle's likely range of hands (he's probably unlikely to have checked twice with TT+) he is probably sitting with an absolute monster or garbage. In my opinion, Crane realized that the only non-bluff hands that such a line makes sense with is 55,99 and A2. Also, because of his check on the flop, Crane knows (again, speculation) that DiMichelle knows that this bet is very often weak, so if he's unwilling to play back, DiMichelle's raise isn't a bad one. Sensing weakness and knowing his own range of hands is very bluff-heavy, he opts to raise again. It's difficult to say with the numbers (although Norman Chad said he was nearly all-in at that point) but I think if Crane believes DiMichelle is full of it, he should just jam instead of 3-betting with the intention of folding.
What makes this hand sick is that DiMichelle then shoves in, into a pot that sounds like it's large enough that any reasonable hand is calling. However, Crane opts to fold. Essentially, DiMichelle's read here has to be that even though his opponent has played his hand in a way that may indicate a monster (flop check, bet/3bet), he put him on nothing and went with it.
It'd be interesting to know the actual stack depths, because it's possible Crane should've called even if he thought he was only drawing to a gutshot, even if he's potentially drawing dead.
3) Negreanu bluffs Deeb.
I don't have the video, and I feel like this hand has been written about ad nauseum.
The Worst:
1) Jennifer Tilly Fears Quads
Conversely to the Ivey hand, I can't even speak to this. I just don't understand. Antonius is a sicko for sure, but jesus. The look on the other players' faces are priceless. I also love Antonius' reaction: "Full house?..... I can't beat that."
2) Tommy Reed Folds A Set
Don't remember how the action took place exactly, but if I remember correctly, he called on the flop with a pair of tens, hit his set on the turn and folded when facing a bet and a call. If anyone can find it online, let me know-- it was from the Circuit Event that Lisandro beat Ivey heads up in.
3) Kanter Doubles Barch Drawing Dead
Don't recall exactly, but I remember listening to the Cardplayer broadcast when this hand took place. I'd already concluded (justifiably or not) that Kanter was an over-aggressive donk after the hand that crippled Greg Raymer. So I, along with Phil Hellmuth from the broadcast, was waiting for Kanter to blow up.
On this hand, Joe Hachem limped in, Kanter limped in the small blind and Tex Barch checked in the big blind.
The flop came KT7 and it was checked to Hachem who bet with QJ I believe. I think his bet was somewhere in the 350k range. Kanter, with K5, then checkraised to 1 million. Tex Barch, with K7 then raised it again to two million. Hachem sighs and folds (he would've sucked out to win the hand, but it worked out for him anyway). Now it gets back to Kanter who thinks for like five minutes and then jams.
I'm not really a believer in most adages, but this is definitely a spot where "not going broke in a limped pot" should obviously apply. More importantly, putting in the fourth raise against a solid player who's put in the third raise with one pair and no kicker is just a god-awful play. I think Kanter probably just talked himself into thinking that Barch had either 89 or QJ. I doubt he does this very often, if ever, with either of those hands at that point in the tournament (I think it was five handed). In my opinion, Barch almost always has one of only four hands there: K7, T7, KT and the occasional 77.
In non-poker news, I put in my two weeks notice at my job. That's about all for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
