Live Grind: How to Fall Asleep at the Table (Without Getting Caught)

[duggs]

That would make them worse not better

 

[Ubercroz]

That would make them worse not better

I meant better than they are. They tend to under rep there hands so they don't get value when they should and they over rep worse hands so they get called down by better too often.

If they only raised their good hands and called their weak hands, they would do better than playing the ass-backwards way they are.

So not "better" meaning good, but better as a relative value to the crappy way they normally play. At least they would get value from their good hands.

 

[duggs]

No what up suggested is further away from a balanced strategy, limping 100% and calling is better than limping 95% and raising the top 5%

 

[Ubercroz]

correct, but if you have a strategy perfectly balanced towards losing it can be worse than a predictable strategy that is consistent.

So while your strategy may be "balanced" it is worse than the obvious one.

 

[Matt Vaughan]

No what up suggested is further away from a balanced strategy, limping 100% and calling is better than limping 95% and raising the top 5%

I think it's tough to talk about what makes a better strategy in a vacuum, without talking about opponents? Just to play devil's advocate here, strat 1 (limp/call 100%) is better than strat 2 against people who are solid and can exploit you. But strat 2 is much, MUCH better against people who will still pay you off when you raise only 5% (definitely an existing dynamic in this game at times).

 

[duggs]

fair point

 

[DunningKruger]

This exactly. A cold call from the SB is like PP's (22-JJ) and AQ+. But I don't think non-pairs ever get to the turn. Overpairs don't get to the river, and if they did they wouldn't be jamming.

To be honest you're saying a lot of things in regard to this hand I find quite puzzling. No deuces in her cold calling range (that don't have quads otr), overpairs supposedly don't even get to the river, and you think it's close between bet/fold and check? So there's virtually nothing at all this 35/8 is holding we can actually beat let alone that will pay a river bet? If jamming is "awful" then how is bet/folding the 2♦ for close to half our remaining stack (yet roughly a third of the actual pot size) anything but a complete disaster? We stick in 2/3rds of our 188 blind stack and then fold what is pretty much the top of our range to like 7 combos getting almost 5 to 1..? Against many players doing anything but shoving would be awful here, but I concede that in this particular game where everyone sucks the dynamic is rather unique. Bet/fold otr here is brutal however in spite of that, and most of what you're arguing here (how this player can check/raise with a full house otr, etc) only furthers the point.

Don't reply or it will ruin your 1,337 post count.

 

[Matt Vaughan]

Agreed I took the worst line by far lol.

Personally I just have a lot of trouble getting inside the head of a player like this at times. Does she call the turn with 77? What about JJ? And then what about the river?? I have no idea.

But I think you're right that bet/fold has to be the worst option. Since if villain is bad enough to bluff-catch with like 99 here, then we should just jam the money in, and if she really has QQ, then gg us. And if she can't bluff-catch 99 here then it's a snap check-back. I sort of tried to "compromise" by bet/folding since she's never going to x/r the river with something worse really, but the compromise doesn't work too well in SPR like 0.9. I was trying to accommodate my uncertainty in her range... or something.

 

[Ubercroz]

To be honest you're saying a lot of things in regard to this hand I find quite puzzling. No deuces in her cold calling range (that don't have quads otr), overpairs supposedly don't even get to the river, and you think it's close between bet/fold and check? So there's virtually nothing at all this 35/8 is holding we can actually beat let alone that will pay a river bet? If jamming is "awful" then how is bet/folding the 2♦ for close to half our remaining stack (yet roughly a third of the actual pot size) anything but a complete disaster? We stick in 2/3rds of our 188 blind stack and then fold what is pretty much the top of our range to like 7 combos getting almost 5 to 1..? Against many players doing anything but shoving would be awful here, but I concede that in this particular game where everyone sucks the dynamic is rather unique. Bet/fold otr here is brutal however in spite of that, and most of what you're arguing here (how this player can check/raise with a full house otr, etc) only furthers the point.

Don't reply or it will ruin your 1,337 post count.

I think the point of b/f on the river is that there ARE some hands that get to the river we beat, and can get value from. However, none of the hands that raise on the river are those "beaten" hands.

So you can bet the river, with expectation of getting some value from worse hands, and you can fold to a raise because it is very unlikely that you win in that spot.

Pretty straightforward.

Though, I wonder a little what worse hands are calling. Probably not any under pair to the board, so maybe JJ? AQ could still be there, but seems (based off of impressions by the player) that it is unlikely.

Because this player called a flop bet and a turn bet you have to start limiting down the range to hands that would make sense to get there. Honestly, this seems really strange.

Not only do I have trouble seeing a hand that we beat getting to the river like this, I have a hard to seeing a hand we lose to playing it like this.

I think a b/f makes sense, I would be stunned for someone to bluff raise the river here, so you may as well save yourself some big blinds when the raise does come and you have to fold.

 

[DunningKruger]

I think the point of b/f on the river is that there ARE some hands that get to the river we beat, and can get value from. However, none of the hands that raise on the river are those "beaten" hands.

So you can bet the river, with expectation of getting some value from worse hands, and you can fold to a raise because it is very unlikely that you win in that spot.

Pretty straightforward.

Though, I wonder a little what worse hands are calling. Probably not any under pair to the board, so maybe JJ? AQ could still be there, but seems (based off of impressions by the player) that it is unlikely.

Because this player called a flop bet and a turn bet you have to start limiting down the range to hands that would make sense to get there. Honestly, this seems really strange.

Not only do I have trouble seeing a hand that we beat getting to the river like this, I have a hard to seeing a hand we lose to playing it like this.

I think a b/f makes sense, I would be stunned for someone to bluff raise the river here, so you may as well save yourself some big blinds when the raise does come and you have to fold.

Just trying to better understand the thoughts/logic of the poster I replied to. Bet/folding otr only makes sense if there are a sufficient number of worse hands that will pay the bet. The thing is, even if bet/folding is a profitable play, it just means that shoving is likely to be more profitable. To contrive a set of circumstances where bet/fold is better than jamming isn't easy because for one thing villain would need to get to the river with a wide enough variety of hands that her calling range can sufficiently expand (or contract) based on the size of our bet - assuming she'll actually do that to begin with. Just based on some of the thoughts on this hand so far (mainly hero who would know better than any of us I suppose, but also Sandbag who I was replying to) it doesn't seem like villain has a particularly wide range on the river here.

Another problem with bet/fold in the face of ridiculous odds is that you have to soul read this 35/8 flawlessly not to make an epic blunder. With even the smallest chance this is a hand value jamming we can actually beat or split with... maybe an AA (it's plausible to suggest villain doesn't have us on any better than a big pocket pair) or something we don't expect to see in her range like an A2s or 32s or whatever... then suddenly bet/fold is a definite mistake. You don't often get into situations where a bet/fold is the best play when you have less than a pot sized bet to begin with, and I'm not convinced this is one of those times. Basically I'm just wondering how shoving can be so terrible and yet at the same time bet/folding is something a few of you are cool with.

 

[Ubercroz]

DunningKruger - Good points there, I don't think a shove here is awful, I think I just like a bet/fold better.

You are risking a relatively low amount and you can react reasonably based off the information you get. I don't know that you need to have a soul read on this guy to fold, just a good understanding if they are likely to bluff raise a value bet on the river. I have a hard time seeing someone doing that at most stakes.

I can see the merit in a shove, if you think we get enough calls from worse hands then it is much better than a bet fold. I just am not certain enough worse hands call often enough for it to actually be better than a smaller bet and a fold to a shove.
I could certainly be wrong here, I haven't run any ranges on this and don't know how often we need that shove to get called for it to be better, it could be close or I could be totally wrong.

 

[Weisssound]

I can think of a number of lines that do this that don't beat a straight. But I can think of a lot of lines that do...

Villain is flatting a three bet out of position. That's a big clue as to what's going on. There's really only a few things this implies: A) Villain's hole cards are so strong she feels she's likely to get money on later streets. AA/KK/QQ. B) Villain has a marginal hand that she feels she can see a flop with - AQ/AK/KQsuited. C) Villain is very loose and will play speculative hands out of position. Her VPIP is fairly high so we can consider pocket pairs, and suited connectors as a possibility.

We can also assume that A 3 off is fairly disguised and that big Aces and big suited connecters, or hands like 10s, JJ, QQ are a more likely read, with KK and AA being reasonable possibilities.

Ok, so 2 45 on the flop. A check, a 2/3ish pot bet and a call. We can assume whatever would call pre-flop that isn't dead-looking would play this line. So AA, KK, QQ, 67, 22, 33, 44, 55, AK. Now what does she have you read for? This looks like a pretty run-of-the-mill c bet so its probably the exact same range you've been read for pre-flop.

Turn. Q.

Another 2/3 pot bet. If I didn't know your pre-flop cards, from the villain's perspective, I would think your most likely hole cards are AQ/KQ, with a second possibility being 10 10 - A A. So whatever the villain is calling with has to at least beat a pair of 10s. I think this narrows her range to JJ, KK, AA, AQ, KQ or 55, 44, 22. I think speculation is out at this point, and I think cold bluffs are out because your bet is too much in that "perfect value" zone.

River 2

So the question is, what checks the river, sees a 1/3 pot raise and shoves. The thing about that raise is that (in my experience) the only reason people do 2/3s 2/3s 1/3d is because they don't feel their opponent has a strong enough hand to call more and you would maybe like to induce a bluff. To me, your line reads strength. If the villain had AQ/KQ I think its a flat call. Out. AA and KK might shove here if they feel you solidly have AQ - but me personally, I've been bit on the river so many times with AA that I think a flat call is fairly likely. QQ would definitely shove here, as would 55, 44, and 22.

The only other clue is the tanking. Tank-checking a set of queens in my experience isn't usually how that trap goes. It's usually: moment of hesitation cause holy shit there's my set, followed by a quick check. The tank-check would be more indicative of AQ. The tank call makes sense for AQ, QQ and 55. If it's AQ, it's about: am I still beat here? If it's QQ/55 it's: how can I get value here?

The tank-check on the river is weird though. I don't think hands like AQ really need to think too much about a check here.

I think the only likely possibilities are that villain has AA/KK, tries to figure out if she's ahead, figures she is. OR villain has 55/QQ is hoping you're strong enough to go for it.

It's a tricky spot. My question would be, how often were you calling on that table? If you were calling a lot then I think QQ/55 is more likely for that shove.

Just my thoughts.

 

[stately7]

Nice breakdown and thoughts Weisssound. Very odd hand, hence the interesting discussion here.

FWIW, I would be folding pre unless I’d been pretty card dead or passive for a while, otherwise 3bet is fine, flop good.

What about an (ok maybe horrible) jam on the turn that gets looked up by big pairs and sets, and protects you against unpleasant rivers such as paired boards and a 3rd club?

In any case, I would be just as dumbfounded on this river, but maybe given I’m a lolz noob, I’d check – tank – call depending on her sizing and given the pot odds and % of my stack already in play, or check and enjoy her check back with something like KK (remembering how passively she played the hand to there).

 

[Matt Vaughan]

Jamming turn misses sooooo much value imo. It'd be for like 3x pot.

Just a quick update here. I played a long session the other night where variance was kind of gross. I was up to +$300 at a few points and suckouts dragged me back down twice, once right at the end of my session in a large pot where I was an 80% favorite getting it in on the turn vs. two opponents. Double gutter hit the river and I lost $120 instead of winning something like $270. Still managed a $60 winning session, but that was a frustrating swing right at the end. Glad I just left instead of letting my mental state deteriorate though.

The online game I'm in has a NL/PLO rotation game that I've had my eye on for a while, as it plays deep, and I can't imagine them being much better at PLO than they are at NLHE. I've played a few sessions, and it's going okay so far. The play is much more aggro than in the NL game, but I've seen some pretty bad stackoffs so far. But it will be tough for me to really know how I'm doing for quite a while simply because of how bad the variance is. I find myself playing significantly tighter than everyone else in both the NL and PLO segments. Will be sick if I run good, but gross if I run bad, so I haven't decided what percentage of the time I want to play rotation in comparison to NL. We'll see as time goes on I suppose.

Edit: Oh, and I'm still trying to decide whether it's worth it to purchase the Omaha PLO add-on. It's like $80... And I am feeling frugal.

 

[stately7]

Yeah i know on the jamming turn. Lowering variance and losing value, perhaps that should be my new signature

Is it fair to say PLO requires a greater roll of buy ins due to the higher variance? I do not speak from experience as Omaha always looks completely nuts at the Sydney casino. The big table is fun to watch though, average $5k pots.

 

[Matt Vaughan]

Just finished a roto session. Was a very good experience. I stacked a short-stacked guy twice in a row where he got it in pretty piss-poor vs. my range, and also pretty bad vs. my exact hand. Went a little "card-dead" after that, where I was seeing flops with decent starting hands and bricking completely. Was also getting almost nothing in NL, which didn't help, since I figured my edge was bigger there anyway.

Then I went on a pretty sick PLO run. I won't go into the hands in detail since I can't easily post the HH's, but they mostly involved me holding in some pretty sick 65-35 and 60-40 spots. I was in for $200, planning to leave if I broke roughly the $600 mark, since stacks routinely get so deep in PLO, and while I may be rolled for 100bb-PLO (or at least somewhat close), I'm certainly not rolled to be playing 400bb-PLO. However, I got into a confrontation where I back-raised an aggressive squeezor with QJ98 ds (double suited), and he flatted OOP. I flopped front door and backdoor FDs and an 8-card NSD (nut straight draw). The villain snap-jammed the flop (about 0.7 SPR) and I of course called. I was something like a 60% favorite against his A854 ds (he had a backdoor flush draw covered mine). But I turned a flush, leaving him drawing dead.

That put me at around $700, and in the next PLO orbit I opened AA74ss (single suited), got two callers, and flopped top set, a pair, and a flush draw, and had a blocker to straight draws. I got it in for like 200bb as a 60% favorite and managed to hold. I left the rotation up a solid 4 BI's.

 

[stately7]

I left the rotation up a solid 4 BI's.

That's what it's all about, very nice.

 

[duggs]

Weeeee, PLO is terrifying tho

 

[Matt Vaughan]

No doubt, my heart was pumping a bit in the AA74 top set + NFD spot, because even though it feels like I have a dominating hand, he's got wraps + FD's a ton of the time, so it's like, unlikely I spike a flush, and he's probably got 13 outs minimum. Very different from NL, simply because your equity advantage when you get it in is rarely going to be particularly high.

I'm reading a pretty basic PLO book by Jeff Hwang, but I'm enjoying it because it's helping me clarify thoughts that I've never articulated to myself. It's pretty preflop- and full ring-oriented, and pretty much advocates playing for the nuts only. A good place to start for me I guess, and I'm planning on getting his advanced PLO book once I finish this one (I found a free PDF version online). And that one will supposedly be better-suited to this short-handed game.

 

[Ubercroz]

I don't like short handed PLO games.

In full ring you get more orbits for less money and people (in my experience) play just as loose. Since you can drive the action when you want to, seems like full ring is a nicer slightly lower variance way to play.

I guess if you don't have a choice, it is what it is and enjoy.

There is a 2/5 game nearby me that has a minimum buy-in of $500 and people regularly sit with $2,000. I have taken a few shots at it, but I shouldn't because I don't really have the roll to play deep stacked PLO.

Good luck!

 

[Matt Vaughan]

Since I'm in the midst of the last days of classes, my Wednesday was shaping up to have not much going on. So I decided to go play live PLO Tuesday night. When I got there, the 1/2 PLO (with a $5 bring-in) game that had been going strong and had a waiting list when I left, was now 4-handed and about to break. I hopped onto a 1/2 NL table instead, and virtually immediately bluffed and semi-bluffed my way to a $300 stack from my $200 buyin (no one was very deep so I didn't buy in full). But then I went on a pretty terrible run, having to bet/fold many value hands postflop, and overall just not having boards come out ideally.

This continued for sometime and I topped up two separate times. Once for $100 and once for $150. I was in the game for $450 and only had $100 left with me. My name was on the PLO interest list, but it had been sitting with only 6 people on it for quite some time. So I decided I was going to grind no limit and see where that would take me. After dumping off about a stack and a half, I went very card dead preflop - card dead in actual starting hand strength, but also in terms of favorable preflop situations. I remained disciplined and kept folding, even as pots started to get bigger and hand requirements dwindled around me.

I took a break for food a little after midnight, and even though I was still down about $150, I was quite pleased with my play. I felt like my instincts were particularly spot on, and I was feeling the table dynamics better than usual. Maybe something to do with folding so many hands and getting more of an outside perspective.

I started to make some more hands again, and was paid off in a couple spots. Back to even, and feeling good about it, our table quickly went from full to 4-handed, and then broke. I went to another table, where there was a LOT of money. The average stack was probably about $400, with a couple people sitting with over $600. I spent a decent amount of time just observing the table, as my hands were pretty mediocre. The table was full of semi-regs and a couple fish, but most of the regs weren't solid, and I won a few medium-sized pots by using basic hand-reading and bluffing people off weak ranges.

Then I got into a spot where a tight player made it $12 in EP and I flatted 99 in the CO. The BTN and SB both called, and the BB made it $20. Everyone of course called. The flop came the lovely J93, and the BB bet $25 when it checked to him. It folded to me and I raised to $65. It folded back around to the BB, who snap-went all in for about $250. It was only a moment for me to call. The turn came a J, and villain weirdly said "ship it" - I had a brief moment of terror that he had JJ, but the moment passed as a blank hit the river. He turned over AA and my nines full of jacks were good.

This was a pretty big turning point in my session, since I'd been hovering around breakeven for quite a while. This was the first time I'd been in significant profit since the very beginning of my session, and I now had ammunition to deal with the deeper stacks at my table. It helped that at that point, the deck started hitting me in the face. At one point I made a marginal flop call getting an insane price, and with a lot of backdoor equity (I could easily fold turns unimproved), and when I backdoored a flush, my x/jam was mega-tank called. In another spot, I 3bet AK, flopped AKT, and got 2 streets of value against what I think was just a second-pair hand.

In another spot, I over-limp/called a smallish raise with A7s, flopped top two and led into about half the field when it checked to me. I got three streets of value against the PFR, betting $30, $70, and $115. There was some controversy on the river when the PFR pushed a call-sized stack just barely in front of his cards (which act as the betting line at the horsehoe), and I turned over my hand. He claimed he hadn't pushed them in front, but the whole table agreed, along with the dealer, that he had. He was asking if he could raise, but I think he was just trying to save face, as my hand was good for a nice pot.

All-in-all, I played for 12 hours - in for $450, out for $1,285. It's been an insane couple days, and while I know run good had a lot to do with this upswing, it's also really gratifying to see that I can swing to the positive side of my EV, too. My bankroll is (obviously?) sitting higher than it ever has, and I'm feeling great about my play and my run good. Hopefully I'll actually manage to play live PLO at some point and peddle the nuts (since the game is supposed to be insane), but... I guess this will have to do for now.


P.S. Will probably post a spot or two in more detail after I go to sleep for a while, but wanted to post this while it was fresh in my mind. Hope everyone has had as good a few days as I have!!

 

[vinylspiros]

Good to hear that things are going well for you scourge. Good thing that you remained cool while you were card-dead and managed to get into that good spot with the set of nines. Keep it up man.

 

[Matt Vaughan]

What an insane few days... I went to the casino tonight and played 1/2 for about 6 hours. I was in for $300, and cashed out $715, for a $415 profit. My stack peaked at about $850 at one point, and swung from there all the way back down to $500ish, until I settled back at the final $700ish. My bankroll is sitting at a healthy $5,900 (at this point, it's pretty much by FAR the highest it's ever been), which I'm still a bit in shock over. I'm trying not to get attached to that number though, because I realize that a lot of that has to do with recent run good, and it's easy to go on a downswing, etc etc. But I'm still proud of my play and pleased with my recent success.

With all that out of the way, I want to discuss a few hands. There weren't too many super interesting spots in my session from the other day, but I'll post a hand or two from there first before I get into the meat of tonight's session, which I'll do after I go to sleep.


Preflop:
In MP, I flat a $12 raise from a tightish, but aggressive player UTG. We go HU to the flop.

Flop: ($20) (2 players)
Villain bets $12, and I call. His betting range here is essentially his entire preflop range, and I expect to be able to take the pot away a lot on later streets.

Turn: ($45) (2 players)
Villain bets the same $12, and seeing as this is a scare card to almost his entire range, and my range is fairly uncapped here, I opt to raise to $45, hoping to fold out most Kx, along with any PP's QQ and lower. He snap calls though. I put him mostly on monsters and pair + Qh type hands.

River: ($135) (2 players)
Villain quickly leads out for $85. Now I put him almost exclusively on turned flushes, since his sizing indicates solid hand strength. Either way, we only have about $100 effective behind the $85 bet, so it's not like I can make any more moves at the pot. I fold.

Spoiler

Villain shows the Qh. I ask him why he is showing, and he says he's being nice to me, since we've played together before, and so on.

Next we have an exercise in hand-reading. My hand is not given, nor is villain's. Let me know what you think villain has after each decision point, and whether you like my line with air, with value, or a semi-balanced range (should have some of both). Another thing to consider is what you think a good preflop range is in this spot, and what our plan is for different postflop board textures.

Preflop: X X
On the button, facing an UTG raise from a somewhat weak-tight player to $10, along with two calls. I call. The blinds fold.

Flop: ($35) (4 players)
Checks around to me and I bet $20. UTG calls.

Turn: ($75) (2 players)
UTG checks, and I bet $45. UTG tanks for a while before calling.

River: ($165) (2 players)
UTG checks, and I bet $75. Villain snap folds.


Let me know what you guys think. I'm going to head to bed, and when I get up I'll post some of my hands from tonight's session.

 

[JOEBOB69]

Villains range preflop AJo+,99+
Villains range on the flop AJ+
Villains range on the turn AJ+
Villains range on the river AJ+
Looks like AKo to me the whole way.

Your range pre flop should be 22-99, ATs-AQs, 78sc-KQsc
On the flop i like for value or semi bluffing with a flush draw so 7x,55-99, xxss
On the turn somewhat of the same range. Though half the time i would check back my flush draws.
On the river you should be betting every value hand. An hope to get hero called by some A high hands(your sizing suggest that's what you did).

It's hard for you to have air in this hand betting into 3 players on the flop.
It's hard for villain to have any thing besides A high in this hand.

 

[Matt Vaughan]

Villains range preflop AJo+,99+
Villains range on the flop AJ+
Villains range on the turn AJ+
Villains range on the river AJ+
Looks like AKo to me the whole way.

Your range pre flop should be 22-99, ATs-AQs, 78sc-KQsc
On the flop i like for value or semi bluffing with a flush draw so 7x,55-99, xxss
On the turn somewhat of the same range. Though half the time i would check back my flush draws.
On the river you should be betting every value hand. An hope to get hero called by some A high hands(your sizing suggest that's what you did).

It's hard for you to have air in this hand betting into 3 players on the flop.
It's hard for villain to have any thing besides A high in this hand.

Thanks for replying, JB! I'm gonna give others a chance to reply before I chime in with any more thoughts/hands.