I'd originally decided to go back home to the Bay Area for a week, primarily in Reno/Lake Tahoe to ski and play a little poker, but since the ski trip got cancelled, I've been spending about 6 hours a day at Bay 101 in San Jose. Apparently, it's not actually a Casino (since I guess you're not allowed to have those in California unless on Native American soil), as there are no slots, just card games (like poker, blackjack, some game called baccarat...). I've played 5 days so far, every day besides Christmas day. The weird thing about Bay 101 is that the no-limit games have button blinds, so it's either 1-2-2 or 2-3-5 (where the button posts 1/2, the small blind posts 2/3, and the big blind posts 2/5, and the "limps" in the 1-2-2 games are for 4). Furthermore, there seems to be some pretty small max buyins for each game (200 for the 1-2-2, 500 for the 2-3-5). Most of my days have been relatively uninteresting (hence, no update until tonight), but I'll briefly recap those sessions before delving into today's hands in more detail.
Day 1:
I played the 1-2-2 game for about 6 hours. I didn't realize just how small the stacks ended up being so the games had very little action (lots of beginners who almost never ever bet, and very rarely fold to reasonable value bet bluffs). I ended up playing at a table with a lot of these noobs, but unfortunately, also an extremely LAG player. He was fun to play and talk with, but I have a lot of problems with tables with one super aggressive player and the rest calling stations. Apparently, the guy owns his own tech company and he usually/often plays 10-20 NL (with the biggest hand he'd ever won being a 20K pot with a straight flush against an Ace-high flush). I asked him why he was ruining my day by playing at the 1-2 table, and he was like, "It's Christmas Eve, I don't want to ruin my Christmas." Well, fine, just go ruin mine instead.
The rest of the table didn't seem to understand that he was actually really good. They just saw him play and raise lots of marginal hands and hit two pair/straights/flushes against them and just assumed the reason he was winning was because he was running so well. He ended up only leaving with around 500, but he ended up getting sucked out with top 2 against Aces when the board paired. Anyways, the whole point of this description of the LAG player is that I ended up playing super passive against everyone, and it threw me off my entire game (it didn't help to be card dead and calling off way too much money). Again, I need to learn to adjust when there are drastically different playing styles at my table. I ended up down 250 after the 6 hours, at one point up 200 and at another down 350. Definitely not one of my better days in terms of my actual controllable performance. I'm sure there were at least a few interesting hands from the night, but nothing noteworthy so I've forgotten them all by now.
Day 2:
I realized at the end of my first day that the players in the 1-2-2 game were actually pretty soft (meaning I should be up at the end of the majority of my sessions) but that my EV/hour probably wasn't that high because there's less action at the Bay 101 1-2-2 games than usual 1-2 games. Anyways, I played around 4 hours on the night and ended up around 170. Nothing really interesting to note otherwise about the session.
Day 3:
Remember the session that was the hottest I'd ever run? Well, previous session, here's your silver medal. I had the best combination of outside factors for this session: 1) good hole cards, 2) great flops, 3) no suck outs and a significant coin flip win (because it started my hot streak and gave me my big stack), and 4) horrible loose and spewy opponents (3! of them to be exact). Nothing much happened for the first 10 minutes after I bought in for the max 200.
-Hand #1-
Villain is an old lady (at least 50-60) who really doesn't seem to know how to play poker at all but seemed to have way too much money to spend (almost like she convinced her rich husband to let her have some fun). I'd saw her play some marginal hands aggressively preflop (any Ace-rag, KT, etc) and showdown without pairs. So that's something to take into account in this hand.
Anyways, she's UTG and raises to 8 (which is an extremely small raise at this table, especially for her). I wake up with AK suited and raise to around 30 after a call. Everyone folds to villain who ships (and has me covered slightly). I think there's no way she's "good" enough to raise so small with AA or KK to trap, so I'm convinced she has a low pair (or even better, a worse A), so I call. She shows 66. Board ends up showing two pair (higher than a 6) so my A kicker wins. Given all the information I had, I'm convinced that my call is very profitable (she's much more likely to have a worse A than AA/KK).
She rebuys and then two more horrible players sit down, one being some guy who looked like a hobo and overrated good hole cards post flop (i.e. AK is a good hand regardless what the flop is) and another being some middle-aged Indian dude (30-40 years old) who began raising and bluffing literally almost every single hand (it probably took him about 10 hands to bust out of 3 buyins). Through a combination of good cards and bad opponents elsewhere at the table as well (just not to the extent of the 3 that have been noted), I'd already built my stack to an overwhelming big stack (something around 600-700). Then come two interesting hands (probably separated by about 20-30 minutes).
-Hand #2-
Bad Indian player is the villain. I'd already seem him raise the last 3-4 hands preflop and showdown horrible hole cards, so I'm sure he'll do the same again (and I'd rather it get limped 6-way then called for 20 6-way). As a result, I limp UTG with red JJ. After a couple more limps, villain predictably raises to 25. Big blind calls and I repop to 65. Only villain and big blind call and they each have around 200 behind.
Flop is KQx with two spades. Big blind checks. I think this is a perfect time to check-fold here and still maintain control of the hand. Villain is definitely the type of player to continue betting (if checked to) as long he's still the aggressor in the hand. Otherwise, he'll probably take a free card if he can get one, and he has to be vaguely aware of 1) his table image (meaning it wouldn't be unreasonable for someone to expect him to bet as long as he's checked to), and 2) that KK and QQ are very much in my range and are hands (given the chip stacks) are trying to extract allins on this hand. In other words, I expect him to bet if he has a K or Q, but he'll almost definitely take the free card with any other hand (especially a lower pair). Predictably (and luckily), villain checks.
Turn is the 10 of spades, putting 3 to a flush on the board (and giving me the open-ender). Big blind checks. I'm confident villain at least doesn't have the flush because he's definitely betting the flush draw on the flop. Big blind might but if he does, it's definitely a low one, and I think he's betting the turn. I bet small, about 70 (appearing to commit myself to the pot either way, and I probably am if villain raises but I might fold if big blind does). Villain makes a speech about how he thinks I have the A of spades so he folds. Big blind also insta-mucks. Somehow, my red JJ survived the KQT board with 3 spades.
-Hand #3-
Villain is the hobo and he's in late position. Despite being obviously bad, he'd built his stack from around 100 to 250. I've straddled every time in the 1-2-2 games to induce action (unless my table has a surprisingly large number of aggressive players) and this is one of those hands. A very tight player (who's also short stacked and very readable) opens for 15. Villain calls, I see Q7 (I actually don't remember if it was suited or not, but I do remember it being a very loose call, so it was probably not).
Flop comes 775. I bet small, around 20, fully expecting the preflop raiser to raise, allowing me to potentially trap both players. He doesn't disappoint and puts in around 50 of his remaining 80 or so. Villain cold shoves for 250. I'm thinking, the only only hand I'm at all worried about is A7. He's loved his Ace-rags all night, but definitely isn't even remotely good enough to realize that a hand like 75 is probably more playable. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if he had 78 or an overpair, and I only need to be 50% sure that he doesn't have A7 for this to be a profitable call. After tanking for a really long time (somewhat purposely, because while it's slightly favorable for my EV if preflop raiser calls, I still don't want to have to dodge more cards), I somewhat reluctantly call and show my Q7. Villain flips over AK (before seeing my hand), as if he's confident he's ahead. He's drawing very thin at this point and the turn blank ends the suspense.
I ended the night at 987. I remember the exact number because I'm convinced I gave away 15 bucks. When I was stacking my chips to leave, a short stack had moved his chips to my seat and I inadvertently started collecting his chips as well. Right before I'd decided to leave, I remember counting my chips at 1002 (significant because I'd never left a table with more than 1000). The guy's like, "Hey why are you taking my chips," and I'm totally confused at this point and ask, how much did you have, and someone at the table says "around 105." So I take out 105 and give it to him, before realizing that I probably gave him too much. It really is only 15 bucks, but I get really annoyed at stuff like this because my obliviousness and naivete has cost me many times. Plus, I still have never left a table with 1000+ (this is somewhat significant, because at 3 different sessions, I'd at one point had over 1000, with one of them occurring tonight). My almost 800 dollar winnings on the night surpass my previous personal high of around 600 (which has occurred multiple times).
Day 4:
I decided to enter the 105+15 tournament at Bay 101 at 9:30 in the morning. 120 or so players ended up buying in, with 12 players making the money. I pretty much played perfectly (making correct calls, shoving opportunistically) but ultimately lost to lady luck. I actually started off poorly, as I leaked away about 30% of my 10k starting stack getting c-bets picked off early. Once I got to around 6k, with the blinds at that point at around 300-600, I'd open-shoved with QT, got called by 9's and doubled up on the coin flip. Much later in the tourny (short stacked again, as I was never more than a middling stack), I won another flip shoving 9's into a big stack who had AK. However, I ended up losing a pretty significant sized pot when my TT was called by a short-stack without looking and another player. I bet my TT on 3 undercards (and a club draw), the other player folded, the 3rd flush card came, and the blind short stack somehow turned over two clubs. On my crippling hand, I began with about 10x in the big blind, small blind shoved (with a slightly smaller stack), I correctly called with A7 (he had K5), and he hit his K. Left with less than 2 big blinds, I could only win 1 all-in and busted in 25th.
Day 5:
I entered the 105+15 tourny again. I ran well from the start and was able to build up to a moderately big stack for much of the tourny. Unfortunately, I ran into a couple of dumbasses my last table, who apparently don't realize that 1) there's no utility in semi-bluffing/bluffing me off a better hand when an all-in hand clearly still has them beat, and 2) there actually is utility in checking all the way to maximize the probability of knocking out the short stack.
-Hand #4-
I'm the biggest stack at the table, but not overwhelmingly so. I have maybe 25k in chips, while the second biggest stack has about 20k. Blinds are maybe 400-800 with some ante. I'm UTG and raise small with 33, to something like 1800 (the table was way too tight with blinds so big so I was hoping to steal the blinds and antes; this may have been a mistake but that's a story for another day). Dumb villain calls in middle position with about 15k behind, and short-stacked villain shoves for about 6k. I tank, and decide to call. I thought that if I were to call, there would be no way dumb villain would still call. And this was my mistake. I can't assume dumb villain would play optimally. Besides, if he only flatted my raise for about 1/6 of his stack, there's no way he's calling my shove. This way, I can get him to fold hands like 66/77, assuming big blind has overs. So in other words, I can make an argument in hindsight for either calling or re-shoving but not actually for flatting. Perhaps I should have folded, but big blind was so short stacked that he's probably shoving any two cards 10 or higher, meaning a big portion of his range is flipping with me (flipping of course often means I'm a 55/45 favorite), which is why I decided to call. What I should have realized though, is that there's such a small chance that dumb villain was trapping with a big pair that he's not calling me with anything less than AK/AA/KK (QQ/JJ/TT aren't trapping). In other words, I should have reshoved. Sure, I might be losing EV since the villains could have had overlapping overs, but given that I'm OOP in the side pot, I can never know if dumb villain ever hits his over. Anyways, flop comes T64 (or something like that) with 2 clubs. I check, dumb villain shoves, and I'm like, fine you hit your over. Instead, he shows AQ of clubs. What I was especially miffed about is that by shoving here, he's trying to get a marginally better hand of mine to fold (like 33). However, there's very hands that big blind villain can have that AQ currently beats (if a club hits, he beats me as well, so we should only care about if the club misses). AJ, KQ, KJ, and QJ are probably the only hands dumb villain currently has beat (short stack wasn't going to shove a weak A into a raiser and a caller, not with how tight he was playing). Furthermore, while dumb villain has 50% equity in the pot vs. me heads-up (meaning in a normal scenario, shoving isn't bad for him), he can easily get max value if a club does hit (i.e. if I theoretically had AK and the K of clubs hits, or if my small pair hits a set with a club). I'm also clearly not betting the turn unless I hit my overcard or set so dumb villain can probably see all 3 streets for free. I just see no benefit for dumb villain shipping the flop, while he could easily be missing out on value since I'm always folding unless I flopped a set (if I have AT, I'm not checking). And if I did flop a set, dumb villain only has around 35% equity, and he can see the turn for free, since I'm almost guaranteed to be betting the turn, regardless if a club hits or not. Of course, a non 3 hits the turn, and the river is a blank (non-Q, non-club). Big blind villain has AK and survives because dumb villain knocked the best hand out of the hand.
-Hand #5-
Not soon after, I raise middle position with AQ, which puts a very small short stack all-in, and I get one additional caller from the big blind. Flop is 3 blanks. Big blind checks, and I check behind. Turn is another blank. Big blind points at me, so I check, but instead, once he sees my check, he shoves. I call the floor judge, and apparently, pointing does not equate to checking. (The discussion here isn't whether the floor rules are consistent, because big blind had been pointing to check the entire time anyways.) Anyways, I'm forced to fold and big blind triumphantly flips over 7-high. River makes a flush, which the short stack has, so everything is moot, but had the river missed the flush, the short stack still had the big blind beat with a higher high-card (but obviously lower than my A-high), so again, I would have gotten screwed by a dumbass trying to bluff me out of nothing. This is even worse because there's LITERALLY no way big blind's 7-high currently had the short stack beat, because not only would many of the worse preflop hands have hit a pair, there's no way short stack (who had been folding the entire time, even with a stack of 2x the big blind) calls with worse than a 7-high.
The horrendous play at that table puts my slightly on tilt, and not soon after, I raise with A4 of diamonds on the cutoff into 2 small stacks and a big stack (why I raised small, so if the big stack shoves, I fold). Short stacked small blind calls (he happens to be the dumbass in Hand #5). Flop comes 865 with 1 diamond. Pot is around 8k at the moment. Villain shoves for about 10k. At this point, I have around 16k if I fold. I figured that being a medium stack at this point in the tournament isn't that significantly better than being a short stack, while being a big stack (>25k) is huge. I figure I have at least 7 outs (3 aces and 4 7's), which equates to at least 30% equity. Given how stupidly villain acted in the previous hand, I might actually still be ahead. So I figure, with villain's distribution of hands, it might be a right call for me in terms of plain EV, but even more so given how much more utility I assign to being big stack instead of medium stack vs. being medium stack instead of short stack. So I call. He shows Q8, and I miss the turn and river. In hindsight, the previous hand skewed my judgment over the probability villain is bluffing, so assuming he's hit his pair and with only a 30% equity, I should easily fold. Instead, I get crippled, and after losing JT vs. 88 (shoving UTG with 6x with almost any 2 cards) and missing my J and T, I'm eliminated in around 30th place.
Afterwards, I decide to play a few more hours at the cash games. Both the 1-2-2 and 2-3-5 games have long lines, so I sign up for both. My 2-3-5 spot gets called first, so I decide to play 2-5/2-3-5 for the first time in my life.
I buy-in for 300 (min is 200, max is 500). The most immediate realization I have is that there is so much action at the 2-3-5 tables, as the majority of the players are LAG. On one early hand, a pretty good player called the flop, bet the turn into two players (including me, the original flop better), and then shoved the river and shows bottom pair (which the other caller obviously could beat, but I couldn't as I missed both my flush and gutshot outs). From this point on, I'll refer to him as the Bluffer, as he's involved in many of the interesting hands from the session. I'm put completely off my game by the action and the overall frequency of bluffs and semi-bluffs. This leads to the following hand.
-Hand #6-
There are about 3-4 limps to me in late position. I have A3 suited and I limp as well. 6-7 players see a flop of A63 with 2 diamonds. Big blind bets 10 (into a pot of 30-40), 2 players call, I make it 40 (this is my first mistake, the stacks are so big that my raise to 40 doesn't give me any real information, as both a flush draw and any ace calls the raise), and big blind and the aforementioned Bluffer call. Turn is a diamond. Big blind shoves (I have around 150 left and he has me covered). Bluffer makes a really long speech about how he can't believe he's folding his hand and how he's not actually worried that big blind hit his flush but that big blind actually has an Ace. This of course influences my decision because now I think that it's likely villain has an Ace with a big diamond. Once Bluffer folds, I call, and see the flush. The river misses and I'm down around 500 at the table already. A lot of the regs at the 2-3-5 tables tell me that I can't fold two pair there (which may or may not be their honest opinion), but the fact that it's even a discussion that I should call is a big indication for the difference between 1-2-2 and 2-3-5 (at 1-2-2, you never call in that scenario).
Anyways, I'm rattled, but still convinced that I can beat this game, so I buy-in again. Unfortunately, I'm left with only 200 left (I'd brought around 800 with me). Then I start running hot again. I get QQ on the button, raise to 35 after numerous limps, get 5-6 calls, and see a flop of QJx with a flush draw. It gets checked to me, and at this point, I can't bet anything small as any sizable bet commits me to the pot. I get called by KT who misses and I quickly double up. Soon afterwards, I get JJ and raise early position. I get called by two players and we see a flop of Jxx. This time, with my bigger stack, fewer players in the hand, and less obvious draws, I can afford to deceptively check. Turn is a K. I bet, small stack calls, bigger stack behind raises, and I shove. Both players call and the river is a blank. Apparently, the big stack had AK (as the player next to him later said). After the AK rebuys again, I wake up with AA late position and raise. Only he calls and we see a low flop with a flush draw. He check raises me all-in and I call. He misses his flush and I'm now at 1000+. Then comes the cooler.
-Hand #7-
I wake up UTG with KK. I make a relatively standard open to 25 (this is after showing down the previous hand with K9, having raised preflop to this same amount). I get two calls before a 550 stack raises me to 65. There's actually a call after him to me, and I know that villain has a big hand (he's not one of the super LAG regs). That means either AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK, or maybe AQs. I figure since I'm out of position, I can't afford to flat here. I even tell myself that AQ and potentially AK/JJ are probably going to fold to a reraise, while QQ and potentially AK/JJ are going to call. This means that the only hand that can reraise me is AA. By 4-betting here, I can then determine if indeed I'm behind with KK. So I repop to 160. Folds to villain who announces all-in immediately. Remember my plan earlier? Well, when there's so much money on the table, it's hard to stick to previous plans. Now, I tank for a really long time, all the while subconsciously trying to convince myself villain can have QQ (because I lose a lot more utility from folding to QQ than from calling AA). I reluctantly put in 400 more and he predictably flips over AA. I miss my 18% and lose the largest pot in my brief history (an 1200 dollar pot). In hindsight, I played the hand perfectly, and had myself set up to fold to a 5-bet but I couldn't get away from the additional 400. I was calling 400 to win 700 so there needed to be a 35% chance villain has QQ. I'd convinced myself that with the loose nature of the table, villain is 5-betting with QQ at least half of the time. In hindsight, against any random player at the 2-3-5 tables, that's still not the case. Given the player in particular, it was an even worse error. He's probably 5-betting QQ 5% of the time, giving me absolutely no odds to call. Some might argue that I should have just called his 3-bet but what happens when the flop is all low (like it ended up being)? I don't think I'm going anywhere on a flop of 6-3-2 or something, so the 4-bet is correct as it should save me money in the long run, as long as I don't do something stupid. Of course, since I did, I ended up paying 400 to learn that no player at the 2-3-5 tables 5-bet shoves QQ.
This leaves me totally rattled and down to a stack of around 450. I hover around 400 before the next interesting hand.
-Hand #8-
I have Q9 of hearts in late position, and it's limped around to me, so I follow suit. About 6 players see a flop of ATx with two hearts. Early position limper bets out, Bluffer calls and so do I.
Turn is a 9. Checks around to me, and I bet relatively big (like 40 into a pot of 60). Original better tank-folds and Bluffer calls. River is a non-heart 10. Bluffer leads into me for 75 and I'm convinced there's no way he can call me on the turn with just a 10, and he's a solid enough player that he wouldn't have 1) check-called the turn with an Ace and 2) bet into me with an Ace, that I know he either has a boat (from a flopped set) or he's bluffing a missed draw. I almost instantly call and he mucks. I want to muck my hand too but apparently, I have to show it anyways. Bluffer asks me if I think he had a lower flush draw and I tell him yes.
This hand leaves me at around 550 and I eventually leave slightly above 500. However, the last hand before I left was interesting as well.
-Hand #9 (Bystander)-
Player A is in the small blind with a stack of 500. Player B is UTG+1 with a stack of around 250. Bluffer has everyone involved covered and is in the cutoff (I was the button). Player A seems a little like me, probably usually a solid player but overly tight at the 2-3-5 tables. Player B just seems bad, not like the bad players at the 1-2-2 tables, as he's not egregiously stupid; he just plays too passively.
Anyways, someone opens preflop and about 5 players see the flop. Flop is A65 with 2 hearts. Player A bets 25 into a pot of 80, player B ships for 200 more. Bluffer calls pretty fast (for him), and Player A then shoves over the top for 300 more. Just as Player A is reraising, Player B (who is already all-in) complains about how he now knows that he's beat (I'm not sure this made a difference in Bluffer's decision but it does make his decision a whole lot easier as it's clear Player B doesn't have a flush draw now). Consequently, Player B obviously has either 2-pair or bottom set. Player A obviously has a set. Now, since Bluffer is tanking, it's obvious he's got a draw, and probably more than just a flush draw if he called the original 200. He'd be calling 300 to win about 1000 so with just an open-ender or just a flush-draw, he's got more than enough odds. Turn is a blank but the river is a heart. Bluffer shows 79 of hearts, while Player A shows 55 and Player B shows A6. I'm not sure Bluffer's original 200 call is correct though. Assuming Player A folds (which means he probably has an A) and Player B has 2 pair/a set, Bluffer has 12 outs and 36% equity (taking into account board pairs). If Player B has a higher flush draw, he's got even less equity (27%). He's calling 200 to win 300 in this scenario, and he doesn't have enough equity in either to justify calling. The only way he has even close to enough equity to call is if Player A is in with 2-pair/a set since Bluffer would be calling to win more and there's fewer board pairs to dodge. However, in that case, Player A is almost guaranteed to be shoving over the top, and then the math gets a little more complicated. Furthermore, it's conceivable (before Bluffer's 200 call) that Player A has a set and Player B has a higher flush draw, and in that case Bluffer has only 10% equity. He can only win the main pot with a non-heart 8 and he still only has 30% equity in the side pot. Now, even in his best case scenario (which is if he knows for certain that both players have sets/two-pair), Player A has to shove, and then Bluffer is still calling 500 to win 750 with 37% equity, which is still not worth it. Of course, I did all this with the aid of the Poker Odds Calculator so I can't criticize Bluffer too much.
-Summary-
Time at 1-2 cash tables: 16 hours
1-2 Cash: +$720
Time at 2-5 cash tables: 4.5 hours
2-5 Cash: -$200
Total time at the cash tables: 20.5 hours
Cash Games: +$520
Time at the tournies: ~9 hours
Tournies: -$240
Poker total: +$280
Gas and food: ~ -$20
Net: +$260
-On record career to date-
Time at the 1-2 cash tables: 30.75 hours
1-2 Cash: +$1270
Time at the 2-5 cash tables: 4.5 hours
2-5 Cash: -$200
Total time at cash tables: 35.25 hours
Cash games: +$1070
Time at the tournies: ~9 hours
Tournies: -$240
Poker total: +$830
Net: ~ +$755
No comments:
Post a Comment