Posted by Junelli 6:31 PM
Last night was great example of how your ultimate success at the table is a direct function of whether or not you're "in touch with the rythm of the game" or whether or not you're "in the zone." When you're out of the zone (and just not getting any cards), it's very easy to just sit in the rut for hours on end. You stop playing your normal style and wait impatiently for the bad streak to end. Bad cards breed bad play. Bad play breeds losses.

I've played in games where I was on top of the world and it seemed like nothing could stop me: Where I'm constantly raising and pushing the table around, and it seems like everyone's play is based on what they think I'm going to do. But I've also been on the flip side of that coin: Playing in games where no one even notices I am at the table. Folding hand after hand. Missing flops and getting pushed out of pots. And generally, not enjoying the game at all. These hot/cold streaks are all part of poker, and as players, we had better get used to them, recognize when they occur, and realize that all streaks (good or bad) come to an end.

But a bad streak can't only be blamed on bad cards. Cards are indeed important, but there's more to it: Confidence is a huge factor in how successful you are at the table. When the cards are bad and your confidence is down, it sometimes takes a miracle to reverse the situation. However, with high confidence a player can put together a winning session despite not having the cards to back it up. This is primarily what separates the men from the boys at the poker table. It affects everything from your quality of play, to the decisions that you make, to how you are perceived by others.

Last night was a perfect example of how easy it is to fall in and out of the zone (and play with and without confidence in the same session).

I played $2-$5 Pot Limit at a brand new social club opening up in the Galleria area (about 300 yds from my house). This was my 2nd time to play at this location, and last week was very profitable ($820 in 3 hours). I bought in for $300 last night and expected the same results.

I played much tighter than normal (as this game is very fast and loose), and didn't play many hands in the first 90 minutes. I did however manage to lose every hand I played during that time, knocking my stack down from $300 to about $75.

I was pissed. I wasn't getting dealt any good starting hands. I was missing flops. My pocket pairs were always lower than the board. I was folding preflop much more than usual, and I had the distinct feeling that no one else at the table even knew I was there. I was a non-factor in the game. Those of you that know my style, will attest that this isn't usually the case.

I reloaded for an additional $200 and proceeded to piss away another $140 or so. After 4 hours I was stuck $380 and only had about $120 left in front of me. I didn't bring any more cash, and had all but accepted the fact that this just "wasn't my night."

Then came the defining hand which turned it all around...

In the Big Blind I called a $15 raise with Q4 (**I know this call was bad, but that's a different subject). The flop came Q46 giving me two pair (Q4). I am first to act with about $140 left and decide, (1) to slowplay the hand, and (2) that all my chips are going into the pot no matter what happens (not too wise, I know). I check and the cutoff seat (original raiser) leads out for $35. I'm the only caller. The turn is another disastrous 6, counterfeiting my hand because now I only have queens and sixes (fours are no longer good). Worse yet, I have queens and sixes with a four kicker. Definitely not the card I wanted to see.

"Oh well fuck it." I lead out and move all-in for my last $105. The cutoff calls with AA. His two pair (AA66) is way ahead of my two pair (QQ66). "Oh well. Good hand." I stand up ready to go home. But wait...the river is a 4 giving me a full house (QQ444)! What an unbelievable suckout!!

I can't count how many ways I misplayed this hand. But what's important here, is that I won, and now have some chips to play. More importantly however, I now have my confidence back. I can play "my" game now.

I then proceed to win 3 out of the next 6 pots, eventually running my stack up to $700 or so. The cards were pretty good, but several of the wins were well timed bluffs (which I cannot pull off when I'm not in the zone). In the end, I gave a little bit back, but still finish the night with a profit. That's much better than losing $500.

The point of this article is not to describe that particular hand, but rather how important confidence is to your game. Sometimes it just takes one hand (or in my case, one little 'ole 4) to get it back and turn a losing session into a winning one.

11 Comment(s):

Posted by  Anonymous, at 5:31 AM, May 13, 2005  

Did the guy say "I hate pocket pairs" after the suckout?

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Dr Fro, at 8:39 AM, May 13, 2005  

Don't apologize about Q4. It seems that every time I have a defining hand that gets me out of a rut, it is a crap hand. I don't think that is an accident...

If you have been getting crap cards, then you have been folding a lot, either pre-flop or later. You have given an impressioin of a tight player. On this hand, he maybe had you on TT or something like that. Now the way this particular hand played out, disguising your hand is irrelevant (after all, you were behind), but 9 times out of 10, I get out of my rut by playing crap cards that hit a ragged flop perfectly while my opponents assume I have an overpair.

I'm glad you had fun - no more poker for you after next weekend!!

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Anonymous, at 9:32 AM, May 13, 2005  

No one in those games pays any attention to other peoples' "table image." I doubt he bothered to even put Junelli on a hand. He just thought "I have aces I'm going no where"

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Dr Fro, at 11:27 AM, May 13, 2005  

anon -

I recognized that his particular hand was not a good example of my point.

The point still stands that bad cards leads to folding which can lead to an image of much tighter than reality. When this happens, "switching gears" can be profitable.

I do agree with you that switching gears is worthless if people don't adjust to each player's table image. I don't what the case was in this specific example as I was not there.

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Anonymous, at 12:18 PM, May 13, 2005  

ni han

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Junelli, at 2:43 PM, May 13, 2005  

While I agree with the comment about "AA not going anywhere," I completely disagree with the statement that "no one at those games pays attention to table image."

This is not a small home game. Nearly everyone at the table is a regular poker player, and the stakes are not insignificant. At one point (in my first visit) there was close to $5,000 on the table with only 8 players.

Table image is important, and my guess is that everyone at the table has a pretty good idea who is: (a) the rock, (b) the maniac, (c) the solid player, (d) the loose player, (e) the calling station, (f) draw chaser, (g) the guy who's tilting, or (h) guy who can't lay down top pair, etc.

If a rock folds for an hour and then pots it preflop, I won't be calling with KT, AJo, or the like. However, if the Maniac or Tilter raises the pot, I'm inclined to call with more marginal hands.

Image is vitally important, and you'd be surprised how people (subconsciously) pay attention to it. Even the bad players recognize a tight or loose player.

But you're right AA wasn't going anywhere. Even if I had played that hand properly on the flop, and raised the pot, he would've called me (or put me all in). There is no way he was going to lay down AA to a rainbow board of Q46.

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Anonymous, at 11:45 PM, May 13, 2005  

Excellent point Poker Pro. One quick question; What did you put YOUR opponent on before you moved in for your last $105?

You sound like the prime example of a player that won't fold a big hand. One more question, did it ever occur to you, even briefly, that 2 pair might not have been the best hand? Doesn't sound like it.

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Anonymous, at 12:10 PM, May 14, 2005  

I think the lesson here is that top and bottom pair need to be played much faster on the flop. It's not a trapping hand. Especially when you are short stacked.

By the way, I went to this new club last night that Junell refers to in the original post. I think the club will be called the Dirty Zebra.

Anyway, Junell, Morris, Daly, Bailey, Edens and I had the pleasure of playing with Little Joe and his crew. Little Joe is considered by many the best player in Houston. He was playing our little 2-5 game because his company supplied the poker tables to the Dirty Zebra.

Suffice to say, an exciting time had by all.

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Junelli, at 3:14 PM, May 14, 2005  

Anon-

Excellent post. Very well thought out. I find it ironic that all ridiculous comments come from Anonymous people.

You are absolutely correct that, "I am the prime example of a player who won't fold a big hand." (you might refer to my post dated March 14, 2005 where I laid down KK preflop).

If you had bothered to read and/or think about my post, you would understand that I'm the one who moved all-in on the turn. I didn't call an all-in bet. If you don't understand the difference go read a book on the subject.

Please explain to me how, when I moved in on the turn, I was supposed to fold my "big hand?" Muck it as soon as he calls my all-in bet?

Oh wait, I guess you were talking about folding on the flop! Let's see: Should I have folded on the flop? The bet was $30 to me and I'm holding Q4 against a board of Q46. I guess I should've realized that 2 pair may not be the best hand. Wow, the more I think about it, I'm starting to realize that Q4 isn't actually the stone-cold nuts? Damn. If I had known that, I would've just checked-out before he even bet.

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Anonymous, at 2:57 AM, May 15, 2005  

Great comeback, PRO.

The question was: What did you put YOUR opponent on before you moved in for your last $105?

In other words, it was clear as day that you stacked off on the turn instead of calling all in on the turn.

All of which doesn't change the question, which was never answered.

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Junelli, at 12:12 AM, May 16, 2005  

I put him on AA, but knew I was going to suck out a full house on the river. :)

Seriously, I put him on a range of hands. By that point he had only made 2 actions: preflop raise, and a continuation bet on the flop.

He was a very aggresive player and had position on me. He could've been holding anything from AA to 22 to KQ to AJ to TT, etc. It was difficult to narrow down his holdings, because he made this type of move nearly everytime he had position.

There are only a small number of hands that could be ahead on the flop (QQ, 44, 66, Q6). I knew I was ahead on the flop. On the turn the number of hands is much higher (AA, KK, QQ, Qx, 44, 66, 6x). I was definitely more vulnerable and I knew it. It was probably stupid to move all-in, but oh well. There was also the chance that he wasn't holding a monster like AA. There were still a lot of hands that I could beat, and he also loses to any 6. I moved in hoping to take it down right there.

It's not the first (or last) mistake I'll make at the table...

__________________________________________________

Post a Comment