Posted by Dr Fro 10:01 PM


We went to a new place on Friday night. We all met in the parking lot of a nearby Kinkos. It was a lot like when Ocean's 11 all met up. Well, there were a few differences. They were 11 very studly, well-dressed con artists meeting in a Vegas hotel suite planning to make the biggest robbery of all time; we were 5 dorky accountants sitting around our Camrys at Kinko's in north Dallas planning on playing in a $50 poker tournament.

We caravaned to Muirfield. When we got there CCM was impressed because a player came up to me and said, "Hey, aren't you Dr Fro from IAG.com?" (thanks LAYGO, I owe you for that.) We got a bunch of referral bonuses just for coming. Flush with our bonuses, we felt like winners before we even sat down. Then we sat down. Out of 19 people in the 2-table tournament, we only managed to send one person to the final table (me). I represented the group well by busting out on the very first hand.

Only ARH, CCM and I played in the cash game, a $1-$2 NL Holdem game. Early on, I lost $200 to ARH with AK to his KK. Last week, Adam and I were trying to figure out who had the best of whom over our many big all-in hands against each other, and I think the edge now easily goes to him. ARH left early and CCM and I played until 2am. I rarely stay up past about 11pm, so I was having trouble staying awake for the last few hours.

The table was unbelievably tight for the first several hours. I was doing everything in my power to loosen the table up: table talk, straddles, showing rags when I won, etc. I don't know if my antics worked, if the change in opponents was the difference, if the passage of time did it or just what, but the table loosed up significantly over the 5 hours we played.

I have rarely been as happy with my play as I was on Friday night, even though I lost. I lost $200 on AK, $300 and $250 on AA and $320 on a hand I'll describe later. That makes about $1,100 in losses on quality hands. Plus I was dealt AA 4 other times that I could not get a pre-flop call. That sounds like a terrible string of luck, but I manage to lose only $250.

So here is the hand:

I am dealt 83o in the BB and see the flop for free. The flop comes K83 with 2 of a suit. I bet and get raised, and I reraise. He calls. Turn is an Ace, no flush yet. I check, he bets and I raise again. He calls. I am thinking that he flopped a flush draw and that ace just made him a pair. River is a blank. He bets, I go all-in and he calls. He shows K3. We both flopped two-pair, but his was better. These hands drive me through the roof.

I can handle a bad beat. I can rationalize to myself that in the long run I will win those more often than not.

I can handle making a stupid decision. I don't like it at all. But, I am good about analyzing the mistake, and turning it into a lesson learned.

I can handle making a bad read. Junell is very wise about NL, and he is the first to say that sometimes you just have to take a point of view on a hand. So you read a guy for trips and it works out that he had a boat. Sucks, but if you had a solid thought process for your point of view, you shouldn't sweat it.

What drives me completely nuts is having a hand fall into your lap in the BB, betting it up and losing like that. How in the hell can I put him on K3? Who plays K3? Even I don't play K3. I play just about every hand there is, but I don't ever play K3. Ug.

So, anyway, I was quite proud of my performance of losing $250 given the $1100 in losses above as the result of some very creative play. I have never stolen as many pots in my life as I did on Friday. Only once was I caught bluffing and the price was small (and the recipient was a friend). I was also reading opponents well and making good laydowns. Several times that I laid down a pretty good hand, I watched the bettor on the showdown show an absolute monster. And (the ultimate high for a gambler!) I twice called a guy that I put on a bluff even though I had barely enough to be the Bluff Police (once with A high and once with bottom pair). I have never had such a read on a table as I did that night; everyone was completely transparent. If only I had won that stupid 83 hand, I would have been up huge.

So that was Friday night. Saturday afternoon, Jane went upstairs to take a bath and played in the $200 ($1-$2) NLHE game on Party Poker. After 12 hands, I was up $250. The put a little extra bounce in my step for the rest of the weekend. I have spent a decent amount of time playing that $200 game this weekend, and I have come to a conclusion: The $25 NL game is easier than the $50 NL which is easier than the $100 NL game, but dude, the $200 is really soft. People come to that table to freaking gamble. For whatever reason, my results at the $100 game suck, but I have won the most at the $25 and $200 tables. I think I win at the $25 table because it is full of beginners and guys that are stuck and steaming. I think the $200 table is full of guys that love the thrill of gambling. In between are some decent players. Your thoughts?

4 Comment(s):

Posted by  LAYGO, at 6:06 PM, April 03, 2006  

It's all good.

You made it to the final table, I just managed to bubble. Wheee.

On the last three hands, I did manage to avoid a set of Qs, AA, and whatnot.

For some reason, I made a big show of playing J4s (Jack Hammer, or is it J2?). That just gave this guy the courage to raise w/A3o. 3-3-x-A-x board. YUMMY!

I'd've been all in in the BB next hand anyways, probably should've folded, eh.

In the $1/$2 I was at, I got seriously sucked out on . . . TWICE.

What was interesting, I had AJ (once suited) 3 times in a row! TWICE I flopped top 2 pair.

1st: I win after being all in w/top 2. Board: A-J-3-J-T vs a flush draw.

2nd: I AGAIN have top 2, I check-raise $20 bet to +$40 more, he goes all-in, I call. He's got A4. board: A-J-3-2-5.

And you know I want these calls EVERYTIME.

3rd: I flop nothing, but I had raised a straddle to $28 preflop & I get a call by 69o!!

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Anonymous, at 12:23 PM, April 06, 2006  

Dr Fro, you're a better player than I, but I always try and catch myself when I say something like you said ... " I don't, I never, etc.". The point is to not transpose your style, your biases, your thinking on the other player. But to look objectively at previous play, history and the information you have from that hand. There was enough information for you to at least slow down on the river. You made a mistake that I still make all the time by, in a sense, only playing your cards. Don't assume that a player is reasonable until you evidence that he is. Don't assume that he has similar starting hand requirments until you have evidence that he does. I couldn't have put him on K,3 either, but there was evidence that he had some strength. You could have played bottom two more cautiously given the information from the hand. FWIW.

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Johnnymac, at 12:49 AM, April 07, 2006  

Why can't all anonymous comments be as good as that one?

__________________________________________________

Posted by  Dr Fro, at 11:14 AM, April 07, 2006  

I hear you and appreciate the thoughts. What really tripped me up was that the whole table was playing very tight the whole night and this guy was new to our table. Evidently, he plays every hand, and the "regulars" knew that. My biggest mistake was assuming that his play was like everyone else when there was no evidence to support that.

__________________________________________________

Post a Comment