I just want to win ONE hand...ONE HAND

[feitr]

Ofc you never fold hand 1, but i also don't necessarily think that pushing all in is the right decision either. It's a pretty hard hand to play because if you flat call the flop, you have to hit turn or you are pretty much done. If you 3 bet flop, which is the right decision (but deeper stacks would be ALOT nicer), then you drive off alot of hands, but you are in pretty big trouble vs a set because they are going to shove.

I think the cooler aspect of hand 1 is just the fact that you were up vs a set, because most other hands would have folded this (or you would have had 6 more outs with the A and K being live cards).

 

[KingCurtis]

yeah this morning i saw a hand you were in when the guy called your bet whatever it was with Ace high( i think you had a low PP)....but then he hit his kicker on the turn.......seems like you cant win lol...your graph is hilarious, but i say your skill level is too high for the level at 10nl.....seriously i think you would do a lot better at 25nl or 50nl

 

[jaymfc]

combu , ok ok , I said I was a puss , I also said it was jmo . no need for tilt , chill .
my opinion can't get better till I read and post enough to learn the right way.

I don't just wait for the nuts but can't bring myself to chase a flush draw for good money. if my weaktightness disturbs you feel free to help me

ok back to OP , I'll shut up and read more , post less

 

[Stick66]

i can't even explain how bad bet/folding in hand 1 would be. good to know some of you guys only 3bet postflop with the nuts. jeez

let's think about a hand and use the beauty of aggression and not just waiting for the nuts every time. we raised in MP and made a standard c-bet on a flop that missed overwhelming majority of our hands. thus we easily have fold equity because he can have any number of medium pairs that figure they're good (until we 3bet), or pure air. we have way near the top of our range, and we even do well against a rather strong calling range. yes obv he raised so let's put him on a set only. the weaktightness of this forum disturbs me at times. name any good aggressive player in the history of ever and not one of them folds flop in hand 1

I guess it's safe to say that Comby doesn't play $10NL much.

At donkey stakes, aggression gets no respect. I think Tenbob wrote a cool article/post a while back about "How to win at 10NL", so I know Jay and I aren't alone in this thinking.

At $50NL and above, you are right on the money, Comby.

 

[robwhufc]

I guess it's safe to say that Comby doesn't play $10NL much.


At $50NL and above, you are right on the money, Comby.

Oooh, nice get out!

I like the play personally, 2 ways to win - opponent folds, or he calls and he is either already behind or he is ahead with enough outs to make AG favourite (or as near as).

Of course with a pair of 2's hitting a set, opponent is going nowhere, and this hand loses, but successful money making players are going to lose a hell of a lot of hands.

 

[robwhufc]

I still am having trouble believing that the rake is 'unbeatable'-- I am 5.63ptbb/100 over 13.7+K hands at $10PL on FT. I realize it is cutting into profit in a huge way, but 'unbeatable'?

Sorry if it seems i keep sticking the boot in a bit on this thread (you know I have best intentions) but does this mean you have won $77 over 13,700 hands (5.63 x 0.1 (big blind) x 13,700 / 100)? At 300 hands per hour (guess) thats only a couple of bucks per hour?

Have I misunderstood the stats?

 

[aliengenius]

Sorry if it seems i keep sticking the boot in a bit on this thread (you know I have best intentions) but does this mean you have won $77 over 13,700 hands (5.63 x 0.1 (big blind) x 13,700 / 100)? At 300 hands per hour (guess) thats only a couple of bucks per hour?

Have I misunderstood the stats?

it's actually 'big bets' in Poker Tracker (stupid limit game), but yeah, $155.20 over 13,774 hands, played probably close to two years ago.

imo the worst street is actually the river (though i do raise flop), which you surprisingly didnt comment on. really standard river fold when he overbets after the flush completes. if he had the weak A you put him on after the flop and turn, he's not going to suddenly like his hand 4x more on that river, such to overbet. yeah, you can't put him on the K exactly, looks more like a flush or full house by the river, but anything less gets scared when the flush completes and you've been just happily calling him down with the draw out. technically with the K he might be worried too, but he obv just thought "zomg i made backdoor trips, nuts"

what were you putting him on by the river? because the weaker A thing no longer makes any sense, and that's even in terms of players who are awful

most of the rest of them just look like mostly standard beats and slightly bad luck. hang in there and gl to you

Good points here ^^.

I guess it's safe to say that Comby doesn't play $10NL much.

At donkey stakes, aggression gets no respect. I think Tenbob wrote a cool article/post a while back about "How to win at 10NL", so I know Jay and I aren't alone in this thinking.

At $50NL and above, you are right on the money, Comby.

I have to disagree with this generally. Maybe you are not going to fold tpnk, but other hands will fold. Also, we want to see both cards here, and are not folding ourselves, so why not be the one putting it in instead of calling-- we are a fav over a hand like tp here anyway.

____________________

I guess I just am not getting enough positive reinforcement to stay sane. I don't know what the ratio is, but you don't have to give a dog a treat every single time you ring the bell to keep them running back, only like one every eleven times or something. I NEED A GOD DAMN TREAT !!

 

[feitr]

I can't understand why you would want to play NL10 tho just doesn't make any sense because it sounds like you have played poker for quite some time.

And beatable or not beatable isn't the point. The point is that you have probably given FT at least 2x your current BR in rake...

 

[Stick66]

I can't understand why you would want to play NL10 tho just doesn't make any sense because it sounds like you have played poker for quite some time.

And beatable or not beatable isn't the point. The point is that you have probably given FT at least 2x your current BR in rake...

10NL = good BR management for AG. That's the highest level he can play because he spends the rest of his BR on poker books.

 

[aliengenius]

I am a nit w BR. I have only about $600 on FT.

 

[skoldpadda]

Move up to $25max imo.

 

[Stick66]

Move up to $25max imo.

My thoughts, also.

 

[zachvac]

Step 1: Withdraw $600 from Full Tilt
Step 2: Deposit $600 on pokerstars
Step 3: Play until you have a large enough bankroll such that Full Tilt will only charge 5% rake
Step 4: Withdraw that from Pokerstars
Step 5: Deposit to Full Tilt
Step 6: Continue to play without being raped by the rake

jmo.

 

[blankoblanco]

Move up to $25max imo.

My thoughts, also.

agree. you will thank us. it's less % rake and better suited to your play (50nl even moreso, but i understand you don't yet have the roll for it)

 

[beardyian]

Have you thought of another game

No i don't mean like that - maybe take a break from all the fishes chasing to the river etc and dabble in omaha or stud etc.

Try something different and maybe see things from another angle

 

[robwhufc]

10NL = good BR management for AG. That's the highest level he can play because he spends the rest of his BR on poker books.

You put the smilies on, but i do find it rather incongruous that a person that has spent what must be IRO $3K on Poker instruction books is practising strict bankroll management on a roll of $600.

2 words, E and Bay.

 

[blankoblanco]

I so think Full Tilt is the cancer of online poker... beat etc. sucks

that's a great analogy.

moron.

 

[skoldpadda]

Pyre of poker books as sacrifice to the poker gods FTW.

Now that's a fire!

 

[Stick66]

I'll admit that I had to look this one up:

incongruous � � (

n-k

ng

gr

-

s) [SIZE=-2]KEY [/SIZE]�

ADJECTIVE:

1. Lacking in harmony; incompatible: a joke that was incongruous with polite conversation.
2. Not in agreement, as with principles; inconsistent: a plan incongruous with reason.
3. Not in keeping with what is correct, proper, or logical; inappropriate: incongruous behavior.

And I agree. I can only think of 1 out of my 43 poker books that I paid full price for. The rest I bought with Borders' 40% off coupons, gift cards, or I got used at used book stores or on eBay. But I've only read 12, so I have a ways to go to catch up.

 

[NineLions]

I do admire your determination, AG.

Though to some extent it's looking as if it's now a thorn in your side that you're trying to work out, which is fine too.


I truly hope to see a treatise from you at some point on how to beat $10NL on Tilt. Even with the rake I think it can be done, but I suspect it requires a real understanding of how the various players at this level think/play and then how to beat each individual style. These ain't, for the most part, CC regulars.

 

[feitr]

w/ 600 you are more than rolled for 25$ NL...the play at 25$ NL is terrible as well but at least you don't have to have as much +BB/100 to actually profit nicely. 10% rake is an absolute robbery.

 

[blankoblanco]

w/ 600 you are more than rolled for 25$ NL...the play at 25$ NL is terrible as well but at least you don't have to have as much +BB/100 to actually profit nicely. 10% rake is an absolute robbery.

he's not really "more than rolled" at all. he's reasonably rolled but not quite bankroll nit rolled, which is his problem