Study Group: Polished Poker Vol. II Workbook

[Figaroo2]

Hi Fig... can we post / discuss this elsewhere? I want to just keep this thread for the book discussion. Some things you have to consider is that ranges aren't static. A lot of people get really confused by this. I think there might be an APD thread in poker software. If not we can open one or something.

Yeah no problem I thought the process of transferring preflop ranges into equity through the streets and thus whether you should bet/check/fold would be of interest to the group.
This area appears to be the source of the passivity in my game.
I can effectively use my HUD and the preflop action to give my opponent a range. What im not so good at is determining the equity of my hand against that range and how that changes post flop and thus what action is best. This is a key area for me and should be my aha moment when I finally nail it.

 

[John A]

Yeah no problem I thought the process of transferring preflop ranges into equity through the streets and thus whether you should bet/check/fold would be of interest to the group.
This area appears to be the source of the passivity in my game.
I can effectively use my HUD and the preflop action to give my opponent a range. What im not so good at is determining the equity of my hand against that range and how that changes post flop and thus what action is best. This is a key area for me and should be my aha moment when I finally nail it.

I completely understand, and it's good you're working on this part. It's an area that once you start seeing and understanding better, the game does get easier. There's no easy way to get better at it, but that's why I made the equity trainer in ace poker drills. It's trying to take something that can take a few years to learn, and bend that learning curve really quickly. So while you're playing with it, know that you're not going to get become an expert right away. Even if you're missing the value ranges, it's more about that you're understanding where that equity range is because it's not an exact science. You just don't want to be 15%+ points off, because that can make a difference in slim decisions. You want to have an error range of less than 10%, and of course the lower the better.

 

[John A]

If there's anyone who doesn't want me to go over their Chapter 2 results that posted here publicly let me know and I can PM you instead. Otherwise I'm going to go over each of them and make fun of all of the holes in your games, and berate you on how bad you're doing. Or I'll just make some suggestions.

 

[rhombus]

If there's anyone who doesn't want me to go over their Chapter 2 results that posted here publicly let me know and I can PM you instead. Otherwise I'm going to go over each of them and make fun of all of the holes in your games, and berate you on how bad you're doing. Or I'll just make some suggestions.

Bring it on. The only way is UP

 

[John A]

Hand Reading (R) 7
Depends on the player against some players I seem to do ok then othertimes against the fish can be way off.

Ok, this is good. I know you're putting work in here.

Post-flop Bluffing (R/A) 6
I tend to CBET and Bet the Turn but shut down on the River. Sometimes think you are making a great bluff and they call with bottom pair on a bad River

I don't think this should be a big focus for you right now. At some point yes, but right now there's a couple of other areas you need to focus on below.

Anticipating Opponent Reactions (P) 6
OK, makes it alot easier when somebody takes a bad beat then goes crazy

If you have a reg on your right, then you should start trying to 3-bet them lighter and getting them to make some mistakes. I don't think this is a primary focus for you right now either, but it's something that's crucial to being a great player.

Light Value Betting (R/A) 7
Tend to just try against the pasive fish on drawy boards when I have top or 2nd pair and keep betting till the raise or when the obvious draws hit

Turn CBET% 45.2 - Plugging Leaks Overall & Leak Buster Overall
Turn Agg% 36.5 - Leak Buster Overall

River Agg% 30.02 - Leak Buster Overall

Are the above stats from the right location or should they all be on same Tab

I've seen some spots where you've missed some spots. So definitely keep working on this so it's in the 8+ range.I think your river agg% is pretty decent, the turn agg% is a little low. It matters how much you're involved in pots though also.

Tilt Control (P) 7

Occasionall spew chips when the usual bad beats occur but got alot better.
Couple of years ago Id be tempted to chase but if I lose 2 or 3 buyins with suckouts I just stop playing. No point throwing more money away.

Not bad. It's always an area we can get better at, but it looks like you're ok here.

Calling Down Light (R) 5
Probably biggest weakness, Im one of lifes non-believers

If you're a non-believer, then you'd be calling down lighter no? I know this is an area you're working on. Keep posting hands. It's not going to be about calling down light as much with what you're doing at your stakes, but just making the correct turn and river calls given your opponents range and pot odds. I know this is a work in progress and it's good you've identified it.

Bet Sizing (R) 6
Alot of time never sure what sizes I should use especially on the turn.

If Im trying to get my stack in with strong hands on drawy boards, Im never sure what to Bet on Turn so River becomes easier, mainly at what point am I commited or if the obvious flush draw comes in, can I get away from it

This should be a key area for you to work on. I see you missing a good amount of value in hands you post. You're unsure about commitment thresholds because you're still trying to get better at understanding range. When these things come together, it will get super easy. But for the most part, I'd work on making sure you're at least betting much more against weak players. The sizing should change between regs and weak players. With value hands you're betting big, and weak hands weak against weak players. They'll let you get away with it.

Proper Aggression (A) 6,
I think my 3Betting is ok, although not sure which hands at times to do it with.
Post Flop I rarely 3 Barrel as it just seems I get shoved on the River.

Maybe linked with Bet sizes above

Not a big concern right now. Something you'll want to work on, but it will come naturally when you get these other areas worked out.

Capitalizing on Opponent Weaknesses (A) 6
probably ned to work at getting better with my HUD

Yes, if you see someone doing X too much or not enough, then you need to exploit it. Since you said you're not 3-betting enough, then if someone is opening a lot, 3-bet a more non polarized range against them in position for value. It's a good way to start some simple exploitation.

Inducing Bluffs (R) 6
Ok against the aggros my checking back when obvious draws have missed when I have top pair etc and waiting for them to bluff

Yeah, and this is fine for now. Later you're going to want to combine this with calling down light in some spots as your opponents get better. But for now, not a big concern.

Math of Poker (R) 8
Know al my %'s of hiting my hand just not great on My EV against their range

Solid.

Starting and Quitting Sessions (P) 8
Depends how its going, Linked to my tilt I know when to quit and wait for another day

Good... so that's good as well. I think you know the areas you should focus on and put work in on. I'd say:
Light value betting
Calling down light (or at least making the correct river calls).
Bet sizing

Those are the areas I'd focus on first. Good work!

 

[rhombus]

Quote:
Calling Down Light (R) 5
Probably biggest weakness, Im one of lifes non-believers
If you're a non-believer, then you'd be calling down lighter no? I know this is an area you're working on. Keep posting hands. It's not going to be about calling down light as much with what you're doing at your stakes, but just making the correct turn and river calls given your opponents range and pot odds. I know this is a work in progress and it's good you've identified it.

When I said non believer , I mean I call way too light esp OOP.

It seems to go I bet they float I check they bet, I call and lose lol

 

[John A]

Gotcha... so you're calling down too light in spots, but also not calling enough on the river. Interesting, those don't go together too often.

So you know what to work on and target?

 

[rhombus]

Gotcha... so you're calling down too light in spots, but also not calling enough on the river. Interesting, those don't go together too often.

So you know what to work on and target?

Im confused now. I mean I call down too light including the river,

 

[John A]

Im confused now. I mean I call down too light including the river,

Ok, I thought I saw several hands where you weren't making obvious river calls. Perhaps I'm mistaken.

 

[rhombus]

Ok, I thought I saw several hands where you weren't making obvious river calls. Perhaps I'm mistaken.

maybe i need to run some filters to see WTF Im on about lol. I thought a big leak of mine was to call down too light

When you mention Obvious river calls can you give coule of good examples especially using HUD stats. Whats best one to use

On the LB HUD you have WWSF% but hear alot of people use WTSD

 

[John A]

Well, never a bad thing to run some filters.

I saw some hands you had posted recently that were clear river calls, but you were contemplating c/fing. I don't know where they are now. But if you think you're calling down too light, then just keep looking into that. I'm just seeing a small window here.

Well, the LB HUD I have stats that are quick to normalize so that you can combine them together to build profiles of players fast. I don't take on coaching students anymore, but I had coached a few hundred players at one point. You the #1 thing I saw in every single student, and I mean there's not one this wasn't true for. None of them were making quick reads on their opponents. They were always really shocked how I did this so quickly and accurately. And I coached 1000NL players down to 25NL at that time (when I made that HUD), a good portion of them smart winning players.

WTSD takes too long to normalize, but if you have a lot of hands on someone, then definitely use it. If it's high, then you know they are over valuing hands, so increase your value range, etc... I don't use one specific stat. And that's what I'm trying to get you guys to realize. It's REALLY hard to take only one stat, and then draw a valid conclusion from it unless you have a good sample size, and/or an extreme stat in one direction or the other. EX: 3-bet of 65% in only 30 hands.

 

[fishinthesea]

Well, never a bad thing to run some filters.

I saw some hands you had posted recently that were clear river calls, but you were contemplating c/fing. I don't know where they are now. But if you think you're calling down too light, then just keep looking into that. I'm just seeing a small window here.

Well, the LB HUD I have stats that are quick to normalize so that you can combine them together to build profiles of players fast. I don't take on coaching students anymore, but I had coached a few hundred players at one point. You the #1 thing I saw in every single student, and I mean there's not one this wasn't true for. None of them were making quick reads on their opponents. They were always really shocked how I did this so quickly and accurately. And I coached 1000NL players down to 25NL at that time (when I made that HUD), a good portion of them smart winning players.

WTSD takes too long to normalize, but if you have a lot of hands on someone, then definitely use it. If it's high, then you know they are over valuing hands, so increase your value range, etc... I don't use one specific stat. And that's what I'm trying to get you guys to realize. It's REALLY hard to take only one stat, and then draw a valid conclusion from it unless you have a good sample size, and/or an extreme stat in one direction or the other. EX: 3-bet of 65% in only 30 hands.

John, it's funny that you say this. I'm having trouble player profiling myself. Playing on bovada makes this so much more difficult because I need at least 100+hands before I can start drawing any conclusions at all... and people leave and go all the time..

 

[John A]

John, it's funny that you say this. I'm having trouble player profiling myself. Playing on bovada makes this so much more difficult because I need at least 100+hands before I can start drawing any conclusions at all... and people leave and go all the time..

I designed the HUD for my own play on Bovada. But even on sites where you can accumulate data, if you're not putting energy into player profiling as fast as possible, then you're just leaving money on the table. I used to emphasize that a lot with my students. Yes, you can wait 50 hands, and then start exploiting your opponents imbalances. But why wait for 50 hands if you can do it in 15 or less? You should be paying attention, did someone who raised and got 2 callers c-bet on a wet board and then c/f the turn. Huge red flag he's c-betting too much and in bad spots. You don't need 100 stats to see an 80% c-bet stats and start exploiting that.

I'm not sure if you saw this with the Hitman HUD, but I have a PDF and video that goes over how to profile some of the common players be using the quickest normalizing stats (which are in the HUD). Player profiling quickly on Bovada can really boost your winrate, since just about all of those guys you're playing are not doing it well.

Free poker HUDs

 

[fishinthesea]

Where is the pdf??? I can't seem to find it.

Edit: nevermind I found it.

 

[John A]

Yeah, if you login, then you should see it there. You can build upon it too, but it works well if you follow some of the player profiling I talk about.

 

[John A]

As promised, even if a bit delayed.

Self assessment
Aspects of Poker Score 1–10

Hand Reading (R) 7
I still feel like a quarter of the time I'm just guessing especially against looser players with wider ranges. Duggs picked me up on not being dynamic enough and narrowing ranges as we play through the streets, probably fair comment. I'm improving through constant hand analysis in the forums and replaying hands from my database.

7 is pretty good I think. This is an area you'll just keep improving on with experience. I recommend some drills in polished poker Vol. I to use with your database and replayer. Posting hands and doing these drills are the only way you'll improve. The key thing with hand reading is just make sure you're not projecting how you think someone should be playing the hand, and make sure you're trying to get into the mind of the other player and see how they are thinking about the situation. It's a real stumbling block for a lot of players and I could show example hand after example hand where people are posting ranges and saying, "well they won't have this in that spot because you shouldn't..." That's not how it works. Maybe the range is weighted much lower, but you shouldn't completely eliminate some ranges because you don't think someone should have X or Y.

Post-flop Bluffing (R/A) 5
I'm fine with c-betting and double barreling, I do occasionally triple but not often as a pure bluff more often than not that they are thin value. I've been studying Duggs' thread carefully and playing a bit of deep stacked myself. It is clear that to be able to make large bluffs on the end you have to be able to hand read confidently. I'm still dreaming of bluff raising turns and bluff shoving rivers for fun.

I wouldn't worry about this too much yet. As you get into 100NL+ it will be a bigger concern. Right now is still about good fundamentals and reading opponent player types.

Anticipating Opponent Reactions (P) 7
I'm pretty astute as to the player types and what they are capable of, I make notes on cash game regs. Still not a master by any means.

This becomes a bigger issue as your regs get better and you know how to antagonize / set them up.

Light Value Betting (R/A) 8
I was weak here but getting better, my first poker books were by Harrington who always advocated checking medium strength hands on the river (as nothing worse calls and you risk getting raised off the hand all together). However I would say that advice isn't true for the modern micros, just think hard before checking the river, what worse can call? if your opponent is a CS he will call with 4th pair so you can bet 2nd pair for value!
My turn cbet% is 41.6% ...River agg 30.8%
And JohnA.... Harrington did win the main event in 95 and final tabled in both 2003 and 2004 and was highly feared by his peers at that time. One of the all time greats as far as i'm concerned

Yeah, you just don't want to compare Harrington's games back then to today's micros. Totally different games. You still need to do some aggressive value betting. The only time you're check / calling really is to pick off bluffs.

Tilt Control (P) 8
I am attempting a vulcan like grip on my emotions after reading Tendler. I'm so much better at handling bad beats than I used to be not that it was ever a really big problem for me. Much of this is understanding variance properly and injecting correct logic when you feel hard done by. If anything I've recently noticed a little winners tilt and been tightening up when I get a few buy in's up at 25nl as i don't want to lose what i've won.

Solid.

Calling Down Light (R) 7
Happy to when my opponents are very aggressive.

I think you've gotten much better at this.

Bet Sizing (R) 5
A work in progress, this is an art form especially in tournament play. It is important not to just autopress pot/halfpot buttons. If someone is going to call make it as big as you think they will!! The terrific review of my deep run in wcoop22 by pokerschool online teacher Dave Roemer picked up my half pot tendency.

Yeah, this is an area you should really be focusing on. I think you're improving in this area. But I still see lots of significant mistakes in your hand posts.

Proper Aggression (A) 5,
I'm passive and analytical in nature and it shows in my play and I'm aware and don't mind admitting it. I am attempting to up my 3betting and squeezing significantly.

This is the other big area you need to work on. These two, bet sizing and aggression should be your main focus.

Capitalizing on Opponent Weaknesses (A) 8
Understanding the player types and making full use of my HUD are part of my strengths. Stack those fish baby.

Solid

Inducing Bluffs (R) 5
Getting better but light value betting can sometimes get in the way of this, appears to be a fine balance.

You're not going to have as many bluffs at micros, but as you're moving up, you'll want to make sure you look for spots to bet small to induce, and check call in situations where it's clear most of your opponents range will be whiffed draws or air.'

Math of Poker (R) 6
I have enough to get by at the table 4+2 and pot odds, its how that relates to equity and EV that I can struggle abit.

I know you're putting work in here.

Starting and Quitting Sessions (P) 6
Often slow to start and quick to finish. I'm not blaming myself too much here, I work full time, often very long hours (I currently haven't had a day off since last Monday and worked 30 hours at the weekend and didn't get to play at all ) I don't like forcing myself to play tired, which is why I'm doing this tonight rather than playing.

Yeah, playing tired is pretty much never good. You only want to play when you're at your best. If you're not, then post like you did in this case or study.

Good job!

 

[Figaroo2]

Thanks John, I will take away and digest your comments.
I think having money target goals is hurting my progress because it stops me from experimenting. I know I can eek out $200-300 a month at 10nl&25nl cash games just doing what i'm doing but I don't want to get stuck at those levels.
I mean 3betting and squeezing just takes practice to see what you can get away with right? The squeeze play is particularly effective,,,,(against me, unless they are doing it just too much and i can see it on the HUD),,,,I often know/suspect they are squeezing light but I struggle to carry on with those pair of 9's or AQ which you know still have plenty of equity (especially in position if the squeeze is from the blinds)

 

[John A]

Thanks John, I will take away and digest your comments.
I think having money target goals is hurting my progress because it stops me from experimenting. I know I can eek out $200-300 a month at 10nl&25nl cash games just doing what i'm doing but I don't want to get stuck at those levels.
I mean 3betting and squeezing just takes practice to see what you can get away with right? The squeeze play is particularly effective,,,,(against me, unless they are doing it just too much and i can see it on the HUD),,,,I often know/suspect they are squeezing light but I struggle to carry on with those pair of 9's or AQ which you know still have plenty of equity (especially in position if the squeeze is from the blinds)

You're welcome. I know it was a bit delayed, but believe it or not I've had a lot going on lately. Correct. You need to experiment, and you can use some of the things I talk about in Polished Poker as a guide. As you do it more, you'll get used to knowing when profitable spots arise. And always, as you're working on it, just post hands and ask questions.

 

[Figaroo2]

I reread the workbook again today to see what I could glean about getting stuck with goals. Raising my levels of 3 betting and squeezing upwards from value hands only is a persistent issue in my game. Last week I had a sweat session (with fishinthesea) where an obvious spot arose for raising a reg who was trying to isolate a fish. We talked about the spot and agreed it was good to go. 25nl..a fish limps in ep and reg in CO isos for $1. I make it 3.25 and both fold and we take it down. My watcher says too small... make the raise bigger. I'm ok with the sizing on the basis of having a very low squeezing rate and have the bet look like value rather than say $4.25 which starts to like more like a steal.
I can see that as your squeezing rate goes up then sizing bigger may dissuade loose calls.
What is interesting and I said this at the end of the session with my observer is I admitted if I wasn't being sweated I would have just let the spot pass. I was trying to think why this was and came to the conclusion it's just too much aggravation if you get called. Do we get out of this mindset by just pushing our boundaries in this sort of area until we find the tipping point? Also this is a shout out to anyone else who feels like they might benefit from running some sweat sessions, just pm me.

 

[mottotom27]

I reread the workbook again today to see what I could glean about getting stuck with goals. Raising my levels of 3 betting and squeezing upwards from value hands only is a persistent issue in my game. Last week I had a sweat session (with fishinthesea) where an obvious spot arose for raising a reg who was trying to isolate a fish. We talked about the spot and agreed it was good to go. 25nl..a fish limps in ep and reg in CO isos for $1. I make it 3.25 and both fold and we take it down. My watcher says too small... make the raise bigger. I'm ok with the sizing on the basis of having a very low squeezing rate and have the bet look like value rather than say $4.25 which starts to like more like a steal.
I can see that as your squeezing rate goes up then sizing bigger may dissuade loose calls.
What is interesting and I said this at the end of the session with my observer is I admitted if I wasn't being sweated I would have just let the spot pass. I was trying to think why this was and came to the conclusion it's just too much aggravation if you get called. Do we get out of this mindset by just pushing our boundaries in this sort of area until we find the tipping point? Also this is a shout out to anyone else who feels like they might benefit from running some sweat sessions, just pm me.

$3.25 is fine if you were on the button in that hand. but if you are in the blinds you have to make it bigger. and that's a pretty important point that my backer went over with me. if someone raised to 3bb then my standard was to 3bet to 10bb, trying to risk the minimum. thing is we really want to discourage calls when we're out of position. there is a tendency to call a lot more 3bets in position. so we should make it a slightly bigger size, 11-12bb as a default, to increase our fold equity. in this case i'd pop it to about $4 from the blinds, but your sizing is perfect if you were on the button there.

 

[John A]

I reread the workbook again today to see what I could glean about getting stuck with goals. Raising my levels of 3 betting and squeezing upwards from value hands only is a persistent issue in my game. Last week I had a sweat session (with fishinthesea) where an obvious spot arose for raising a reg who was trying to isolate a fish. We talked about the spot and agreed it was good to go. 25nl..a fish limps in ep and reg in CO isos for $1. I make it 3.25 and both fold and we take it down. My watcher says too small... make the raise bigger. I'm ok with the sizing on the basis of having a very low squeezing rate and have the bet look like value rather than say $4.25 which starts to like more like a steal.
I can see that as your squeezing rate goes up then sizing bigger may dissuade loose calls.
What is interesting and I said this at the end of the session with my observer is I admitted if I wasn't being sweated I would have just let the spot pass. I was trying to think why this was and came to the conclusion it's just too much aggravation if you get called. Do we get out of this mindset by just pushing our boundaries in this sort of area until we find the tipping point? Also this is a shout out to anyone else who feels like they might benefit from running some sweat sessions, just pm me.

Yeah, I think 3.5 would be perfect, just to be picky, but I don't mind your sizing. That wasn't a squeeze though, but I'm sure you know that.

To your last question, and it's difficult for this not to sound harsh on a typed format, but it's because it's easy to mediocre at something, and difficult to look to achieve excellence. This is EXACTLY what I was talking about in the whole goals section of the book. In order to be really great at something, you're going to have to push yourself, and challenge parts of yourself that you're only dimly aware of right now. What you should be asking yourself is, why is it aggravating to know that sometimes you'll be called?

 

[John A]

Should we look at and break down chapter 4 now? I'd like to go through it all, and then focus on some other concepts I have in mind I think will be helpful.

 

[mottotom27]

Sounds good to me!

 

[John A]

Ok, let's blast through some of this. I'll start by asking if there's any questions about chapter 4, and highlight some points in my next post.

 

[Figaroo2]

Re chapter 4....I'm taking some notes on the most unusual plays but multi tabling doesn't help this.
I do note flushchasers if I see something like Jh5h. Most of the time I'm going on my HUD.

What you should be asking yourself is, why is it aggravating to know that sometimes you'll be called?

Because I usually end up getting overly aggressive and get stacked.
I find I will fire on the flop and then can't get away from the hand usually just bluff shoving the turn. I always seem to get called. It only takes a few to go wrong to put me off using the play. (which of course I know is wrong)

In the above example I think I had A7... say we get a rainbow flop KT4. Should we just give up on the flop or fire once and give up?

I do silly things like this recent hand that springs to memory
CO is a preflop CStation

$25 No Limit Hold'em Cash, 9 Players

Hero (SB): $26.76 (107 bb)
BB: $25 (100 bb)
UTG+1: $43.27 (173.1 bb)
UTG+2: $26.65 (106.6 bb)
MP1: $41.57 (166.3 bb)
MP2: $24.99 (100 bb)
MP3: $22.07 (88.3 bb)
CO: $64.93 (259.7 bb)
BTN: $25 (100 bb)

Preflop: Hero is SB with K

A

UTG+1 folds, UTG+2 raises to $0.75, 3 folds, CO raises to $1.75, BTN folds, Hero raises to $6, 2 folds, CO calls $4.25

Flop: ($13) 5

2

7

(2 players) I'm like **** you... don't you EVER fold.....have some of this.....
Hero bets $20.76 and is all-in, CO calls $20.76

Turn: ($54.52) T

(2 players, 1 is all-in)
River: ($54.52) 8

(2 players, 1 is all-in)

Results: $54.52 pot ($2.00 rake)
Final Board: 5

2

7

T

8

Hero showed K

A

and lost (-$26.76 net)
CO showed J

J

and won $52.52 ($25.76 net)

What is so dumb is that Id done the work and already noted he was a calling station and still tried to bluff him... dooh