Progress report from an aspiring pro player

Eugenius

Eugenius

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Total posts
131
Chips
0
Hey everyone,

I promised to post a follow-up to this thread:

https://www.cardschat.com/forum/gen...ooking-feedback-those-who-made-switch-119097/

I've done 5 sessions since then, and here is my report.

Session 8 & 9:

I finally experienced my first down-swing. While it was a sucky experience, I am glad to have received the lessons that came with it. I was able to identify a few problems with my game, the most important of which was dealing with a slight tilting problem. Most of the losses came from losing 3 big hands, each for $500-$700. Two of them were due to the tilting issue, each time I knew my AA was cracked, but I couldn't force myself to put them down. The other was a very hard to avoid situation where I turned a boat, and the other player rivered a higher boat (that one really sucked).


I came down with a nasty flu after that weekend and had a lot of 'down time', during which I picked up and read a few poker books. I absorbed some good knowledge as well as the mindset and techniques to help me avoid going on tilt.

I came back to play the next weekend (last weekend), and I could see an instant improvement in my game from what I had learned in the books as well as during the previous two losing sessions.

Sessions 10 & 11
Session 10: Friday's session was pretty good - in fact, I achieved a new earnings/hour record for a single session. I think that Friday is generally a good day to play, as there is a good number of people playing, and many of them worked that day, and are therefore tired and not playing their A game.

Session 11: Started out a bit rocky - I played well but hit some bad situations (will go over some specific key hands in a bit), and was stuck for $600 after about 4 hours of play. Eventually I turned it around and was up $950 8 hours later. This was also probably the most card-dead session I've ever played, and I'm quite proud of myself for doing as well as I did.

Biggest losing hand from session 11
My biggest losing hand was when I lost an all-in for my stack of $240.

I was playing :qd4: :7d4:. The flop came :ad4: :qs4: :5d4:. About $45 in the pot on the flop. A player in earlier position bet $15, I was the only caller.

The turn card was :7c4:. I now had 2 middle pair and a flush draw. The player in earlier position bet $50 into the $65 pot. I pushed all in. He called me down with AQ. The river card wasn't a diamond and I lost the hand.

Even though I lost, I didn't think I played the hand very badly. I didn't put him on AQ when he only bet 1/3 the pot on the flop. I think a better player would have bet it more aggressively with the flush draw out there. I had him on something like A9/AT/AJ. When I turned 2 pair I was at least 65% sure I had the best hand at the time, and in the case my opponent had a set or top 2, I still had the flush draw as an additional safety net.

My best winning hand of session 11
This wasn't my most profitable hand of the night, but the one which I made a fantastic read on a moderately skilled player and won a $300 pot. It was also the hand which was the turn-around point of the night for me (having been down $600 up to that point).

Some background:

I had been playing for about 4 hours now. Seeing a cheap flop was getting somewhat difficult as there were a few maniacs at the table, which including the chip leader. He would constantly overbet the pot pre-flop by opening with a $25 bet, and he played every small pocket pair that way - of course, he'd play the big pocket pairs that way, too. As far as maniacs went, he was generally more skilled than the garden variety maniac - he had some reading skill and had the sense to lay some hands down.

On to the hand:

I was in 3rd position (first to act after the big blind). I was dealt :10s4: :8s4: and I wanted to see a cheap flop. Since I was dealing with a bunch of maniacs, I decided to throw out a small blocking bet out for $6. The action folded to the chip leader maniac. He raised to $25. Maniac #2 immediatly behind him calls, as did 2 other players. The rest of the action folds to me. At this point I'm getting almost 6:1 on my money, so I call to see the flop.

The flop comes :qs4: :8c4: :3d4:. I am first to act and I check. The chip leader maniac bets $35, and the rest of the action folds to me.

Here's where it gets interesting.

I KNOW he overplays small pocket pairs all the time, but, sometimes he has a real hand. I start to stare at him like a hawk trying to pick up a read.

He wears sunglasses when he plays, so I know that being read is one of his concerns. Now, here's where he messed up. Whenever in a hand and trying to hide his tells, he would take this passive position of ducking his head down and looking at his cards. What didn't occur to him is that when he does that, he gives other players a perfect line of sight to his eyes, making his sunglasses defense completely useless. I stared at him for about a minute, and I saw his eyes move a number of times - and I identified that eye movement as him being legitemately nervous. I put him on a weak hand and pushed all in for my remaining $90. He called me down after about 5 seconds - he was holding 77. My 8's held up on the turn and river and I won the hand for about $299.

A few players at the table applauded me and one said that it was truly a "brilliant play" - which was a pretty good ego/self-esteem booster.

Wrap-up
During the last weekend two players including a local pro player who, had been playing professinally for about 5 years, suggested that I should try moving up to 2/5. I am going to take their advice soon. My goal is to try 2/5 once my bankroll reaches $5000.

However, the last weekend was probably my last time playing at my local casino. I am moving to SF soon, and I hope that their card rooms will be as lucrative for me as the ones here in the North East.

On the way to SF I am also going to stop by Vegas for 3 days. That will be a good test for me. I know that if I can come out ahead after grinding it out in Vegas, then I can grind it out anywhere.

Here is my current running bankroll chart as well as updated session results data:
 

Attachments

  • bankroll.gif
    bankroll.gif
    10.6 KB · Views: 6
  • pokerdata.gif
    pokerdata.gif
    9.6 KB · Views: 5
Last edited:
ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
Chips
0
Over/under on busto anyone?

Look up bankroll management, Eugenius. TRUST ME. There's nothing wrong with aspiring to play poker for a living, but doing so with no padding is just gambling.
 
Eugenius

Eugenius

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Total posts
131
Chips
0
I have plenty of padding.

Note that this isn't my entire bank-roll. The chart is a representation of my 'winning bankroll' I guess. I have 3k more behind what is on the chart as my gambling bankroll.

Aside from that, I have over $25k in fluid savings/investments to fall back on if needed, as well as the ability to secure a 6 figure job at pretty much any time I want.
 
F

feitr

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 8, 2008
Total posts
1,570
Chips
0
You really don't like online poker? I make a little over $30/hr just playing NL50 and you don't have to waste time traveling (which really should be included in your "hrs played"),etc. You can quit whenever you want (bad day/tilt etc) whereas you are alot more committed to stay at a casino...just alot more flexibility. And obviously the swings at NL50 are significantly easier to take than at NL200 (ofc you could play NL200 online, but in order to earn the same you'd probably have to play NL1k live...which in turn has much bigger swings than NL200 online).

Obviously it is totally up to you, but i wouldn't have thought starting out a pro career by playing 1$/2$ live is "typical".
 
Eugenius

Eugenius

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Total posts
131
Chips
0
You really don't like online poker? I make a little over $30/hr just playing NL50 and you don't have to waste time traveling (which really should be included in your "hrs played"),etc. You can quit whenever you want (bad day/tilt etc) whereas you are alot more committed to stay at a casino...just alot more flexibility. And obviously the swings at NL50 are significantly easier to take than at NL200 (ofc you could play NL200 online, but in order to earn the same you'd probably have to play NL1k live...which in turn has much bigger swings than NL200 online).

Obviously it is totally up to you, but i wouldn't have thought starting out a pro career by playing 1$/2$ live is "typical".

I've discussed it before, but no, I don't really like online poker. I used to play online a good bit while still learning the game, but it lost its fun quickly, even if I was winning. My list of reasons:

1. I don't like sitting in front of a computer all day long (too much like my web developer day job).

2. I enjoy interacting with people at the table. Where else can you be chatting with a doctor, a lawyer, and a drug dealer all at the same time?

3. I have very good reading ability, which gives me much more of an edge than when playing online.
 
blazin321

blazin321

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Total posts
86
Chips
0
Dam dude you either a drug dealing reader (i.e you look and go ya hes a drug dealer) "or" do they actually admit to it ?

lol apologies for my unprofessional question. Your post was actually a good read and i wish you luck sir ;)
 
Eugenius

Eugenius

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Total posts
131
Chips
0
Dam dude you either a drug dealing reader (i.e you look and go ya hes a drug dealer) "or" do they actually admit to it ?

Hehe, it was just a hunch/read. You see some sketchy character play at night... A few sessions ago there were 3 guys playing who were friends, and they mentioned how one of them couldn't go back to Jamaica because he was wanted there... Then another one from the group was telling a story of how he got shot in the leg once when someone tried to steal his car and pulled a gun on him.
 
aliengenius

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Total posts
4,596
Chips
0
1. "I was playing Q7s...."
2. Didn't know he was 50/50 vs top pair (w flush draw and middle pair) and therefore just passively called in position (failure to capitalize on fold equity).
3. Playing T8s out of position (especially at an aggressive table) = -ev.
4. Possible over-reliance on physical tells at the expense of betting patterns.

Sorry kid, I don't like your chances...
 
Eugenius

Eugenius

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Total posts
131
Chips
0
1. "I was playing Q7s...."
2. Didn't know he was 50/50 vs top pair (w flush draw and middle pair) and therefore just passively called in position (failure to capitalize on fold equity).
3. Playing T8s out of position (especially at an aggressive table) = -ev.
4. Possible over-reliance on physical tells at the expense of betting patterns.

Sorry kid, I don't like your chances...

1. Had the odds to do it.
2. Fair enough.
3. I generally play a very tight style, and it was a "mix it up" play. I am sure that the reason he called me down after my all in was because he had me on AK, because he wouldn't have ever expected me to raise out of position with a hand like T8s.
4. It was a combination of betting patterns and physical tells that led me to make the play. I knew he over played small pairs all the time, which was part of what led me to make the play. I find it quite hilarious how all the internet players here (which is apparently 99.9% of this board's population) try to down-play the importance of physical tells, when that's a huge part of the game.

This sure is a hell of a pessimistic board.
 
T

thasauce7

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Total posts
122
Chips
0
I just read through and I noticed a few things that you should probably work on. I play most of my poker live, and I do believe there is a difference in the way you should play but:

1. Your playing too many crappy hands out of position with raises. I think your trying to look at implied odds, but like you said about that guy, he had the sense to lay hands down. If I'm going to play your hand here and there is a raise in front from a maniac, I'm three betting or chunking. If you want to talk about that I would love to via pm or something.

2. As far as hand selection goes I have a process for almost every hand I decide to play that i go through before acting.
1. Figure out what would be the best thing to hit, (EX: your q7 obviously you wanted to hit a flush and not a queen or 7.)
2. Decide where you can do the most damage with that hand and if its worth playing in your position.
3. Factor in opponents that have entered the pot in front of you. (if you don't do this enough your playing too many hands oop.)
4. The most important thing to me is after I act I never ever stop thinking about what all my opponents have.

3. For physical tells I wouldn't rely too much on something like sneaking a peak behind someones sunglasses, that could easily be a reverse tell.
 
ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
Chips
0
The reason we're so pessimistic is because it looks to us like you're set up to lose a lot of money, and we don't want to see that. We're not even being pessimistic, we're being realistic.

Read up on some theory books as well as some books on how to actually make a business out of poker. It's very possible, like I've said before, but you have a LONG way to go. 11 sessions doesn't mean dick in the long-run.
 
Eugenius

Eugenius

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Total posts
131
Chips
0
Read up on some theory books as well as some books on how to actually make a business out of poker. It's very possible, like I've said before, but you have a LONG way to go. 11 sessions doesn't mean dick in the long-run.


I'm on it. I'm currently reading another book and have 2 more on the shelf to go through after that one. I acknowledge that I still have plenty to learn.
 
ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
Chips
0
Theory and Practice (sklansky/miller) is probably the best out there for deepstacked ring strategy, go nab that if you haven't already.
 
Eugenius

Eugenius

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Total posts
131
Chips
0
Theory and Practice (sklansky/miller) is probably the best out there for deepstacked ring strategy, go nab that if you haven't already.

I'll add it to the list...

Right now I'm reading "The Psychology of Poker" by Alan Schoonmaker (which I would recommend - a lot of great info on reading opponents in live games).

After that on the list is "Harrington on Hold 'em Expert Strategy for No Limit Tournaments, Vol. 1: Strategic Play".
 
roundcat

roundcat

Creature of leisure
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 25, 2005
Total posts
2,464
Chips
0
I'm not sure folks are trying to be pessimistic, just cautious.

Congratulations on your success thus far and cheers to future wins! :)
 
Top