Beware the Ides of March... into April?

I thought I was happy the month of March was over.  I played 7 sessions and had my first losing month since June of 2015.  I guess I shouldn't complain; it's bound to happen that I'll run bad over an "extended" period of time - and by extended, I mean 5 out of 7 losing sessions with 4 in a row.  I was very happy to break that aforementioned 4 session loser on the 1st of April, when I settled for a modest 1/2 buy in plus up.  It served to restore a bit of my confidence in my game, but I wasn't feeling 100% healed.  Stuff was still going south on my at a rapid rate, though I did not feel like my play was suffering.  Worst part was I had a killer start to the year, but March pretty much undid all the winning - my hourly rate dropped to below 1/2 levels!  I know... I know...  sample size - 21 total sessions is too small of a sample size to really make judgements and get upset.

Needless to say, I played last night and felt like April had become more of the same that I've come to expect from my sessions lately.  The night started off well enough; I spiked an open-ender with the "Grump" - 2 4ss (his favorite hand).  Mind you, I've never won with that  hand - but I called a SB $15 raise while in position with 5 other callers to see a flop of 3 5 T (one spade, rainbow).  The original raiser had $50-60 left and open shoved the flop.  I was the only caller and saw a spade on the turn and a 6 on the river for the nice, early $160 winner.  I chipped up little by little on my way to +$300 before the doomswitch got turned on.

Note: Skip to below if you don't want to read about whining and bad beats

I went on to flop a set of Aces on an all hearts board only to be shown a JT flush by the river (-$300).  I 3bet to $55 with JJ and flopped mid set only to be shown a 46hh flush on the river (he had $~200 to start the hand, called one bet and then called the 3bet LOL... -$200).  I flopped a 53 flush only to be shown a 95 flopped flush (-$100).  I flopped top 2 pair (T8) only to be 4 straighted on the river (-$65).  I flopped top 2 pair (QT) again only to be flushed on the river (-$65).

Note:  End of whining and bad beats

Despite my string of nauseously poor luck, I found myself out no more than $200 on the night and continually working my way back into the game.  As you can probably gather above, the table was juicy and primed for the pumping if only I could get my hands to hold up.  There were a few guys on total tilt, with the key player sitting on a peak of around $1700.  I could only watch it dwindle away drip drip drip when I finally caught a hand at around 2:30AM:

As I said, I'm no more than in for $200, so in this hand, I'm sitting on approx. $400.  Facing a mid position raise to $15, I look down at 55 on the BTN and opt to just call.  I actually consider 3betting here, but figure with position, sitting on a decent stack, and the looseness of the table, if I hit I can really get paid without giving the strength of my hand away pre-flop.  The player mentioned above is now sitting on around $1100 and is involved in the hand, as are around 5 others.

Flop comes 5 6 Qr, and action checks to villain.  Before we get into it, I want to provide a bit of background on our villain.  He's very active, frequently continuing with hands where he's clearly beat, only to have sucked out continually on the river... and get okay value.  A few examples are calling a turn $75 bet on a 7 A x x board with K7, betting $150 on the river when he hits his K and getting paid.  He'll call $75 on a turn bet with $60 behind when he hits his flush.  You know the type.  He's a middle-aged Asian dude who likes to gamble gabol!  He obviously will not lay down a draw... like EVER.  Finally, I'm seething from this guy - he's the most rude, inconsiderate and questionable rule breaker I've seen in a LONG time.  He'll talk about the hand whether he's involved or not - for example, he bet into a small flopped set and got raised, and starts talking about hands that he puts the raiser on while other players are still involved.  He'll regularly fold out of turn.  He'll act inappropriately like laughing at other players, berating them, slamming his hand down when he folded a flop that he would have hit.  This guy's a regular, and has clearly been warned for his behavior before, but the dealers nor the floor have taken any action against him.  In other words, he couldn't give two craps about the hand or the game if he's not involved.  In one word, he was an asshole - I almost felt sorry for him because I thought he may be on the spectrum (that's how poorly behaved he was).

Anywho, back to my flopped bottom set.  His pattern du jour is to bet smallish (~$15 into $60) with probing bets on hands that he has some equity, but continually will bet 2 or 3 streets as a bluff when other players just call his bets.  Contrary to prior action, this time he bet $47, a large bet for him to be bluffing or drawing.  Another player calls his largish bet and action folds to me.  Around $75 + $47 + $47 in the pot and I'm sitting on $385.  I read his hand as clearly - NOT A BLUFF.  I don't think I want the mid position player just calling - and I'm not sure where I'm at with our villain; he's betting so often that he's very difficult to read.  In fact, with our villain, I've opted to take a straight forward play-my-cards-face-up approach with him, because he's paying off so often and/or bluffing so often that I get more value because he so infrequently likes to fold.  Therefore, I decide I will raise large - and spike $175 into the $~170 pot.  He thinks for a few seconds and calls.  Our monkey-in-the-middle player folds.  Turn is a 3 completing the rainbow.  He checks to be again - actually I bet out of turn but realize that I incorrectly did so - and he check / calls my shove of $210 after some deliberation.  I don't remember the river, but he shows down KQo and I scoop a nice and much needed double up to end my night to the decent positive.  After a whipsaw night, I'm pleased with the results.

Inelastic hand ranges and 2 interesting hands at the 'Shoe

Ever had a read so strong that you can't possibly get away from that read regardless what logic dictates?  I was having a good session at my first session back at 'Shoe since they've listed the curfew in Baltimore - all the hooliganism has settled down - and the players were as fishy as always.

Late in the session, I look down in my BB (I think) and see A2o.  I knuckle letting the dealer know I check my option and he deals a flop of 2 4c 6c to the ~6 limpers.

Looking around the table, I see no interest in this flop - so I lead for $20, 75% sure my 2's are good.  It folds around to a girl who had been having a break even night, who looked continually disappointed and bored (a look I've seen on my face a lot lately...) who immediately calls - no thought, just throws in her $20 instantly when the action turned to her.  The SB also comes along and I realize that maybe my initial read isn't good; I need help.

Turn is the Ad, and now I'm certain I'm good with my Ace's up.  Checks to me and I lead for $50 into the $75 pot - again, girl insta calls and SB thinks, then calls.  Of note, the girl has $75 remaining.

River is the Jc - $~220-230 in the pot.  A club or a 5 is the worst card to see IMO.  The girl based on her no-thought snap call on the flop has me ABSOLUTELY convinced she's drawing to the flush which just got there.  It checks to me and I check to the girl who instantly shoves her $75.  After much thought, SB folds and I think for a bit before mucking.  I'm getting 3 or 4-1 on the call here; I was [and still am] sick to my stomach having to lay that down.

I think the takeaway here is twofold: don't 100% stick to your read; consider other hands that are reasonable that could have the same action, but also, when you're beat on the river, you're BEAT ON THE RIVER.  Paying off $75 when you're beat is only exacerbating the problem.  Given the action, the snap call on the flop and turn (when players are making plays without any hesitation, they're almost always on draws), she's on a flush draw.  Fold whether it's $75 or $50.  $25, I can be convinced to call and "donate."

Second hand (which involves a little revenge later on):

Before I get into this hand, I believe I've come up with a new stereotype for a player: the guy who's sitting in a 1/2 or (in this case) 1/3 game waiting for a 2/5 spot to open.  His thought process is usually, "I'm too good for this table; I'm going to sit down & bet all these fish off their hands and take their money while I wait for the 'challenging game' at 2/5."  This player was one of those kinds of guys - Asian guy with spiked hair, late 20's, knew the dealers by name, etc.  He sits down and starts making larger raises, had 3 bet at least once, and indeed started dominating the table.  It's hard; you have to adjust to a player like this really quickly or he'll be out of there before you finally catch on to what he's doing.  I am basing my play and read on all of perhaps 15 hands here...  like I said, need to adjust quickly.  In this hand, I unfortunately did not adjust quickly and made an incorrect move, which cost me implied earnings plus immediate earnings...

I raise $15 with AQ, Asian guy flats and we're heads up to an Q 6 7 rainbow flop.  Not seeing ways to make money on this pot without giving him rope, I check and he throws out a large $35 bet.  I call and we see a turn of 8s, putting out a 2 flush.  $95 in the pot and he leads for $120.  What do you do?

I was not happy in this spot for many many reasons, mainly my hand strength is FAR underrepped.  That isn't a mistake; that was my intent on the approach to this guy.  However, this guy is either far overrepping his hand, bluffing, or wants to value pwn me.  The bet sizing just completely throws me off; overbetting $120 into $95?  I wound up folding my top / top and he shows me an 8 - tells me he was open ended + pair.  Goodbye, $55.

A few hands later, I raise AQdd yet again, and this time, emboldened from our prior dance, he 3 bets me to $40.  We're about $400 effective deep (he's up $100 from a mix of hands prior).  Odd small 3bet.  Undettered,  I 4 bet him to $120 and he [surprisingly] flats.  6 6 2 dd come out - I'm drawing to the nut flush + potential overs.  I lead for $175 and he auto folds.  My thought with this hand, now that I've seen him get all sorts of aggro and overvaluing hands, is that he wants to treat me as a fish, then I'm going to play my hand face up - like a fish.  What would AA / KK do in this situation?  4bet!  So I 4bet!  What would AA / KK do on a flop like this?  Lead!  So I lead!  Sometimes you gotta play fishy to win...  So he may have drawn first blood for $55, but I took back $65 additional.

Stereotypes and poker - Part 5 of a 116 part series on "Better Know a Poker Player"*

Part of my multi-part series of "Better Know a Player"- the 116 part series on racism and stereotyping those around you*, I continue with 2 new stereotypes: the Mediterranean / Middle Eastern foreigner and the typical old guy.  Enjoy it, or ignore it as blatant racism.  You choose!

The Foreigner; Iranian / Syrian / Egyptian / Israeli / Mediterranean type

Wow.  Did I just do that?  Lump Israel in with Iran?  Holy smokes!  At least I separated them by putting Syria and Egypt in between.  But you guessed it; yup... they're the same type of hot-head, ego-driven player.  Gamble gamble gamble; it's in their cultures.  I liken these players to the Craisian Asian type, with the aggression factor amped WWWAAAAAYYYY up.  They'll bet draws the same as value hands the same as bluffs - bet bet bet.  They're usually cocky *SSHOLES at the table to boot - telling others either how bad they're playing, or how to play the hands that they have and how they misplayed them in the prior hand.

The verdict: Bread-and-butter.  Strap in because it'll be wild, but call 'em down light and they'll never understand how you did that.  Moreover, it won't discourage them because they have these big ass egos.  It'll only encourage them to bluff harder and with greater frequency.  Oh yeah - and when you do nut on them, just check and call, don't let 'em off easy by raising so that they can fold.  Let them bury themselves... trust me, they'll do it.  When you do read them to be on a draw, bet bet bet.  Don't fear that they'll fold 'cause you ain't gettin' them off as much as an inside straight draw!  Surprisingly, few of these types have little knowledge of the odds of the game - they're just in it to win it!

Typical Old Guy

Much like the old retired Navy curmudgeon, these "Don't F*ck with me" types look at the young whippersnappers as annoyances.  Featuring a tight, static range, these rocks love to call call call and only raise the nuts.  Note that there are a few exceptions to the rule - see here & here, but I chalk that up as variance to the norm... Even those aforementioned old guys would agree that they see other old guys and think value value value.  If the typical old guy is raising at your table, you can pretty darn well put him on a few specific hands (few is 3 or more - but I put them precisely on AA,KK,QQ.  The typical old man neglects to raise AK usually, and "hates to lose with JJ" so winds up limping perhaps as often as raising.)  

The verdict: You need to nut on these guys in order to make your money.  Call a raise from them - they'll raise smaller than usual, afraid to let their "prey" off the hook by raising too large.  Plus, they're totally static & stuck in their dated ways of thinking about how the game "used to be."  Let them continue to live in the past and be scratching their head and be steaming mad about how their limped KK lost to a random hand, while the reality is that the game has changed, the players are smarter and adjustments need to be made...

To be continued...

* Credit to Steven Colbert and the Colbert Report's 434 part series, "Better Know a District" series.  If you haven't seen any of the episodes, click over to his website and watch.  It's very clever - Eleanor Holmes Norton is my favorite interview.

My limited biased cranium has only a few obvious stereotypes in mind.  I don't fancy my self an honest-to-goodness racist, so I'm having trouble thinking up new targets.  I'm happy to take suggestions as to other stereotypical players!

Stereotypes and poker - Part 4 of a 116 part series on "Better Know a Poker Player"*

Part of my multi-part series of "Better Know a Player"- the 116 part series on racism and stereotyping those around you*, I continue with 3 new stereotypes: the Indian guy, the European foreigner and the white trash guy.  Enjoy it, or ignore it as blatant racism.  You choose!

The Indian player (the guy from the Asian subcontinent, not the wah wah wah / feather type)

For whatever reason, I've been seeing an influx of Indian poker players burst onto the poker scene.  Perhaps I was blind to it before, but it seems that poker has grabbed hold of the Indian culture.  These players, much like your run-of-the-mill white guy, are hard to fit into a box.  They're modest gamblers, sometimes downright degenerate, but for the most part, intelligent, much like their young, Asian internet- kid counterparts from the same area of the world.  I can't really describe a pattern here, because there is such tremendous variability.

The verdict: Let your own eyes and their actions determine how to proceed.  Frequent raises could signify a string of good hands, or tendency to gamble.  Beware and take mental note.

The foreigner; European

Downright awful.  These guys will pay you off and will be happy about it.  They've seen poker on TV and sometimes can play it in their originating country.  The expression "In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is King," comes to mind when describing these players.  In other words, you have a continent filled with fish  and no King to take their money or school them.  Bad play begets bad play and they bring it to America with them.  Oh to be playing cash games throughout Europe...  Easy peasy.
It should be noted that there are a few Gus Hansen- type Euro foreigners out there.  They are total aggro with no valid story.  In effect, they're simply spew machines.  Variance will be high with these guys and they're a challenge, but stick to your guns and trust your reads - they're usually weak.

The verdict: Bread-and-butter for the guys described first.  Although "the blind squirrel will catch a nut" every once in awhile, value value value on these guys.  They have little idea of their own immediate hand strength, much less their relative hand strength.  In other words, they have no problem calling down JJ when there's an A and a K on the board and action dictates otherwise.  They're usually so unaware of their own immediate hand strength that they'll limp all hands except AA - so watch out for their weirdly played flopped sets or whatever when PF action had dictated otherwise.

The white trash guy

These guys are downright awful.  I don't know if they have busses from the mountains that ship these ATMs in, or what, but a table full of hicks has me a salivatin'!  Gonna get me some redneck!  Darvin Moon aside (just kidding; include Darvin in this here group, yah see), these guys are much like the Europeans described above, but much more abundant 'round these here parts!  They'll make such apparently stupid calls that will leave you wondering what they were trying to achieve by calling.  Perhaps its their inbred mental capacity, but I simply don't think they're well suited to play a game like this.  Fortunately, that doesn't stop them from congregatin' in gaggles.  They come to the table with a buddy, get drinks, turn into drunk guy and drop their hard-earned $2-600 in the drop of a hat.  I always wonder how they afford it, but don't look a gift horse in the mouth... amirite?

The verdict: Bread-and-butter.  Need I say more to rip apart the former lower / slower Confederates?

To be continued...

* Credit to Steven Colbert and the Colbert Report's 434 part series, "Better Know a District" series.  If you haven't seen any of the episodes, click over to his website and watch.  It's very clever - Eleanor Holmes Norton is my favorite interview.

Stereotypes and poker - Part 3 of a 116 part series on "Better Know a Poker Player"*

Part of my multi-part series of "Better Know a Player"- the 116 part series on racism and stereotyping those around you*, I continue with 2 new stereotypes: the Marine and the take-no-sh*t Navy old Navy guy.  Enjoy it, or ignore it as blatant racism.  You choose!

The Marine / Army guy

We've all seen this person at the table.  He's either wearing a cropped haircut and an "Army One" t-shirt, or he's got the ever-so-subtle digital camouflage backpack.  Whatever means you choose to recognize him, I always swallow hard.  Here's a guy who's fighting for our country (directly or indirectly), and he's putting his money on the table as the table fish.  It's an ongoing internal battle for me; on one hand, I'm not one to shy away from the fish - I'm not above taking handouts.  On the other hand, he's putting his life on the line for my freedom that I don't necessarily take for granted.  However, he's a big boy and knows what he's getting into; I just hope he's not losing more than he can afford.  He has a tendency to combine with the table drunk because he's there for the free drinks and the entertainment that poker brings him.

The verdict: Bread-and-butter.  Easy game.  Totally loose-passive.  Value value value, if your heart can handle it.

The retired Navy guy

Take no shit from no one 'cept his war buddies, this guy proudly served our country when you're daddy was in diapers.  I can respect that.  Like the Marine / Army guy, thank you for your service to our country.  Thank you for fighting the Nazis, or the Japs, or the Vietnamese, or the Koreans (North, of course).  He's wearing a hat that states what destroyer / battleship / carrier he served on, and he's usually grumpy.  Ham it up with him and he'll be more palatable at the table, though careful, son - don't overstep 'yer boundaries.

The verdict: Rock.  He'll check / call you down and never fold top pair.  He's got an unadapting range in mind that he'll *NEVER* deviate from - position be damned.  He's going broke on AA every. single. damned. time!  (Why the F*CK do they *NEVER* hold up, G*DD*MNIT!?!?!?!   Why?  Because you're only paying off when they know they have you beat, and they're folding the hands that didn't flop good against your 1% raising range of AA, KK)  Again, check / call means top pair.  Raise means some two pair, but definitely set+ and overpairs (for some reason, overpairs are held in higher regard than 2 pair; WTF?).  Value value value when you nut on him.  Fold otherwise.  He'll pay off your flush / straight and set.  Therefore, don't try to bluff.

To be continued...

* Credit to Steven Colbert and the Colbert Report's 434 part series, "Better Know a District" series.  If you haven't seen any of the episodes, click over to his website and watch.  It's very clever - Eleanor Holmes Norton is my favorite interview.

Stereotypes and poker - Part 2 of a 116 part series on "Better Know a Poker Player"*

Part of my multi-part series of "Better Know a Player"- the 116 part series on racism and stereotyping those around you*, I continue with 3 new stereotypes: the businessman, the former jock, and the drunk.  Enjoy it, or ignore it as blatant racism.  You choose!

The Businessman

Well dressed, regardless of ethnicity, he's likely coming off a hard day of work at a conference or meetings away from home.  Coming straight from work (he didn't take the time to change into something more comfortable, did he?), he's looking to blow off some steam and play some cards.  He's not here to fold hands - he's here to take flops and see where they go.  He's a fish, and although he sometimes knows it, he usually doesn't care.  Again, money isn't really an object to him since his business is likely footing the bill.  He's going to be a loose passive, and he's going to allow himself to call down with second- and sometimes third- pair hands "on a hunch" that you're bluffing.  Sometimes, ego is involved, whereby he'd rather lose big than fold what could be the winning hand.

The verdict: Bread-and-butter players.  Similar to the black, thug types, they will pay you off and begrudge their "bad luck."  Like their counterpart, watch out when they take the betting reins.

The Ed Hardy former jock

Bursting with muscles from the seams of their shirts, these guys were "the man" in their high schools and/or colleges.  I was talking with a guy last night who went to Podunk University and was begrudging the fact that he didn't make it to the NFL - because he was the best blah blah blah on his blah blah blah team.  His career was curtailed due to injury or girl troubles or whatever... oh yeah; you got the mental fortitude to be a poker player!  Anyway, these guys are huge in the ego department and not so big in the brains department.  They understand aggression because they've been picking on the nerds, but don't understand a story.  Therefore picking off their bluffs are usually easy, and inducing action is usually even easier.

The verdict: Bread-and-butter players.  Check to signal weakness and let them do the betting for you.  If you really want to make a statement and put them in their place, come over the top of them, but this is more meta-game than immediately profitable poker (i.e. you fold out their bluffs, etc. - situation dependent).

The table drunk

Do I need to go further?  We've all seen this kind of player and know exactly what I'm talking about.

The verdict: 'Nuf said.  Never know where he's at or what he has.  He's dead money, but keep the liquor flowing so he'll stay there.  He'll pay ze man his moneys every time, without fail.  Strap in for some variance turbulence, but he'll be way behind and paying off far more often than the reverse.

The verdict: Bread-and-butter.  Easy game.

* Credit to Steven Colbert and the Colbert Report's 434 part series, "Better Know a District" series.  If you haven't seen any of the episodes, click over to his website and watch.  It's very clever - Eleanor Holmes Norton is my favorite interview.

Stereotypes and poker - Part 1 of a 116 part series on "Better Know a Poker Player"*

I know that I, personally, am guilty of making judgements based on race, accent, or style.  I believe that stereotypes do exist in poker, and I hold that they're all correct until proven otherwise.  It's negative EV if you close your eyes and imagine your opponent as looking like vanilla ice cream instead of what and who he truly is, whether he be chocolate, green tea or rum punch.

Since this is my blog, and I can write what I want to without fear of reprisal or being called racist (people can still call me that, I guess), elitist, etc., I'm going to keep a running log right here & now intending to catalog the various stereotypes dancing through my head.  This is going to be a multi-part series.  I think it is important to note that yes, this is a bit biased, but away from the table, I honestly believe that I treat all people the same regardless of color or creed.  The only thing that prejudging does at the table is help me get a leg up on my opponents initially.

Let's start with the Asians first, because they're easy to pick on:

The Craisian Asian

The typical crazy Asian is the gambol gambol gamble type.  He loves to throw good money after bad - even if it's clear that he's beat - in order to suckout for the euphoria of the win.  He's typically middle- to late- aged, skinny, scraggly beard... you know the type - perhaps a long hair coming out of his mole?  This guy will play literally any two cards - they're SOOORRRTED (suited) or they're CORRRREEEECCTING (connecting).  QJ and JT is the nuts PF.  They are action junkies to the extreme.  They take the culture to heart, believing in rucky (lucky) numbers, thereby playing J4o as a limp / call.  They love calling gutters, so beware when that weird 3 straight turns like 6 8 K -> turned 9.  I'd imagine most of them are simply degenerate gamblers who are constantly losing money; they're in it for the thrill.

The verdict: These are bread-and-butter payoff players.  You'll feast on them, but strap in because it can sometimes be a bumpy ride when they do hit their improbably gutters on the river.  Make sure you value bet the shit outta them!

The young, Asian internet- type

Proceed with caution!  Usually, they know what they're doing.  Donning a hoodie pulled low to cover their foreheads, they're aware of their table image, and like to feed off the impression of their elder brethren.  However, they are not Craisian.  They are generally smart, know how to fold, and know how to represent.  Their bluff stories usually make sense and their value bets are just as well-thought out; sized appropriately for the hand they perceive you to hold.  They also understand odds, so size your bets appropriately for this kind of player.  You're not going to get a ton of value out of them.  Generally avoid pots with them when possible.

The verdict: As I said above, keep clear of these guys.  They know what they're doing, and if their iso-ing you, raise an eyebrow and question whether they view you as the fish at the table.

The black, thug-types; i.e. gold caps, goatee, low hanging pants, etc.

Somewhat intimidating at first glance, these players are generally nice people, looking for a night of entertainment.  Give them the entertainment they're looking for; talk it up with them.  Buy them a drink!  They've played at home games and fancy themselves knowledgeable players, but at their cores, they're loose / passive.  They play level one poker, much like the Craisian Asians, however, they're not nearly as aggressive and loose.  Their value bets when they do nut on you are usually uncharacteristically small in comparison to the pot - they tend to miss a lot of value from their big hands in that regard.  I believe they value bet small because of the rampant fear among the loose passive community that they're going to lose the fish on the hook.

The verdict: Bread-and-butter players.  They will pay you off every time without fail and begrudge their "bad luck."  However, when these guys are doing the betting, make sure that you have a hand.  Don't spaz out when they bet small and you think you can come over the top of them.  They're pretty certain to have a premium hand.

To be continued...

* Credit to Steven Colbert and the Colbert Report's 434 part series, "Better Know a District" series.  If you haven't seen any of the episodes, click over to his website and watch.  It's very clever - Eleanor Holmes Norton is my favorite interview.