playing better poker

I've been reading Paul Wasicka's blog:

http://www.bluffmagazine.com/blog/blogdetail.asp?aid=81&bcatid=4

I looked for things on Wasicka after I heard Matusow saw that he was impressed by some of the things he had read about Wasicka, how Wasicka knows he has to play perfect poker and how he's been running lucky. What I've been reading is fascinating. Reading his analysis of hands during the LA Poker Classic is great learning material. He plays close attention to other players' styles and behavior and will outplay them in select spots.

But back to me . . .

My focus is waining. I'm making sub-optimal plays. I also need to be tighter. Same stuff that I've been saying. Play tighter, less bluffing, more value betting. I do need to be in a better mood when playing, though. I can't underestimate that aspect. I played two S&Gs yesterday, lost in them both and then played too fast in another and busted out after 13 hands. I was not playing my best - I was tired and frustrated. Maybe I can play better today.

my own interpretation of ICM

I re-read Jennifear's article on ICM. If you're concentrating on the math, it seems difficult, but it's basically just what Dan Harrington called "first in vigorish"

When you're on the bubble, push a lot with just about any two cards. Don't call without premium hands. The way she talks about a call that may have positive cEV (positive chip expected value) but not necessarily positive $EV (positive equity expected value) is interesting. It makes you awfully tight in terms of calling when on the bubble. If it ever becomes an all-in fest for all players as this theory prescribes, then you have to loosen your calling requirements. Of course each situation is different and it seems most of the donkeys I play with don't do this.

I found myself at a 12+1 6 handed STT on Stars today and tried it out twice. One worked, one didn't (actually had A9o and got called by KQs and lost). On the other, I never got called.

My basic philosophy has always been - get your money in good, that's all you can do.

Being a knowledgeable player, I know the quandry I'm in when someone pushes in to me and I have A6s. I could be dominated. I could be 55/45. This posting has been a little but of stream of consciousness.

One of the things I have trouble with is the luck factor. I know that when I'm pushing with 92, I'm only going to get called by a better hand. And it kills me and goes against my own theory
(get your money in good) - but I guess that's the thing, it's a +$ev value if not necessarily a +cEV play. But I guess you have to get called for it to be a -cEV play.

I guess I need to adjust my thinking. People who have thought this through more than I have are coming up with this conclusion, so I don't see why I can't change my line of thinking to incorporate it into my game.

dealing with the luck factor

I can play this game, I can beat these players. I'm beginning to think my real advantage is style. I play a better style - kind of a semi-loose aggressive style, but not moronic like most of the players I play with at these levels. But here's the issue - the damn luck factor. I play my ass off only to get outdrawn by a donkey who doesn't know what he's doing. I guess that's the nature of S&Gs.

So to wind down, I'm taking a stab at 6 handed $.10/.25 Pot Limit Hi/Lo Omaha.

where is my focus?

I didn't even read the book (I only read its description on Amazon), but I know what it's talking about. "Your Worst Poker Enemy" is about how your own emotions and thoughts make you bad. I know I'm better than everyone I play against, but I make sub-optimal plays OVER AND OVER because I see others doing it and benefiting from it. And for some reason, I think that because I'm better than the others around me, the pots will just come to me. It's not true. I have to be patient and outplay these donkeys. I'm a little tired and I know that lowers my level of play.

I play too fast. I'm not disciplined enough. I know to stop multi-tabling and get back to one table and make it so that +EV decisions are the only decisions I am making.

what the hell is ICM?

I haven't played a lot lately, but in some reading I've done, I've come across a concept called ICM (The Independent Chip Model). It seems I'm late to the party on this. From the beginning of what I've read, it's about making decisions based on math and position relative to the money. I read through someone named Jennifear's $55 STT which had some interesting plays and thoughts:

http://www.pocketfives.com/0DBF774F-1FC9-4349-825D-9BE7645FCF20.aspx

I want to do some reading on ICM and see if it can help me short handed STT bubble game.

I also want to focus more when playing - my play was not tight today, too many loose plays. I'm better than this.

against donkeys with a flush draw, don't always be so aggressive

Here is the third hand of this S&G. Jesus, I played this badly. I don't mind the call on the button with KQs. I flop a flush draw with two overs. I don't hate the call on the flop. I easily have pot odds on the chance that I hit my draw. Could I get much value if I did hit? Maybe, maybe not. But the turn is where this hand went wrong. Two players check to me, and I think I can take this pot away on the turn, so I bet big. One caller. Why didn't I take the free card? I didn't spend enough time thinking about it, but my general thought was that I'm building the pot if I hit and I also might take the pot away. He checks to me again on the river. Now, I'm dead. Surrender? I could have, but the pot was so big. I didn't really think about this too much. I didn't really put him on a hand. Looking back, the check call and relatively weak play puts him on QJ to me. And considering the call on the turn, I doubt I could have gotten him to lay it down on the river. He told me later he had JJ, which is a bad play on the river to me, he should have bet into me. Either way, the real fault is mine.

This was a weak player. In a step 3 PCA qualifier, it's pretty safe to assume that I'm better than everyone at my table, but I didn't follow my own rules on beating weak players. Play closer to the vest, bluff less, and push with the nuts. And yes, after I blew this hand, I finished 9th on a 9 person table.

The hand:
http://www.pokerhand.org/?1608327

taking advantage of weaker players

Keeping this blog has helped my game because it requires me to critically analyze my play. It's one thing to think you're keeping track of what you're doing, but when you write it down and think about how you explain it, you have to analyze it more critically.

With that being said, my analysis of beating weaker players has been correct for the most part. I'm making more value bets when I think I'm good on the river. I'm doing less bluffing for the most part. And my favorite play that I've been making a lot is the overbet. Donkeys have a really tough time laying down top pair. Here's a great example that didn't work out for me.

http://www.pokerhand.org/?1583330

The raise I made was too large, but I knew that your average donkey couldn't lay down an overpair or top/top. It didn't work out, but there are plenty of examples where it has worked for me. I can't find the hands, but I have examples, where I have an overpair on a board that comes queen high or king high, and I check raise all in.

So what I am still doing wrong? Still bluffing too much. Fire one shell - but don't push too much. These donkeys will call you down with second pair or even third pair BECAUSE they are donkeys. They don't know any better. I still need to be tighter after the flop. And I also need to be looser when firing bullets at orphaned pots. In a heads up pot that goes check/check, I need to fire more on the turn. Especially if an undercard comes on the turn.

I'm going back to my theory of finding games you can beat and beating them. I'm going to try to play a couple hundred 12+1 six handed STTs. I can beat them relatively regularly, and I'd like to build my bankroll to a couple thousand before I move up.