lolpassive
Hmm, interesting. His style is almost antithetical to my own yet he has $150k+ (lol), and then I figured out that a lot (?) of his winnings come from tourneys. Still something to think about. He's hyperaggressive, almost like a maniac, but seems to be enjoying wild success.
Meanwhile, my own tight-passive 'counterplay' crap is getting me nowhere fast. Although, to be fair, had I been following it religiously I would have lost a bit less...That's about it, however. I think time has come to reevaluate how successful counterplay is and if it is still a winning strategy in the games I'm playing. It is after all 1.5 years old.
"These tactics are designed for tables that have a mix of "ace crackers" and fish where a standard 3-5xBB raise will NOT reduce your competion to 1 or 2 max players, and for tables wehre your competition will make calls that defy drawing odds with their drawing hands." True. "On the river the rules is only to raise if you're prepared to commite all your remaining chips to the hand. Otherwise call, or check and take the hand down." Hmm. "If noone raises you have to look at it [AA/KK] as a drawing hand and hop for trips [sic]." Okay, I don't like LRR or playing AA/KK for set value.
Glad I reread that. Turns out I haven't been passive enough!?! I've been mixing in aggressive play and it's been getting me into trouble. A lot of trouble. Typical line I've been taking with TPTK/two pair: PSB flop, 0.5PSB/PSB turn, 0.5PSB or C/C river. Bad idea! I'm making the pot too big with a crappy hand so that when I get minraised or villain bets pot on the river I feel I have to call.
I think I see one of my problems. TPTK and two pair are shit in a family pot and I've been betting them. In a 3 handed pot, they're good. But, the premise of counterplay is that "Multiple preflop callers with pot sized or 5xBB raises with 'any 2', primarily nut cracking hands - which any hand can be if you have to balls to call a big preflop raise." & "A GROUP of nut crackers can crack nuts more often than not." & "1/2 to pot sized bets only eliminate the nut cracking hands that lost potential. The one's on a draw stay in." That's it! The players haven't changed, but I have. I would argue that some of the games I've been playing aren't the way he's described. I need to be aiming for 0 aggression.
Just did it there. Dealt A8s in newbie blind. Flop pair of Aces and a flush draw. Do I bet? No I check it all the way down. MHIG and I win a small pot. Next hand, I call a raise with AKo, miss flop so I check fold. Easy! I know to non-believers that sounds fishy as hell but I think he's on to a good thing.
I am not entirely convinced it is viable at Party and/or at higher limits. Optimal TAG play seems to be the standard there. I will have to experiment.
And there we go. BB QQ: I raise to >10% of my stack. SS calls (about a 1/4 of his). Jack-high two heart flop, I put SS all-in. He calls with A2s on the flush draw. Equity check: 57/43. Fine by me. I'd have played exactly the same way if I could have seen his cards (well, I would have preferred more money in preflop where my equity is 68/32 but whatever). Someone asks me "how mad are you?" and I'm glad that I can truthfully say "not at all". Skalanksys won that hand: $7.45 less rake. Real money lost: $12.45.
Then I get a little too weak perhaps with AKo OOP. Small pot, small hand, small mistake.
Before I reread that, I had considered that perhaps I should write a perl/shell script that 1) parses HH (obviously) 2) extracts and stores a metric boatload of stats that PT doesn't with the intention of 3) modeling players behaviour in real time.
What would that actually accomplish? Well, it would draw on past statistics about how villains played hands and then present likely holdings given their current actions. Like PT stats but better. It might be worth doing purely as a poker learning experience.
mmmm
<< Home