nice ! well you have to take into consideration accomadtion and the food/bar bill ) good luck - run good m8'ty Posted by rancid
Me and Emma were already going anyway, regardless of if I qualified or not. Booked the hotel a while ago, only staying the Saturday night and got a room for the bargain price of £32.
In Response to Re: Lambert180 - A Tale Of 2 Bankrolls ----- Bring On SPT Blackpool!! : How foolish of me lol, but I think you'll find it means I could have paid anywhere between £1 and £59 for the £60 to be a profit for me Posted by Lambert180
Both wrong lol
Its between £31 & £59 m8 because if it was any less you would only require 1 Bounty to be in profit!!
Against an aggro player, I kinda think it's impossible to win long-term in those hypers. A 3-bet in the first level commits you to the pot with any Ace... Just from those few games I can suggest a couple of adjustments you can make that I think might improve your game. Nothing major, just one or two things I think you can tidy up. If you're interested I can PM you.
There's a serious gap in the structures of HU SnG's on Sky, isn't there?
Hypers: 500 chips, 2min blinds Turbos: 1000 chips, 2 min blinds Regulars: 1500 chips, 10 min blinds
That's a fair old leap between turbos and regulars. Where are the 1000/1500 chips with 5 min blinds? You can either have fast, really fast or really slow... Weird.
Played four, won two, lost two... Against an aggro player, I kinda think it's impossible to win long-term in those hypers. A 3-bet in the first level commits you to the pot with any Ace... Just from those few games I can suggest a couple of adjustments you can make that I think might improve your game. Nothing major, just one or two things I think you can tidy up. If you're interested I can PM you. There's a serious gap in the structures of HU SnG's on Sky, isn't there? Hypers: 500 chips, 2min blinds Turbos: 1000 chips, 2 min blinds Regulars: 1500 chips, 10 min blinds That's a fair old leap between turbos and regulars. Where are the 1000/1500 chips with 5 min blinds? You can either have fast, really fast or really slow... Weird. Posted by BorinLoner
To be fair, that's not exactly a full description of events and I think this session was evidence of being able to beat an aggro player.
I'd say you were pretty aggro, we played 4 games against each other, in 3 of the games the decisive hand where we got it all in I was 70%+ favourite, and the other game when we got it in, it was a flip with me as favourite (holding the PP). The fact you happened to bink a 2 in the JJ v 22 does not mean suddenly the games are unbeatable, I did get it in as a favourite for stacks in 4/4 games.
Also, the fact you can't fold after 3betting is because your 3bets were ridiculously big. If I raise to 50, there is absolutely no benefit to raising to 170 at all, a raise to 120 does exactly the same job and does allow you to 3bet/fold. When you 3bet to 1/3 of your stack, you only have yourself to blame for putting yourself in a spot where you can't fold any Ace.
3bets do not commit you in level 1 at all. Most people min-raise because it gets the job done just as well and with such a short stack makes much more sense. So when someone makes it 40, I can happily 3bet to 100 (leaving myself 400 behind) and fold/shove to 4bets, depending on my hand and my opponent, or if he flats, continue as normal, but more than capable of folding post-flop and still having 20BB behind.
Now I've got that out the way, gotta update on today's happenings...
I didn't play any Hypers tonight because I was at my local pub game, although it wasn't much of a game. By 8:30pm there was only 2 of us there, so we agreed to just play a quick £5 HU game while we wait for others, crushed him in that so was a fiver up. Still no-one there, but the other guy managed to convince a third guy (random pub go-er) to take part but as he was not very good he only wanted to play a £5 BI and no rebuys, so we did that and winner gets £15.
That one didn't go too well, couple of outdraws and got bluffed off a hand where I gave the guy too much respect obviously. Ended up on about 11BB, shoved from the button with Q9s... the third guy who was an idiot tanks and then flat calls for about 80% of his stack with 96off lol, the other guy has us both covered by quite alot so he sticks the guy all in with A4s. Flop comes a xx9 and I'm loving it, then it comes runner runner for 96 guy to hit a straight lol. So I'm out and he very quickly donks off his chips to the better player. So lost a fiver there, so break even for the night, not bad for a good night out.
On the subject of hypers, I did play some this morning, I played 32 and won 16 for a loss of £8. Still running pretty bad and JJ has watched me on Joinme so can confirm this. Testing my patience here to keep doing things right and still keep getting outdrawn... this runbad has now been going on for about 300 games... can't go on much longer.
======================= Sky Games Played: 673 Sky Profit/Loss: -£83.25 Poker Points: 2082 (£24.98)
=======================
??? Games Player: 48 ??? Profit/Loss: -$55.90 ========================
I've now passed the 2000 poker points mark so jumped up to £24+ in C4P. My belief in my ability was slightly starting to waiver with how bad my results have been but I've got my head back on track and I know I'm making all the right moves and it's just variance. I still have complete faith I can finish the month in profit, even if it requires some C4P to get me over the line.
In Response to Re: Lambert180 - A Tale Of 2 Bankrolls ----- Bring On SPT Blackpool!! : To be fair, that's not exactly a full description of events and I think this session was evidence of being able to beat an aggro player. I'd say you were pretty aggro, we played 4 games against each other, in 3 of the games the decisive hand where we got it all in I was 70%+ favourite, and the other game when we got it in, it was a flip with me as favourite (holding the PP). The fact you happened to bink a 2 in the JJ v 22 does not mean suddenly the games are unbeatable, I did get it in as a favourite for stacks in 4/4 games. Also, the fact you can't fold after 3betting is because your 3bets were ridiculously big. If I raise to 50, there is absolutely no benefit to raising to 170 at all, a raise to 120 does exactly the same job and does allow you to 3bet/fold. When you 3bet to 1/3 of your stack, you only have yourself to blame for putting yourself in a spot where you can't fold any Ace. 3bets do not commit you in level 1 at all. Most people min-raise because it gets the job done just as well and with such a short stack makes much more sense. So when someone makes it 40, I can happily 3bet to 100 (leaving myself 400 behind) and fold/shove to 4bets, depending on my hand and my opponent, or if he flats, continue as normal, but more than capable of folding post-flop and still having 20BB behind. Posted by Lambert180
Well, I wasn't using those four games specifically as evidence that the game can't be beaten against an aggro player, rather that my feeling from those was that they couldn't because of the way I'd expect them to play. Four games is far too small a specimen to use as an example. You're right that my 3-bets were big and I wasn't exactly treating it as a serious exercise in profit making.
Incidentally, the reason why my 3-bets were so big: On the first hand, you opened to 50 and I wanted to 3-bet to 150, so that's what I typed in and, of course, it made it 170. The next time round it came to me and I think "I'd better make it the same" so type in 170... of course that made it 190: What a muppet, lol.
As for when I could fold, it depends on the range I put you on after 3-betting. So shallow, I wouldn't fold an Ace or a pair mainly because I'd assume that you were going to be very aggro on the button. So while 3-bet/folding with an ace would be possible, the reason I said I wouldn't was that I'd expect my opponent to be too aggressive and therefore the fold wouldn't be profitable. The reason you were favourite in those circumstances was that you picked up AQ when I had A2 and JJ when I had 22. Since they were the first hands in the first two games, I assumed that you were playing as aggressively as I'd expected them to be played so I was beating your range as I saw it. See my PM about that for a bit more detail.
I'm absolutely certain that the game can be beaten against alot of players at that level. The reason I don't think it can be beaten against an aggro player is that, because of the 5% rake, you'll need to get it in as more than a 55% favourite against them on a regular basis. That excludes coolers because those will benefit your opponent as often as they benefit you. A decent 3-betting range for an aggro player is going to be any pair, any Ace a QT+ and probably most Kings. After 3-betting they're going to find it tricky to lay most of that range down but you'll have to lay down alot of your opening hands... It will be really difficult to get it in as a significant favourite on a frequent enough basis to beat the rake, mainly because they won't give you enough hands to do that in the early levels.
I'm sure you'd need to take notes about your opponents' opening and 3-betting range in these.
Anyway, no offence was intended. I would think that variance is going to be a pain in the backside in these but I think over the long-term you can win. There have got to be enough poor/passive players to beat the rake.
I might edit this reply later when I have a bit more time but here's quick replies to what I can remember from your post...
I dont't wanna give too much info away about my game but here's some thoughts on what you said.
As I'm sure you are aware, knowing your opponent in HU is absolutely vital and while I haven't played against you much (and never at HU), I knew from what I've seen you post on the forum (especially on the topic of Hypers) that you were gonna start out super aggro. So the first 2 hands in them 2 games, when I had AQ and JJ... I knew you would most likely be piling on the aggression from the very start to get a head start. I usually ALWAYS min-raise in these, but because it was you I thought I'd make it 50 instead, because I was expecting you to 3bet the button alot, and that would force your 3bet to be a bit bigger, and so when I shove there would be more for me to pick up uncontested (didn't think you'd call). By the way, I'm never happy getting in 25BB in the very first hand with 22 or A2.
I am aggressive on the button and against most players will be min-raising virtually 100% of buttons, but again it comes back to knowing your player, and I obviously tighten up my raising range if I know people will 3bet alot because alot of people won't ever 3bet/fold.
I also don't entirely agree that levels 1 and 2 are the key, granted they are certainly the times in the game when you have the most 'play', but against the right players, the blinds going up is brilliant. Some players look purely at their hand and not notice the size of their stack in comparison to the blinds and so realise they should obviously be shoving/calling wider with 7BB. So many people don't realise this and will happily fold to a jam, fold to the button, fold to a jam, and so on, at 20/40 or 25/50 where doing that just 3-4 times is gonna make the stacks like 700 v 300 in your favour.
"The reason I don't think it can be beaten against an aggro player is that, because of the 5% rake, you'll need to get it in as more than a 55% favourite against them on a regular basis. That excludes coolers because those will benefit your opponent as often as they benefit you. A decent 3-betting range for an aggro player is going to be any pair, any Ace a QT+ and probably most Kings."
I know it's a small sample, but I got it in against you as 55% and 70%+ (3 times) favourite in the 4 games, and these were not coolers at all. It is not a cooler to get A2 v AQ in the first hand, you simply should not be getting A2 all in pre in the first hand.
You need to get constant 3betting out of your head, you just don't have the stacks and are gonna be called by ATC so often it's unreal. Keep it low variance. Say for example, I min-raise the button to 40, you pick up 55 and decide to 3bet to 100 (a good size), when I fold, ok you've won 40 which is a nice addition to your stack when we're only 500 deep, but if I call you're ALWAYS in trouble. Suddenly you're playing 55 OOP when the board is likely to come 3 overcards and I will ALWAYS have either 2 overcards to 55 or a bigger PP.
Again everything I say is massively opponent dependent, I will do one thing with 77 against one player and do something completely different against another player if they play differently.
. The reason you were favourite in those circumstances was that you picked up AQ when I had A2 and JJ when I had 22. Since they were the first hands in the first two games, I assumed that you were playing as aggressively as I'd expected them to be played so I was beating your range as I saw it. Posted by BorinLoner
You're much better off shoving these hands than making a regular 3bet.
Unless you had reads that Paul is a total spewman with a high opening frequency and a reluctance to ever fold to a 3b, & with the potential to 4b bluff shove a high % of the time, then it's far better to jam these hands.
It's better to to make non all in 3bets with hands which play well post flop when he peels in position.
I can't think of 2 hands that play worse post flop against his 3b peeling range than A2 and pocket 2s......
You can fold out a ton of his range that has 45%+ equity against your hands here by just jamming.
Depending on the levels (I assume it's level 1 if he's opening to 50) I'd lean towards a fold pre with the A2o and a jam pre with the 2's, but that's because I know he's playing a pretty solid game and wont be getting out of line much.
Looks like the sizes are too big from both, everytime I've watched Paul play he normally opens the minimum in level 1. I'm not sure if he made an adjustment to open to 50? But against a standard min raise open from a competent/solid player, a 3b to 95 is fine, if you're going to try and balance your range abit, and leave him room to jam light, so we can induce, and bluff, as well as get value from worse and play flops.
Making it 120+ narrows his options really to shove/fold, and his jams are rarely/should rarely ever be bluffs as he should have minimal fold equity.
Hope you continue to play a few of these, it's good to get fresh ideas in the clinic, normally don't get many contributions on clinic hyper threads.
If you wanna play a few £1 games, best of 5/7 for abit of practise/get some HH's today I'll be around all afternoon from around 2pm. Post here or player search me.
I stand by my play. Shoving for your 10BB with A5 is standard. Because you had 44 doesn't make that wrong. Getting 12BB in with top pair, 8 kicker isn't wrong. So you had a 10 kicker; that's how it goes.
As for tha A2, it's pretty well the right move to 3-bet against a wide opening range. Once I make it 150, 170, whatever I can't fold. Making it 120 would have offerred you the chance to call and play in position against me. That's not too bad, since I have the betting lead but I'd just need to shove almost any flop and hope you've missed it. That's not ideal.
I made it 170, so 330 to call to win 670? I only have to be ahead of a small portion of your range to make it right because against most of your range I'll be 2.3/1. I actually imagine you'd 4-bet with KQ, KJ, maybe KT or QJ. You may even shove with weaker hands if you perceive me as being super-aggro. So that's the right call after the 3-bet.
With the 22, it's again about the pot odds. Yeah, I can be 20/80 there, but far more often you'll have two overs. Again, with pot odds of 310/690, I can't fold. The same is true if I made it the 150 I'd have liked to.
In both cases, if the 3-bet is right, then so is the call. If you have a wide opening range, then the 3-bet must be right. You're saying you do have a wide opening range, just as you should. If you fold either one of those hands, I gain a 55/45 chip lead in one hand by making a pretty standard heads-up 3-bet. I was unlucky that you had the hands you did but that doesn't mean I misplayed the hands. The alternative is to call out of position with two hands that are ahead of your range pre-flop, but probably won't be after the flop. The fact is that against a player like me, you'd need to be aggro when you're this short or the blinds will eat you up. If we're both aggro, then hands like these two are going to happen and the cards will decide who wins.
In Response to Re: Lambert180 - A Tale Of 2 Bankrolls ----- Bring On SPT Blackpool!! : You're much better off shoving these hands than making a regular 3bet. Unless you had reads that Paul is a total spewman with a high opening frequency and a reluctance to ever fold to a 3b, & with the potential to 4b bluff shove a high % of the time, then it's far better to jam these hands. It's better to to make non all in 3bets with hands which play well post flop when he peels in position. I can't think of 2 hands that play worse post flop against his 3b peeling range than A2 and pocket 2s...... You can fold out a ton of his range that has 45%+ equity against your hands here by just jamming. Depending on the levels (I assume it's level 1 if he's opening to 50) I'd lean towards a fold pre with the A2o and a jam pre with the 2's, but that's because I know he's playing a pretty solid game and wont be getting out of line much. Looks like the sizes are too big from both, everytime I've watched Paul play he normally opens the minimum in level 1. I'm not sure if he made an adjustment to open to 50? But against a standard min raise open from a competent/solid player, a 3b to 95 is fine, if you're going to try and balance your range abit, and leave him room to jam light, so we can induce, and bluff, as well as get value from worse and play flops. Making it 120+ narrows his options really to shove/fold, and his jams are rarely/should rarely ever be bluffs as he should have minimal fold equity. Hope you continue to play a few of these, it's good to get fresh ideas in the clinic, normally don't get many contributions on clinic hyper threads. If you wanna play a few £1 games, best of 5/7 for abit of practise/get some HH's today I'll be around all afternoon from around 2pm. Post here or player search me. Posted by DOHHHHHHH
I'd never shove 25BB over 2.5BB with a premium heads-up hand so I can't shove these hands that are beating his range, but not crushing it. The range of hands you'd do this with would be far too obvious.
In either case if he had peeled my 3-bet, not only would I have been surprised given the size of it, I would view it as extremely exploitable... I'd just shove any flop, expecting that he'll miss 2/3 of the time. If he's peeling with big hands, okay the first couple of times he'd get my stack, but that's something that's pretty easy to adapt to. So 2/3 times I'd take 30% of his stack, and of those 1/3 times that he hits, I'm allowed to hit some of the time too.
That's how I see the hands anyway. I'm sure you can understand why I think two solid players are going to struggle to beat the rake playing each other. I think you really need to have massive edges at these levels to make a profit. You might not agree but I hope my logic is clear.
Got a few games in this afternoon, more just for fun than anything. Had some games against IDONKCALLU, best of 5 on Turbos and best of 5 on Hypers. I did win both of them 3-1 but to be fair he did get more than his fair share of coolers like jamming into me in a hyper with AQ and me waking up with AK. It was only small stakes, so the total profit made was £5.40 but every little helps at the moment, and I got a few more poker points.
======================= Sky Games Played: 681 Sky Profit/Loss: -£77.85 Poker Points: 2090 (£25.08)
=======================
??? Games Player: 48 ??? Profit/Loss: -$55.90 ========================
The second laptop we ordered arrived today will post up a picture on the diary later when I get round to taking one. I don't know that much about computers but Emma does and she's happy lol. It's an I3, has 6Mb of RAM, and a 17.3" screen. Should be able to get some more games in later
After discussing something with a mate, I've come to a very horrible conclusion.
This month I have played 681 games, and 5% rake (25p) that means I've paid £170.25 in rake.
Now if I played on 'another site' where the rake is 2% (10p), I would have paid £68.10
This is a discrepancy of £102.15 which means that instead of being £77.85 DOWN for the month, I would actually be £24.10 UP.
How I can ignore such a glaring difference in profits, even with my C4P @ £25, that still leaves me £75 worse off. I'm going to continue for the rest of June because I've earned a good bit of C4P and it'll only increase and increase in pence per point, the more I play. But sadly, at the end of June I may need to make a very horrible decision that I didn't really want to.
After discussing something with a mate, I've come to a very horrible conclusion. This month I have played 681 games, and 5% rake (25p) that means I've paid £170.25 in rake. Now if I played on 'another site' where the rake is 2% (10p), I would have paid £68.10 This is a discrepancy of £102.15 which means that instead of being £77.85 DOWN for the month, I would actually be £24.10 UP. How I can ignore such a glaring difference in profits, even with my C4P @ £25, that still leaves me £75 worse off. I'm going to continue for the rest of June because I've earned a good bit of C4P and it'll only increase and increase in pence per point, the more I play. But sadly, at the end of June I may need to make a very horrible decision that I didn't really want to. Paul Posted by Lambert180
if you are worrying about rake, then you need to look at aspects of your game to improve...good luck,maybe for a small fee i could give you lessons..
In Response to Re: Lambert180 - A Tale Of 2 Bankrolls ----- Bring On SPT Blackpool!! : if you are worrying about rake, then you need to look at aspects of your game to improve...good luck,maybe for a small fee i could give you lessons.. Posted by djblacke04
what a totally clueless naive reply...
why play somewhere where they charge 5% rake when u can play the exact same games for 2% rake.
eg 2000 games at £5.25 at 2% rake you will be instantly £300 better off than playing 2000 games at 5% rake.
i know what you mean paul. if you buy any product in a shop and you found it cheaper elsewhere you would buy it there instead. been considering my options for a while myself. gl in what ever decision you make. phil
So we've got our 2 laptops up and running now, it's good cos I can play my Hypers while Emma does her DYMs. To be honest, I think she's sick of them, but she said she'd play 100 so that's what she's gonna do. I broke the depressing news to her today of why it seems to be taking forever to get through them compared to her last 100 games (hypers) cos in the time it takes to play 100 Hypers, she'd have only played about 10 DYMs.
Anyway, was an ok session tonight, a small winning one at least, and at the moment I'm just trying to string together a few winning sessions. I played 18 games and won 10 of them for a £5.50 profit. Slowly reducing that big red number, and earning poker points along the way.
======================= Sky Games Played: 699 Sky Profit/Loss: -£72.35 Poker Points: 2144 (£25.73)
=======================
??? Games Player: 48 ??? Profit/Loss: -$55.90 ========================
I notice we aint had any ROI challenge up dates recently. Please don't lay off the updates for fear of making me depressed lol... it'll be something nice to look back at when I dig my way out of the hole
Either that or just no-one has been playing... can we get an update.
So if you continue playing on Sky at the same rate as you have this month for a whole year, you'll pay an extra £2.5k in rake. That sounds like alot to me.
That's just an approximate number but it's based on 10p v 25 p and assuming you maintain 700 or so games for the next two weeks and also maintain that rate for the year. It's a pretty hefty number though. Can you afford to miss out on £2.5k in a year?
So if you continue playing on Sky at the same rate as you have this month for a whole year, you'll pay an extra £2.5k in rake. That sounds like alot to me. That's just an approximate number but it's based on 10p v 25 p and assuming you maintain 700 or so games for the next two weeks and also maintain that rate for the year. It's a pretty hefty number though. Can you afford to miss out on £2.5k in a year? Posted by BorinLoner
In short... no I can't lol.
It's also more than that as I do intend to be putting more volume in than I currently am. I'd be doing an absolute minimum of 2000 games per month, which means a loss of £300 per month.
But then I do have to take into account that 2000 games, is 6000 poker points which is about £100 C4P per month. Still a big difference but then there's the added factor of how will changing to a larger site affect my win-rate.
i know what you mean paul. if you buy any product in a shop and you found it cheaper elsewhere you would buy it there instead. been considering my options for a while myself. gl in what ever decision you make. phil Posted by pod1
Cheers Phil. Aint seen you aronud for a while.
It is a horrible decision because I really like playing on Sky and everything they do, but no matter how nice the shop keeper is, if my local corner shop is twice the price of Asda, I'll go to Asda
Comments
Should be a good laugh anyway.
Played four, won two, lost two...
Against an aggro player, I kinda think it's impossible to win long-term in those hypers. A 3-bet in the first level commits you to the pot with any Ace... Just from those few games I can suggest a couple of adjustments you can make that I think might improve your game. Nothing major, just one or two things I think you can tidy up. If you're interested I can PM you.
There's a serious gap in the structures of HU SnG's on Sky, isn't there?
Hypers: 500 chips, 2min blinds
Turbos: 1000 chips, 2 min blinds
Regulars: 1500 chips, 10 min blinds
That's a fair old leap between turbos and regulars. Where are the 1000/1500 chips with 5 min blinds? You can either have fast, really fast or really slow... Weird.
I'd say you were pretty aggro, we played 4 games against each other, in 3 of the games the decisive hand where we got it all in I was 70%+ favourite, and the other game when we got it in, it was a flip with me as favourite (holding the PP). The fact you happened to bink a 2 in the JJ v 22 does not mean suddenly the games are unbeatable, I did get it in as a favourite for stacks in 4/4 games.
Also, the fact you can't fold after 3betting is because your 3bets were ridiculously big. If I raise to 50, there is absolutely no benefit to raising to 170 at all, a raise to 120 does exactly the same job and does allow you to 3bet/fold. When you 3bet to 1/3 of your stack, you only have yourself to blame for putting yourself in a spot where you can't fold any Ace.
3bets do not commit you in level 1 at all. Most people min-raise because it gets the job done just as well and with such a short stack makes much more sense. So when someone makes it 40, I can happily 3bet to 100 (leaving myself 400 behind) and fold/shove to 4bets, depending on my hand and my opponent, or if he flats, continue as normal, but more than capable of folding post-flop and still having 20BB behind.
I didn't play any Hypers tonight because I was at my local pub game, although it wasn't much of a game. By 8:30pm there was only 2 of us there, so we agreed to just play a quick £5 HU game while we wait for others, crushed him in that so was a fiver up. Still no-one there, but the other guy managed to convince a third guy (random pub go-er) to take part but as he was not very good he only wanted to play a £5 BI and no rebuys, so we did that and winner gets £15.
That one didn't go too well, couple of outdraws and got bluffed off a hand where I gave the guy too much respect obviously. Ended up on about 11BB, shoved from the button with Q9s... the third guy who was an idiot tanks and then flat calls for about 80% of his stack with 96off lol, the other guy has us both covered by quite alot so he sticks the guy all in with A4s. Flop comes a xx9 and I'm loving it, then it comes runner runner for 96 guy to hit a straight lol. So I'm out and he very quickly donks off his chips to the better player. So lost a fiver there, so break even for the night, not bad for a good night out.
On the subject of hypers, I did play some this morning, I played 32 and won 16 for a loss of £8. Still running pretty bad and JJ has watched me on Joinme so can confirm this. Testing my patience here to keep doing things right and still keep getting outdrawn... this runbad has now been going on for about 300 games... can't go on much longer.
=======================
Sky Games Played: 673
Sky Profit/Loss: -£83.25
Poker Points: 2082 (£24.98)
=======================
??? Games Player: 48
??? Profit/Loss: -$55.90
========================
I've now passed the 2000 poker points mark so jumped up to £24+ in C4P. My belief in my ability was slightly starting to waiver with how bad my results have been but I've got my head back on track and I know I'm making all the right moves and it's just variance. I still have complete faith I can finish the month in profit, even if it requires some C4P to get me over the line.
Incidentally, the reason why my 3-bets were so big: On the first hand, you opened to 50 and I wanted to 3-bet to 150, so that's what I typed in and, of course, it made it 170. The next time round it came to me and I think "I'd better make it the same" so type in 170... of course that made it 190: What a muppet, lol.
As for when I could fold, it depends on the range I put you on after 3-betting. So shallow, I wouldn't fold an Ace or a pair mainly because I'd assume that you were going to be very aggro on the button. So while 3-bet/folding with an ace would be possible, the reason I said I wouldn't was that I'd expect my opponent to be too aggressive and therefore the fold wouldn't be profitable. The reason you were favourite in those circumstances was that you picked up AQ when I had A2 and JJ when I had 22. Since they were the first hands in the first two games, I assumed that you were playing as aggressively as I'd expected them to be played so I was beating your range as I saw it. See my PM about that for a bit more detail.
I'm absolutely certain that the game can be beaten against alot of players at that level. The reason I don't think it can be beaten against an aggro player is that, because of the 5% rake, you'll need to get it in as more than a 55% favourite against them on a regular basis. That excludes coolers because those will benefit your opponent as often as they benefit you. A decent 3-betting range for an aggro player is going to be any pair, any Ace a QT+ and probably most Kings. After 3-betting they're going to find it tricky to lay most of that range down but you'll have to lay down alot of your opening hands... It will be really difficult to get it in as a significant favourite on a frequent enough basis to beat the rake, mainly because they won't give you enough hands to do that in the early levels.
I'm sure you'd need to take notes about your opponents' opening and 3-betting range in these.
Anyway, no offence was intended. I would think that variance is going to be a pain in the backside in these but I think over the long-term you can win. There have got to be enough poor/passive players to beat the rake.
I dont't wanna give too much info away about my game but here's some thoughts on what you said.
As I'm sure you are aware, knowing your opponent in HU is absolutely vital and while I haven't played against you much (and never at HU), I knew from what I've seen you post on the forum (especially on the topic of Hypers) that you were gonna start out super aggro. So the first 2 hands in them 2 games, when I had AQ and JJ... I knew you would most likely be piling on the aggression from the very start to get a head start. I usually ALWAYS min-raise in these, but because it was you I thought I'd make it 50 instead, because I was expecting you to 3bet the button alot, and that would force your 3bet to be a bit bigger, and so when I shove there would be more for me to pick up uncontested (didn't think you'd call). By the way, I'm never happy getting in 25BB in the very first hand with 22 or A2.
I am aggressive on the button and against most players will be min-raising virtually 100% of buttons, but again it comes back to knowing your player, and I obviously tighten up my raising range if I know people will 3bet alot because alot of people won't ever 3bet/fold.
I also don't entirely agree that levels 1 and 2 are the key, granted they are certainly the times in the game when you have the most 'play', but against the right players, the blinds going up is brilliant. Some players look purely at their hand and not notice the size of their stack in comparison to the blinds and so realise they should obviously be shoving/calling wider with 7BB. So many people don't realise this and will happily fold to a jam, fold to the button, fold to a jam, and so on, at 20/40 or 25/50 where doing that just 3-4 times is gonna make the stacks like 700 v 300 in your favour.
"The reason I don't think it can be beaten against an aggro player is that, because of the 5% rake, you'll need to get it in as more than a 55% favourite against them on a regular basis. That excludes coolers because those will benefit your opponent as often as they benefit you. A decent 3-betting range for an aggro player is going to be any pair, any Ace a QT+ and probably most Kings."
I know it's a small sample, but I got it in against you as 55% and 70%+ (3 times) favourite in the 4 games, and these were not coolers at all. It is not a cooler to get A2 v AQ in the first hand, you simply should not be getting A2 all in pre in the first hand.
You need to get constant 3betting out of your head, you just don't have the stacks and are gonna be called by ATC so often it's unreal. Keep it low variance. Say for example, I min-raise the button to 40, you pick up 55 and decide to 3bet to 100 (a good size), when I fold, ok you've won 40 which is a nice addition to your stack when we're only 500 deep, but if I call you're ALWAYS in trouble. Suddenly you're playing 55 OOP when the board is likely to come 3 overcards and I will ALWAYS have either 2 overcards to 55 or a bigger PP.
Again everything I say is massively opponent dependent, I will do one thing with 77 against one player and do something completely different against another player if they play differently.
As for tha A2, it's pretty well the right move to 3-bet against a wide opening range. Once I make it 150, 170, whatever I can't fold. Making it 120 would have offerred you the chance to call and play in position against me. That's not too bad, since I have the betting lead but I'd just need to shove almost any flop and hope you've missed it. That's not ideal.
I made it 170, so 330 to call to win 670? I only have to be ahead of a small portion of your range to make it right because against most of your range I'll be 2.3/1. I actually imagine you'd 4-bet with KQ, KJ, maybe KT or QJ. You may even shove with weaker hands if you perceive me as being super-aggro. So that's the right call after the 3-bet.
With the 22, it's again about the pot odds. Yeah, I can be 20/80 there, but far more often you'll have two overs. Again, with pot odds of 310/690, I can't fold. The same is true if I made it the 150 I'd have liked to.
In both cases, if the 3-bet is right, then so is the call. If you have a wide opening range, then the 3-bet must be right. You're saying you do have a wide opening range, just as you should. If you fold either one of those hands, I gain a 55/45 chip lead in one hand by making a pretty standard heads-up 3-bet. I was unlucky that you had the hands you did but that doesn't mean I misplayed the hands. The alternative is to call out of position with two hands that are ahead of your range pre-flop, but probably won't be after the flop. The fact is that against a player like me, you'd need to be aggro when you're this short or the blinds will eat you up. If we're both aggro, then hands like these two are going to happen and the cards will decide who wins.
Edited to prove I can add up. lol
In either case if he had peeled my 3-bet, not only would I have been surprised given the size of it, I would view it as extremely exploitable... I'd just shove any flop, expecting that he'll miss 2/3 of the time. If he's peeling with big hands, okay the first couple of times he'd get my stack, but that's something that's pretty easy to adapt to. So 2/3 times I'd take 30% of his stack, and of those 1/3 times that he hits, I'm allowed to hit some of the time too.
That's how I see the hands anyway. I'm sure you can understand why I think two solid players are going to struggle to beat the rake playing each other. I think you really need to have massive edges at these levels to make a profit. You might not agree but I hope my logic is clear.
=======================
Sky Games Played: 681
Sky Profit/Loss: -£77.85
Poker Points: 2090 (£25.08)
=======================
??? Games Player: 48
??? Profit/Loss: -$55.90
========================
The second laptop we ordered arrived today
This month I have played 681 games, and 5% rake (25p) that means I've paid £170.25 in rake.
Now if I played on 'another site' where the rake is 2% (10p), I would have paid £68.10
This is a discrepancy of £102.15 which means that instead of being £77.85 DOWN for the month, I would actually be £24.10 UP.
How I can ignore such a glaring difference in profits, even with my C4P @ £25, that still leaves me £75 worse off. I'm going to continue for the rest of June because I've earned a good bit of C4P and it'll only increase and increase in pence per point, the more I play. But sadly, at the end of June I may need to make a very horrible decision that I didn't really want to.
Paul
Anyway, was an ok session tonight, a small winning one at least, and at the moment I'm just trying to string together a few winning sessions. I played 18 games and won 10 of them for a £5.50 profit. Slowly reducing that big red number, and earning poker points along the way.
=======================
Sky Games Played: 699
Sky Profit/Loss: -£72.35
Poker Points: 2144 (£25.73)
=======================
??? Games Player: 48
??? Profit/Loss: -$55.90
========================
I notice we aint had any ROI challenge up dates recently. Please don't lay off the updates for fear of making me depressed lol... it'll be something nice to look back at when I dig my way out of the hole
Either that or just no-one has been playing... can we get an update.
That's just an approximate number but it's based on 10p v 25 p and assuming you maintain 700 or so games for the next two weeks and also maintain that rate for the year. It's a pretty hefty number though. Can you afford to miss out on £2.5k in a year?
It's also more than that as I do intend to be putting more volume in than I currently am. I'd be doing an absolute minimum of 2000 games per month, which means a loss of £300 per month.
But then I do have to take into account that 2000 games, is 6000 poker points which is about £100 C4P per month. Still a big difference but then there's the added factor of how will changing to a larger site affect my win-rate.
It is a horrible decision because I really like playing on Sky and everything they do, but no matter how nice the shop keeper is, if my local corner shop is twice the price of Asda, I'll go to Asda