[Wooderson]

I picked up the book this weekend and unfortunately I think I'm one of those that can easily misapply some of this stuff. I'll watch from the sidelines and maybe ask a question or two as seems appropriate.

[yeltzen]

Originally Posted by Wooderson

I picked up the book this weekend and unfortunately I think I'm one of those that can easily misapply some of this stuff. I'll watch from the sidelines and maybe ask a question or two as seems appropriate.

No shame, no shame. The book wasn't around when I started getting into NL cash games, but all of the stuff I'm talking about is exactly what I did... committing when I shouldn't, etc. I only bring this stuff up because the book is titled "Professional No Limit Hold'em", but the primary group of people buying it will be small stakes players who have no intention whatsoever of being pros.

[Savior17]

I got thru the REM section and I think you can learn more about equity and how to calculate it (with plenty of hand analyses) on 2+2. I mostly play live and there is no way I can get a good estimation of what my equity is on the fly. I have been playing $25NL lately with prety good results (about 8BB/100). Does anyone use Pokerstove and does it help you with your live equity estimations?

As far as putting a player on a range, that only comes with experience and observing the player. I just took a peek at the SPR sections and I think that this is where the meat of the discussions will lie.

[yeltzen]

Originally Posted by Savior17

I got thru the REM section and I think you can learn more about equity and how to calculate it (with plenty of hand analyses) on 2+2. I mostly play live and there is no way I can get a good estimation of what my equity is on the fly. I have been playing $25NL lately with prety good results (about 8BB/100). Does anyone use Pokerstove and does it help you with your live equity estimations?

As far as putting a player on a range, that only comes with experience and observing the player. I just took a peek at the SPR sections and I think that this is where the meat of the discussions will lie.

Since I multi-table, there is no way I could use PokerStove to calculate equity while I'm playing. In the heat of battle, I very rarely even do the "R" (range) part of REM, but I do try to estimate the chances I'm winning (usually a "yeah, I'm probably winning" or "I'm probably not winning) and then compare that to my pot odds.

I think that REM is a good process, and I think that most people do that sub-consciously, but it's definitely something that would take experience to do quickly enough for online play. Most of the time, I'll think about what they might have based on their PT stats and bets so far, and then I'll come up with a decent bet size for whatever situation I'm in.

[yeltzen]

Okay, so we cant open it up for discussion about Chapter 2: The Fundamentals, which consists of Pot Size, Committment, Pot Control, Position, and Hand Reading. Most of this is discussed in NLHETAP, but there are a few new ideas in here. If someone wants to talk about the Basics chapter, that's fine, too.

So, here's a fun (and embarrassing) example of how to completely ignore the fundamentals of no limit Hold'em. This is a hand at 6-max against a player with pretty solid stats... nothing too out of line. My comments are in yellow and I'll try to relate what happened to the fundamentals section.


Poker Stars - No Limit Hold'em Cash Game - $0.10/$0.25 Blinds - 5 Players - (LegoPoker Hand History Converter)

SB: $31.50
BB: $37.30
Hero (UTG): $29.05
CO: $7.25
BTN: $25.00

Preflop: Hero is dealt (5 Players)
Hero raises to $1.00, 2 folds, SB raises to $2.50, BB folds, Hero calls $1.50

Okay, so I get re-raised preflop by a player with pretty solid stats (25/10/4 at 6-max). While there is some crazy play in 6-max games, players with these kinds of stats don't tend to get too out of line with their 3-bets, especially when the original raiser was not in stealing position. Chances are good I'm up against TT+, AQs, or AKo/AKs.


Flop: ($5.25) (2 Players)
SB bets $3.25

This is a decent flop for AK. Top pair, top kicker, and no flush draws. A solid player is going to make a continuation bet here about 90% of the time, so I can't assume that I'm behind here at all. The big point in the Pot Size and Committment sections is that you want to make the decision to go all-in before you start making a big pot. Do I want to go all-in here? I don't really know. If I get all-in, I'm probably crushed or tied. Of the hands I put him on preflop, I'm beating 3 (AQ, TT, and QQ). Three have me crushed, and the other is tied. The big problem is that the 3 I beat will never call a raise. So I'm in a way ahead/way behind (WA/WB) situation. The best play, according to the Pot Control section, is to just call and see what happens. Even though I'm out of position, I don't really have much choice. I can't win any money by raising.


Hero raises to $10.00, SB raises all-in to $29.00

Obviously, I wasn't thinking about any of this during this hand. I decided to raise. Why, I don't know. Now, I've built a big pot in a hand that I really don't want to get committed to (because there's a hug chance I'll lose if I do).


Hero calls all-in for $16.55
Uncalled bet of $2.45 returned to SB

I basically played right into this guy's hands. I helped him build a big pot when I didn't want to play one. I didn't think about what I've talked about so far during the hand. I just thought "sweet I have top pair! Let's get all in!"

Turn: ($58.35) (2 Players - 2 All-In)

River: ($58.35) (2 Players - 2 All-In)

Pot Size: $58.35 ($2 Rake)

SB had (a pair of Aces) and WON (+$27.30)
Hero had and LOST (-$29.05)

Okay, so I got killed, just as expected. Working backwards through the Fundamentals chapter, we can see where it all went so wrong.

- Hand Reading: I had enough information on this guy to realize that he was not a maniac, and was very unlikely to be re-raising light.

- Position: I was out of position, which is a horrible situation to be in when playing NL Hold'em. Out of Position = Out of the Action according to the authors. My first instinct should be to fold. With AK preflop, that's pretty hard to do. After flopping top pair, top kicker, that's hard to do. However, no matter what action I take on the flop, I'm screwed. Out of position, if he's bluffing, he folds if I raise, and re-raises if he's not. Out of position, if I call, I have no idea where I am, and he can take a free card or bet again after I check the turn. It's a bad, bad situation.

- Pot Control: Yeah, this just didn't happen. As discussed above, calling doesn't put me in a very good situation, but it's still better than raising. I really don't want all of my money to go in the pot here, since I can't be sure I have anything even close to the best hand. So calling is the only way to keep the pot somewhat small. It still sucks, but at least if he checks behind on the turn, I can have some idea of where I am.

- Committment: Oops. I'm definitely not committed to this hand, yet I'm playing it like I can't wait to get all the money in. I have to ask myself on the flop if I'm committed. I can't be, because so many hands he could have beat me. Thus, I can't raise to $10, because that makes the pot so big that I can't fodl any more (I've put nearly 1/2 my stack in). Even though I realize I'm beat when he pushes, I have no choice but to call. I built the big pot BEFORE I was committed, which is a cardinal sin according to the authors (and comon sense).

- Pot Size: Again, I built the big pot when I didn't want to play one. Sure, if I know he has QQ, I want to play a big pot. But he's not going to play a big pot with that hand. So, the only logical conclusion is that I'm crushed if the pot gets big. That is, HE wants to play a big pot, but I don't. So, assisting him with building as big a pot as possible probably wasn't very intelligent (I use the word "probably" to protect my self-esteem).


Luckily, I don't always play this bad. But the bad hands are more fun to analyze, and really point out why the Fundamentals are the Fundamentals.

Discuss!

[Savior17]

I had an extremely similar situation last night in FR $25NL on FTP, and I have had this more than once. Stats not too crazy, although V liked to limp a bit. Basically I raised in EP to $1 with AKs and the BB raised to $3. I call putting him on the same range - TT+, and AQ+ (which is pretty typicaly I think). Flop comes KTx rainbow. He checks, I fire $4, he moves all-in. Right away I start thinking AA, KK, TT, AK. He can't have me on KK because he can't beat that, obviously, and he knows I would call. What can he beat - AK, AQ?? Why would he move all in? He has to have AA or KK or TT, right?. I folded like a champ and got away from it. Why? Because I made a few dumb moves playing live with my group ($100NL) and overvalued my hand (TPTK) and got crushed. Rookie mistake - completely forgetting about the fundamentals.
Now, because I read thru part 2, I can think about it more clearly.
I definitely don't commit here because of the re-raise. I like my hand, but not that much now.
I laid out a plan and this was an ok flop for my plan. I have position and can control the pot by checking behind if the flop was horrible. With this flop I think a bet was the right thing to do - I had to see where I stood. If I get check raised I have to think about why that happened then decide. Well I got check-raised all in and it was clear to me I was beat...had to be. I don't think there was much that could help be on 4th and 5th street.
I may have overvalued this if i hadn't just read part 2.

BTW: excellent Monday morning quarterbacking. Review like that puts the pieces together nicely.

[yeltzen]

Originally Posted by Savior17

I had an extremely similar situation last night in FR $25NL on FTP, and I have had this more than once. Stats not too crazy, although V liked to limp a bit. Basically I raised in EP to $1 with AKs and the BB raised to $3. I call putting him on the same range - TT+, and AQ+ (which is pretty typicaly I think). Flop comes KTx rainbow. He checks, I fire $4, he moves all-in. Right away I start thinking AA, KK, TT, AK. He can't have me on KK because he can't beat that, obviously, and he knows I would call. What can he beat - AK, AQ?? Why would he move all in? He has to have AA or KK or TT, right?. I folded like a champ and got away from it. Why? Because I made a few dumb moves playing live with my group ($100NL) and overvalued my hand (TPTK) and got crushed. Rookie mistake - completely forgetting about the fundamentals.
Now, because I read thru part 2, I can think about it more clearly.
I definitely don't commit here because of the re-raise. I like my hand, but not that much now.
I laid out a plan and this was an ok flop for my plan. I have position and can control the pot by checking behind if the flop was horrible. With this flop I think a bet was the right thing to do - I had to see where I stood. If I get check raised I have to think about why that happened then decide. Well I got check-raised all in and it was clear to me I was beat...had to be. I don't think there was much that could help be on 4th and 5th street.
I may have overvalued this if i hadn't just read part 2.

BTW: excellent Monday morning quarterbacking. Review like that puts the pieces together nicely.

This is a situation that killed me when I first started moving over to NL cash games (and obviously even now, occasionally). I think this section will definitely help people get past over-valuing TPTK hands a lot faster than just experiencing the ass-kicking first-hand. Problem is, you actually have to have the discipline to realize what hands are worth committing to and what hands aren't (sometimes TPTK hands are worth it, sometimes they aren't). I think that's the part that will be tough for the average player, and they might misapply some of this - committing even more with hands that aren't worth it.

[yeltzen]

Okay, so I'm on the stack-to-pot ratio section now. It's a nice way to plan out your hand, but it's not nearly as revolutionary as they make it out to be. Thus far, the chapter has been nothing but a really long-winded way of saying "being short-stacked makes marginal post-flop situations easier to play". Wow, really? Does anyone reading this book not know that having a lot of money left behind (compared to the pot) sucks when you flop top pair? Seriously.

On top of that, the way they explain this almost implies that you should attempt to get a good stack-to-pot ratio by raising more/less based on your hand. As we all know, that's a HORRIBLE way to raise pre-flop, and one of the biggest criticisms of the NLHETAP book... so it's weird that they would put this in here. Needless to say, this is another thing a beginner could take too far and get into trouble with (e.g. raising more with AA/KK etc than anything else).

I'm glad I started this thread, because there has been so much valuable discussion.


...

ROFLMAO

[yeltzen]

Some of the authors' comments on 2+2 kind of confirm this...

Quote:

---

Im playing $100 NL against somewhat loose players with a couple tight players.Im in LP with AK.According to your book Id need to raise to about $7 to achieve an SPR of about 4.4 assuming I get 2 callers.Now at this point Im thinking......I have only $7 invested into this pot yet because Im gonna cbet the flop the size of the pot,Im commiting to going all in on the turn(assuming I hit the flop or turn).

---

Hi DovVN,

From the above quote, it sounds like you are reluctant to commit against these opponents with an SPR of 4.4. So maybe 4.4 is too high for your particular situation. That means you can aim for a lower SPR by raising even more preflop, or if you think they'll fold most of their range to a bigger raise, you can aim for a higher SPR and play a "small pot". (Something we mention throughout the SPR section.)

Raise more than $7 preflop in a $.5/1 game? Are you serious? Otherwise play a smaller pot? This just makes no sense... so your options are to raise to like $10 preflop, which is ridiculous (even $7 is pushing it), or limp. A "normal" raise to 3 or 4 BBs puts you in a close to 13 SPR, which is exactly what you want to avoid with a hand like AK (i.e. a top pair hand). I don't get this at all.

[TheMightyJim2k]

I personally think what we are seeing here is a bunch of really good players trying to quantify and set in theory how to play NL, when really to most important part of NL is hand reading.

While their advice is certainly good, and the theory is correct, you can't turn yourself into a NL bot and just raise a huge amount everytime you have a big hand because you'll get no action and price out everyone except those players who have you beat. Plus you'll turn all of your hands face up, and players will start punishing your limps and small raises.

So I feel like what they are saying is theoretically correct, but if you try to blindly apply it without also understanding how it is impacting your image (and thus how mixing up your play is necessary to change that image) you'll become much to predictable.

This probably isn't too big of a problem if you play a lot online as you can keep your sessions short enough, and will play with enough different opponents that it won't matter too much. But if sit for a long session and play like this I think you are making yourself exploitable.