Comments: Sauce123's Simple Guide to Beating SHNL

Comments re: http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...oker-58095.htm


Sauce,

Thanks so much for posting this. Always appreciated your advice.

Some questions:

2. 3bet ANY HAND in your opponent's (positionally adjusted) opening range from any position. 3bet with a hand in the top 1/2-2/3 of their positionally adjusted opening range if they are a calling station or large donkey of some other sort. (MOST IMPORTANT PART OF GUIDE)

I'm really confused by the wording here, I really don't understand what you are trying to say. By positionally adjusted, you just mean account for their range, based on what position they are in right? Isn't that implied when someone says range anyway, or am I missing something? Then, I just don't get your point, are you saying put them on a range, then raise with hands that are superior?

4. Fold to a 4bet shove unless you have QQ+ AK if people aren't batshit insane.

This should be stack-size related. 1/2 stacks and under you can open this more, to JJ IMO. Then I would tighten it against 100bb+ stacks to KK and AA. 200bb stack I only call a shove with AA.

1. Cbet any flop containing 1-2 paint cards, any flop containing 3 cards 7 or lower, any flop containing disconnected cards and any flop which hit you. Do not cbet if you have not hit a flop with 4 or more ppl in the pot.

This sounds much too loose, IMO. I think in a 3 way pot you are getting called too often to be cbetting this much, especially when you're doing it often you're going to get looked up....people will stick around with just high cards. You'll have to start double-barelling. Personally, I restrict the above comment to HU flops. What are your instructions if a lot of your cbets are getting called? Some tables you'll get a good portion of folds, others you are getting called.

In a Reraised pot:

1. Continuation bet for 2/3 pot any flop containing one or more A K Q, any flop which has given you top pair or an 8+ out draw or better.

This has to be situational, right? You didn't mean this as a blanket, right? I think with 1010 or JJ on AKx or KQx boards that might be spewy. You're most likely to be called down in RR pots, IMO.

4. With your strongest hands and draws shove turn.

do you mean made draws? Most good draws are strongest on the flop for a shove.

I'd just like to point out that IMO you are the user who has provided the biggest amount of really great posts lately. Props.

god you would destroy me Sauce....my next exercise will be learning to 3 bet more - Right now I guess I just don't have the balls to do so - never have...guess i'm what they call a weak-tight - im such a big believer...

any minimum stake guidelines? 100NL+? Any HUD requirements, Like we don't 4 bet AK against a 14/7 or anything?

Very good and simple post, that cbet part is pretty much what i say to do when im teaching new players.

4. I think this needs to have a special exception "Fold to a fourbet shove unless u have KK+ at 200nl and 100nl versus's nits." I know this sounds ridiculously outlandish, as I can't even think to fold those hands pre in the games im playing in right now, but im almost positive this is correct with all the nits i played with at 200nl.

5. Christ does this one need to be repeated. People are always like "I'm being threebet constantly oh noes!!!
Calling oop isnt the answer.

mixchange,

great points, i think i was being overly vague and agree with everything you said.

- by positionally adjusted I mean we are 3betting with anything in their opening range from a specific position. I just wanted to be clear that we shouldn't be 3betting 98s as a rule when a 21/16 raises 4x from UTG.

example: 19/17 raises otb, we 3bet with something approaching 87s+, QJo+ any pair. so maybe something slightly ahead of their opening range but approaching it. the point is that we should have incredible fold equity because of our preflop stats.

- 4bet QQ+ AK was based on tag players with 100 BB stacks as that is the most important type of player we will be playing against. LAG players perhaps add JJ and with 50 BB stacks we will be adding many many more hands.

- the cbetting strategy is 100% restricted to HU flops but as we are 3betting 4x an opener's range OOP and 3.5 or a little less in postion we wiill almost never have multiway 3betting action (if this occurs we will only bet if we have a hand or draw)

- cbetting 2/3 on a AKx or KQx flop is probably our most profitable line against most players if the pot is HU.

- when i say shove turn with made draws im referring to if our opponent called our flop bet in positon and the turn does not help our hand as this situation will come up frequently.

example: 20/16 opens in the CO. We 3bet 98s he calls. Flop T74 we bet 2/3 pot from bb he calls. Turn Q we should make a pot committing bet in this situation almost always.

i also probably didnt deal with preflop betsizing well. We open 4x from all positions.

we 3bet 3.5x in position and 4x OOP.

we 4bet 1.5x our opponents 3bet. For example we open to 4 he 3bet to 15 we 4bet to 35 or 40 hopefully giving him some perceived fold equity or postflop play which does not in fact exist.

our bets postflop in raised pots should generally be for 5/6 pot on the flop and 3/4 or so on turn.

I just started a "how to beat sauce123" thread on that other site.


















jk nice work sir.

Originally Posted by Trikflow77

I just started a "how to beat sauce123" thread on that other site.

ha trik the funny part is that i play completely different from what i outlined here but some recent adjustments to how i have played and a deeper understanding of poker make me think this is an optimal strategy to build a bankroll

















jk nice work sir.

Originally Posted by sauce123

I will edit/add to this later but anyone of average intelligence should be able to make 30,000 or more per year playing sporadically using this strategy.

excellent guide sauce. thanks! btw, i just wanted to highlight this part and mention that that is actually a VERY low estimate.

with a good rakeback deal, if you run 1ptbb/100 @ 100NL, you'll be making 30k a year if you put in around 30-35 hours a week.

how do i know? cuz i'm running 1ptbb/100 this month and i am still averaging $20/hr with RB.

oh, and 100NL doesn't even count as MSNL. hell, it's "low stakes" on absolute.

im going to make a "how to quote people" thread soon, nj sauce

sauce4modzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I think we all know which forum, l d 0

P.S.- I want a guarantee on this strat b/c as of tomorrow this is my gameplan.

Sauce.....

all I can say is your a BOSS. I don't think this will work at 25nl but when I make my way up to 100nl I am all over it. Until then I will just over aggro my way through the small stakes.

Very nice post Sauce, thanks for sharing

Still busting my ass on full ring atm but once I make the move to $100NL I want to start moving into $25NL sh once or twice a week to get experienced at that (since I run around 13/6 FR for some reason) and going to use this as my template for sure.

Looking at it from a LHE perspective, do you think it would work as well or do we just need to tighten up too much there still due to not being able to take away odds?

auto sticky please

Originally Posted by Knytestorme

Very nice post Sauce, thanks for sharing

Still busting my ass on full ring atm but once I make the move to $100NL I want to start moving into $25NL sh once or twice a week to get experienced at that (since I run around 13/6 FR for some reason) and going to use this as my template for sure.

Looking at it from a LHE perspective, do you think it would work as well or do we just need to tighten up too much there still due to not being able to take away odds?

If you're playing SH limit and not 3betting a lot I think you're way behind the game. FR, I dunno, never played it.

Sorry, I wasn't fully clear.

I'm not playing any limit atm, want to expand to that once a week as well to get more experience in it and by the looks of game availability and rakeback it seems sh seems the way to go and thus was just seeing if this info could be applied to limit at all or if the value of the more speculative hands goes down compared to NL due to not being able to push people out or get large implied odds.

Adam001: My note on him is something like light 3betting nit...

Nice post BTW. I was thinking a lot lately about turn shoving and when I should and shouldn't be doing this, while maintaining balance. This definately will help my reraised pot game.

My question is how would your 3betting strategy work with someone who plays a lot looser preflop? I get the feeling that if we were already a 20/16 player, then implimented this 3betting system, would we get the same result as the ~14/12 player you have created with your PF openers?

very nice post, lot's of good ideas in here.

Very very nice Sauce !

In general I think this is best for 50NL and up, because at most people there at least try to think at the 1st level. At 25NL and down, you'll see so much bad players that do very unlogical things that you're usually just better of being the nit and valuebetting. (That's my experience though)

2. 3bet ANY HAND in your opponent's (positionally adjusted) opening range from any position. This does not mean you have to 3bet every hand in his range every time you get it, but it is your default play. 3bet with a hand in the top 1/2-2/3 of their positionally adjusted opening range if they are a calling station or large donkey of some other sort. (MOST IMPORTANT PART OF GUIDE)

With hands like 98s, is it really more profitable to 3-bet in position against callingstations and donkeys, instead of calling? I'd imagine our implied odds are usually pretty large against them.
In general, with the above range against range, are we hoping our 3-bet gets called or not?

3. Isolate/raise limpers with any hand you would open with from the button.

Do you have a minimum number of limpers for limping behind, like 2 or 3? Or do you just never do it?
What about OOP?

Wow, weird. I decided to experiment and played 30/15 tonight, tons of 2 and 3 barelling and made 9 buyins at 100nl -- inspired by some of sauce, lukie, and ISF's posts lately.

I stole tons of pots and my big hands got paiddddd

Never played this crazy -- reraising whenever I felt weakness, even with nothing... just finally followed instinct as to when I thought someone had somethign and when they didn't, the cards mattered not much... maybe 100nl is a lot more passive in small pots but I haven't pulled this type of table bossing at 200nl yet.

Awesome post man. Seriously. Thanks. Now I just need to make sure I understand all of it!

Originally Posted by mixchange

Wow, weird. I decided to experiment and played 30/15 tonight, tons of 2 and 3 barelling and made 9 buyins at 100nl -- inspired by some of sauce, lukie, and ISF's posts lately.

I stole tons of pots and my big hands got paiddddd

Never played this crazy -- reraising whenever I felt weakness, even with nothing... just finally followed instinct as to when I thought someone had somethign and when they didn't, the cards mattered not much... maybe 100nl is a lot more passive in small pots but I haven't pulled this type of table bossing at 200nl yet.

Nice! But shouldn't the vpip and pfr percentages be a lot closer to eachother then 30/15 with sauce his strategy?
More like 30/23 or 25/20?

are you trying fold more opponents when OOP sauce? I bet 4x bb in every position

i can see the argument we want more callers because we make more money on the button (and play better)

but the same can be said for raising more... I know ppl that raise 5xbb on button, 4x in other position!

Originally Posted by minSim

Originally Posted by mixchange

Wow, weird. I decided to experiment and played 30/15 tonight, tons of 2 and 3 barelling and made 9 buyins at 100nl -- inspired by some of sauce, lukie, and ISF's posts lately.

I stole tons of pots and my big hands got paiddddd

Never played this crazy -- reraising whenever I felt weakness, even with nothing... just finally followed instinct as to when I thought someone had somethign and when they didn't, the cards mattered not much... maybe 100nl is a lot more passive in small pots but I haven't pulled this type of table bossing at 200nl yet.

Nice! But shouldn't the vpip and pfr percentages be a lot closer to eachother then 30/15 with sauce his strategy?
More like 30/23 or 25/20?

maybe, I dunno... but I was calling a lot of raises and just betting against them based on what showed up on the board vs. what I thought was their range, even if I missed

- this strategy was basically me trying to simplify play in hu pots and create a lot of PF fold equity.

-Its also incredibly difficult to spew using this strategy

-I definitely left a bunch of shit out but fwiw this strategy would look a lot more like 17/15 than 30/23 in terms of preflop stats.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

auto sticky please

been doing some editing also.

major things ive changed:

1. Put some shit in preflop about when it is ok to call a raise (note it says never to call a raise in a hu pot)

2. i changed the 3bet any hand in his opening range to 3bet any hand in the top 1/2 of his opening range. this just has to do with balance issues as you will be 3betting too much if u followed the strategy before to the letter.

what i was trying to get across before was you use his range as a pool of hands you can 3bet in this situation and then you decide whether metagame factors etc dictate you should 3bet this specific hand.

but thats a lot more complicated and im going for simplicity so id say if you just almost always 3bet any hand in the top 1/2 of his opening range you should be playing relatively balanced.

Originally Posted by sauce123

As a defauly 3bet with the top 1/2 of hands they open with. 3bet with a hand in the top 2/3 of their positionally adjusted opening range if they are a calling station or large donkey of some other sort. (MOST IMPORTANT PART OF GUIDE)

This makes sense if we are playing from out of the blinds, but do you recommend this rule from the blinds as well? If thats the case, seems as though we should be 3-betting a VERY wide range against a button-opener/blind stealer?

Jager,
I would never play at a table with adam001, the guy has the skills of a 5/10 reg at least and he just absolutely kills 400nl.

Originally Posted by griffey24

Originally Posted by sauce123

As a defauly 3bet with the top 1/2 of hands they open with. 3bet with a hand in the top 2/3 of their positionally adjusted opening range if they are a calling station or large donkey of some other sort. (MOST IMPORTANT PART OF GUIDE)

This makes sense if we are playing from out of the blinds, but do you recommend this rule from the blinds as well? If thats the case, seems as though we should be 3-betting a VERY wide range against a button-opener/blind stealer?

ding ding ding

6. Call a raise in any position if the following conditions are present:
a) you are holding an SC or a PP
b) There are two or more people already in the pot
c) your hand is not strong enough to 3bet (not in the top 1/2 if their opening range from that position)

This means 3-betting PP's a lot? Aren't you taking away a lot of it's potential that way?

I don't see any difference while being in or out of position. Can that be ignored because we often have initiative on the flop?

yea one of the drawbacks of this strategy is we are not taking full use of position.

its fine and optimal to 3bet a bit tighter in the blinds

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Jager,
I would never play at a table with adam001, the guy has the skills of a 5/10 reg at least and he just absolutely kills 400nl.

I didn't say I don't respect his game. I think I have about ~2k hands on him, and he ran about 12/9 but I think he 3bet his entire range. Right after that I seen he had a tourney score and moved up. I thought he was solid, but I was never really bothered by him because he was so tight.

i wasnt trying to be condescending
yeah its really hard to tell how good your opponents are.

Isolate/raise limpers with any hand you would open with from the button.

So UTG+1 (+) we are raising with our button range?

if UTG limps then yes

6. Call a raise in any position if the following conditions are present:
a) you are holding an SC or a PP
b) There are two or more people already in the pot
c) your hand is not strong enough to 3bet (not in the top 1/2 if their opening range from that position)

Are we assuming 100bb effective stack? What about in a 3bet pot?

Originally Posted by sauce123

1. Open AK, AQs, 22-AA UTG.

Drop 22-66 for 2 reasons:
o They're -EV in a lot of player's databases from this position.
o It makes you look like an even bigger nit.

[quote="Fnord"]

Originally Posted by sauce123

1. Open AK, AQs, 22-AA UTG.

You fold AQo UTG at a 6-max tables? What? What???

Originally Posted by Doom

You fold AQo UTG at a 6-max tables? What? What???

It's +EV for me and probably should be a raise. If our aim is to drop marginal holdings OOP for the sake of driving down our VP$IP & PFR on the HUDs for exploitation, then 22-55, 66 and 77 are better canidates. 88+, AQ+, AJs, KQs is a range we can fight loose 3-bets with.

fnord- there are a few things u arent thinking about:

1. pairs r easy to play
2. they balance our range on low flops to prevent floating
3. they are my most profitable hands idk about the rest of you

Originally Posted by sauce123

2. they balance our range on low flops to prevent floating
3. they are my most profitable hands idk about the rest of you

Is 22-55 showing a profit from UTG/HJ for you in your database?
Also, even if you're good, showing down cheap is hard out of position and you're extremely vulnerable. SCs can hit pairs then check behind. Set over set is rare but expensive. etc.

I once thought as you did, then results convinced me otherwise. Also, if we're trying to drive down our PFR, it's an easy spot to drop.

Finally, turned pairs help quite a bit against floats.

Here's an evil thought:

Our range is not only defined by the hands we would play in a certain way, it is also defined by the range of hands similar players would play in a certain way.

It would take an absurd amount of hands to remove 22-55 from our UTG range unless they could do so via a forum post, table talk, etc.

Hence, we don't need to ever play a hand for an opponent to have to put it in our range.

Originally Posted by Fnord

Here's an evil thought:

Our range is not only defined by the hands we would play in a certain way, it is also defined by the range of hands similar players would play in a certain way.

It would take an absurd amount of hands to remove 22-55 from our UTG range unless they could do so via a forum post, table talk, etc.

Hence, we don't need to ever play a hand for an opponent to have to put it in our range.

Fnord why don't you post these kind of thoughts more? This is the sick kind of stuff i want to be discussing.

Oh god so genius.

Perceived Range v Actual Range.

This is why it is always good to take good notes...

fnord- been looking thru my database and it appears that i dont have the sample size to make specific predictions- however in both UTG and hijack my biggest losers r hands like KJo, KQo, AQo, AJo while i tend to make money with the same hands soooted. also, pairs seem to have sick variance: for instance im down 3k with QQ in the hijack, and another 3.5k with 88 while im up about the same with 22 and 33 (these are all over 300k hand database). So i stick by my original statement with the caveat that perhaps we should be adding all sooted broadways to our UTG range and continue to leave out AQ.

i also think ur point about perceived ranges will allow us to successfully take down a lot of pots with small pairs on Kxx and Axx flops where x doesnt hit our hand.

I think 22-55 play similar enough you can look at the net win/loss them collectivly from UTG and UTG+1 6-handed and come to a reasonable conclusion in a few thousand hands.

After thinking about this for a while and comparing results with some other people, I think JTs > 22 in aggressive online games where people are regularly testing but not committing because JTs is going to hit more flops.

Good god our UTG range and UTG+1 is sick tight, great thing is with our CO/BTN range's being larger than the normal NiTTAGG that our perceived range's will be wider there and tighter OTB/CO. I think that's some good deception, isn't it?

If I'm totally thinking back-asswards plz lemme know.

Also, I'm assuming that positional stats are not available on HUD's, that's correct isn't it.

i insta raise any pair and any SC UTG but then again im a lagtard who never folds so w/e

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

Good god our UTG range and UTG+1 is sick tight, great thing is with our CO/BTN range's being larger than the normal NiTTAGG that our perceived range's will be wider there and tighter OTB/CO. I think that's some good exploting, isn't it?

FYP and realizing why is essential.

And yes

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

FYP and realizing why is essential.

Don't tell me, I'm gonna figure it out myself, just wanted to make sure I was on the right track.

I would hope some of it would have to do with having thinking Multitable Laggs and Taggs putting you on a range, that will have you actually playing your upper range hands only from OOP. Leaving you playing hands that would beat/crush their calling/3betting range from OOP, but when they fold to your raising/3bet range OOP or try to put you on a range It will be a mistake.


Sorry I said range so many times.

From a 90,000 hands sample, My 22-55 from UTG and UTG+ combined earn me 2.68ptbb/hand.

I don't know if the sample is big enough... it is based on 593 instances of 22-55 from UTG and UTG+.

Originally Posted by sauce123

6. Call a raise in any position if the following conditions are present:
a) you are holding an SC or a PP
b) There are two or more people already in the pot
c) your hand is not strong enough to 3bet (not in the top 1/2 if their opening range from that position)

I think you just identified my biggest leak. I don't know how many, if any at all, players at my level or 100NL are playing like this. this strategy is a real eye opener for me.

What if there is a raise and no callers and we hold a small PP vs a tight player UTG? I presume we are still calling for set value if we have implied odds?

yes u can deviate from this strategy however u see fit im just trying to keep it simple and ensure that if this is followed u will be able to make a lot of money playing poker even if u play worse than ur opponents after the flop

i think u would be surprised that ur profit from calling an EP raise with a PP hu and set mining OOP is a lot smaller than u think

It's really hard to get value OOP vs a decent player.

Over 472k hands of 1/2 I am showing a profit with 22,33,44, and 66 in the UTG and UTG+1 positions. I am losing with 55 due to a sick amount of under sets/boats. Overall these hands are winning out of these positions.

Wow that is a lot of hands of 1/2

Really really good stuff guys

Im gonna have to reread it though to get some thoughts together

Originally Posted by PokerMuzz

Originally Posted by sauce123

6. Call a raise in any position if the following conditions are present:
a) you are holding an SC or a PP
b) There are two or more people already in the pot
c) your hand is not strong enough to 3bet (not in the top 1/2 if their opening range from that position)

I think you just identified my biggest leak. I don't know how many, if any at all, players at my level or 100NL are playing like this. this strategy is a real eye opener for me.

I'm by no means a top player or big winner at 100NL but I play pretty much exactly like this!

3bet with a hand in the top 1/2-2/3 of their positionally adjusted opening range

wow nice thought...ive never really looked at it like this. Although I'd prefer to play a bit tighter, and to maybe raise hands in the top 1/3 of their range.

...good job.

Originally Posted by sauce123

Add AT0, 76s, 65s, 54s, T8s, J9s, A9s-A2s, 97s, 86s, 75s, QJ0, JT0 from Btn

Question 1, What about blind stealing? Will this be enough to stay at the magic 20%+, or is there still room for opening up for steals?

Originally Posted by sauce123

6. Call a raise in any position if the following conditions are present:
a) you are holding an SC or a PP
b) There are two or more people already in the pot
c) your hand is not strong enough to 3bet (not in the top 1/2 if their opening range from that position)

I'm assuming this means if ALL the following conditions are present?

Originally Posted by sauce123

6. Always bet if an A or K falls on the turn or river and you have already bet the flop unless there are two cards connecting to it.

This is something I need to work on for sure.

Originally Posted by Spenda

Good god our UTG range and UTG+1 is sick tight, great thing is with our CO/BTN range's being larger than the normal NiTTAGG that our perceived range's will be wider there and tighter OTB/CO. I think that's some good deception, isn't it?

If I'm totally thinking back-asswards plz lemme know.

Also, I'm assuming that positional stats are not available on HUD's, that's correct isn't it.

IowaSkinsFan wrote:


FYP and realizing why is essential.

Don't tell me, I'm gonna figure it out myself, just wanted to make sure I was on the right track.

Originally Posted by Trainer_jyms

I would hope some of it would have to do with having thinking Multitable Laggs and Taggs putting you on a range, that will have you actually playing your upper range hands only from OOP. Leaving you playing hands that would beat/crush their calling/3betting range from OOP, but when they fold to your raising/3bet range OOP or try to put you on a range It will be a mistake.


Sorry I said range so many times.

How did I do with this riddle. I'm really trying to figure this shit out.

Jym's you essentially got it. Pretty much everything goes back to the fundamental theory of poker. We win money when our opponent makes mistakes and (less importantly in this example) when we make as little mistakes as possible. A multitabler will always put us on certain hands UTG, and will always put us on certain hands from CO and OTB. It's like if the board is A9886 facing a river bet from us with AQ, opp may call because they are beating two hands that are in our range, AJ/AT (given the action lets say this is the conclusion they come to). So they call and lose because we never have AJ/AT. You can feel really good about this because we have essentially made money by exploting our opponent.
In the same note they may fold a lot to our two barrels because our range is percieved as much tighter from the LP even though it isnt as tight as it seems.

The reason I said its not really deception is because you have to start thinking of poker as a game of beating your opponents. Deception makes it appear that our opponents are innately good and we need to do something different so they don't read us as well. This isn't true, our opponents suck, we have to figure out in which ways they suck and more importantly figure out how to completely annihilate him because of his specific suckage. Here we exploit the fact that our opponent isn't actually paying attention to how tight we are from each position and instead taking our PFR and VPIP as a range of hands they are just guessing from expereinces with players like us.
And yeah it seems very little, but im sure its something very few of you even considered before reading this thread. Isn't it really cool? Well guess what? There are tons of more elements to the game just like it!

Deception is more one sided. We decieve by playing our hand/s in a different way. With exploitation we can think of more we can do the same thing every time, do a completely predictable strategy, and have it be the best way to play.

If I told you I threebet Kxs, Axs, TT+, and AQ+, most players at 200nl- wouldn't actually understand what they need to do against it. You may not even know right now (although its pretty obvious, fold all A and K high flops, and get it in on low ones) Here I'm employing a completely predictable strategy, not deceptive whatsoever. But this strategy is extremely effective against those who don't know what to do against it. Again, we win because our opponents don't play the way they should if they knew our range.
This is most of poker. It's not what should I do when im c/r all in with AA on a K975 board (In fact, most hands posted on this forum by some of the good players are just super marginal spots that aren't even worth focusing on because of how little the decision will affect your winrate). It's actual poker strategy. Do you here that? most of poker takes place before a decision is even made. It's feeling how your opponent is playing, and figuring out whats the best way to play against it.
The next level of this is very simple. People begin to figure out what you're doing and adjust. at 400nl and 600nl these adjustments are very slow. at 200nl- these adjustments are almost non existant (making poker super easy, in fact, you might as well find a reg who has some big leak and sit to the left of him on 12 tables). at 5/10+, these adjustments happen very quickly.

Sorry sauce for kind of ranting in this thread but i hope it helps.

Very nice post ISF! Also thank to Sauce for the great thread

I would add that when you are playing against an opponent like ISF, the fact that his 3bet range is not only wide but doesn't follow the top % of hands linearly (some of the hands he is 3betting according to this post - K-xs - are barely in the top 30% of starting hands!) is a great example of why taking detailed noted on what hands specifically your opponents are showing down is important. A HUD is a useful tool for getting a general idea of your opponents style, and a lot of players use them. Taking detailed notes on opponents showdowns during sessions and after when reviewing hand histories is just another edge we can have over our "lazier" competition.

By my understanding, opponents taking useful and detailed notes is the sort of thing that ISF is referring to when he says opponents adjust effectively to his 3betting range.

ajs, ats utg+1? really?

lol at reading this entire thread and that being your question.

Originally Posted by Alibi

ajs, ats utg+1? really?

im sure u could make more money per table playing more hands from utg, utg+1, but im saying that if i had to rebuild my BR (or if someone has to build one) i think u can play better postflop if ur only playing very strong hands OOP.

this also applies to ppl who consistently play too weak OOP as if we are either flopping a strong hand or nothing we are in good shape to not make FtOP mistakes

Originally Posted by Alibi

ajs, ats utg+1? really?

AJ is barely a winner in the long run from UTG. AT is not a winner UTG. Not sure about UTG +1 but it cant be much more. I mean clearly if you dont play well OOP they're not even close to winners.

ISF, what kind of sample size are you basing this off of? I'm using a ~100k sample size and I've only had hands like AJs, KJs, etc.. around 30 times each UTG. I'd think you need a really, really large sample to provide accurate information regarded profitablity for specific hands UTG.

harry- in a 300k sample ive noticed i seem to lose money with the big offsuit cards from EP but make money with pairs and KQs, AJs etc

Originally Posted by Harry

ISF, what kind of sample size are you basing this off of? I'm using a ~100k sample size and I've only had hands like AJs, KJs, etc.. around 30 times each UTG. I'd think you need a really, really large sample to provide accurate information regarded profitablity for specific hands UTG.

My friend Lyric, who is a 5/10 and 10/20 professional went on a hunt asking all his poker friends if certain hands were winners UTG and UTG + 1. That was the conclusion he came to.

Sauce123 (Ben),

Is it weird that I crush the higher stakes (NL400) but get killed at the lower stakes (NL50 and NL100)?

Small sample size for sure, but it just seems like I get so much more respect at the higher levels. People can put me on hands instead of just saying "fuck it I call with TPwK" and then they win. This allows me to bluff a lot more than I ever could at lower levels......maybe?

Maybe I'm wrong? Danny (ISF), Max (Massimo), anyone else want to fill in?

Or maybe its a combination of me just not giving a fuck when I play NL100 so I donk off stacks and then make it back at higher levels. Or me getting fancy-fancy play syndrome at lower levels. Either way, I've sucked at the lower levels.

After looking through some HH's both of those are probably the case.

Originally Posted by Ultimate George

Or maybe its a combination of me just not giving a fuck when I play NL100 so I donk off stacks and then make it back at higher levels.

This is a big issue for me. So that could be it.

there are a lot of situations at 100nl and 200nl where if you were at 400nl it'd be an easy all in/call but at low stakes its actually a fold. That could be another issue.

its so true though bcoz you will lack alot of respect for the money at 50/100NL. id say FPS increase 400%