Monday, October 23, 2006

A Weekend of Pokery Fun

A weekend of pokery fun is absolutely the truth. Friday night was a blast hanging out and donking chips around. I doubled up Ski when he hit trip 4’s after I raised with a pocket pair and he called with 4,2. I have to say I didn’t see that coming. Overall the poker was good for me. I tripled up in the 25 nl game and did well in my sngs to see a nice return on the weekend.

Tournament play was bad. I didn’t get very deep in any of them and dropped about $80 playing them. My game was Ok but the well time coin flip was very good for my opponent. It seemed that when I had the pocket pair that the over-cards hit and when I had over-cards the pairs held up.

Token play went well except when I tried for a $75 token. My A10 was now good for 10,7 when my opponent called my push for 30% of his stack. I looked him up on shark scope afterwards and saw his negative ROI and understand why he made the decision he made. It was the only chance I had for a $75 token so no big game for me.

The $26 tokens were good to me for the most part. I just couldn’t win anything with them. I’m thinking that I’ll build these up a little and take a few shots at some razz and horse events. I like the games and I also think they help your game overall.

I’ve finally made the conversion to $20 +2 sngs. I had been to conservative and not willing to move up to this level over the last month or so. I don’t have very many of these yet but I’m doing well so far. Kat railed me while I won one on Friday night. The guy was a complete donk and let me erase a 3-1 chip lead before I gave it back. I then repeated my come back 2 more times before I put him away. I tilted him when I showed to bluffs in a row and then caught a hand. Weak passive is not the way to play me that’s for sure.

I also won one of these same events after being knocked down to 200 chips with 7 players left. I stayed a afloat and got lucky one time when I pushed my short stack hoping for a double up. My A7 beat pocket 6s and it was go time. The chip leader became a passive folder waiting on second place and let me and the other casher run over him. We knocked him out and It was long before heads-up play saw me win the game. That was probably the biggest comeback I’ve ever had thanks to the tight bubble play.

I’ve noticed that the play at this level isn’t all that good. Sure there are some good players but the game doesn’t get interesting until the final 5 players. Then the game becomes tight, making selective aggression a necessity. The ability to raise with any two cards seems to make the difference between success and failure.


Last Friday I asked a couple of questions that I would like to comment on. I’ll start with the first.

Does the significance of a person bankroll mean anything at all?

The only significance I see is that I want to play people playing above their bankroll. A person playing within their bankroll will play more relaxed as well as play there normal game. A person playing up will tend to play weaker and more passively, allowing me to take advantage. Now frequent re-loaders don’t fall into this category but they must be re-loading for a reason.

Does the level of play that someone enjoys accurately reflect their ability?

This is a tougher question in that many players play higher then they should. I think that time should be spent at a given level regardless of the success one has there. I think that many a player has moved up to quickly because of a short term run without being sure they are a winning player at that level. I don’t know what the magic number is but a pre determined amount of time should be played before advancing to ensure that you are a winning player at a given level. While this discussion is fine and dandy, what about perceptible skill.

I think we can make assumptions as to the ability of our opponent based on the level of play but it isn’t all encompassing. Conservative players may have tighter bankroll restrictions then the average player. I try to maintain 30 but-ins for a given level but some one else may maintain 50. I guess I’m saying that making an assumption based on the level of play may come back and bit you in the butt. In general, the lower the level the worse the play but not in all cases. And then there is the fact that we were playing at that level at one time. Most players are trying to learn the game and get better and will get better just like most of us did.

I don’t know what the reasoning was for all of this is other then it might help me maintain focus. I’m not sure.

No comments: