SPeedFANat1c

Hello,

yesterday was checking my lifetime at NL20, NL25, and maybe I can do some of conclutions.

Of course 120K hands is not huge sample and there might be downswings. But am I really so unlucky or I am I having so many leaks.

I am considering now to be more picky about tables. Actually I still want to crush not so soft tables, but I the problem is that it takes lot of time, and and might be losing anohter 1.5 year, because I dont have too much time, or even when I have time, my eyes are tired and I dont want hurt them too much.

Because lets say I crush soft tables at nl25, nl50. But same situation can be at nl100 when there is not soft tables anymore, if we have 1 recreational player at nl100 table we should be happy. Only at nl100 losing in terms of $ can be much higher.

Sveikas!

I think it's much more likely to be leaks than luck/downswing. I think table select might help a little bit, but from my recent experience there are still plenty of fishes in NL25 (usually at least 3-4 at every table ). So my advice would be to keep studying and maybe try some coaching with a person you like so that they would point you towards the right direction.

Cheers,
Deividas

usually at least 3-4 at every table

thats not so true at unibet non anonimous tables. Unless you count in bad regulars as fish.

Maybe I am bit overconfident with my skill that I can beat table with one recreational player at least being breakeven.

Hey Speed,

Can you show me the following:

- a graph with all the lines (red, green, orange)
- the "By Position" report with SD and NonSD winnings showing
- the hand groupings report with VPIP = true filtered.

By the looks of that graph there's more than just bad luck. Based on the hands I evaluated from you it appears that you level yourself way too often and are always trying to overcomplicate things. So this may be a good time to go back to the basics.

Graph with all those lines:

By position

By position after 2013 march 19 (game might have changed during time):

Hand groupings, vpip = true

Hand groupings, vpip = true, after 2013 march 19

So there are some weak hand groupings loosing but not a ton. If they would be breakeven, I would still be loosing. So I am not winning enoiugh with strong hands maybe.

Also suited hands overall are loosing whith really is bad I guess. THey should make flushes and also I should with with them with semibluffs. They proably should not be even close to breakeven.

If more stats are needed then please let me know

I play the same limits so take my advice with a pinch of salt but...

Originally posted by BogdanPS
By the looks of that graph there's more than just bad luck.... So this may be a good time to go back to the basics.

I agree with this. Your losing >10bb/100 on redline which is huge imo. The first thing that I noticed was you play quite aggressive pre and flop but then seem to 'give up'. If i was playing against you I'd float/raise quite a bit on the flop.

So if I was in your position I'd tighten up. Playign 28/24 your probably just getting yourself into more trouble than its worth. It'll be easier to play with tighter ranges as well. And then I'd work on blind play, you could probably do a lot better there...

Playign 28/24

this is not 6 handed. Its combine of 3handed 6 handed. While when I filted only 6handed - then past 4 months my vipi is 25.5 overall.

Hmm, but 5 handed past 4 monts I play 30/26. But I feel spot is profitable, I enter the pot. So if I want to drop, then first I need to find which spots (which I hink are profitable) I should remove.

Hey Speed,

Thanks for posting those.

First, the graph.

We can see that the red line is plummeting and holmeboy already mentioned that there are quite a few "obvious" reasons for that.

Since you play looser than your average player you enter more pots and it seems that you abandon them more frequently. One of your biggest "silent killer" is the small pot. That's generally the pot where you raise, make a cbet and then give up without giving it much thought after. These pots are small, they evade the session review and you rarely give them a second look.

So the first thing I would do is reduce the range of hands we play based on what hands are not profitable, especially in EP->BTN.

Your win rate on the BTN is a bit on the lower end (you want to aim for at least 30 BB/100) and you are losing quite a bit in the blinds.

While you don't cbet a whole lot on the flop your turn cbet, especially in later positions seems lower. Of course, just because we cbet 70% doesn't mean that we cbet the right 70%.

What we can definitely see though is the huge discrepancy between flop/turn/river aggression frequencies.

Let's take the BTN for example.

You bet more than half the pots you see a flop on. Then on the turn you bet only less than one third and by the river you are down to almost 1 in 7. So clearly there's money being put into the pot when it shouldn't be or left there when we could attack it (also most likely missing valuebets on the river).

After March the game changed a bit but there hasn't been a huge change, at least not one that I can see (other than worse winrates in the BTN and blinds)

What you can do next, is split up your hand groupings by position (remember in some positions you put money in the pot without a choice) but you can definitely see some red flags.

I'd look at BTN only and see hand groupings, and then move to each position. You may be surprised.

I'd also be interested to see your fold to 3-bet stats, and a filter with Call 3-bet = true (by position).

Speed, how you get Bogdan doing this? ♦ I want it too

Thanks, for detailed post.

We can see that the red line is plummeting and holmeboy already mentioned that

I was never paying attention to this, because was hearing everywhere - its micros, red line at micros is very often not good. So was focusing on some other things.

Since you play looser than your average player you enter more pots and it seems that you abandon them more frequently. One of your biggest "silent killer" is the small pot. That's generally the pot where you raise, make a cbet and then give up without giving it much thought after. These pots are small, they evade the session review and you rarely give them a second look.

And they are not even silent it looks. When I am playing - I often feel like, if I dont win some big pot, my session is at beast breakeven, at worst - negative. Just did not kwow what to do about it. Was trying to think - oh, its just variance. Like people say 10K hands is not sample, 20K hands is not sample, 30K hands is not sample. So keep playing same way hoping variance will even out ♦

But somehow variance should not always be negative. It should have good wining strikes also.

I remember I was adviced at 2012 december 09 database review that my flop agression is big and turn agression is low, so I was working on that, but looks like it was unsuccesful.

Before 2012 dec 09
afq f/t/r: 55/32/19, flop cbet 79, turn cbet 47

after 2012 dec 09
afq f/t/r: 51/35/23, flop cbet 69, turn cbet 47

So kind of fixed a bit, but did not know if enough and then probably decided to wait for some sample.

So the first thing I would do is reduce the range of hands we play based on what hands are not profitable, especially in EP->BTN.

I guess that one will be tough, because the ranges are very dynamic especially in BTN which is probably warying 40-100% depending on players in the blinds. Probably will need to take individual hands where I open loose and post in forum.

You bet more than half the pots you see a flop on. Then on the turn you bet only less than one third and by the river you are down to almost 1 in 7. So clearly there's money being put into the pot when it shouldn't be or left there when we could attack it (also most likely missing valuebets on the river).

I guess maybe I should reduce flop aggression, because on river I think I was betting for thin value and with maheepsangari we discussed who plays same limits and wins - he says I bet too thinly. And I think it makes sence, because maybe because of this my wtsd is low - people don't call my bets, and W$SD is low - when they call - they have better hand. Or maybe I should use smaller sizings when value bet to let them call more light.

It also makes sence - when I bet flop with trash, I have weak range on turn and river, so I cannot get value and my bluffs also dont work.

If the player is going to fold, I probably don't necessarily need to bet flop, because he can fold his weak hand on turn also. That is problem when I am OOP - then if I don't cbet, he might bet into me and if I have trash, I have to fold.
Which means - I have to check top pairs to have range to call. And I try to do this and it feels that I catch lot of bluffs with this when I check.

I'd look at BTN only and see hand groupings, and then move to each position. You may be surprised.

VPIP = TRUE, all hands

BTN:

Suited 2 gappers check:
Biggest pot won J8s - 68bb when I hit 2 pair
Biggest loss: T7s - 167bb flopped flush vs flopped nut flush ♦

CO:

Suited 1 gappers:
biggest win: QTs 57 bb nut flush vs 7 high flush 4tone board
biggest loss: 79s 112bb trips vs FH

MP:

UTG:

SB:

BB:

So the tendency is - suited hands loose often which is bad.

I'd also be interested to see your fold to 3-bet stats

By position all hands
SB: 72.7
BB: 58.3
EP: 57.5
MP: 68.0
CO: 72.9
BTN: 79.1

and after match 19

SB: 71
BB: 45.5
EP: 56
MP: 67.6
CO: 70.5
BTN: 73.2

Called preflop 3bet, all hands (terrible):

Speed, how you get Bogdan doing this? grin I want it too

I guess the first thing to do is to create a thread in Begginers forum section

And btw I think my mistake is to wait too long for variance to even out. Maybe its enough like 10K hands for agression stats to check.

FOr example this month filter 11K hands, afq f/t/r 48, 34, 25.4 which is very similar but flop reduced bit.

And I really reduced flop cbet which is over this sample - 60.5, turn cbet 39. ANd I was trying to reduce flop agression to make turn agression bigger. But turn agression still is low

Originally posted by gAsheks
Speed, how you get Bogdan doing this? ♦ I want it too

This is what I normally do in database reviews

Speed needs to take what I have wrote here and also come up with his own conclusions

When you bleed money in many different areas one way to "slow down" the bleeding is to tighten up your game preflop. A lot of your mistakes (speed's and others) start on the preflop or flop.

So you should look at cutting back on hands that we open and are not profitable (or hands we 3-bet or call, etc).

ok, thank you very much I will try to tighten up. In zoom especially I was started to play loose, openin Q4s and someitimes all suited cards in CO But yesterday oblio said its too loose and maximum CO open should be 34% vs nits or bad players.

Vs good players open 24%.

Also one interesting suggestion he game - c/r instead of cbet. Like when I have backdoor FD - baord is 9xx. With hands like 66 they call often but when I c/r they might fold more.

And if they check, its not bad, I can see free card and hit something.

Not sure then what do I do with strong hands. IF I play vs reg on same table, he might notice that my c/r do not make sense and call down. So for this reason I should include strong hands. But at the same time with strong hands when he checks back, I might miss value.

ok last month graph, 0.72 bb/100

from it 12K hands is zoom 5.5 bi down.

From 18 day started to use better table selection when not playing zoom, have to admit that even playing few tables, studying a lot (at least comparing to playing time) still I am not good ♦

The changes you are looking to make are not small so you will go through a period of adjustments.

At 25nl people are still not calling super light versus your ck/raises and such. You can usually throw them off of hands on later streets and if you raised with equity then you should be fine to win enough pots.

Of course you still want to ck/raise for value at times, especially against guys you pushed around a lot.

Today playing zoom at stars I see it does not autoreload. Checked cashier and see there is no money.

So check grapht. Am I really doing so bad again even when focusing on turn agression.

Sample is not big but knowing my history that I was not doing good, I think is an alarm.

This is stats after july 18, so 10K hands of zoom.

At least showdown became better but thats probably because I cbet less on flop, so more often get to sd.

Found out that after july 22 turn stats start become better:

So between 18-22 I was just started focusing on turn, so might be thats why it was not so agro yet. Still 50 % cbet is on bottom side as I undenstand when my flop cbet is about 60.

I now think that I will play nl10 zoom. Even when it looks easy at nl25, results so far does not look good and I dont want to risk.

Checked my bankroll, and I am surprized that its still 1064 eur ♦ probably partly have to thank for unibet fish, when I started table select as a nit after july 18

Unibet

This is not big sample.

Even though it may not be a big sample you may be finally turning things around, at least via the unibet field.

As far as the 25nl graph/stats go the sample is a bit small to make any meaningful assumptions.

Although something is clearly wrong in the Co and even BTN since your winrate is very small there.

August ended - all limit resutls:

If not NL25, would look big nicer.

flop cbet got reduced bit too much. But oblio said 60 is most optimal together with 60 cbet on turn. I believe its even ok not only for his limits but on NL25 also because it makes sense.

In SB vs BTN situations they dont fold a ton so we cannot cbet like crazy, unless fish calls with very wide range which he has to give up often.

And I also was thinking I will increase turn agression by skipping cbets on flop.

Its hard to have exact number of 60, so few % +- should be ok if 60 is optimal.

But was pleasure to play NL10 zoom ♦ its like I am actually playing and making money. Has forgot that for long time

ALso I have one skype friend who still plays NL10 but has skill like me ( I assume from hand discussions with him) or even better. And he says - why for him to play NL25 when he still has many leaks. He prefers better to crush NL10 until he fixes more leaks. Actually it makes some sence.

Congrats on your August month.

Just because Oblio said that 60% is the ideal cbet % doesn't mean that's your ideal cbet given the games and limits you play at

Just make sure to always remember that (you seem to want to take advice from other limits and bring it in to the lower limits exactly as it's given instead of making adjustments).

Staying too long at a low limit can affect you overall. Ideally you want to get to the limit you are hoping for (50,100,200+) as soon as possible. Delaying stuff because it's "easier" to stay at a lower limit is usually not a great reason. And you will never have a cahnce to fix all the leaks.

Staying too long at a low limit can affect you overall. Ideally you want to get to the limit you are hoping for (50,100,200+) as soon as possible. Delaying stuff because it's "easier" to stay at a lower limit is usually not a great reason. And you will never have a cahnce to fix all the leaks.

Yeah, also was thinking about that - might not be 'forced' to study enought and fix my leaks when I am at low limit which I beat with decent winrate.

But somehow I dont feel I reach NL200 at least in next few years if I ever reach it, when I see how long I stay at NL20

If till the new year I will beat NL25 zoom that will be good for me.

ANd yeah, I understand that I have to think about which limit I am at when applying certain strategy.

And still we can see that on NL20 my cbet is higher. Maybe because I see the spots to cbet, I mean I play using same strategy all those limit, but automatically on NL20 I have stats on oponents so its like adjustment maybe to cbet more.

I will try to remember to ask him if in his opinion 60% cbet is good at NL25 zoom, but might be taht I have asked and he confirmed, just I dont find in my documents this, so I should write what he reccomends for exact limit.

Understanding why someone recommends something is 10x better than just getting the recommendation and following it blindly.

If you understand the reason behind it you can then evolve that strategy based on your own variables. Generally speaking a strategy is based on some variables which are different from one scenario to the next.