Is focus on reviewing large pot hands overrated?

Hi monteCarlol,
If I get into a spot where I start to second-guess myself, I mark the hand for review, regardless of size.
In most hands we play we know what to do at the outset.

If I mark it for review, and still can't figure out what I should have done I post it.

I do this regardless of the size of the pot, and whether I won or lost.
In fact, I'm more likely to post hands that I won, thinking I made a bad call or raise and just got lucky.

Cheers,
VS

smaller pots happen at higher frequencies, so some smaller pot spots may be more important.

Especially if you have a leak where you fold often to small bets in small pots because "it isn't worth it" or some such.
Over time those small errors add up.

Yeah, I have been focussing on the big pots that I lost... probably too much.
Thanks for the advice!

Hi, long time since I logged in here. But sometimes I read homepage and found this thread now.
Actually what I've heard, all good players say that biggest difference between good and very good players is small pots. Bad players just let the small pots go, but greatest players fight to win every pot if possible.

I will give you a few tips how to beat nl2

I set for myself a checklist with simple rules:
1) Be patient.
2) Why do I bet?
3) Sizing?
4) Take your time.
5: Think!

First you opening range must be okay, mine look like this:

You can be tighter.

Flop play: reasons to c-bet or check and sizing:

Depending on your hand and the villain(s) in the pot I use this as a general guideline:
a) I have a high equity/value hand.
b) I have a protection hand.
c) I have a medium strength hand or weaker draw.
d) I have a hand that suits with my opening range very well. * Ace and King high boards.
e) I have a hand that doens't want to bet or call.

Betsizings under a) 1/2 2/3 pot or a checkraise spot.
Betsizings under b) 2/3 pot, full pot or at this limits a small overbet works too.
Betsizings under c) 1/3 pot if you bet, but can work better as a check call, if you lead the turn.
Betsizings under d) 1/3 pot, range (bet) advantage.
Betsizings under e) you can bluff 2/3, but with no equity, redraws or anything, I like to give it up at low limits.

Pretty much made it all up by myself so don't hate me if I say something wrong, it really works for me tho!

GL

Originally posted by SittingOuts
I will give you a few tips how to beat nl2

I set for myself a checklist with simple rules:
1) Be patient.
2) Why do I bet?
3) Sizing?
4) Take your time.
5: Think!

If I go through that, but the time I'm finished #5 I've timed out and my hand is folded.

<sigh>
VS

Originally posted by SittingOuts
First you opening range must be okay, mine look like this:

You can be tighter.

Thanks.
Here are my RFI stats from my recent games:

A bit tighter, but overall similar. SB only outlier.

Aim to not care about result when you choose hands to analyze. Won pot can be badly played and vice versa. For normal session analyze it's best to aim to mark hands during play. If spot feels unsure just mark it.

To check certain type of situations filter hands from database and see how it has gone. For example you can filter few of weakest hand types you tend to defend big blind and check how have you been doing BB/100 wise. Just remember that folding give -100bb/100 and that is what you need to beat.

Originally posted by monteCarlol

Originally posted by SittingOuts
First you opening range must be okay, mine look like this:

You can be tighter.

Thanks.
Here are my RFI stats from my recent games:

A bit tighter, but overall similar. SB only outlier.

Looks good to me, key is to figure out how to play post flop better. Keep us posted how its going

I'm not really sure if my 3 bet numbers are good, don't think I'm massive out of line and fold too 4 bets a bit too.

Originally posted by SittingOuts

Originally posted by monteCarlol

Originally posted by SittingOuts
First you opening range must be okay, mine look like this:

You can be tighter.

Thanks.
Here are my RFI stats from my recent games:

A bit tighter, but overall similar. SB only outlier.

Looks good to me, key is to figure out how to play post flop better. Keep us posted how its going

I'm not really sure if my 3 bet numbers are good, don't think I'm massive out of line and fold too 4 bets a bit too.

Looks like
- I fold to 3bet more
- I call open raise more
- I 3bet less

All in all I play more passively than you.
My standard 3bet range is QQ+, AK+, (AQ). Maybe I should 3bet light more sometimes with suited connectors, suited wheel aces and maybe small pockets? Or maybe I should increase the top of the range depending on position?

My PF 2bet calling range is app. JJ-22,AQ-AJ,KQ,QJs, TJs-98s

Sample size ~9k

I will look at post-flop, too.

Thanks!

Yeah that seems way too tight, 99+ and all broadway suited hands should be in your 3 betting range. On the button you can even be looser 66+ 56 suited and up.

Calling 3 bets (depending on the size, some players are really faced up with there sizing) is fine, suited broadways and 99+.

Messed up my bankroll in the beginning of the month, so had to start over at nl2, small sample size like you, but I had these kind of results many times. I did changed my play a bit, since I had a sky rocking redline.

Originally posted by SittingOuts
Yeah that seems way too tight, 99+ and all broadway suited hands should be in your 3 betting range. On the button you can even be looser 66+ 56 suited and up.

Calling 3 bets (depending on the size, some players are really faced up with there sizing) is fine, suited broadways and 99+.

Messed up my bankroll in the beginning of the month, so had to start over at nl2, small sample size like you, but I had these kind of results many times. I did changed my play a bit, since I had a sky rocking redline.

Maybe the reason ist that I do not feel so comfortable in 3bet pots. As the pot gets large, mistakes get more expensive.
I will slowly try to incorporate a larger 3betting range into my game.

Impressive graph 👍

Small session. Slowly adjusting. 9 BB/100
Some tough spots, though. I might post some hands later in the hand discussion forum.

bigger pots are fewer in number so they are easier to work on first (low hanging fruit and small wins)

though i would usually work on Preflop and Flop, cos it's pointless to talk about river with some 72o when u arent even supposed to VPIP it preflop in the first place.

Originally posted by mbml
bigger pots are fewer in number so they are easier to work on first (low hanging fruit and small wins)

though i would usually work on Preflop and Flop, cos it's pointless to talk about river with some 72o when u arent even supposed to VPIP it preflop in the first place.

Concerning pre-flop, would you say that these ranges from PokerStrategy articles are worthwhile following?
I know that it is also important to know the reasoning and principles that these ranges are based on, rather than blindly follow a strict schema. Also knowing how to play post-flop is important, I guess. Are they a good guide anyway, even if in progress of learning the other stuff currently?

Originally posted by monteCarlol
Concerning pre-flop, would you say that these ranges from PokerStrategy articles are worthwhile following?

Hi

From the article
1.5 million hands of NL200 were analyzed for the creation of these ranges. The standard opponent was created based on a database analysis and the experience of several successful players.

Since the ranges were created for NL200, I would think that they would be wider than one should play at NL 10 or lower.
Also, splitting Aces into call and 4bet may have value at higher stakes, but not at lower.

So if you are playing NL 200 and are comfortable post-flop, they have merit.
Even then, you will need to adjust them dynamically to suit each table you're on.

All the best,
VS

Originally posted by VorpalF2F

Originally posted by monteCarlol
Concerning pre-flop, would you say that these ranges from PokerStrategy articles are worthwhile following?

Hi

From the article
1.5 million hands of NL200 were analyzed for the creation of these ranges. The standard opponent was created based on a database analysis and the experience of several successful players.

Since the ranges were created for NL200, I would think that they would be wider than one should play at NL 10 or lower.
Also, splitting Aces into call and 4bet may have value at higher stakes, but not at lower.

So if you are playing NL 200 and are comfortable post-flop, they have merit.
Even then, you will need to adjust them dynamically to suit each table you're on.

All the best,
VS

Thanks, that makes sense. I think I'll stick with these from an earlier section then. A couple of spots mentioned in this thread aren't really covered in detail. But I guess, I'll learn by doing, analysing, posting hands then.

I was playing 13.7 % less hands in certain position than I should.

This is where most of the edge comes from - from most frequent scenarios. So postflop first hehe.

Anyways, reviewing the big pots makes sense as well. But it is all about the details. First we make preflop decision, then flop, turn and river to make it all the way there. Even to creat the big pot. There is so much behind it.

Article is amazing. I realized, tha that I was focusing on "tough" spots, which don't bring most of the value. And I should be focused on these "std" spots, that occur most frequently and therefore the edge I can gain there is tremendous.