PokerTracker Omaha

New Years are good for fresh starts. And one of mine was getting serious about PLO. I've been playing and really enjoying the game on and off for a few months now. I got the mechanics at micro stakes and quickly started playing way beyond my bankroll for the variance of the game. I decided to try and ramp up my learning curve even if it cost me a bit - which it did initially.

So I purchased PokerTracker for Omaha yesterday and instantly gained an insight. When I imported my Hand Histories I realised that I was a winning BB/100 player but a losing $ player. Needless to say that what I win at PLO25, I lose at PLO100. That said, my PLO100 is showing signs of breakeven. This is over 3000+ hands so isn't yet a statistically significant sample size.

Omaha is such a different game that I didn't know where to start looking for leaks. No starting hands dominate as much as Hold'em so your pushing smaller edges all the time. If you hate bad beats, you'll hate Omaha. If you realise that no poker beat is really that bad, you'll do well.

In my search for guidance for analysing my play, I stumbled across the best little website I've found in a while. Check this out! I wish I'd known this when I was playing NLH.

http://www.hand-histories.com/opp_prof.html

I'll write some more on PLO when I learn some more ... I really feel like I am only starting out as I now have the tool to study. I can't believe that I routinely push $$s in a single bet greater than the cost of PokerTracker and have never before purchased it.

Go figure ... or go buy!

New Year resolution

I've never had a resolution before, but when thinking about my goals, the only important SMART goal that springs to mind is to shed a few kilos (while adding the pounds).

I am currently a slightly out of breath 82kgs and would like to be 74kgs by Easter. To achieve this, I'd like to diet and exercise. So far the diet is on track but I'll need to include a bit of exercise. This public forum will hopefully help me stay motivated. Weigh-ins will hopefully be Monday mornings.

A busy two weeks and a Blogging Bad Beat

I've gone through spells in my life where I take up jogging or, when I was younger, running. I really enjoy it and get a lot of benefit from it. Then for some reason, it'll be wet and cold or I'm just tired and I'll miss a couple of days. Before you know it, a couple of weeks go past and each day that you miss seems to matter less. And so it has been with this blog. Hopefully I am back in the saddle though. I have been keeping up to date with my favourite blogs and am pleased to see Adam around again.

I hate to end the year with a bad beat story ... but ... having finally got around to capturing the last 2 weeks in an entry, the Save failed because my wireless had dropped out. Gutted, I couldn't muster the energy to retype it all again. Luckily it is NYE and I am now typing in Notepad, so I don't have an option but to jot down the festive season activities.

Christmas is always busy at home, we close a few things out at work, we have 3 birthdays including my own, the kids are finishing school and it is the middle of summer in Oz. Add to the mix a healthy dose of poker and the blog has taken a back seat for 2 weeks. I won't be able to recreate last night's lost epic entry but I did want to share the two most memorable poker happenings, a sweat session with Laff and a home game.

SWEATING LAFF

Thanks to an entry on Laffs blog, I offered to watch his play and see if there was any value that I could add by sweating him. The answer was a resounding 'No'. Laff was kind enough to blame the internet lag but the truth is that I am way off being qualified to comment on someone's style in a short session. It was my first attempt and I'd be interested to learn if anyone can add any real value in such an exercise.

What did appear useful though was firing up 4 tables of my own and talking my way through my logic, similar to a Training Video. Again, I am way under-qualified but the exercise taught me a lot and Laff seemed to learn too. I discovered that my play is very inconsistent. I'm not convinced that that is not such a bad thing as it provides balance. While inconsistent on the surface, it may have underlying reasons behind it that I don't fully understand myself (I hope).

Starting hands are the foundation of hold'em strategy. Refining the ranges for stack sizes and your opponents playing styles is something that must be tailored to your own risk tolerance and post flop play. I've now realised that since reading Harrington on Cash that my objective is to stack off whenever I am confident that I am in front. Playing that style, I find that selective pot-sized bluffs pay off more than 50% of the time and are hence profitable.

Hopefully Laff and I can have another session soon and I may well learn a little more about my own play.

Home Game

Now this section was my epic as I had 12 people around for a Christmas Home Game. It went off very well and I had detailed all of the players and their styles (alas, without Jesse's humour). Format was one that we'd used before - casino rules enforced, 50c/$1 blinds, $100 buy-in, top-ups at any time in $10 increments. Tip: Make up zip lock bags with complete Buy Ins in advance.

The long and short was that we had 2 extras turn up which meant we split into 2 6-max tables which worked well. We didn't lose anyone all night and with rebuys, the bowl became pretty full. It still amazes me the scale of the poker economy. When I first deposited $25, I sweated over 1c/2c. I remember reading someone who couldn't understand someone sweating near the bubble of a $1 tourney. I can say that I still have the discipline to take those situations seriously, while also being able to shove a few hundred dollars in on a single bet, live or online. Anyway, when cashing out $4000+, it all balanced to the $. That's 5 nights out of 5 for perfect accounting.

My own result was a slightly disappointing $200 win. I had the softer table of the two and ran into a few big hands from the same player who had an amazing run of cards. He made $650, we had one other small winner and three losers. The other table was a lot tougher with everyone being a very good tournament player. As you know, cash is different and the cream did come to the top. One young guy (who can use the money the most) played perfect TAG style and took down 2 big pots for a $450 win. On that table we had 1 big loser and the rest pretty much stayed even for the night. Everyone that played has plenty of money, so no-one gets really hurt.

Relative to my online success (or lack thereof), offline reaps the benefits of all the study and experience of playing 100K+ hands. My offline bankroll is mounting up and even though it isn't enough to retire on, it is certainly significantly more than a burger flipping wage. I have had the significant advantage of occassional soft home games and no rake.

WBCOOP Omaha - no good

Failed at my first attempt at the WBCOOP. I must say that I was confident going into the tournament that my new found PLO skills would see me through a field of 450 to make it into the last 72. Alas, after an hour and into the last 300, my short-stack went out with 17 wrap outs on the flop. But as often happens in a tournament, the last hand isn’t the root problem. To be fair, I could have been out much sooner and feel that I played reasonably well card dead.

The chip leader took his lead with no cards though; he was showing all sorts of aggressive bluffs including one that he took to the river with TTxx on an AQJ9Qr board. To his credit, he must have decided that no-one had a straight. That was a big pot and even then he’d never put his stack on the line doubling early. I do admire those that can read the board really well, I’m still playing my own cards a lot and bluffing with air early in cash games to take it down or find out where I’m at and fold to the raise. Obviously when I am strong, I get paid off handsomely.

I got away from all sorts of hands this morning post flop that others would have exited from. I managed to raise my chip count to $2640, when I was dealt 7c7s8dTh in the BB with a tight image. Average chip stack was $4500 and the blinds were now 50/100. MP limped and then CO made it 200 (which was a standard raise from him about 30% of unraised hands in position). I called hoping to hit a flop and stack off or just let the hand go. MP called. (3 runners, Pot $625)

Flop came 4c8c2s which was OK for me because I can just let it go. Check, Check, Check. Turn came 7d which completes a 56 straight, but otherwise is a good card for me with my trips. I decide to lead out for $350 and to my surprise get raised by MP to $950. CO folds and this is now a very interesting spot …

Would I have bet out with a straight (so what can he put me on)? Would MP have raised me with a straight? Is he pot committed or can he be pushed off with a shove. What can he realistically hold? If I put him on 56 for a straight, am I getting the odds to complete my FH with 9 outs? Is he just isolating me with a lot of outs on a wrap and a FD? Bugga … the joys of Omaha. I am not feeling in good shape and am now pretty much going for my 9 outs, if I call or shove. With $2140, I can still double up close to average stack if I fold, but I’ve been pushed off one or two marginal hands that I would have shoved with in a cash game. Can I call in this spot and hope to check down the River? He has been playing very strong Omaha, why would he risk his tournament life with a marginal hand as we have similar sized stacks. Could he be protecting trips? If so, would he not have done that on the flop?

Bugga … Thoughts?

A lesson at PLO100

Thankfully, I am not as results oriented as I once was because I took a hit Saturday and it has hardly affected me.

I was on the wrong side of a couple of PLO100 coinflips early and found myself down 2 BIs and onto my 3rd. I was also being outplayed, but learning. A more disciplined approach would have been to stand up but I made a conscious decision to battle through for the education of overcoming a tough game.

A mix of good cards and aggression seen me win back the BIs to the big stack at the table, on $340. Then came along "postmand" from Denmark (I googled him to find significant WCOOP cashes). He stood out with his exceptional selectively aggressive style. He won almost every hand at showdown. His stack grew rapidly to $290, none of it at my expense.

My focus was good as my stack was always under threat OOP. I felt like I was playing my A game and breaking even at a tough table with the big stack. A seat became vacant to postmand's left and I quickly moved into position. Several orbits later he left and I still had my stack intact.

Now for the bad news, the table got extremely fishy and I chased easy $$$s. The deck cooled and after a period of overly loose and surprisingly passive play for me (I knew I was narginal at best against calling stations), I found my stack whittled away to zero. In retrospect, this is perhaps where I should have left as I was playing far from optimally.

There is no doubt that the $300 retrospective educational budget would have been better spent on CardRunners, but I am convinced that my PLO game has gone to a new level as I had an awareness for the game that I have never experienced before.

As Stars is a new site for me, I must now work out how to retrieve and review the key hands more objectively with hindsight.

Pocket Pairs in Small Stakes Hold'em

Optimal maths poker isn't natural or intuitive for many and the math is only one aspect of poker. The requisite to fold for equity rather than chase for excitement is also unnatural psychologically.

Sometimes I miss my Limit Hold'em and as I learn other games I find that I struggle to win at it now. I used to win at $5/$10 consistently (when the games were much softer) and have played up to $20/$40 occassionally. But Adam's suspended blog got me thinking when I watched his hands play out. It reminded me how frustrating the game can be if you don't have the confidence in your own actions and focus on getting it in good.

Today, there appears not to be much wrong with Adam's play. He has recently posted about a new LAG approach though which inherently incurs more variance and attracts action so you will take more bad beats. That aside, I read a snippet last night in "Small Stakes Hold'em" by Ed Miller (I recommend it). The maths seemed so wrong that I was going to check it out. Turns out (no surprise with Sklansky and Malmuth at the helm) that it was spot on.

Using PokerStove Monte Carlo simulation(www.pokerstove.com), with 5 opponents willing to take a flop with 40% of their hands {44+,A2s+,K2s+,Q5s+,J7s+,T7s+,97s+}, which doesn't seem to be unreasonable looking at what reaches showdown with Adam.

The book states that with AA you should be jamming on a dry board with almost 50% equity, but with TT in this spot you should be calling because your equity is closer to 21%. I was amazed! I extended the simulation to see the spectrum. The inter-pair gap gets greater with higher pairs, for the record -

AA thru 22 is 42.3%, 33.2%, 27.5%, 23.6%, 20.4%, 18%, 16.5%, 15.3%, 15.7%, 14.9%, 14.2%, 13.9%.

My interpretation is something that I've experienced and posted about before. When playing against 5 loose opponents willing to get to showdown with marginal hands and draws:
- QQ thru 99 are really middle pairs; (Adam inspired this insight)
- 88 is the cut-off where you are becoming a dog.
- 77 thru 22 are set mining hands with implied odds - flop or stop.


BRAINTEASER : I've run the simulator a few times ... why does it always deliver the pre-flop equity for 77 to be 15.3% while 66 is 15.7%, at first glance an anomaly?

TRUST IN MATHS? Even if you "knew" all the other players starting range was 40% (and the maths above), would you ever prefer 66 preflop over 77?

New Year resolutions?

I've finally come up with my goal for December. Come up with proper goals for January. I've realised that I'm not a goal oriented person. Partly because I've been fortunate in life not to need them and partly because targets can be restrictive and have an unnecessary adverse psychological effect if you're not trying to get anywhere in particular.

In my businesses, I've never had a business plan. I've known roughly where I've wanted to get to. It is often ambitious by other people's measures. Then I just try to get the important things right and avoid the big mistakes. Every so often when I arrive somewhere, I pause look around and 9 times out of 10 I'm happy with where I have arrived and set out again. A big downside is that employees often need targets and I sometimes feel like I fail them in that regards. Other times I think that I demonstrate not to get hung up on the result but concentrate on the decision making.

And so to poker. Dan Harrington wrote something along the lines of "NLH is the perfect game as it simulates life in a compressed way". Actually it was probably nothing like that but that is the impression that he left me with and the more I play the more I know it to be true.

The BCG shared with me how he would approach Badugi and there is no doubt that the blindman's rational man would agree 100% with that approach. Also, LaffyChappy wrote about his Flying Scot inspiration (I now need to watch the movie as I virtually know someone with first hand experience). But the good thing about meaningful goals is that they need to be personal.

I will learn Badugi, I'm sure. I'll probably not stick with it as it seems flawed but it will be a sound introduction to draw games. Winning a HORSE bracelet would be for me the pinnacle of success. I've been playing with O/8 as a split game and then I just need to master the stud variations and go for it in retirement.

Last night at PLO, which was a disaster for me this time last year, I sat on Stars at two PLO25 tables and stood up with $130 and $112 dollars. I got lucky cards, but I folded way more than usual with no regrets and got it all in the middle holding the nuts or close to it a few times. More right moves and less mistakes.

So as we near year end, it is time to pause and have a look around:
- I am a competent online player which is far from easy these days.
- Amongst my network of local friends I have an edge, but only one or two of them take poker anyway seriously.
- I have a healthy hobby that stimulates the brain and doesn't cost me anything other than my time.
- All my life I've been an above average all-rounder and this is showing through in my poker.

The massive downside is that it takes me away from my family and has consumed too many thinking cycles. I am less up to date with current affairs, get less exercise and have a skewed perception on the value of money in these turbulent economic times.

So, I will ponder goal setting for the New Year, I've never had resolutions. And hopefully they will have more to do with Laffs fitness regime and life balance that winning x dollars. As always, thanks to all of you who happen by this neck of the internet woods.