If I can make it here...

Today I played probably the most challenging game I think I've ever played. The stakes had nothing to do with it. The opponents were probably of below average skill. I probably learned more about myself and my game than I learned in the 100 hours I played before this one and a half hour tournament.

To set it up, I've been having a horrid run lately. Right now I'm lucky if I can even win a 60/40 at all, let alone 4 or even the mathmatically dictated 6 of 10 times. I had played in almost exclusively sit n go's for the past couple of days due to a small roll. I had gone through 5 of them without even making the money, something pretty unheardof for me. Finally it looked like things were turning around for me, I was hitting flops, playing well and I had developed a chip lead early. I made it to heads up against a far weaker opponent with a chip lead and felt confident in my chances of winning...

Then I found myself in the god damned twilight zone... here's the first hand.

Full Tilt Poker Game #859804418: $5 + $0.50 Sit & Go (5736004), Table 1 - 150/300 - No Limit Hold'em - 16:44:47 ET - 2006/08/03
Seat 4: Zacus (1,125)
Seat 8: ColdE (12,375)
ColdE posts the small blind of 150
Zacus posts the big blind of 300
The button is in seat #8
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to ColdE [Ah Tc]
ColdE raises to 900
Zacus raises to 1,125, and is all in
ColdE calls 225
Zacus shows [5d Jd]
ColdE shows [Ah Tc]
*** FLOP ***
[Ts 9h Qd]
*** TURN ***
[Ts 9h Qd] [9s]
*** RIVER ***
[Ts 9h Qd 9s] [Kd]
Zacus shows a straight, King high
ColdE shows two pair, Tens and Nines
Zacus wins the pot (2,250) with a straight, King high
*** SUMMARY ***Total pot 2,250 Rake 0
Board: [Ts 9h Qd 9s Kd]
Seat 4: Zacus (big blind) showed [5d Jd] and won (2,250) with a straight, King high
Seat 8: ColdE (small blind) showed [Ah Tc] and lost with two pair, Tens and Nines

Ok, now that was NOT cool... but it gets worse...

Full Tilt Poker Game #859809938: $5 + $0.50 Sit & Go (5736004), Table 1 - 150/300 - No Limit Hold'em - 16:46:50 ET - 2006/08/03
Seat 4: Zacus (3,450)
Seat 8: ColdE (10,050)
ColdE posts the small blind of 150
Zacus posts the big blind of 300
The button is in seat #8
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to ColdE [As 3h]ColdE raises to 900
Zacus raises to 3,450, and is all in
ColdE calls 2,550
Zacus shows [Kd Tc]
ColdE shows [As 3h]
*** FLOP ***
[5d Ks 9s]
*** TURN ***
[5d Ks 9s] [4s]
*** RIVER ***
[5d Ks 9s 4s] [8d]
Zacus shows a pair of Kings
ColdE shows Ace King high
Zacus wins the pot (6,900) with a pair of Kings
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 6,900 Rake 0
Board: [5d Ks 9s 4s 8d]
Seat 4: Zacus (big blind) showed [Kd Tc] and won (6,900) with a pair of Kings
Seat 8: ColdE (small blind) showed [As 3h] and lost with Ace King high

Ok now that one isn't that bad, but this next one was the one I should not have been able to recover from...

Full Tilt Poker Game #859838384: $5 + $0.50 Sit & Go (5736004), Table 1 - 250/500 - No Limit Hold'em - 16:57:11 ET - 2006/08/03
Seat 4: Zacus (3,250)
Seat 8: ColdE (10,250)
ColdE posts the small blind of 250
Zacus posts the big blind of 500
The button is in seat #8
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to ColdE [4c Tc]
ColdE calls 250
Zacus checks
*** FLOP ***
[6c 8c 2c]
Zacus bets 500
ColdE raises to 2,500
Zacus raises to 2,750, and is all in
ColdE calls 250
Zacus shows [Kd 6h]
ColdE shows [4c Tc]
ColdE: gg
*** TURN ***
[6c 8c 2c] [2h]
*** RIVER ***
[6c 8c 2c 2h] [6d]
Zacus shows a full house, Sixes full of Twos
ColdE shows a flush, Ten high
Zacus wins the pot (6,500) with a full house, Sixes full of Twos
*** SUMMARY ***Total pot 6,500 Rake 0
Board: [6c 8c 2c 2h 6d]
Seat 4: Zacus (big blind) showed [Kd 6h] and won (6,500) with a full house, Sixes full of Twos
Seat 8: ColdE (small blind) showed [4c Tc] and lost with a flush, Ten high

Eventually, I came back to win this tournament. By all means, I should've have tilted and it probably, while not acceptable, would have been understandable. The biggest problem with my game has always been patience, I managed to come back and win this game by not letting these beats get to me, (though the last one was close), playing my game and waiting for my opponent to make critical mistakes while not letting myself make them. Hopefully I learned a permanent lesson with this win, and will be able to apply this experience for success in the future... I'd say it's prolly a 60/40 that I do.

Forced Break

Ok, so I'm coming off a 5 day break... Thanks to Comcast. Apparently, when I signed up my apartment for cable apparently something happened with the change over and comcast is a company full of fucking morons. Then there comes the part that for some reason they couldn't get someone out to my apartment for 5 days to fix it. I pay Comcast $150 a month... are you fucking serious? If it wasn't for the fact that Comcast is the only place I can get cable from, I would definitely be watching TV on Cox or AT&T or the Wereallysuckdickbutwe'restillnotquiteasbadasComcast Cable network.

So basically, in the middle of my job search I was without television or internet for 5 days... you can imagine how pleased I was. Being a child of the pop culture age, I find it hard enough to live without television. Factor in the fact that I'm currently trying to get a job an now I can't access my e-mail, I'm in one of those moods where I'm walking down the street using every ounce my self control just to stop myself from ripping out the heart of the first person who makes eye contact with me like that cat with the bone through his nose in Temple of Doom. I would almost feel bad about the way I treated the person I talked to the second time I called up to complain except for the fact that he was not only a moron but a jackass. If you're reading this Kevin, let me explain something to you... when I tell you to "hit" my cable box, I don't want questions, I don't want you to tell me that you don't THINK it will work, I just want you to "hit" the damn box like the good little cable monkey you are. You do that, I spare you the three minutes of obscenities, it's that simple. When you make more an hour than I do, you can tell me to "hit" your cable box and I'll give it to you anyway you like it big daddy, but until then you're in my world.

So that sucked... moving on...

Anyway, this caused me to have to take a little unplanned hiatus from poker, during which I decided to finally take the advice of all my friends and everyone who has ever read Harrington on Hold 'Em and I began to seriously start reading Harrington on Hold 'Em. I'm 80 pages into this book, and all I can say is I'm pretty damn impressed. It's not that Harrington tell you what to do, anybody can do that. It's not that he tells you why to do it, Sklansky can do that. It's that he can do it thoroughly and conversationaly. If the rest of this book is as good as the first third, this one will easily go to the top of my reading list.

Anyway, that being said, it's be a pretty uneventful return. Since I'm not doing so hot on the financial front, I'm getting by with a little help from my friends and grinding it out at the 5+.50 sng's. I'm at about a 80% money rate, but I'm yet to win one. Yeah for some reason, the easiest thing for me is now the hardest thing, I can't close it out. I think this has a lot to do with the more cautious style I'm using A) because I'm reworking and B) because right now making the money to me is of paramount importance. I'm not really too concerned about this because even though it's a slow profit it's a profit and that's really all I'm worried about for right now. Also, check out the link for T's Spot, she's one of my friends who satellited into the WSOP ME for Fuh-reakin free, and even though she's a little short after day one, she's my early pick to win the whole God Damn thing... GO KW WOOT!

Back to Basics

Ok, I know a lot of people who read this blog know me, so they know what's been going on with me lately but for those of you who don't know me that well, let me explain to you why I haven't updated this thing for a metric year.

First of all, I took a break from poker. The game wasn't fun for me anymore, and I always said when it stopped being fun, there's no point in me playing. I took a month or two off and then came back to realize...

I fucking sucked.

Apparently the combination of my time off and my super aggresive style had basically turned me into a play-every-hand-douchebag incapable of folding even the most remote draw... awesome. The only comforting fact in this whole equation is I still have what seems to be my in-born voice in the back of my mind that tells me when I'm about to get into some serious trouble, unfortunately, I still don't listen to it. So I decided I need to go back to basics. I have to re-close up my hand selection and start playing tighter. Obviously the way I was playing before had room for improvement anyway otherwise I would have more than 10 (not that I don't love you guys you know you're fucking awesome) people reading this blog. So I said fuck it, I had just finished Phil Gordon's The Real Deal, which is probably one of the better poker books I've read, and I decided to completely overhaul my game.

The first step to this is discipline, which any of you know for me in never something that I've had an abundant supply of. It can be god damn excruciating sometimes to a K-2 suited to a raise in NLHE, (I dun curr what you all say, those calls used to win me massive pots.) but I must learn to do it. The second part is just going back to the basic math of the game. Folding my draws if I am not getting the right price. Not factoring in backdoor draws as a reason to call (in NLHE). When reading The Real Deal I came across a particular concept. It's a concept I had read in thousands of other pages I've read on poker. It's a phrase I heard a million times, but for some reason it hadn't sunk in until I read it in Gordon's book:

"Everytime you make a mistake, your opponent wins money, everytime you get your opponent to make a mistake, you win money," (to paraphrase)

Now I always knew what this meant, but I don't think I understood it. This is the concept that balances out variance. It is what makes winning players winning players over the long haul. It's what makes poker a game of skill. It's what makes the grinders at 5/10 games so FUCKING BORING... but winners. Until now, not gonna lie, I didn't get it. When I first started playing the game I just followed it because I knew it was the right thing to do. Unfortunately I think in order to become truly great in anything I believe you have to get outside the box. Which I did. I got way outside the box... like if I stood on the roof of my apartment and looked around, I couldn't even see the fucking box, then I realized, I needed to get back inside that damn box.

Don't get my wrong, I think my little experiments that I made definitely improved the non-mathmatical portion of my game. I feel I'm better at reading the context of the board than I have ever been and I know I'm better at putting people on hands than I've ever been. Those are things that won't go away. The problem basically comes down to this. When you watch the movies about poker and you watch poker on TV they always say things like "for the truly great players, the cards don't matter."

This is simply just not fucking true. Maybe, in one hand, if you know exactly what your other opponent has, the cards don't matter. Maybe in one instance if you picked up a rock solid read on your opponent, in that particular hand, the cards don't matter. But in the long haul, in the "trenches" as Action Dan would say (just started that book, I'm more excited about it than a Senior taking a Freshman chick to prom), the cards matter. No matter how good you are, you can't outplay your opponent every hand. You can't even outplay your opponent on one of every 5 hands if he or she has any fucking idea what they're doing. Now that I said that, hopefully I'll be able to appreciate it... and listen to that damn voice in the back of my mind.

Maniac Play Continued

Okay, well I got some responses to my post about maniac play which is really cool. In response to those posts, I wanted to talk a little bit about hand selection.

A lot of poker authors, pro's, novices, and commentators love to wax philosophical about playing tight aggressive poker. Using good hand selection to beat your opponents. The problem is, if everyone is using good hand selection, the only time pots are going to be big and get lucrative is when two monster hands clash. A great deal of online players who really think they know what they are doing stick to maybe the top 10 or 15 hands when playing. While this is a nice strategy to make poker simplistic, these players will never be able to butcher a game. I mean sit down, play 30 hands, break 2 people and make everyone else at the table piss their pants. Poker is not meant to be a simplistic game played by hard and fast rules. Ring game poker should be played with every hand in a vaccuum, save information you've included about your opponents.

Since I started experimenting with maniac play, I've gotten a lot of grief from players I've beaten with jackpot hands; "How could you play 23 suited to a raise?" It's simple, I knew what I was trying to make with it, if I didn't make it I could let it go. For instance, in that Q2s hand I posted, I called a pretty significant raise with a mediocre hand. Some people would call that a donk move. I disagree. If I had called with that hand and made top pair with my Queen a played it fast, I agree that would have been a donk move. This is a very important part of playing like a maniac: You have to be able to know when your hand is good. I played that Q2s hand because I knew if the flop hit me big it would be almost impossible for it to hit my opponents big, (unless one was holding AQ). For example, I would play Q2s to a raise, but not ATos. Here's the reasoning: First of all the Q2 is suited and gives me a pretty good shot at being best should I hit my flush shorthanded, the AT is off suit. Second of all, the AT is most likely dominated by the hand that is raising me unles my opponent is overplaying an underpair, the Q2s not so much. If I hit trip aces in a a raised pot with ATos, I need to still be afraid. If I hit trip Q's in a raised pot with Q2, I'm not going to worry as much.

Now while all of that sounds pretty good, I'm sure there are some people out there saying, "yes but you're still going in behind." That's fine, and I'll tell you why. I have a pretty good idea of what I need to make in order to have a good shot at winning the pot. I know my opponent is strong so that greatly decreases the range of hands I need to try to put him on post flop. But that's not the important thing. The important thing is my opponent has NO FUCKING IDEA what I have. All he knows is that he's got a big one, so when that flop comes out a seemingly harmless Q28, he's gonna pay me off the whole ride. He knows I'm an aggressive player, which gives me a lot of options as to how to play the hand to break him.

If I think he's a loose cannon and is liable to stand up for himself it's easy, I just bet at the pot hard and try to make it look like a steal right away. If I think he's more reserved, I can try to feign being on a draw and then make a huge bet on the end to try to convince him I missed and I'm shopping. The second strategy is definitely riskier only reccommend doing it if you also have a decent redraw. The third and best way is to let him bet himself broke, he showed preflop strength, so he's prolly going to lead into you, call him. If he checks on the turn, overbet it big, make him think you think he's weak and you're trying to buy it. If he bets again, call or reraise depending on what falls, how you think your opponent plays, etc.

I know this is a rather disjointed explanation and is not meant to be taken literally. As I hope you've gathered by now, there is no script to play maniac style, you just go on feel. I've never surfed, but I imagine it's similar, lol. This explanation is more for the sake of illustrating general principles: You oppress the weak and let the "strong" go too far. I say "strong" because as the maniac you're obviously the strongest prescence, perhaps "bold" would be a better word.

Just remember, in low limit shorthanded games most players are still playing tight aggressive. They are playing a small selection of hands fast and not aggressively attacking pots. If you only play top15 hands, even if you're aggressive, there's not a whole lot differentiating you from the rest of the table. However, if you can SKILLFULLY, play a wide range of hands, it will open up to you many profitable opprotunities that your opponents don't even know how to take advantage of.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about

Here's a hand I played for implied odds on my flush, I know it was a raised pot, but part of this style is seeing a lot of flops and letting yourself get lucky. Granted I could've paid $2.35 for nothing, but if you can play hands like this and not make mistakes and instead let your opponents make them (which they will be more prone to do if they're uncomfortable) it can be very profitable in the long run.


Full Tilt Poker Game #527687844: Table Faiss (6 max) - $0.10/$0.25 - No Limit Hold'em - 19:41:56 ET - 2006/03/27
Seat 1: mrhenwen ($20.50)
Seat 2: dallygooduiy ($10.45)
Seat 3: slapant ($37.85)
Seat 4: ColdE ($22.10)
Seat 5: elg123 ($26.50)
slapant posts the small blind of $0.10
ColdE posts the big blind of $0.25
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to ColdE [2s Qs]
elg123 calls $0.25
mrhenwen raises to $0.75
dallygooduiy folds
slapant folds
ColdE calls $0.50
elg123 raises to $3.10
mrhenwen calls $2.35
ColdE calls $2.35
*** FLOP *** [7s Th 2h]
ColdE checks
elg123 checks
mrhenwen checks
*** TURN *** [7s Th 2h] [2d]
ColdE checks
exsquid069 sits down
exsquid069 adds $25
elg123 bets $0.25
mrhenwen calls $0.25
ColdE raises to $5
elg123 raises to $23.40, and is all in
mrhenwen folds
ColdE calls $14, and is all in
elg123 shows [Kc Qd]
ColdE shows [2s Qs]
Uncalled bet of $4.40 returned to elg123
*** RIVER *** [7s Th 2h 2d] [4h]
elg123 shows a pair of Twos
ColdE shows three of a kind, Twos
ColdE wins the pot ($45.65) with three of a kind, Twos
ColdE: ????
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $47.65 Rake $2
Board: [7s Th 2h 2d 4h]
Seat 1: mrhenwen folded on the Turn
Seat 2: dallygooduiy (button) didn't bet (folded)
Seat 3: slapant (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 4: ColdE (big blind) showed [2s Qs] and won ($45.65) with three of a kind, Twos
Seat 5: elg123 showed [Kc Qd] and lost with a pair of Twos

Playing Like A Maniac

Ok boys and girls, I've been really really busy with a whole bunch of personal stuff lately so I apologize for not updating. At first I went through a little period where I just lost interest in the game. Playing so much limit, I started to become mechanical which was dangerous for two reasons; I wasn't evaluating my play to look for potential holes or places I could improve, and I was just plain getting bored as I just wasn't getting a whole lot of joy out of playing. If you ever find yourself falling into a rut like this, take a break. If you're not having fun, there's no point in playing. If you're not critically evaluating your own play, it's only a matter of time before it begins to deteriorate. If you're getting bored with a game, you're not going to be able to focus as well, which is one huge reason why it is important to play different variations of poker, not just NLHE or whatever you're comfortable with.

So anyway, I took some times off, focused on other things for a while and now for the past week I've been playing steadily again. I know previously I primarily focused on Limit Hold 'Em. Since I've returned however, I've begun to play quite a bit of low stakes NLHE shortanded ring games. These games are generally pretty soft and the players are usually pretty easy to put on hands, so I decided to experiment with a new strategy; playing as a maniac.
Anyone who plays me knows I am a very aggressive player by nature, so this seemed to me to be a logical progression in my game. There are many advantages to using this style effectively.

First of all, a lot of players, especially at low limit, are not very good at putting people on hands, meaning they will simply see you are aggressive and you have a good chance of getting paid off if you catch a hand and they're fed up with you bullying the table. Second of all, a lot of players at lower limits do not really know how to deal with an aggressive player who is capable of making good folds. Most will just sit back and wait for a hand and then hope the aggressive player bets into them and pays them off. If you can play a super aggressive style, yet at the same time are able to make tough laydowns, inexperienced or bad players really do not have a lot of recourse against you.

Finally, poker is a game of comfort levels. If you can take a player out of his or her comfort zone and make them play in an environment they are not accustomed to, you make them face situations they aren't familiar with. Basically to put it simply; if you make people make tough decisions they haven't made before, they tend to fuck up... a lot. I've never said I was a great or even good poker player, but if you put me at a table and I am able to push the people at that table out of their comfort zone, I will win damn near everytime. You don't have to be good to do that, you just have to know what you're doing and have everyone else not know. All of the sudden your opponents become defensive and reactive and they're not having fun. They're not thinking clearly and they're not making you make tough decisions.

Now, all of that being said, playing like a maniac successfully is like walking a tightrope. This style lends itself to big swings. This style means you have to be willing to pump up a pot and then fold if you think you're beat. It also means you have to be decent at putting another player on a hand. Most importantly you have to walk a fine line between aggressive and stupid. You want the table to think you're a very loose player, but you don't want them to think that because you're making bad calls, playing at the wrong pots, or raising with just any two cards out of position. It's definitely madness, but there is damn sure a method to it. Oh yeah, and I don't advocate doing any of this shit in a full ring game otherwise you're just asking for an ass-whooping.

First of all position is huge. If I'm on the button or even one off in an unopened pot, two paint cards are a monster, I'm raising preflop. Second, speculative hands are huge. I'm raising unopened pots with suited connects and even some offsuit connects in any position. Third, fear the raise or reraise preflop. People know you like to play hands, they want to punish you for it, don't let them. I'm not saying if you make it a buck to go and someone makes it 1.75 fold preflop, but be ready to muck on the flop when you call and don't hit. Play your draws aggressively and don't let people get free cards ever, ever, EVER... fuckin ever. Classic example which happens quite frequently at lower limits, I raise preflop to $1, my standard raise. Flop comes out and someone bets .25. I don't care if I have 7 fucking 2 I'm coming back over the top, if they reraise that, maybe I'll slow down. Basically people win pots when you let them, it's that simple. Some players advocate that the money in the pot is in the pot, it doesn't belong to anyone. When I'm playing this style it's more like "that's my money, I'm taking it, and you can't have any unless I let you." If someone has a hand that I don't feel confident that I can get them to lay down, I'll let them win, otherwise, tough shit, ship it. Once again though, this makes the ability to read your opponents essential. If you're not confident in your reading ability, do not play this style.

Also, if you raise preflop, you keep firing until someone gives you a good reason not to. Your opponents should be the ones playing scared, not you. I will keep throwing out bets 60% to 80% of the pot until it becomes apparent I can not win the hand outright and my opponent will not lay it down. This brings up another point; don't be afraid of the Boogeyman. If the flop comes out suited, make your opponent convince you he or she hit. I'm not saying bet blindly, if you're beginning to get the sense he or she may have a hand, by all means relinquish the pot, but that pot is yours until you give it up.

I know some of you reading this prolly think I've finally lost it, and some of you prolly just think I'm a donk, and that's ok. I know this type of play is not for everyone, but I've recently found it to be very successful. I will probably be posting more on this in a few days but for now I'll leave you with this:

If you can ever force your opponents to either play your game and not theirs, or play for more money than they are comfortable with at any given time, you will have a distinct advantage over the rest of the table.

Getting Housed

Alright, I was feeling good, in a real good mood to play some poker, so I decided to play a little 5/10 fixed... a few hours later, I'm stuck $200. I really don't know what to say. I mean, was this outside my limits? Yeah it was. Was it a conscious decision? definitely. Did I play well? I think I did. The turn and river were really tough on me. I had wired kings one hand, which I lost a significant amount of money on when my opponent reraised on the turn with only a flush draw. My pair was over the board and I put him on a bluff so I reraised, he called and then hit on the river. I knew what he was on but had to pay him off, I was getting roughly 12 to 1. In another hand I had a pair of 99 on a board of Q9Q, I knew my opponent was on AK, so I got after him. He still stayed until the river and hit his A. Luckily I've over doubled my money on Absolute Poker, so as soon I as I get my 400 raked hands, I will moving that money back over to Full Tilt, but my BR is in the gutter right now compared to what it once was and I think after I qualify for Ironman tomorrow, I think a break is in order. I'm still on my game but pretty burned out, and it's starting to not be fun anymore. When it's not fun, there's no point to play, so I'ma take some time off.

- Huck

Limit Questions

This was a post on fulltiltforum.com that I liked because I thought it gave some good examples of tough situations you can run into in limit where a player has the potential to gain or lose a good deal of bets. Special thanks to Steeler247 of fulltiltforum.com. My responses are in Red

"comments please. i'm trying to get back in limit poker. i decided to play a 6 seater and the play is soooo bad that its laughable. I can't believe they will play any ace all the way down to the river. every time....
HAND #1 - SHOULD I HAVE PLAYED THIS HAND FROM THE BB?
Full Tilt Poker Game #395820030: Table Beretta (6 max) - $2/$4 - Limit Hold'em - 21:09:35 steeler247 posts the small blind of $1
Okla-Bandit posts the big blind of $2
The button is in seat #6
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to steeler247 [Kd 9h]
NemoRailBird folds
effin doit raises to $4
Heaterly folds
steeler247 calls $3
Okla-Bandit calls $2
*** FLOP *** [2d 4c 9s]
steeler247 bets $2
Okla-Bandit calls $2
effin doit calls $2
*** TURN *** [2d 4c 9s] [8h]
steeler247 checks
Okla-Bandit bets $4
effin doit calls $4
steeler247 raises to $8
Okla-Bandit folds
effin doit calls $4
*** RIVER *** [2d 4c 9s 8h] [Qc]
steeler247 bets $4
effin doit raises to $8
steeler247 calls $4
*** SHOW DOWN ***
effin doit shows [Th Jc] (a straight, Queen high)
steeler247 mucks
effin doit wins the pot ($52) with a straight, Queen high

You should not have play that hand from the BB In my opinion. If they initial raiser preflop was on the button, yeah I prolly would have played it. The other thing is I don't like the checkraise on the turn. The purpose of the check raise it to maximize your profit on hands where you have a stranglehold and are almost a lock to win the hand. This was not the case with this hand, a lot of other hands could've been out there that could've had you beat.

HAND #2 - IS THERE EVER A TIME WHERE I CHECK THIS HAND TO RERAISE OR IS THIS PLAYED OPTIMALLY
Full Tilt Poker Game #395822308: Table Beretta (6 max) - $2/$4 - Limit Hold'em - 21:10:53 ET - 2006/01/21
NemoRailBird posts the small blind of $
1effin doit posts the big blind of $2
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to steeler247 [Ts Td]
Heaterly folds
steeler247 raises to $4
Okla-Bandit calls $4
NemoRailBird folds
effin doit folds
*** FLOP *** [2s 7s 4d]
steeler247 bets $2
Okla-Bandit calls $2
*** TURN *** [2s 7s 4d] [9d]
steeler247 bets $4
Okla-Bandit calls $4
*** RIVER *** [2s 7s 4d 9d] [5d]
steeler247 bets $4
Okla-Bandit calls $4
*** SHOW DOWN ***
steeler247 shows [Ts Td] (a pair of Tens)
Okla-Bandit mucks
steeler247 wins the pot ($30) with a pair of Tens

This is a tough one. Really the only way I see you squezzing another bet out of this hand is by checking the flop, your opponent leading out at the turn because of this, flat calling and then check raising on the river, but the chances of that happening are slim. Plus with a lower overpair like that you really want to apply constant pressure to hopefully get players who have overcards to you from sticking around to hit.

HAND #3 - WHEN PLAYING SHORTHANDED, SHOULD I RAISE THIS HAND PREFLOP? AND WHEN SHOULD I HAVE LET THIS HAND GO?
Full Tilt Poker Game #395823708: Table Beretta (6 max) - $2/$4 - Limit Hold'em - 21:11:42 ET - 2006/01/21
effin doit posts the small blind of $1
Heaterly posts the big blind of $2
The button is in seat #3
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to steeler247 [Kd Qc]
steeler247 calls $2
Okla-Bandit folds
NemoRailBird calls $2
effin doit calls $1
Heaterly checks
*** FLOP *** [6c Kh 6d]
effin doit checks
Heaterly checks
steeler247 bets $2
NemoRailBird folds
effin doit raises to $4
Heaterly folds
steeler247 calls $2
*** TURN *** [6c Kh 6d] [Td]
effin doit bets $4
steeler247 calls $4
*** RIVER *** [6c Kh 6d Td] [9s]
effin doit bets $4
steeler247 calls $4
*** SHOW DOWN ***effin doit shows [6h 2h] (three of a kind, Sixes)
steeler247 muckseffin doit wins the pot ($31) with three of a kind, Sixes

Also tough, usually I raise with KQs but limp with KQos. However, if I'm coming in in early position, especially shorthanded, I usually like to raise, so I probably would have come in for a raise. The only problem with this is that the villain is the sb so he very well may call anyway. In so far as letting this hand go, so long as you never have to pay two big bets one betting round, you probably should take this hand to showdown.

HAND #4 - DO YOU FOLD ANY ACE PREFLOP SHORTHANDED? ACE HIGH WON THIS POT AND I FOLDED PREFLOP.
Full Tilt Poker Game #395828796: Table Beretta (6 max) - $2/$4 - Limit Hold'em - 21:14:41 ET - 2006/01/21
NemoRailBird posts the small blind of $1
Sinker posts the big blind of $2
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to steeler247 [As 3c]
effin doit calls $2
Heaterly folds
steeler247 folds
Okla-Bandit folds
NemoRailBird folds
Sinker has 15 seconds left to act
Sinker checks
*** FLOP *** [Ks 2c 3d]
Sinker checks
effin doit bets $
2Sinker calls $2
*** TURN *** [Ks 2c 3d] [8s]
Sinker checks
effin doit bets $4
Sinker calls $4
*** RIVER *** [Ks 2c 3d 8s] [4c]Sinker checks
effin doit bets $4
Sinker calls $4
*** SHOW DOWN ***
effin doit shows [Tc 7c] (King Ten high)
Sinker shows [Ad Qh] (Ace King high)Sinker wins the pot ($24) with Ace King high

Good fold, the chance of you having the only A even shorthanded is rare. Plus the problem with playing that hand is that the only real rationalization to playing it is if you think you have the only A, so if you do hit and you're wrong, it's gonna cost you a lot of money. Now, if that hand was suited and I could play it for only one bet preflop, I would, but I'm trying to make AT LEAST two pair, more going for a flush. Shorthanded I really vary my play but at a full table, usually the lowest offsuit ace I will play in EP is AT, and only for one bet, MP to LP A9 once again for one bet, LP-Button A-8 for one bet.

HAND #5 - SAVING BETS. I FOLDED THE WINNER AT THE RIVER BECAUSE I FELT I WAS BEAT WITH THE 2 OVERS. DO I HAVE TO MAKE THIS CALL? THE WHOLE TIME I'M THINKING I NEED TO SAVE A BET.
Full Tilt Poker Game #395836783: Table Beretta (6 max) - $2/$4 - Limit Hold'em - 21:19:31 ET - 2006/01/21
NemoRailBird posts the small blind of $1
Sinker posts the big blind of $2
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to steeler247 [Js Jd]
effin doit raises to $4
Heaterly raises to $6
steeler247 raises to $8
DarkAngelKiller folds
NemoRailBird folds
Sinker folds
effin doit calls $4
Heaterly calls $2
*** FLOP *** [6c 8s Kd]effin doit checks
Heaterly bets $2
steeler247 calls $2
effin doit calls $2
*** TURN *** [6c 8s Kd] [8d]
effin doit checks
Heaterly checks
steeler247 checks
*** RIVER *** [6c 8s Kd 8d] [Qc]effin doit checks
Heaterly bets $4
steeler247 folds
effin doit calls $4
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Heaterly shows [As Ts] (a pair of Eights)
effin doit shows [Jc Ac] (a pair of Eights)
effin doit ties for the pot ($19.50) with a pair of Eights
Heaterly ties for the pot ($19.50) with a pair of Eights

This is one of the reasons everyone who plays limit needs to read Small Stakes Hold 'Em: Winning Big with Expert Play. You should almost never fold on the river because you think the river may have beaten you without an EXTREMELY strong read, unless maybe it double pairs the board or something. Let's look at it in terms of money. If you would've called here and lost, it cost you $4, because you didn't call here it cost you $40. Sure you might pay more people off, but if one time you fold to save the $4, especially in limit, if you fold wrongly it will easy cost you 10 times that. Now if the pot was only say 15 bucks I'd say yeah, fold, but not when you're getting 10 to 1 on your money.

HAND #6... THIS SUCKED
Full Tilt Poker Game #395849022: Table Beretta (6 max) - $2/$4 - Limit Hold'em - 21:26:56 ET - 2006/01/21
effin doit posts the small blind of $1
Heaterly posts the big blind of $2
The button is in seat #3
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to steeler247 [As 5s]
steeler247 raises to $4
DarkAngelKiller calls $4
NemoRailBird folds
effin doit folds
Heaterly calls $2
*** FLOP *** [6s 8h 7d]
Heaterly checks
steeler247 checks
DarkAngelKiller bets $2
Heaterly calls $2
steeler247 calls $2
*** TURN *** [6s 8h 7d] [4d]
Heaterly checks
steeler247 bets $4
DarkAngelKiller calls $4
Heaterly calls $4
*** RIVER *** [6s 8h 7d 4d] [9c]
Heaterly bets $4
steeler247 calls $4
DarkAngelKiller folds
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Heaterly shows [Ad Tc] (a straight, Ten high)
steeler247 mucks
Heaterly wins the pot ($38) with a straight, Ten high
steeler247: "lol"
steeler247: "nice catch. what the heck did you think i had?"
Heaterly: "i knew you had the str8 but i had outs."

You could've prolly gone for a check-raise on the turn here, which may have worked, but judging by the chat at the bottom, basically the guy is a donk and deserves to burn in hell.

- Huck