Monday, February 28, 2011

Personal record streak

Saturday night was my third session in a row where I set a personal record of some kind. On Thursday, I set two: most big blinds won per hand (180.8) and most big blinds won per session (904). On Friday, I set a negative personal record: most big blinds lost per hand (28.57). On Saturday, I set a neutral one: most hands played in a winning session (110). It will be truly surprising if I manage to set another personal record tonight!

I hit the felt at the first table I joined Saturday, but my improved patience at the second table was finally rewarded when I hit a full house to win a pot worth $4,500. That's chicken feed at the big stakes tables, but a real windfall at the $5/$10 tables.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 110 hands and saw flop:
- 25 out of 26 times while in big blind (96%)
- 26 out of 28 times while in small blind (92%)
- 47 out of 56 times in other positions (83%)
- a total of 98 out of 110 (89%)
Pots won at showdown - 14 of 27 (51%)
Pots won without showdown - 10

delta: $1,417
balance: $1,039,387

Saturday, February 26, 2011

Note to self: read the fine print

It's embarrassing to admit it, but I've wasted good play money on a ghost house twice now in the last three sessions. Last night, as during my Wednesday night session, I saw a ghost house that could only be formed by using one and only one of my hole cards. I think I implied in my earlier post that I'd used three hole cards to make my ghost house, but that wasn't actually the case. Shorting the number of hole cards used is actually a more egregious error than using an extra one, since the more your hand relies on community cards, the more likely it is to be beaten.

Almost as embarrassing to admit is that there was a ready remedy for my faulty poker vision, but I'd forgotten about it. The PokerStars software discreetly displays the value of the best hand you can make onscreen, and if I'd simply looked at what was displayed I would have known I didn't have a full house, and wouldn't have continued betting. Probably that information is displayed too discreetly, as it's in a smallish font in an understated color. Note to self: read the fine print!

During current Omaha session you were dealt 7 hands and saw flop:
- 0 out of 0 times while in big blind (0%)
- 1 out of 1 times while in small blind (100%)
- 5 out of 6 times in other positions (83%)
- a total of 6 out of 7 (85%)
Pots won at showdown - 2 of 4 (50%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $-2,000
balance: $1,037,970

Friday, February 25, 2011

Turning the dial to 11

I never saw the rock mockumentary "This is Spinal Tap", but am aware of one impact it had on popular culture; to wit, the whimsical concept of going beyond the bounds of the possible, illustrated in the movie by someone in the band turning up the dial on an amplifier to 11, when its maximum setting was 10.

Last night, I turned the dial to 11 in my betting; in other words, I bet the pot early and often. Luckily for me, I had great hands to work with! It was a short but very sweet session. I won so much money in relation to my starting stack that I was immediately convinced that the session was my best ever, percentage-wise; this turned out to be true.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 5 hands and saw flop:
- 0 out of 0 times while in big blind (0%)
- 1 out of 1 times while in small blind (100%)
- 4 out of 4 times in other positions (100%)
- a total of 5 out of 5 (100%)
Pots won at showdown - 3 of 3 (100%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $9,040
balance: $1,039,970

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Ghost house

One of the wonderful things about poker is that just when you think you've got it figured out, you discover that you're horribly mistaken! Last night, I played much too loosely; I hit the felt quickly at the first table I joined, and hit it even more quickly at the next table I joined. How much would you bet that I was able to refrain from joining a third table? Well, I wasn't, of course, and was on a bit of a tilt as well. And here's where the cruelest part of the cruel cruel nature of Omaha comes into play.

The cruelest part of the cruel cruel nature of Omaha is that you are only allowed to use two of your four hole cards. Not only that, you must use exactly two, to go with exactly three of the community cards. If you're an old hand at Hold'em, like me, this can make for trouble. Hold'em veterans see the best five card hand that can be formed from a pool of more than five cards in the blink of an eye. Hold'em doesn't care how many of your hole cards you use; you can use neither of them, one of them, or both of them. It's all one to Hold'em. Omaha, however, as I've mentioned, is another story entirely.

To the Hold'em pro, often Omaha hands will present themselves as fool's gold, or phantom hands. The Hold'em pro will see the great hands which can be formed if 3 of the hole cards are used, instead of only two. On the hand I rode to the felt for the third and final time last night, I was convinced I had a full house. Trouble was, it was only a full house if I used 3 of my hole cards, instead of only 2. In effect, it was a ghost house. Ouch.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 39 hands and saw flop:
- 5 out of 5 times while in big blind (100%)
- 5 out of 6 times while in small blind (83%)
- 23 out of 28 times in other positions (82%)
- a total of 33 out of 39 (84%)
Pots won at showdown - 3 of 11 (27%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $-6,000
balance: $1,030,930

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Omaha gold

I claimed a while back to have renounced my pursuit of the golden ratio, but I have to admit that just isn't true. The golden ratio is such an easy statistic to check, and has never ceased being a worthwhile goal. I got a bit frustrated when going through that extended period of poker doldrums after my stack dropped below the play million mark, and lashed out at any near and convenient poker target. It would be so sweet to achieve the golden ratio again, and even more meaningful than the last time. It's like the difference between hitting .350 for a single baseball season and hitting .350 for a lifetime average; the longer your career, the harder the average is to maintain, and the more meaningful it is.

I'm very happy to report that in Omaha, I recently hit the golden ratio; I've now played 22 Omaha sessions, losing 7 and winning 15.

Last night, I had quad sevens on my very first hand, and value bet it skillfully (if I do say so myself) to win a pot worth $2,825. When I won two of the next four hands, I knew it was time to hang it up for the night. I used a final hand to bow out, as is my custom.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 6 hands and saw flop:
- 1 out of 1 times while in big blind (100%)
- 0 out of 1 times while in small blind (0%)
- 3 out of 4 times in other positions (75%)
- a total of 4 out of 6 (66%)
Pots won at showdown - 2 of 2 (100%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $3,260
balance: $1,036,930

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

All-ins in Omaha

Based on my current level of experience in Omaha, I've formulated a pretty simple all-in rule: never go all in on a draw. That is to say, if you have four cards to a straight or four cards to a flush, you have no business going all in. Period. Full stop. The end.

Last night, I didn't have to put this rule to the test. I folded early and often until I got a legitimate all-in hand:

Table 'Ara XVIII' 9-max (Play Money) Seat #2 is the button
Seat 1: (5830 in chips)
Seat 2: neostreet (1335 in chips)
Seat 3: (1430 in chips)
Seat 4: (1930 in chips)
Seat 5: (4855 in chips)
Seat 6: (300 in chips)
Seat 7: (905 in chips)
Seat 8: (4240 in chips)
Seat 3: posts small blind 5
Seat 4: posts big blind 10
Seat 6: posts big blind 10
Seat 1: posts small & big blinds 15
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to neostreet [6s 9c 4c 5s]
Seat 5: calls 10
Seat 6: checks
Seat 7: calls 10
Seat 8: calls 10
Seat 1: checks
neostreet: calls 10
Seat 3: raises 85 to 95
Seat 4: calls 85
Seat 5: calls 85
Seat 6: calls 85
Seat 7: calls 85
Seat 8: calls 85
Seat 1: calls 85
neostreet: calls 85
*** FLOP *** [7c 4d 2c]
Seat 3: bets 300
Seat 4: folds
Seat 5: raises 300 to 600
Seat 6: calls 205 and is all-in
Seat 7: folds
Seat 8: calls 600
Seat 1: folds
neostreet: calls 600
Seat 3: calls 300
*** TURN *** [7c 4d 2c] [3h]
Seat 3: checks
Seat 5: bets 200
Seat 8: calls 200
neostreet: raises 200 to 400
Seat 3: calls 400
Seat 5: calls 200
Seat 8: calls 200
*** RIVER *** [7c 4d 2c 3h] [5h]
Seat 3: checks
Seat 5: checks
Seat 8: checks
neostreet: bets 240 and is all-in
Seat 3: calls 240
Seat 5: folds
Seat 8: folds
*** SHOW DOWN ***
neostreet: shows [6s 9c 4c 5s] (a straight, Three to Seven)
Seat 3: shows [Ac Ah 4s Tc] (a straight, Ace to Five)
neostreet collected 3660 from side pot
Seat 6: shows [3s 8c Kd 7d] (two pair, Sevens and Threes)
neostreet collected 1790 from main pot

During current Omaha session you were dealt 9 hands and saw flop:
- 2 out of 2 times while in big blind (100%)
- 1 out of 1 times while in small blind (100%)
- 5 out of 6 times in other positions (83%)
- a total of 8 out of 9 (88%)
Pots won at showdown - 1 of 1 (100%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $3,450
balance: $1,033,670

Monday, February 21, 2011

Value bets left and right

Last night, my showdown percentage fell from its lofty peak. One of the reasons why was that some of my opponents were really good at value betting. I called some bets on the river that I wouldn't have had they been larger. Since turnabout is fair play, I made some value bets of my own that succeeded in snaring callers.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 42 hands and saw flop:
- 7 out of 8 times while in big blind (87%)
- 8 out of 9 times while in small blind (88%)
- 22 out of 25 times in other positions (88%)
- a total of 37 out of 42 (88%)
Pots won at showdown - 7 of 11 (63%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $1,080
balance: $1,030,220

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Signor Showdown

On Friday night, I had a choppy session, but came out on top. The one stat which really stood out was my showdown percentage; it was a perfect 100. Just call me Signor Showdown! What made this stat more notable than the other times I've achieved it was the larger number of showdown hands -- 7.

I sent a suggestion to PokerStars a while back that they host some higher stakes play money Omaha tables, but didn't get a response. I'm really missing the higher stakes!

During current Omaha session you were dealt 24 hands and saw flop:
- 3 out of 5 times while in big blind (60%)
- 4 out of 6 times while in small blind (66%)
- 11 out of 13 times in other positions (84%)
- a total of 18 out of 24 (75%)
Pots won at showdown - 7 of 7 (100%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $895
balance: $1,029,140

Friday, February 18, 2011

McMansioned

Last night I played pretty well for the most part, but not quite well enough. One good thing did come out of the session, though; after being burned twice in the same way, I was inspired to come up with a poker neologism describing how. "McMansioned" is born (or perhaps I should say repurposed)! That's what has been done to you when your full house has lost to a better one.

McMansion #1: my eights full of fives lost to an eights full of kings
McMansion #2: my aces full of eights lost to an aces full of nines

During current Omaha session you were dealt 95 hands and saw flop:
- 18 out of 20 times while in big blind (90%)
- 19 out of 22 times while in small blind (86%)
- 42 out of 53 times in other positions (79%)
- a total of 79 out of 95 (83%)
Pots won at showdown - 12 of 29 (41%)
Pots won without showdown - 12

Once again, long is wrong.

delta: $-440
balance: $1,028,245

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Going flamboyant

Last night, I had another hand where I flopped a monster. Since there was someone at the table who was betting a decent amount, I decided just to call until the river. On the river, I went flamboyant (see my "Flamboyant Cuttlefish" post from last year); as it turned out, that had no effect, as the opponent who was leading the betting had already gone all in. At any rate, I won a big pot and decided to call it a night. Here's how it went down:

Table 'Ebella XII' 9-max (Play Money) Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: (3270 in chips)
Seat 2: (18323 in chips)
Seat 3: (885 in chips)
Seat 5: neostreet (2725 in chips)
Seat 7: (1090 in chips)
Seat 8: (1000 in chips)
Seat 9: (1440 in chips)
Seat 7: posts small blind 5
Seat 8: posts big blind 10
Seat 9: posts big blind 10
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to neostreet [9s Ks 9c 7h]
Seat 9: raises 25 to 35
Seat 1: calls 35
Seat 2: calls 35
Seat 3: calls 35
neostreet: calls 35
Seat 7: calls 30
Seat 8: calls 25
*** FLOP *** [9d 9h Kh]
Seat 7: checks
Seat 8: checks
Seat 9: bets 245
Seat 1: folds
Seat 2: folds
Seat 3: folds
neostreet: calls 245
Seat 7: calls 245
Seat 8: folds
*** TURN *** [9d 9h Kh] [Qs]
Seat 7: checks
Seat 9: bets 150
neostreet: calls 150
Seat 7: calls 150
*** RIVER *** [9d 9h Kh Qs] [Th]
Seat 7: checks
Seat 9: bets 1010 and is all-in
neostreet: raises 1010 to 2020
Seat 7: folds
Uncalled bet (1010) returned to neostreet
*** SHOW DOWN ***
neostreet: shows [9s Ks 9c 7h] (four of a kind, Nines)
Seat 9: shows [As Qd Ah 2c] (two pair, Aces and Nines)
neostreet collected 3450 from pot

During current Omaha session you were dealt 30 hands and saw flop:
- 4 out of 4 times while in big blind (100%)
- 4 out of 6 times while in small blind (66%)
- 14 out of 20 times in other positions (70%)
- a total of 22 out of 30 (73%)
Pots won at showdown - 3 of 7 (42%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $2,735
balance: $1,028,685

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Growing a pot

To grow a big pot, you must water it and carefully tend to it like a precious flower. You can't try to grow it all at once, especially when you're sure you have the best hand. The best situation to be in is to flop a super strong hand, and have someone else in the hand who believes he has a strong hand and starts the betting. You can then just double their bets as long as they'll let you! A lot of players like to have the last word in a betting round, and therefore they'll keep reraising your reraises, as long as you keep your reraises to the minimum allowable.

I was in this situation last night; here's how the hand played out:

Table 'Desagneauxa XIII' 9-max (Play Money) Seat #7 is the button
Seat 1: (7315 in chips)
Seat 2: neostreet (1990 in chips)
Seat 4: (8924 in chips)
Seat 5: (990 in chips)
Seat 6: (1955 in chips)
Seat 7: (610 in chips)
Seat 1: posts small blind 5
neostreet: posts big blind 10
Seat 5: posts big blind 10
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to neostreet [8c As 5c Ah]
Seat 4: calls 10
Seat 5: checks
Seat 6: calls 10
Seat 7: folds
Seat 1: calls 5
neostreet: checks
*** FLOP *** [3c Ac 3s]
Seat 1: bets 50
neostreet: raises 50 to 100
Seat 4: calls 100
Seat 5: folds
Seat 6: calls 100
Seat 5 leaves the table
Seat 1: raises 50 to 150
neostreet: raises 50 to 200
Seat 4: calls 100
Seat 6: calls 100
Seat 1: raises 50 to 250
neostreet: raises 50 to 300
Seat 4: calls 100
Seat 6: calls 100
Seat 1: raises 450 to 750
neostreet: raises 450 to 1200
Seat 4: calls 900
Seat 6: folds
Seat 1: raises 450 to 1650
neostreet: raises 330 to 1980 and is all-in
Seat 4: calls 780
Seat 1: calls 330
*** TURN *** [3c Ac 3s] [4c]
Seat 1: checks
Seat 4: checks
*** RIVER *** [3c Ac 3s 4c] [Ks]
Seat 1: checks
Seat 4: bets 1400
Seat 1: calls 1400
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Seat 4: shows [Ts Jh 3h 8d] (three of a kind, Threes)
Seat 1: shows [5h 5s Ad 2c] (a straight, Ace to Five)
Seat 1 collected 2800 from side pot
neostreet: shows [8c As 5c Ah] (a full house, Aces full of Threes)
neostreet collected 6290 from main pot

I need hardly add I ended my night forthwith.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 4 hands and saw flop:
- 1 out of 1 times while in big blind (100%)
- 0 out of 1 times while in small blind (0%)
- 0 out of 2 times in other positions (0%)
- a total of 1 out of 4 (25%)
Pots won at showdown - 1 of 1 (100%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $4,285
balance: $1,025,950

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Omaha musts

Omaha is like Hold'em on steroids; very strong hands are much more likely, and consequently you have to play much more carefully. The musts in Omaha are really the same as the musts in Hold'em, which are really the same as the musts in poker generally; the only difference is that the consequences for failing to perform them in Omaha are much more severe!

The cardinal Omaha must is to know when your hand can be beaten. You must know whether the board supports a straight when you have a set. You must know whether the board supports a flush when you have a straight. You must know whether the board supports a full house when you have a flush. You must know whether the board supports a straight flush when you have a full house. These are all just poker basics.

I've identified a weak spot in my basic skills; it's probably a fairly common weakness. I don't always recognize when the board supports a straight. It's probably the most difficult of the board-supported hands to check for.

Last Thursday night, I won a pot worth $5,300 on my very first hand; if I'd quit then, I would have had a bigger gain than I eventually did, but I wanted to have some fun.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 22 hands and saw flop:
- 3 out of 3 times while in big blind (100%)
- 1 out of 3 times while in small blind (33%)
- 12 out of 16 times in other positions (75%)
- a total of 16 out of 22 (72%)
Pots won at showdown - 3 of 6 (50%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $2,268
balance: $1,021,665

Thursday, February 10, 2011

The second table

I haven't kept statistics on how well I do at a second table after I hit the felt at the first, but my gut tells me it's pretty well. In the beginning, I was religious about ending my night after hitting the felt, but I relaxed that rule around the time I bumped myself back up to the higher stakes tables.

On Saturday night, after hitting the felt at table number one, I won it all back, plus a bonne bouche, at table number two. I really believe this has been my most common result at a second table; it makes me wish I could just bring a "table two" mindset with me to the first table!

During current Omaha session you were dealt 93 hands and saw flop:
- 25 out of 26 times while in big blind (96%)
- 24 out of 28 times while in small blind (85%)
- 30 out of 39 times in other positions (76%)
- a total of 79 out of 93 (84%)
Pots won at showdown - 11 of 19 (57%)
Pots won without showdown - 10

delta: $248
balance: $1,019,397

Saturday, February 5, 2011

A tale of two all-ins

Last night, I hit the felt at both tables I joined, but in two very different ways. The first time I hit the felt, I backed a strong hand, and simply got beaten by a stronger one. It was the correct play to back the hand all the way down the line. The second time, I backed an incredibly weak hand; it would have been a week hand in Hold'em, and was ludicrously weak in Omaha. I'm almost too embarrassed to reveal what it was, but not quite -- it was a measly two pair.

I hereby take a vow never to go all-in on a two pair in Omaha again. I know I made the same vow in Hold'em, and it didn't hold up, but this time I'm determined it will.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 42 hands and saw flop:
- 8 out of 8 times while in big blind (100%)
- 6 out of 8 times while in small blind (75%)
- 22 out of 26 times in other positions (84%)
- a total of 36 out of 42 (85%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 12 (33%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $-4,000
balance: $1,019,149

Friday, February 4, 2011

Skin in the game

Investopedia.com defines "skin in the game" thus:

A term coined by renowned investor Warren Buffett referring to a situation in which high-ranking insiders use their own money to buy stock in the company they are running.

To do well in poker, you need to have enough skin in the game; if you don't have enough, you won't lose big, but you'll also never win big. Last night, I had plenty of skin in the game in the following hand:

Table 'Bowell II' 9-max (Play Money) Seat #4 is the button
Seat 2: (4145 in chips)
Seat 4: (635 in chips)
Seat 5: (4550 in chips)
Seat 7: (600 in chips)
Seat 8: neostreet (2470 in chips)
Seat 9: (2290 in chips)
Seat 5: posts small blind 5
Seat 7: posts big blind 10
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to neostreet [Qs 6d 7h Ad]
neostreet: calls 10
Seat 9: calls 10
Seat 2: calls 10
Seat 4: calls 10
Seat 5: calls 5
Seat 7: checks
*** FLOP *** [Qd Qc 5c]
Seat 5: checks
Seat 7: checks
neostreet: bets 10
Seat 9: folds
Seat 2: calls 10
Seat 4: calls 10
Seat 5: calls 10
Seat 7: folds
*** TURN *** [Qd Qc 5c] [5s]
Seat 5: checks
neostreet: bets 20
Seat 2: raises 140 to 160
Seat 4: calls 160
Seat 5: folds
neostreet: raises 140 to 300
Seat 2: raises 860 to 1160
Seat 4: calls 455 and is all-in
neostreet: raises 860 to 2020
Seat 2: raises 860 to 2880
neostreet: calls 430 and is all-in
Uncalled bet (430) returned to Seat 2
*** RIVER *** [Qd Qc 5c 5s] [8d]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
neostreet: shows [Qs 6d 7h Ad] (three of a kind, Queens)
Seat 2: shows [9h 8c 5h Qh] (a full house, Queens full of Eights)
Seat 2 collected 3670 from side pot
Seat 4: shows [Kh 4d Kd 6c] (two pair, Kings and Queens)
Seat 2 collected 1945 from main pot

It didn't pan out for me, but I'd play this hand the same way every time. At the next table, I won it all back plus a little extra.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 17 hands and saw flop:
- 3 out of 3 times while in big blind (100%)
- 2 out of 3 times while in small blind (66%)
- 8 out of 11 times in other positions (72%)
- a total of 13 out of 17 (76%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 5 (80%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $1,045
balance: $1,023,149

Thursday, February 3, 2011

Table selection

I've mentioned before the criteria I use for selecting a table to join. The most important one is that no player be in a clear bullying position. I goofed last night; I joined a table where there was a huge disparity between the stack sizes of the two players in the lead ($23k and $20k) and those of the others (an average of about $4k). I must have thought that those two players would keep each other honest, but that was a faulty assumption. I only lasted four hands at that table!

I lasted much longer at the second table (31 hands), but still ended up hitting the felt. Tonight, I'll make sure to join a table where no player has more than $8k.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 35 hands and saw flop:
- 2 out of 5 times while in big blind (40%)
- 4 out of 5 times while in small blind (80%)
- 14 out of 25 times in other positions (56%)
- a total of 20 out of 35 (57%)
Pots won at showdown - 1 of 3 (33%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $-4,000
balance: $1,022,104

Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Waiting on a boat

Last night, I hit the felt at the first table I joined when I went all in on the possibility of making a full house; in other words, I was waiting on a boat :-) It never arrived, unfortunately. I'm going to have to write an Omaha-specific odds calculator to figure out if I was right to wait instead of bailing. At the next table, after only a couple of hands I flopped a straight which held out, winning back all my losses and then some; I took the profit immediately.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 20 hands and saw flop:
- 2 out of 3 times while in big blind (66%)
- 4 out of 4 times while in small blind (100%)
- 6 out of 13 times in other positions (46%)
- a total of 12 out of 20 (60%)
Pots won at showdown - 2 of 3 (66%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $2,892
balance: $1,026,104

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

50 can get you 100

The meaning of the this post's title is that if you have the discipline to keep your percentage of seeing the flop down to 50, you'll increase your chances of raising your showdown percentage to 100. I hit both those numbers on the nose last night:

During current Omaha session you were dealt 34 hands and saw flop:
- 2 out of 4 times while in big blind (50%)
- 3 out of 6 times while in small blind (50%)
- 12 out of 24 times in other positions (50%)
- a total of 17 out of 34 (50%)
Pots won at showdown - 2 of 2 (100%)
Pots won without showdown - 2

delta: $3,565
balance: $1,023,212