Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Showdown perfection redux

In last night's session, my showdown percentage was perfect again. Whenever this happens, it's means my card sense is in great working order. My stack followed a classic winning trajectory -- mini-porpoising for most of the night, then getting a big lift on the basis of a single hand, at which point I gladly ended the session.

My big hand last night was a jack high flush; I won a pot worth $26,400 with it.

During current Hold'em session you were dealt 30 hands and saw flop:
- 5 out of 5 times while in big blind (100%)
- 5 out of 5 times while in small blind (100%)
- 13 out of 20 times in other positions (65%)
- a total of 23 out of 30 (76%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 4 (100%)
Pots won without showdown - 2

delta: $23,100
balance: $1,032,384

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Unsound exit strategy

Last night, for the most part I played quite well; however, I played too long, and finally lost patience and succumbed to an unsound exit strategy which ruined my whole session. Fairly early on, my stack got a nice lift to $54K on the strength of a $43K pot. I should have ended my night right there, but of course that's 20/20 hindsight. From that point, my stack slowly and steadily descended back down to its starting size of $40K. I had another opportunity to salvage the session by just saying to myself "No harm, no foul", and calling it a night when my stack hit $40K again.

But no, I couldn't bring myself to do that. My stack continued its slow and steady descent until just south of $30K. And here's where the unsound exit strategy came into being. I told myself what millions of poker players have told themselves down through the years -- "Just let me win one more big pot, and I promise I'll quit right then." I was sincere about it too, as most poker players who tell themselves this are. The trouble is, this strategy throws your game all out of whack. You're looking to make the big score, you're impatient, and your judgment becomes seriously impaired. You're almost guaranteed to lose a boatload more money.

That's what happened to me. I took a measly pair to showdown against not one but two opponents, and deservedly got my head handed to me. Of course I wasn't betting the hand, but I did call all the way down the line. Miraculously, I still had a small pile of chips left over after this debacle, and finally conceded that my night was done.

During current Hold'em session you were dealt 77 hands and saw flop:
- 8 out of 10 times while in big blind (80%)
- 7 out of 11 times while in small blind (63%)
- 28 out of 56 times in other positions (50%)
- a total of 43 out of 77 (55%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 9 (44%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $-35,550
balance: $1,009,284

Monday, March 28, 2011

Three fingerfehlers

My first great love, games-wise, was chess. My father taught me how to play when I was about nine or ten. I still love chess, but don't get the chance to play very often. I try to keep my skills in shape by doing the daily chess puzzle at chessgames.com. Why am I nattering on about chess, you ask? Simple, really -- a chess locution inspired the title of this post.

Many of the best chess-inspired words happen to be in the German language; fingerfehler is no exception. It basically means a slip of the finger, and refers to when you intend to make one move but inexplicably make another one instead. Fingerfehlers are possible in online poker, too; they manifest when you intend to click on one thing but click on something else.

On Friday night, I had three fingerfehlers:

1. when joining my first table, I clicked on the minimum initial stake amount ($12,000) by mistake, instead of the maximum ($40,000). This turned out to be a stroke of luck, since I hit the felt very shortly thereafter. When that happened, I joined a second table for the maximum initial stake.

2. on one hand, I distinctly remember saying to myself, "I'll call that bet", but then clicked on the Fold button instead. Considering the thousands and thousands of hands I've played on PokerStars over the last 2 1/2 years, that was bound to happen sometime! This second fingerfehler was fortuitous also, since it saved me some chips.

3. at one point, I was reviewing my stats for the night and mistakenly clicked on the Reset button, wiping out my stats up to that point. This was the first I learned of the existence of this dastardly button. There are at least three buttons in the PokerStars software I think should be removed, since no one would ever want to click on them; the Reset stats button is one.

At the second table, my stack dropped down to as low as $15,700 at one point, but I had a nice rally at the end which brought it up to exactly double that, $31,400.

delta: $-20,600
balance: $1,044,834

Friday, March 25, 2011

Risk-free river bet

On Wednesday night, I won a monster pot on a risk-free river bet. You seldom see such things in poker. As a matter of fact, I didn't actually do the mental calculations to prove to myself that the bet was risk-free; however, I knew it all the same, deep down in my poker bones. Here's how it went down:

Table 'Lynx XI' 9-max (Play Money) Seat #9 is the button
Seat 2: (11200 in chips)
Seat 3: (49766 in chips)
Seat 4: (2155 in chips)
Seat 5: (8100 in chips)
Seat 6: (30400 in chips)
Seat 9: neostreet (41500 in chips)
Seat 2: posts small blind 100
Seat 3: posts big blind 200
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to neostreet [7s As]
Seat 4: calls 200
Seat 5: folds
Seat 6: calls 200
neostreet: calls 200
Seat 2: calls 100
Seat 3: checks
*** FLOP *** [5h 2s 6s]
Seat 2: bets 800
Seat 3: raises 800 to 1600
Seat 4: raises 355 to 1955 and is all-in
Seat 6: folds
neostreet: calls 1955
Seat 2: calls 1155
Seat 3: calls 355
*** TURN *** [5h 2s 6s] [Td]
Seat 2: checks
Seat 3: bets 2200
neostreet: calls 2200
Seat 2: calls 2200
*** RIVER *** [5h 2s 6s Td] [Qs]
Seat 2: checks
Seat 3: bets 12000
neostreet: raises 12000 to 24000
Seat 6 leaves the table
Seat 2: folds
Seat 3: raises 12000 to 36000
neostreet: raises 1145 to 37145 and is all-in
Seat 3: calls 1145
*** SHOW DOWN ***
neostreet: shows [7s As] (a flush, Ace high)
Seat 3: shows [2c 2d] (three of a kind, Deuces)
neostreet collected 80890 from side pot
Seat 4: shows [Qc 9c] (a pair of Queens)
neostreet collected 8820 from main pot

During current Hold'em session you were dealt 50 hands and saw flop:
- 9 out of 10 times while in big blind (90%)
- 10 out of 10 times while in small blind (100%)
- 26 out of 30 times in other positions (86%)
- a total of 45 out of 50 (90%)
Pots won at showdown - 7 of 11 (63%)
Pots won without showdown - 8

delta: $61,776
balance: $1,065,434

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

My 50 percent rule

Last Friday night, I would have ended up with a nice gain if only I'd followed my 50 percent rule. Unfortunately, I hadn't formulated it yet :-) The rule is simple -- if you ever win 50% or more of your starting chip stack, get out of Dodge, pronto. I fell back down from the $60K height very quickly once I reached it. I went briefly into the red on the night before ending with a small gain.

During current Hold'em session you were dealt 67 hands and saw flop:
- 7 out of 7 times while in big blind (100%)
- 8 out of 8 times while in small blind (100%)
- 45 out of 52 times in other positions (86%)
- a total of 60 out of 67 (89%)
Pots won at showdown - 7 of 15 (46%)
Pots won without showdown - 5

delta: $2,300
balance: $1,003,658

Friday, March 18, 2011

Straight sorrow, hammer heartbreak

Last night, I played well; however, the poker gods were against me. At the first table I joined, I lost two hands where I was the heavy favorite; the second one took me to the felt. Since that $40K loss dipped my balance below the magic play million mark, I joined another table just so I could bring it back up above the mark; I was successful in that.

On the first hand where I was a heavy favorite, I flopped an ace high straight and bet it heavily all the way down the line; I lost to a flush which was made on the river. I don't call that sound poker strategy on the part of the winner. Sour grapes on my part? Certainly there's an element of that, but from a purely probabilistic point of view, my opponent never should have called my turn bet of $24,100. I just used Card Player's online Texas Hold'em odds calculator to find out how big a favorite I was when I made that turn bet: I had a 73.81% chance of winning, and a 7.14% chance of tying.

On the second hand where I was a heavy favorite, I was dealt a hammer (7 2 offsuit), but it became what I'll call a full hammer (a full house, sevens full of twos) on the turn. I got into a reraise war on the river, ended up going all in, and lost to a full house, tens full of sevens, which had been made on the river. In retrospect, I probably should not have gone all in, but I had every reason to believe I had the best hand. The full house my opponent made was highly improbable; he had been dealt two tens and the river card was a ten. The Hold'em odds calculator informs me that after the turn card, I had a 95.45% chance of winning.

These two memorable hands begat the title of this post.

During current Hold'em session you were dealt 35 hands and saw flop:
- 5 out of 5 times while in big blind (100%)
- 2 out of 4 times while in small blind (50%)
- 17 out of 26 times in other positions (65%)
- a total of 24 out of 35 (68%)
Pots won at showdown - 2 of 6 (33%)
Pots won without showdown - 3

delta: $-37,000
balance: $1,001,358

Thursday, March 17, 2011

In irons

In sailing, the term "in irons" is used to describe the situation where you have little to no wind and no boat speed to speak of; you can't do anything but sit there until some wind comes along. On Tuesday night, I was "in irons" at the poker table; I kept getting dealt really poor hole cards, and had to keep folding. A classic poker term for this condition is being "card dead".

I'm still trying to figure out if I went on tilt on the hand that took me to the felt; although I was frustrated from my night, I don't think I overvalued my hand. It was more a case of undervaluing my opponent's hand, but it comes to the same thing in the end. Chalk me up for half a tilt, I guess. Here's how it went down:

Table 'Pumma IX' 9-max (Play Money) Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: (137315 in chips)
Seat 2: neostreet (18600 in chips)
Seat 3: (11500 in chips)
Seat 4: (40100 in chips)
Seat 5: (53400 in chips)
Seat 6: (56500 in chips)
Seat 7: (128600 in chips)
Seat 8: (77100 in chips)
Seat 9: (38400 in chips)
Seat 6: posts small blind 100
Seat 7: posts big blind 200
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to neostreet [Qs Jh]
Seat 8: raises 500 to 700
Seat 9: folds
Seat 1: folds
neostreet: calls 700
Seat 3: folds
Seat 4: folds
Seat 5: calls 700
Seat 6: calls 600
Seat 7: calls 500
*** FLOP *** [3d 6c Qd]
Seat 6: checks
Seat 7: checks
Seat 8: bets 3500
neostreet: raises 3500 to 7000
Seat 5: folds
Seat 6: folds
Seat 7: folds
Seat 5 leaves the table
Seat 8: raises 17500 to 24500
neostreet: calls 10900 and is all-in
Uncalled bet (6600) returned to Seat 8
*** TURN *** [3d 6c Qd] [Td]
*** RIVER *** [3d 6c Qd Td] [6d]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Seat 8: shows [Kh Ks] (two pair, Kings and Sixes)
neostreet: shows [Qs Jh] (two pair, Queens and Sixes)
Seat 8 collected 39300 from pot

During current Hold'em session you were dealt 78 hands and saw flop:
- 9 out of 9 times while in big blind (100%)
- 9 out of 10 times while in small blind (90%)
- 35 out of 59 times in other positions (59%)
- a total of 53 out of 78 (67%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 9 (44%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $-40,000
balance: $1,038,358

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Flush hunch

Last night, the second time I was dealt two diamonds, I had a strong hunch I was going to make the flush. Illogically, I felt the fact that I'd overpaid to see the flop on the first hand (only to see no diamonds come up) made it more likely that I'd hit on the second hand. In short, a part of me believed that since I'd demonstrated to the poker gods my willingness to gamble, they'd reward me! My hunch was on the money.

The way I bet that second hand extracted as much value as I could from it. Based on my hunch, I paid $1,800 to see the flop, which had two diamonds in it. I bet $200 on the flop and got three callers. I hit the flush on the turn, and bet $400; everyone came along. On the river, I raised someone's $1,000 bet up to $3,600, and got one caller. I won a pot worth $18,600.

During current Hold'em session you were dealt 25 hands and saw flop:
- 3 out of 4 times while in big blind (75%)
- 2 out of 4 times while in small blind (50%)
- 14 out of 17 times in other positions (82%)
- a total of 19 out of 25 (76%)
Pots won at showdown - 3 of 4 (75%)
Pots won without showdown - 2

delta: $20,600
balance: $1,078,358

Monday, March 14, 2011

97

The title of this post refers to the number of sessions it took me to achieve my new all-time high after achieving my last one. Not impressive! I really hit a mediocre patch. I'm loaded for bear now, though, and have my sights set on the 2 million play money mark!

During current Hold'em session you were dealt 31 hands and saw flop:
- 5 out of 7 times while in big blind (71%)
- 6 out of 7 times while in small blind (85%)
- 11 out of 17 times in other positions (64%)
- a total of 22 out of 31 (70%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 4 (100%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $17,000
balance: $1,057,758

Saturday, March 12, 2011

Going home

Last night, I hit the felt at the first table I joined, for the third session in a row. Enough of this shit, I said to myself. I decided to go home; home to the poker flavor I love the most, and home to the high stakes I've been missing so badly. I joined a $100/$200 pot limit Hold'em table for the maximum initial stake of $40,000.

Paradoxically, I feel much more comfortable at the high stakes tables. A big stack just makes me breathe easier; it's like a big blast of poker oxygen! Also, it just seems to me that the typical quality of play is actually inferior at the high stakes tables than it is at the low stakes tables, so there's a double incentive to play at the high stakes. I work less hard for 20 times more play money!

I've got to face the facts and admit, for the second time, that Omaha is not the game for me. There's just too much luck involved! And, alas, not as much skill on my part as I'd hoped.

I've decided to set myself a really audacious goal. Simply stated, I want to win my next play million in the next calendar year. Not only that, I want to keep winning an additional play million every year, like clockwork. Obviously, I can only achieve this by playing exclusively at the high stakes tables. Almost equally obviously, I can only achieve this by playing pot limit Hold'em exclusively. As the saying goes, you need to dance with the one that brung ya!

During current Omaha session you were dealt 44 hands and saw flop:
- 7 out of 7 times while in big blind (100%)
- 6 out of 6 times while in small blind (100%)
- 30 out of 31 times in other positions (96%)
- a total of 43 out of 44 (97%)
Pots won at showdown - 1 of 6 (16%)
Pots won without showdown - 2

delta: $-2,000
balance: $1,038,657

During current Hold'em session you were dealt 73 hands and saw flop:
- 7 out of 11 times while in big blind (63%)
- 3 out of 12 times while in small blind (25%)
- 29 out of 50 times in other positions (58%)
- a total of 39 out of 73 (53%)
Pots won at showdown - 4 of 8 (50%)
Pots won without showdown - 3

delta: $2,101
balance: $1,040,758

Friday, March 11, 2011

Criminal negligence

Last night, I played quite well; however, I had a monumental mental lapse on one hand that took me almost all the way down to the felt. I lost the rest of my chips shortly thereafter. On that one hellish hand, I broke all three of the most basic poker rules; I didn't look, I didn't think, and I didn't listen. Actually, that's not strictly true; to be precise, I looked a little bit, thought even less, and didn't listen at all.

What makes the lapse especially painful is that I was done in by a weakness in my play which I've already identified, but have yet to correct; namely, the occasional failure to check for a straight draw on the board. The turn card gave me a set of eights, but it also put a straight draw on the board. My eyes turned into dollar signs and my brain turned off. My opponent indeed had the straight, and bet like he did. I lost a whopping $2,835 in play money on the hand.

It was criminal negligence on my part not to check for a straight draw. I've actually trained myself always to look for a full house draw, and always to look for a flush draw, but when both of those checks turn up empty, sometimes I'm so relieved that I don't do the final bit of due diligence and check for the straight draw. I hope I've learned my lesson this time!

During current Omaha session you were dealt 59 hands and saw flop:
- 11 out of 11 times while in big blind (100%)
- 13 out of 13 times while in small blind (100%)
- 35 out of 35 times in other positions (100%)
- a total of 59 out of 59 (100%)
Pots won at showdown - 7 of 18 (38%)
Pots won without showdown - 3

delta: $-2,000
balance: $1,040,657

Thursday, March 10, 2011

CHEEP

Last night, I was a victim of CHEEP, and it was quite costly. CHEEP is my latest poker neologism; it stands for Creeping Hold'Em Evaluation Prejudice. That's the phenomenon of slowly but surely reverting to one's previous, and deeply ingrained, understanding of the intrinsic value of certain poker hands in Hold'em, while you happen to be playing a totally different poker variant (such as Omaha). In a nutshell, you grossly overvalue what are actually quite marginal hands. The reason why this phenomenon is creeping is that you tell yourself early on, quite sensibly, to be on the high alert for just this sort of prejudice, but insensibly your good intentions melt away. To use terms from psychology to help illustrate the point, your superego tells you to beware, but when your id sees a really good Hold'em hand, it overwhelms the superego and you can't help yourself from betting foolishly :-)

I hit the felt twice last night. I knew it wasn't my night, and didn't hazard a third table. Amazing as it seems to me now, damned if I didn't go all in on a two pair on my final hand. I swore I'd never do such a thing! To add insult to injury, I hit a full house on the river, only to lose to a better one.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 35 hands and saw flop:
- 4 out of 5 times while in big blind (80%)
- 3 out of 6 times while in small blind (50%)
- 20 out of 24 times in other positions (83%)
- a total of 27 out of 35 (77%)
Pots won at showdown - 3 of 11 (27%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $-4,000
balance: $1,042,657

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Willingness

I've come to see that one of the essential qualities of a good poker player is willingness. You must be willing to gamble, plain and simple. When you're willing, you enable the possibility that good things will happen to you. When you're willing, your opponents recognize it and respect you for it; it makes it impossible for them to know when you have a really good hand and when you're bluffing. This increases the likelihood of them calling your bets when you have a really good hand, increasing the value you extract from your won pots.

Of course, there's a difference between being willing to gamble and being foolhardy; you need to be able to hang around long enough for your session-ending, monster hands to arrive. The dynamic tension between being willing to gamble and avoiding being foolhardy will make your stack swing up and down over the course of the session; you don't need to worry as long as you don't hit the felt.

Last night, I went all in on two separate occasions, and won both times. The first time, I was basically forced to go all in by my short stack and the quality of my hand; the second time, I had the nuts.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 22 hands and saw flop:
- 4 out of 4 times while in big blind (100%)
- 4 out of 4 times while in small blind (100%)
- 13 out of 14 times in other positions (92%)
- a total of 21 out of 22 (95%)
Pots won at showdown - 3 of 8 (37%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $1,150
balance: $1,046,657

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Mr. Wednesday

By now you know I do like my statistics. I like them so much, I keep figuring out more of them to calculate :-) I even like the ones that aren't really all that statistically significant. In that vein, here's the breakdown of my sessions by day of the week:

Sun: 13
Mon: 43
Tue: 66
Wed: 75
Thu: 80
Fri: 64
Sat: 36

Here's the breakdown of my winning sessions by day of the week:

Sun: 9
Mon: 29
Tue: 35
Wed: 57
Thu: 56
Fri: 41
Sat: 21

Here's the breakdown of my winning percentage by day of the week:

Sun: 0.692308
Mon: 0.674419
Tue: 0.530303
Wed: 0.760000
Thu: 0.700000
Fri: 0.640625
Sat: 0.583333

Just call me Mr. Wednesday!

On Sunday night, I extended my current winning streak to 5 sessions.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 52 hands and saw flop:
- 16 out of 16 times while in big blind (100%)
- 17 out of 17 times while in small blind (100%)
- 18 out of 19 times in other positions (94%)
- a total of 51 out of 52 (98%)
Pots won at showdown - 10 of 18 (55%)
Pots won without showdown - 8

delta: $1,180
balance: $1,045,507

Sunday, March 6, 2011

Charlie Sheen and me

Charlie Sheen is the man of the moment right now; he just set a Guinness world record for amassing the most Twitter followers in a 24 hour period, he's all over the airwaves, and he's on the cover of People magazine.What could I possibly have in common with him? I certainly don't believe I have tiger blood, or Adonis DNA, or that I'm "WINNING!", or that people just need to "Bring it!" to me.

Or do I?

Actually, the truth is that I do believe these things, in the universe reduced to the realm of the wonderful green felt of poker. It's not even that embarrassing to admit, if you look at it in the right way. At its most elemental, the belief boils down to this: "I know I can beat you at poker, because I know I'm better at poker than you are."

Charlie Sheen believe he's better than the mass of humanity at many different things; I believe I'm better than the mass of humanity at poker. The fact that Charlie believes himself better than the mass of humanity at many different things doesn't make him any less deluded that I am for believing myself better than the mass of humanity at poker; but -- and this is a significant but -- it doesn't make him any more deluded, either.

What am I really trying to say? I guess just simply this: delusion is in the eye of the beholder.

Last night, I hit the felt at the first two tables I joined. Did I join a third? You might have an inkling that I did. Did I kick ass at that third table? You might have a suspicion that I did. Did I believe, when joining that third table, that I would be able to effect an in-session rebound? You bet I did!

During current Omaha session you were dealt 69 hands and saw flop:
- 15 out of 15 times while in big blind (100%)
- 13 out of 13 times while in small blind (100%)
- 39 out of 41 times in other positions (95%)
- a total of 67 out of 69 (97%)
Pots won at showdown - 7 of 17 (41%)
Pots won without showdown - 6

delta: $610
balance: $1,044,327

Saturday, March 5, 2011

Five spot

Last night's session was memorable for the winning streak I had at the end -- I won five hands in a row. The thing is, I didn't even realize I was on the streak until I was saving the history of the fourth hand; the PokerStars software highlights the hands you win in green, and I suddenly noticed a nice little set of text lines in green!

Good poker decisions in general, and good Omaha poker decisions specifically, are really starting to become second nature to me. There's a curious side effect of this, though -- I don't get quite as much of a rush playing as I used to. Don't get me wrong, it's still very enjoyable; it's just more routine than it used to be.

I'm sure my complaisance will wear off fast if I go on a losing streak, but right now I feel like I have Omaha all figured out. Famous last words?

During current Omaha session you were dealt 31 hands and saw flop:
- 6 out of 7 times while in big blind (85%)
- 3 out of 5 times while in small blind (60%)
- 16 out of 19 times in other positions (84%)
- a total of 25 out of 31 (80%)
Pots won at showdown - 5 of 6 (83%)
Pots won without showdown - 2

delta: $2,190
balance: $1,043,717

Friday, March 4, 2011

Aces up

Last night, I only won one hand, but it was for a good sized pot. As for the hand itself, it was marginal at best for Omaha -- a two pair. The good news was that the top pair was aces, making my hand "aces up", in poker vernacular. I had a hunch that the player who was leading the betting had nothing, and I ended up going all in. Both of the other players who went to showdown with me also had a two pair, but neither of them had aces up.

The more I play Omaha, the more convinced I am that the optimal strategy is to fold early and often until you either get a really good hand or a really good read that your hand is the best, then go all in; if you win, get out of Dodge fast!

During current Omaha session you were dealt 13 hands and saw flop:
- 2 out of 2 times while in big blind (100%)
- 1 out of 2 times while in small blind (50%)
- 8 out of 9 times in other positions (88%)
- a total of 11 out of 13 (84%)
Pots won at showdown - 1 of 2 (50%)
Pots won without showdown - 0

delta: $1,140
balance: $1,041,527

Thursday, March 3, 2011

Rebound

Last night, I rebounded nicely from Tuesday night's debacle. So nicely, in fact, that I decided to do a little number crunching to see where it ranked all-time in my poker history. There are several ways this can be calculated, but I decided to use the following criteria:

1. the rebound session immediately followed a losing session
2. the session before the losing session must have been a winning one
3. all the chips which were lost in the losing session must have been won back in the rebound session
4. the number of big blinds which were lost in the losing session is used as the rebound number, instead of the number of chips lost; this is to normalize for different betting minimums between tables

Using these criteria, last night's rebound was my second best ever -- I rebounded from losing 400 big blinds. My best ever rebound was very recent -- last Thursday night, I rebounded from losing 600 big blinds.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 20 hands and saw flop:
- 3 out of 3 times while in big blind (100%)
- 3 out of 4 times while in small blind (75%)
- 11 out of 13 times in other positions (84%)
- a total of 17 out of 20 (85%)
Pots won at showdown - 3 of 6 (50%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $4,280
balance: $1,040,387

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

A night for beautiful losers

Last night, I had a session of nearly perfect futility. Though I played at two tables, I won only one hand, and for a minuscule pot. However, some of my losing hands were things of beauty! To wit:

- my queen high straight lost to a queen high flush; both hands were made by the river card, which was the queen of spades; I lost $1,315 on this hand

- my ace high flush lost to a full house, tens full of kings; this hand took me to the felt at the first table I joined; I lost $630 on this hand

- my ace high straight lost to a jack high flush; I lost $480 on this hand

To cap off my night, I did something I swore I'd never do -- I went all in on a draw. I lost $660 on that hand.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 22 hands and saw flop:
- 3 out of 3 times while in big blind (100%)
- 4 out of 4 times while in small blind (100%)
- 11 out of 15 times in other positions (73%)
- a total of 18 out of 22 (81%)
Pots won at showdown - 0 of 4 (0%)
Pots won without showdown - 1

delta: $-4,000
balance: $1,036,107

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

Anatomy of a winning Omaha session

When I came up with the title for this post, I remembered that I'd used the word "anatomy" in a title before. I just did a search and discovered that I wrote that post, "Anatomy of a poker death spiral", exactly one year ago today.

A winning Omaha session is all about patience. A lot of players don't display any at all, so if you can achieve a modicum you're ahead of the game. You have to be able to weather the heavy bettors while waiting for your ship to come in; this means you'll have to do a lot of folding. The good news about heavy bettors is that they usually don't last long.

Speaking of ships coming in, the prototypical winning Omaha session ends for you when an actual poker ship comes in -- a full boat, in other words. In more common parlance, a full house. You'll win on average a lot more money with a full house than you will with a straight or a flush, for the simple reason that it's more difficult for the opposition to detect. The only hint that's available to your opponents is that the board has paired.

When my ship came in last night, it was sevens full of threes, and the pot I won was worth $1,765.

During current Omaha session you were dealt 34 hands and saw flop:
- 5 out of 6 times while in big blind (83%)
- 3 out of 6 times while in small blind (50%)
- 14 out of 22 times in other positions (63%)
- a total of 22 out of 34 (64%)
Pots won at showdown - 3 of 3 (100%)
Pots won without showdown - 2

delta: $720
balance: $1,040,107