GamesDean

Dude, I feel interrogated. Why do you ask me all these questions, and then follow that up by questioning my answers? That’s super weird. What’s your point here? I think, I’m playing for longer than two years at Unibet, the forum didn’t exist from the beginning. But yeah, your other points might be correct, although I don’t think I cash out that much. I’m not keeping any records because I don’t know why I should. It’s not like I’m cashing out super serious money. It’s more like entertainment money to fund my other hobbies. Sometimes, I’m not playing for several weeks, due to being lazy. But sure, call me a winning regular.

Most of the time, I’m playing 3 or 4 tables. I tried to play 6+ tables before but it doesn’t work for me because I need more time to make my decisions. I always try to make the best decision in any given spot, and that decision often deviates from the standard play which makes it hard to play that many tables. My bankroll is sufficient. I try to play with 30+ buy-ins per limit. However, sometimes I play with 15+ buy-ins when I know I could deposit if needed. So far, I didn’t need to. I tend to make a withdrawal when I want to buy something, e.g. a new computer. How much equity I had is something a program called Equilab told me. It’s freeware – you just have to put in ranges or exact hands and the program tells you how likely you are to win against said range/hand selection. On your third question: As I said, I honestly don’t remember. I’m pretty sure, one of them had an inferior straight that had no chance of winning the pot. It was years ago, so it’s quite possible I’m mistaken. I just wanted to point out that highly unlikely things happen. All the time. It’s not rigged or shady or anything – it’s just how the game works, and the beauty of it.

RNG is short for "random number generator", and that’s pretty much what it does. Thanks to that, we get dealt random cards each time we sit down at an online poker table. Honestly, I can’t remember what my starting hand was. I just remember that I was astonished that I somehow lost the hand. I remember that it was the last hand before the break, and that I was a little bit mad at the outcome. I also don’t know how big my deposit was – man, that was years ago. Knowing myself, it wasn’t more than 100€, I think, 200€ tops. I mainly play NL25/50/100 (sometimes mixing in tournaments like the Daily 25€ or random 10€ ones), depending on how big my bankroll is since I cash out way too often to enjoy my winnings. Also, no clue what my monthly volume is – I’m crazy lazy because I enjoy gaming and Netflix way too much but on average I’m playing between 20 and 60 hours/month, I guess. Since I don’t track my results, I have no idea what my winrate is. It’s definitely positive, due to not loosing money in the long run, and it’s probably alright. I would like to think I’m better than the average player. I know what the difference between GTO and exploitative play is and how to apply varied strategies to handle most opponents. Why do you want to know all that though?

Nah – imo there’s something fishy going on. It doesn’t make sense to call shoves for 1/3 of your stack with 75s, but to fold when you’re asked to invest 2bb or 1bb to bust someone else. Sure, that can happen once but the sheer amount of fishy behaviour is something to look at.

How is it possible then, that certain players – myself included – deposit money once and just keep cashing out? I’m not even running that good. I had some terrible droughts but if you keep making good decisions, it will bear fruit. When I was at the final table of a tournament, I got all the chips in with 99,7% equity to win once, against two players for an infinite chiplead. In the end, I lost the hand. Still, I was able to win the tournament. Another time – it was years back –, I was down to 1/10 of a single big blind at a final table. I won the tournament. Why am I telling you this? Because no matter how bad of a situation you find yourself in, if you keep making the right decisions, you have a fighting chance. If I would have missed out on a crucial value bet before, I would have been out of the 2nd tournament because 1/10 of a single big blind is next to nothing. Just keep playing at your best level and don’t make up weird theories. Also, if you believe in such theories, you shouldn’t play. Like at all. I wouldn’t play rigged games. I would rather go to a casino or just stop playing poker.

well said good point but it doesn't change what i stated... I would be surprised if you played less then 5 times the # of online hand I played Sorry – what is your point then? That you have some ominous feeling that the Unibet RNG is treating you unfairly? Well – I can’t counter that point in any other way I did. You can’t counter feelings. Instead, I will say this: You shouldn’t be emotionally attached to your hands, to the 95% equity you had three times in a row etc. If you are not 100% to win, you are not entitled to have the pot. In fact, you are entitled to have 95% of the pot but since poker sites don’t pay you in equity shares, there always is a winner and a loser. In the long term, you will get your fair share – and if you make decisions that are more likely to win than to lose, and if you beat the rake at the same time, you will be a winning poker player. Plain and simple.

Well – if you insist on specific numbers, I must say, you are wrong, too. You have a 4,55% chance to hit one of 2 outs on the river. That means, the exact odds are 1:22 to hit the river once. It’s 1:484 to do it twice, and 1:10.648 to do it three times. So, yeah, you got me – to be honest, I was just lazy, though, because I knew it’s around 5% but I never bothered to do the exact math.

Hitting a 2 outer on the river, happens ~ 1:20 times. Hitting a 2 outer on the river twice in a row, happens ~ 1:400 times. Hitting it three times in a row, happens ~ 1:8.000. That’s not crazy unlikely. Winning the lottery, happens once in several million attempts (depending on the lottery) – and still, people pull that miracle off. Just because something is unlikely to occur, it doesn’t mean, it’s never going to happen. For comparison: Sometimes, I like to play Hearthstone. It’s a trading card game with a lot of RNG effects. One time I got ridiculously unlucky, so I did the math. What happened to me, happens 1:1.000.000 attempts (numbers are a bit off, afair it was slightly more than a million). So we have Poker, the lottery and Hearthstone. All three have something in common: Miracles do happen. On a regular basis. If you are 95% to win, you will lose 5% of these situations in the long run. You could win 95 hands in a row to lose 5 in a row afterwards – or you win all 100 – or you win 80 and lose 20, because you got unlucky. It all evens out, but it takes time and a strong mindset to overcome the inevitable downfalls.

I don’t think @FreedoM meant to make fun of you or anything like that. It’s just that sometimes, we tend to complain about running bad and/or opponents running like sunshine etc. – as a consequence we lose focus, we don’t play our A-game anymore. But at the very moment, we don’t see it and we think we played absolutely perfect and there was nothing we could have done differently. Although, for example, there was that one hand when we didn’t value bet the river or we didn’t value bet big enough or we lost out on a profitable bluffing spot or we didn’t bet enough to get the fold etc. When we are tilted – and you’re already tilting when you think that other players are particularly lucky – we don’t see these small margins, these opportunities to gain an edge on our opponents. It’s really hard to be constantly honest with ourselves – but that’s exactly what you need to be, otherwise you can’t be a winning poker player. Don’t try to defend yourself when someone points out you might be making mistakes yourself. We all make poker mistakes, all the time. Nobody plays perfect. If someone criticizes your play, that’s a great opportunity to improve your game. That’s how I like to see it, at least.

In his defense, it’s feeling really good to call with J high and be correct. Pulled that off in a tournament, heads-up, years ago – it was great. The other guy complained in the chat, too. He still won the tournament, though.

I have an explanation: They don’t come in clumps. People tend to see patterns everywhere in life. That’s why people remember that the flop looks the same like five minutes ago. That’s why people remember that they have lost the last x amount of all-ins. But do you remember the last x times your flop c-bet worked out? Do you remember the last x times the flop board texture was in favor of your range? And there you have it. Normally, seeing patterns isn’t a bad thing. If you are nice to people, they tend to be nice to you, too. However, in poker you have to overcome your patterns to truly succeed. Even knowing this, often isn’t enough. I think a ton about stuff like that, and it’s not enough to make these patterns unseen. Damn patterns! 😃

It really goes both ways. A few months ago, I lost like ten consecutive 80:20 situations in cashgames. Turned out to be costly. A few weeks ago, I had one day when I won four consecutive 20:80 situations. Also quite unlikely. You should never be too thrilled, getting AA all-in preflop – you should never expect to win unless you have 100 percent equity. It makes loosing so much harder. When you accept, you get felted 1 out of 5 times, it gets easier.

:Veryhappy: – saw that, too, and was mumbling to myself about how sick it was. However, I think, B4 made a mistake by raising your overbet on the river. It was a limped pot, so you could have had pretty much all Tx possible. The overbet could be a bluff – B4 doesn’t win more chips than by raising – or it’s Tx. Obviously, you could have 77-99 here but would you call a shove then? Probably not. JJ+ you would probably raise preflop. So all in all, although B4 has quad 66 here, he should just call the river because quads are simply not strong enough – it’s so funny to say that – to go for all the chips. Sickest hand I saw in a while, that’s why I remember it so well. Keep on crushing like that!

But in order to have 200 instead of 120, you have to win 80 more (= 20 buy-ins). That will take you much longer than taking a shot for 2 buy-ins whenever you reach 120 (= 5 buy-ins needed). There’s no difference between moving up with 200 or moving up and down five times whenever you reach 120. You play the same amount of games with the same amount of money. The only difference is that the aggressive player might move up faster.

Obviously, you need to run good to make a shot work. There’s no way, though, that you need more time taking aggressive shots. However, there is a possibility you need less time and you move up faster. There’s no point in having a higher safety margin when you have a safety net at 100€ where you always move down. You just need a strong mindset and then you can be as aggressive as your bankroll allows you to be. I can't understand why there are still players at the lower levels, if everyone took your advice we'd just jump up a level every day. Sure no problem, I don't need more time taking aggressive shots, one a day's plenty for me, 7 days and I'll be playing 100's. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Obviously, not all players are skilled enough to play higher stakes – in fact, some players could play with play money and still loose. That’s the main reason why most players play the lowest stakes available. Also, some players might not feel comfortable playing for a reasonable amount of money. Most people are risk-averse. I don’t get your point, though. Are you seriously claiming that players are moving up faster with a conservative bankroll management?

Obviously, you need to run good to make a shot work. There’s no way, though, that you need more time taking aggressive shots. However, there is a possibility you need less time and you move up faster. There’s no point in having a higher safety margin when you have a safety net at 100€ where you always move down. You just need a strong mindset and then you can be as aggressive as your bankroll allows you to be.

In order to have 10 buy-ins for the 10€ level, you have to win 20 buy-ins more at the 4€ level. That will take you quite some time. Given your example, you might not move up and down as much but it will take you significantly longer to move up in the first place. That’s why shot taking exists. If you have a strong mindset, you could play any stake with just a few buy-ins if you are willing to move down as soon as necessary. Most people don’t have a strong enough mindset though. Most people don’t feel comfortable playing with a large percentage of their bankroll. There’s no reason to not take shots when you can beat higher stakes and the only reason you’re not playing higher stakes is the lack of a proper bankroll.

That doesn’t make sense. Why does it matter if he has 10 or 4 buy-ins for a shot? As long as he moves back, it’s just fine.

I wouldn’t think too much about it. It’s probably just variance since you’re crushing Nanon events and doing well in High events. If you think you make good decisions, it’s all good.

I know the feeling. I seem to run the worst in every High event I enter – just had one decent High event where I collected some bountys to freeroll the tournament to bust just short of the money. And I won the Daily Deepstack multiple times so far (without playing it everyday), so I know what I’m doing – I just can’t win any flips in High events, it’s crazy. :laugh: Obviously just variance, but it’s getting annoying for sure. Best of luck to your series!

Nobody said shoving 72o is a great play. It’s just better to shove 72o than limp/calling 22BB with QJo. Because there’s a hidden logic behind the shove, but there’s no logic behind limp/calling QJo. Both plays are bad but one is worse than the other. Funnily enough, shoving 72o – the worst possible starting hand – is the better play. That’s not an opinion but a fact that you could even prove mathematically but I’m not good enough to do that. I’m better with logic. Long story short, you won’t see me shoving 72o – unless there are heavy bubble factors or ICM considerations involved. Preflop is fine, personally I would raise to 150 or limp but 120 is fine. Doesn’t make a huge difference. The flop bet seems strange because 30/60 should be pre-ante, so you actually bet more than pot. It’s fine with your hand, a big bet is definitely the way to go here since the board is very dynamic and you would want to bet your overpairs, Tx pretty big as well to charge draws. After villain’s minraise you should just call vs. most opponents because minraises tend to be super nutted. Normally, I would shove vs. a flop raise since it’s a bounty tournament and we can win a bounty but the minraise forces me to slow down. I don’t see much fold equity and we will never get it in ahead. Obviously, we will have great equity against no matter what but when I have almost no fold equity I prefer the pot controlling option. However, vs. decent players who use balanced sizings you have to shove here because you have great fold equity and the perfect hand to balance out your nut combos. You decided to 3-bet the flop which I like when it’s a shove. However, you clicked it back forcing villain to call with any holding that has a somewhat reasonable chance of winning. I don’t mind that if you have a nutted hand yourself but you have 9 high. Sure, 9 high like a boss is a thing but you really shouldn’t do that because it’s just burning chips and you don’t gain any information. It just has no advantage to do that. As played, I think, you have to fold on the turn but I’m not sure because I didn’t do the math and I’m too tired to do it right now. I just can’t imagine that the pot is big enough to justify risking 80% of your stack with ~30% equity. You want odds around 4:1 since you don’t want to make a breakeven call (that is, when you give yourself an edge vs. the tournament field).

You´re quoting the wrong person. I didn´t play the hand, nor did I cry out loud, nor was I mad. Try to get THAT right first... I didn’t quote the wrong person, I meant to reply to your post. I also know you didn’t play the hand. I apologize if you thought otherwise, it’s not always easy to express my thoughts in English, since it’s not my mother tongue. This is not how you look at poker hands? Says who ? Experience. A ton of Poker pros. You should always look at hands from a theoretical point of view. We’re not playing vs. 72o in this hand, we’re always playing against a range of hands. I agree the 22 bb call was bad, but again, this nonsense about liking a 72o push, are you guys totally oblivious? I would ONLY care about the current mtt and getting as far into the money as possible, seeing people pushing crap hands deep in a tourney will never go home with me, cuz more often than not these nuggets win the hand, like he did in this case. You people always talk about being happy there are donks at the tables because IN THE LONG run you will beat them. Well, guess what, it´s not the case, because IN THE LONG RUN you´ll run into another donk, and another donk, and another donk... it´s fantasy thinking. Saying that the 72o push is better than calling 22BB with QJo isn’t nonsense. If you call QJo you can never expect to be the favorite to win. If you push 72o you have roughly 30%+ equity vs. unpaired hands + you have massive fold equity vs. a limping range. You are rarely getting called, so you are often winning the 3BB in the middle uncontested. Obviously, that’s not enough to make the shove +EV because loosing your stack here is insanely dumb when you can just wait for a better hand to risk your tournament life with. Fold equity is the reason why we can shove T9s +EV from the CO when we have like 10BB. Not being result-oriented in poker ? What do you even mean by saying that? Not being results-oriented is the best way to fight tilt. If you don’t care about winning or loosing a hand you’re rarely affected by it. In a perfect world, you should only care about making the right decisions. If you made the right decisions throughout a hand, it doesn’t matter if you are suffering a bad beat because in the longterm you will win no matter what. Good results are the ONLY thing that matters, in any game. If you constantly make the right decisions you will get the results you want.

Maybe calling with QJ wasn´t good, but it was right, wasn´t it, he was ahead. This is not how you look at poker hands. You are results-oriented here. In fact, the limp with QJo is highly questionable – and calling the 22BB shove is even more terrible. Realistically, we’re up against 22+, AJ+ and KQ – our opponent might shove QJ himself but even that wide of a shove is not a hand we’re ahead of. So why on earth are we limp/calling here for 2/3 of our stack? That makes zero sense. The shove with 72o isn’t good – obviously – but I like it ten times more than calling vs. a range that has us crushed most likely. At least it’s a proactive play assuming that a limping range usually consists of weak hands (which is the case here). Even being results-oriented (which is something you should never do in Poker), I don’t understand why you are mad about players shoving 72o?! When you are calling with Q high and actually manage to be ahead somehow, you should be delighted, over the moon etc. Instead you are crying out loud – and why is that? Because you lost the hand. If you would have won we would have never heard about it.

Just saw that: In general, I agree with your last point that it’s not a pair too often. However, I like to toy around with pool tendencies, so I can easily have strong hands here. In fact – if I’m playing my A game – I will only 3-bet top premium hands with a stack that shallow. And I’m mainly doing this against weak players that don’t read too much into that. But like I said, I wasn’t playing well and, in retrospect, I’m shoving 99,5% of hands I want to continue with here. Once in a blue moon I’m 3-betting AA but only in very specific spots, e.g. let’s say you had to suffer from a bad beat loosing 2/3 of your stack, then you raised the last 3 hands in a row. That’s a spot where I don’t want to stay balanced but I want to make sure you stay in the hand while getting some more chips into the pot.

Afair, I had ATo there – probably should have called, in retrospect, but was a bit emotional after I realized I was too short to 3-bet in the first place. Shove is the way to go there. Decided to fold for whatever reason – might have been some timing tell. I think, you were acting kinda quick as if you already knew what to do facing a 3-bet. That’s usually a sign of strength and because ATo is kinda close and I figured my 3-bet must look really strong being so short, I ended up folding. The reason I was tanking so long was because ATo is usually not part of my 3-bet range in this spot, so I had to think about it. And I was pretty tired, only played that day because I wanted to play the UOS so badly. :laugh: