$25----->25k Bankroll Challenge on Ignition
I am going to be starting with $25 in my Ignition Account and try to spin it up to $25,000.
I will start at 5nl since it is the lowest stake on the site and be playing Ignition Reg tables only.
I will be updating every 5k hands with my progress.
My expectation for each limit is as follows:
Expected Winrates for each limit:
5NL: 30bb/100
10NL: 25bb/100
25NL: 20bb/100
50NL: 15bb/100
100NL: 12bb/100
200NL: 10bb/100
Variance will be a decent factor in a lot of these winrates but these are just ball park numbers. Once I hit 25k I will take a 10buyin shot at 500nl! As far as moving up I'll move up whenever I feel like it, but probably after winning 30-40 buyins at the limit.
There will be no cherry picking here since you can't cherry pick a Bankroll Challenge. Wish me luck (or not) and follow along in this thread.
I don't think the ev of 33 is so low otr because we're losing to pairs being turned into bluffs. I didn't think that, I wizzed the spot, and wiz confirms it's not that. In wiz, we are losing to specifically 54s and 88 a very low percentage of the time, but these aren't driving the large ev difference in calling.
The main driver is just that having Kx is very powerful for bluffcatching, though this is obviously true and not a very interesting fact :p
No that's the reason. If you lose to bluffs then obviously your bluff catcher isn't 0EV anymore. KTs blocks bluffs so 33 is a much better hand to call down with in a vacuum if your opponent isn't turning better pairs into bluffs like a solver.
So now that we know this, how do we exploit the good higher stakes regs with 33 in this hand?
a midstakes reg is going to shove much more thin for value otr, whereas a micro reg probably needs AK+. (also they will barrel some better underpairs). in my pool I would find checkraises on the flop.
btw though I think this is a losing call preflop longterm
Yes a check raise OTF is a good exploit but there are better ones.
How do you exploit your opponent with 33 if you know MDA tendencies?
I know it's not exactly the same but rate this hand coach. Am I applying the principle of let the people overstab and underfold with big overpair correctly? They're both short and it's 3 handed so SPR is kind of like a 3bet pot.
Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD 2 Poker Tracking Software
NL Holdem 2(BB)
EP ($342.97) [VPIP: 28.3% | PFR: 21.7% | AGG: 52.9% | Hands: 47]
MP1 ($250.49) [VPIP: 10.6% | PFR: 10.6% | AGG: 100% | Hands: 47]
MP2 ($259.50) [VPIP: 12.8% | PFR: 6.4% | AGG:
Turn is well played. Flop can go either way but I prefer betting vs 2 fish, especially on lower boards since they call more than the aggregate (fish love floating 2 overcards).
Bingo
Not only is it solver approved but you also take advantage of two tendencies:
1. Over barreled texture.
2. Overfolded in MDA.
MDA here. Now go compare this folding frequency to a solvers frequency.
The theory is interesting OTT because it is non-intuitive. You never jam vs a turn barrel.
As a general heuristic you should delay your check-raises to the turn on 1 BW boards (non Ace high) since they will over barrel many turn cards.
Yes! Exactly, we lose to bluffs so you fold 33 OTR against a good higher stakes reg. Microstakes regs aren't finding non intuitive bluffs like 54s/76s so now we get to call river instead of fold.
The bolded part doesn't make sense though, you have to think about a good midstakes reg tendencies. How do we use their barreling tendencies against them with 33?
XR flop is probably fine if they can't find enough bdfd A and Q high calls.
Guess you're going to say XR turn?? That's gonna require some pretty specific reads on his barreling range and how he responds to the raise.
This hand just seems like a slam dunk turn fold and I'd need very strong reads to do anything else.
Bingo
Not only is it solver approved but you also take advantage of two tendencies:
1. Over barreled texture.
2. Overfolded in MDA.
MDA here. Now go compare this folding frequency to a solvers frequency.
The theory is interesting OTT because it is non-intuitive. You never jam vs a turn barrel.
As a general heuristic you should delay your check-raises to the turn on 1 BW boards (non Ace high) since they will over barrel many turn cards.
What hands do you think he is overfolding to MR in this line? Are we running it on any non 4x rivers?
XR flop is probably fine if they can't find enough bdfd A and Q high calls.
Guess you're going to say XR turn?? That's gonna require some pretty specific reads on his barreling range and how he responds to the raise.
This hand just seems like a slam dunk turn fold and I'd need very strong reads to do anything else.
We don't need reads because we already know its over folded as a default. We also know it is over barreled which will make the overfold higher.
Whenever I hear someone say they need reads to make a play I just assume they don't know the MDA for the spot.
No that's the reason. If you lose to bluffs then obviously your bluff catcher isn't 0EV anymore. KTs blocks bluffs so 33 is a much better hand to call down with in a vacuum if your opponent isn't turning better pairs into bluffs like a solver.
So now that we know this, how do we exploit the good higher stakes regs with 33 in this hand?
I kept everything the same but removed the small amount of IP bluffs better than 33, and call is losing 13.7bb
33 has no card removal properties as IP never has a 3. The reason it's still losing is because IP under bluffs in theory since OOP has enough really good catchers (Ax/Kx) to meet MDF
IP "should" bluff 36.4% but they only bluff 31.5%
Bingo
Not only is it solver approved but you also take advantage of two tendencies:
1. Over barreled texture.
2. Overfolded in MDA.
MDA here. Now go compare this folding frequency to a solvers frequency.
The theory is interesting OTT because it is non-intuitive. You never jam vs a turn barrel.
As a general heuristic you should delay your check-raises to the turn on 1 BW boards (non Ace high) since they will over barrel many turn cards.
We don't need reads because we already know its over folded as a default. We also know it is over barreled which will make the overfold higher.
Whenever I hear someone say they need reads to make a play I just assume they don't know the MDA for the spot.
Just to clarify, what do you mean by texture? One non A broadway then turn overcard?
Then when you say overfolded, do you mean on the texture or just in general when ip b30-b66 and faces minraise?
When I run this in PIO, turn minraise is a thing but 33 is a pretty big punt so would need to be pretty confident in my MDA assumptions to try it.
I kept everything the same but removed the small amount of IP bluffs better than 33, and call is losing 13.7bb
33 has no card removal properties as IP never has a 3. The reason it's still losing is because IP under bluffs in theory since OOP has enough really good catchers (Ax/Kx) to meet MDF
IP "should" bluff 36.4% but they only bluff 31.5%
A solver checks OTT with gutshots more than humans. QJcc/JTcc are pretty high frequency checks from the sim I'm looking at.
That's a good point about IP under bluffing in theory, I think that happens a lot when there is an Ace on the board.
Can you nodelock them to barrel gutshots OTT?
Just to clarify, what do you mean by texture? One non A broadway then turn overcard?
Then when you say overfolded, do you mean on the texture or just in general when ip b30-b66 and faces minraise?
When I run this in PIO, turn minraise is a thing but 33 is a pretty big punt so would need to be pretty confident in my MDA assumptions to try it.
Yeah the bolded.
The MDA doesn't specify the texture it's just overall but it is overfolded.
GTO Wizard has the turn minraise at 0EV.
After thinking about this hand some more I like x/minraise turn better than how I played it. I still think my call is winning because of populations overbarrelling but also not value betting thin enough OTR. A microstakes reg is not jamming as thinly as a solver and that was a huge consideration for making the call. I thought they would be overly polarized.
Mohegan Sun trip report.
I ended up playing some $1/$2 live over the weekend for about 8 hours.
Low stakes live should be played fundamentally different from microstakes online. When you play online you mostly want to RFI your hands, you do the exact opposite when playing live.
You should be VPIPing 40%-50% of your hands because of the passivity of your opponents preflop. They are limping most of their range which incentivizes you to do the same.
Another thing that most people will tell you to do which is not correct is to buy in for the maximum because you will maximize your skill advantage. That's not correct.
You should be buying in short stacked. The buyin for $1/$2 is $60-$400 where I play, I usually buy in for $100 (50bbs) but less would probably be even higher EV.
The reasons you buy in short are the following:
1. A lot of your opponent's won't have 100bbs to start with, you will be at a natural disadvantage since the highest EV strategy is to VPIP a lot of hands which means getting to the river a lot to realize equity with speculative hands. This will happen less often vs shorter stacks.
2. Most of your opponent's are fish. Fish don't understand absolute vs relative value and will call you lighter if they know you have nothing behind. I'll give you a hand example.
I had KQhh this past weekend and two players limped in front of me (I over limped---->notice most players will tell you to raise here but it's not correct. One of the main reasons is because of the rake structure, you want more players in the pot because now the rake is spread out more evenly among the players. If you get the pot heads up you have to pay 50% of the rake). We only RFI super premium hands that want it to be heads up.
The BTN raised it $15 over 3 limpers and the first limper called/2nd limper folded/I called.
Flop comes QTTr. The SPR is around 1-2 since I am short stacking. The first limper checks and I donk jam hoping to get called by AK/AJ. BTN folds and the first limper calls me with ......wait for it.....33.
His rationale was that he got to see the turn/river for free since I was all in. If I was deeper stacked there he would have just folded.
Okay this is getting a bit long, I do have some HH's from the session that I might post later. I'm going to try to put some online volume in this week, 20k hand update coming soon.
Wow that post is hurting my brain. Interesting stuff to consider. I was at Mohegan Sun this weekend as well. Games were very good on Saturday. I have been short-stacking a bit at $2/$5 but nothing near as extreme as what you are describing.
Wow that post is hurting my brain. Interesting stuff to consider. I was at Mohegan Sun this weekend as well. Games were very good on Saturday. I have been short-stacking a bit at $2/$5 but nothing near as extreme as what you are describing.
A lot of the concepts are from Sklansky's/Mason Malmuth's latest book. It goes against common wisdom (in a good way) and is highly recommended if you are playing low stakes live. The fish to reg ratio is much higher than online and since our strategy is 100% dependent on our opponent's strategy, we end up playing much differently than online.
I have only played $2/$5 a few times but basically the better the players the less you want to employ this strategy.
A lot of the concepts are from Sklansky's/Mason Malmuth's latest book. It is goes against common wisdom (in a good way) and is highly recommended if you are playing low stakes live. The fish to reg ratio is much higher than online and since our strategy is 100% dependent on our opponent's strategy, we end up playing much differently than online.
I have only played $2/$5 a few times but basically the better the players the less you want to employ this strategy.
Cool thanks, I’ll check it out. I’m happy to challenge my notions of what is correct/optimal at live low stakes.
The note about 2/5 makes sense too. Either way, if I were to experiment with a different/unfamiliar strategy I would prefer to do it at lower stakes, for bankroll reasons.
Flop comes QTTr. The SPR is around 1-2 since I am short stacking. The first limper checks and I donk jam hoping to get called by AK/AJ. BTN folds and the first limper calls me with ......wait for it.....33.
His rationale was that he got to see the turn/river for free since I was all in. If I was deeper stacked there he would have just folded.
You're also probably not donk jamming if you were deeper stacked 😀
Agree about VPIP'ing a lot of hands. That's been a good strategy for beating low stakes live games for ever. Nothing new.
I think buying in short is fine, but once you identify the fish at the table, you should be adding on to the max if they are 100bb or deeper.
You're also probably not donk jamming if you were deeper stacked 😀
Agree about VPIP'ing a lot of hands. That's been a good strategy for beating low stakes live games for ever. Nothing new.
I think buying in short is fine, but once you identify the fish at the table, you should be adding on to the max if they are 100bb or deeper.
Agreed on if the fish is deep you should buy in deeper. The average fish is losing -30bb/-40bb/100 so its not the most common scenario that they get deeper.
The live training sites I've looked at advocate mostly rfing if you are going to play a hand so I think it is not common knowledge to VPIP a lot/limp a lot.
Another point that hasn't been touched on yet is your position relative to the fish. This is probably intuitive to a lot of people but it's nice to see the data. Ideally, the fish is 1 to the right of you. Here are online winrates based on fish VPIP and where he is seated relative to us.
This hand is an extension of the concept with the 33 hand. Microstakes regs are too polarized OTR. They will mostly just call JJ-AA here but jam their bluffs.
It's a 0EV spot in theory but a snap call in practice.
A note on preflop as well, if you have huge edges vs your player pool postflop you always want to play the 0EV preflop spots.
A quick note OTF. You could XR flop here if you wanted too but the further away from the flop we get the worse population plays relative to theory so we are incentivized to call. Especially in 3bet pots where we will be playing for stacks by the river.
Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD 2 Poker HUD and Database Software
NL Holdem 0.1(BB)
HERO ($10) [VPIP: 29.4% | PFR: 24.4% | AGG: 36.7% | Flop Agg: 41.3% | Turn Agg: 33.9% | River Agg: 37.9% | 3Bet: 11.5% | 4Bet: 13.6% | Hands: 347106]
HJ ($10) [VPIP: 22.2% | PFR: 22.2% | AGG: 0% | Hands: 9]
CO ($11.93) [VPIP: 33.3% | PFR: 33.3% | AGG: 77.8% | Flop Agg: 100% | Turn Agg: 33.3% | River Agg: 100% | 3Bet: 66.7% | Fold to 3Bet: 0% | 4Bet: 0% | Hands: 12]
BTN ($14.72) [VPIP: 85.7% | PFR: 61.9% | AGG: 17.4% | Hands: 21]
SB ($9.85) [VPIP: 9.1% | PFR: 9.1% | AGG: 0% | Hands: 22]
BB ($14.41) [VPIP: 13.6% | PFR: 9.1% | AGG: 50% | Hands: 22]
Dealt to Hero: T♦ T♠
HERO Raises To $0.25, HJ Folds, CO Raises To $0.75, BTN Folds, SB Folds, BB Folds, HERO Calls $0.50
Hero SPR on Flop: [5.61 effective]
Flop ($1.65): 9♣ 4♥ 6♦
HERO Checks, CO Bets $0.78 (Rem. Stack: $10.40), HERO Calls $0.78 (Rem. Stack: $8.47)
Turn ($3.21): 9♣ 4♥ 6♦ 9♦
HERO Bets $0.76 (Rem. Stack: $7.71), CO Calls $0.76 (Rem. Stack: $9.64)
River ($4.73): 9♣ 4♥ 6♦ 9♦ 5♣
HERO Bets $1.13 (Rem. Stack: $6.58), CO Raises To $9.64 (allin), HERO Calls $6.58 (allin)
Spoiler
CO shows: A♦ K♠
HERO wins: $19.15
Interesting take on shortstacking at Live. I'll keep an eye out for you at Mohegan. I must say I disagree overall as I think learning to play deeper will produce the highest winrate even at the lower limits. I think overlimping and calling is just bad fundamentally and should be avoided at all costs. That said, I enjoy this thread and follow and think you have a good poker mind.
I play a bit at Mohegan (mostly 2/5) but even at 1/2 I think the best value is when people are playing deep and don't know how to value their hand. I think that is that highest EV lane to take and shortstacking isn't it. In my small sample i found the $400 makes 1/2 a little more beatable and at least on the weekends people buy in pretty deep.
My question for you directly is how do you factor in the rake? I know Bart Hanson talks alot about getting to 2/5 ASAP cause 1/2 is such a rake trap even more so with shortstacks.
Either way, love the thread and like reading your analysis. Keep it up! Love seeing New England people doing well!
i don't disagree with you, but think your stat is a good way to consistently win but earn less than minimum wage at the tables
Mohegan Sun trip report.
I ended up playing some $1/$2 live over the weekend for about 8 hours.
Low stakes live should be played fundamentally different from microstakes online. When you play online you mostly want to RFI your hands, you do the exact opposite when playing live.
You should be VPIPing 40%-50% of your hands because of the passivity of your opponents preflop. They are limping most of their range which incentivizes you to do the same.
Another thing that most people will tell you to do
Also, the ridiculous RFI sizes in small stakes live poker make it better to buy in short so you can just jam over a 5x open and 3 flats and realize all of your equity. You get in some odd spots where the pot gets bloated and you have a good hand, but not good enough to jam deeper and you don't have enough depth to squeeze and play post flop. Plus, people will think you're a maniac when you do it a couple of times.
No that's the reason. If you lose to bluffs then obviously your bluff catcher isn't 0EV anymore. KTs blocks bluffs so 33 is a much better hand to call down with in a vacuum if your opponent isn't turning better pairs into bluffs like a solver.
So now that we know this, how do we exploit the good higher stakes regs with 33 in this hand?
No, it isn't the reason.
I kept everything the same but removed the small amount of IP bluffs better than 33, and call is losing 13.7bb
33 has no card removal properties as IP never has a 3. The reason it's still losing is because IP under bluffs in theory since OOP has enough really good catchers (Ax/Kx) to meet MDF
IP "should" bluff 36.4% but they only bluff 31.5%
Yeah my eyeballing the sim a few nights back led to this conclusion as well. It's abundantly clear 33 losing to bluffs isn't the main issue. We need our catchers to be weighting v away from value.
