![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A funny year so far. After zooming out of the blocks on Party, the wheels came off and I'm now $13 down after 23,160 hands at $1-$2, my main game. However, such is the weirdness of online money-making at poker, that I am still $2.8k up on the site -- helped by $900 of profit at 50c-$1 and $210 at $2-$4. Plus, of course, the ever glorious bonuses and rakeback which, as I have written before, are fairly solid on Party now. At this moment, looks like about 5 cents a hand.
Just as the wheels came off at Party, they were fixed on Stars, where my headline number of $1,980 profit after 35k hands masks the fact that I've got a grand's worth of FPPs, even at Amazon.co.uk exchange rate. I'm, $1680 up at $1-$2 after 22,800 hands. Bonuses and rakeback at Stars look to be the equivalent of 3.5 cents a hand.
Is this difference between Party and Stars just "noise". I suspect not. Party just seemed to leap into a new world of toughness all of a sudden. There really are guys playing $1-$2 with a quality and style that I would expect at $5-$10.
I'm getting happier with things. I'm learning all of the time and I feel that I've made a couple of important breakthroughs in the past six weeks, helped by the better players at Party, who have forced me to rethink certain areas and analyze the HUD numbers more carefully while I am playing. That I can manage this while six-tabling is also a step forward. Same tables, but deeper analysis = more profit, I hope.
But I'm still making mistakes. Here's a hand where i took the wrong line (and spotted that it was the wrong line about a minute after the hand, d'oh).
Table 'Marconia IV' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: Hero ($281 in chips)
Seat 2: paulitschMC ($199 in chips)
Seat 3: Technobabble ($210.45 in chips)
Seat 4: rotyme ($107.40 in chips)
Seat 5: Villain ($200 in chips)
Seat 6: slei123 ($69.05 in chips)
Seat 7: insanename ($264.70 in chips)
Seat 8: riksanchez ($200 in chips)
Seat 9: B3rgmann ($240.60 in chips)
rotyme: posts small blind $1
Villain: posts big blind $2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [A♣; A♡;]
slei123: folds
insanename: folds
riksanchez: folds
B3rgmann: folds
Hero: raises $4 to $6
paulitschMC: folds
paulitschMC leaves the table
Technobabble: folds
rotyme: folds
Villain: calls $4
*** FLOP *** [6♡; 9♡; J◊;]
Villain: checks
Hero: bets $6
Villain: raises $16 to $22
This size raise on a raggish board is often a pile of bollocks, and about half the time I will three-bet here, representing JJ or 99 (quite within my range, obv). However, I only have 45 hands on villain and his stats of 9%/8% are just a little bit too tight. Similarly, the three bet is just a little bit too small for total bollocks.
Hero: calls $16
Pot size $56 and we both have $172 behind.
*** TURN *** [6♡; 9♡; J◊;] [T♠]
Villain: bets $34
Hero: raises $38 to $72
This is just plain wrong. I should flat-call here. I raised because I didn't want a "difficult" decision on the river if opponent went all in. But if I flat call and opponent has either 99 (the most likely holding here, TBH) or KQs (or even 87s), then there are a large number of scare cards that can fall on the river that might get me to a cheap showdown. I must remember this point for the future. In fact, I knew it anyway, but it's not a frequent situation, and it's not something I've yet got ingrained in my blood.
Villain: raises $100 to $172 and is all-in
Hero: folds
This is trivial. Opponent is 99 or JJ here I reckon. Calling here is spewing money.
Uncalled bet ($100) returned to Villain
Villain collected $198 from pot
Villain: doesn't show hand
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $201 | Rake $3
Board [6♡; 9♡; J◊; T♠]
Seat 1: Hero folded on the Turn
Seat 2: paulitschMC folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: Technobabble (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: rotyme (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 5: Villain (big blind) collected ($198)
Seat 6: slei123 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: insanename folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: riksanchez folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: B3rgmann folded before Flop (didn't bet)
+++++++++++++++
Keeping to Palladium and Supernova levels on Party and Stars is still tough, but getting less so. Obviously if I could break through to $2-$4 as my standard game, things would become far easier on this particular front.
I'm now generating FPPs on Stars at a very respectable rate, to the point where I can buy most "non-trivial stuff" that I need on Amazon with them. That cuts down the Amex bill and eventually works its way through to my bank account, so long as I only spend money that I would have spent anyway. And that's where it gets tough, because I'm never quite sure whether "I would have spent it anyway", and as a result I am perhaps holding back on purchases that I would in fact have made for cash. If that makes sense.
A tripod, a guide book to Rome and new batteries for the camera must-buys though. As for new books well, hell, I've got at least 50 sitting here waiting to be read. Same with movies. On the lumpy side of the buys, can't decide between a 42 inch plasma for the front room or a new laptop. Suspect I will end up accumulating FPPs until I can afford both!
Now, if only Amazon started selling holidays.....
__________________
Just as the wheels came off at Party, they were fixed on Stars, where my headline number of $1,980 profit after 35k hands masks the fact that I've got a grand's worth of FPPs, even at Amazon.co.uk exchange rate. I'm, $1680 up at $1-$2 after 22,800 hands. Bonuses and rakeback at Stars look to be the equivalent of 3.5 cents a hand.
Is this difference between Party and Stars just "noise". I suspect not. Party just seemed to leap into a new world of toughness all of a sudden. There really are guys playing $1-$2 with a quality and style that I would expect at $5-$10.
I'm getting happier with things. I'm learning all of the time and I feel that I've made a couple of important breakthroughs in the past six weeks, helped by the better players at Party, who have forced me to rethink certain areas and analyze the HUD numbers more carefully while I am playing. That I can manage this while six-tabling is also a step forward. Same tables, but deeper analysis = more profit, I hope.
But I'm still making mistakes. Here's a hand where i took the wrong line (and spotted that it was the wrong line about a minute after the hand, d'oh).
Table 'Marconia IV' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: Hero ($281 in chips)
Seat 2: paulitschMC ($199 in chips)
Seat 3: Technobabble ($210.45 in chips)
Seat 4: rotyme ($107.40 in chips)
Seat 5: Villain ($200 in chips)
Seat 6: slei123 ($69.05 in chips)
Seat 7: insanename ($264.70 in chips)
Seat 8: riksanchez ($200 in chips)
Seat 9: B3rgmann ($240.60 in chips)
rotyme: posts small blind $1
Villain: posts big blind $2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [A♣; A♡;]
slei123: folds
insanename: folds
riksanchez: folds
B3rgmann: folds
Hero: raises $4 to $6
paulitschMC: folds
paulitschMC leaves the table
Technobabble: folds
rotyme: folds
Villain: calls $4
*** FLOP *** [6♡; 9♡; J◊;]
Villain: checks
Hero: bets $6
Villain: raises $16 to $22
This size raise on a raggish board is often a pile of bollocks, and about half the time I will three-bet here, representing JJ or 99 (quite within my range, obv). However, I only have 45 hands on villain and his stats of 9%/8% are just a little bit too tight. Similarly, the three bet is just a little bit too small for total bollocks.
Hero: calls $16
Pot size $56 and we both have $172 behind.
*** TURN *** [6♡; 9♡; J◊;] [T♠]
Villain: bets $34
Hero: raises $38 to $72
This is just plain wrong. I should flat-call here. I raised because I didn't want a "difficult" decision on the river if opponent went all in. But if I flat call and opponent has either 99 (the most likely holding here, TBH) or KQs (or even 87s), then there are a large number of scare cards that can fall on the river that might get me to a cheap showdown. I must remember this point for the future. In fact, I knew it anyway, but it's not a frequent situation, and it's not something I've yet got ingrained in my blood.
Villain: raises $100 to $172 and is all-in
Hero: folds
This is trivial. Opponent is 99 or JJ here I reckon. Calling here is spewing money.
Uncalled bet ($100) returned to Villain
Villain collected $198 from pot
Villain: doesn't show hand
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $201 | Rake $3
Board [6♡; 9♡; J◊; T♠]
Seat 1: Hero folded on the Turn
Seat 2: paulitschMC folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: Technobabble (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: rotyme (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 5: Villain (big blind) collected ($198)
Seat 6: slei123 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: insanename folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: riksanchez folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: B3rgmann folded before Flop (didn't bet)
+++++++++++++++
Keeping to Palladium and Supernova levels on Party and Stars is still tough, but getting less so. Obviously if I could break through to $2-$4 as my standard game, things would become far easier on this particular front.
I'm now generating FPPs on Stars at a very respectable rate, to the point where I can buy most "non-trivial stuff" that I need on Amazon with them. That cuts down the Amex bill and eventually works its way through to my bank account, so long as I only spend money that I would have spent anyway. And that's where it gets tough, because I'm never quite sure whether "I would have spent it anyway", and as a result I am perhaps holding back on purchases that I would in fact have made for cash. If that makes sense.
A tripod, a guide book to Rome and new batteries for the camera must-buys though. As for new books well, hell, I've got at least 50 sitting here waiting to be read. Same with movies. On the lumpy side of the buys, can't decide between a 42 inch plasma for the front room or a new laptop. Suspect I will end up accumulating FPPs until I can afford both!
Now, if only Amazon started selling holidays.....
__________________
