BCC Trip Report (contains rant)

fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck
fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck
fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck
fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck
fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck
fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck
fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck
fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck fck

Recipe for disaster

1) Go to Brantford
2) Sit down at the 5/10 table and discover it's fn BINGO nite.
3) Volutarily play 3 hands in 1.5 hrs (66/QQ (UTG)/AK (UTG+1)) - didn't play 66 past the flop
4) Get called by crap (J9o / Q7s)
5) Donkey hits TP (crap kicker) on the flop.
5) Bet the hell out of it while ahead.
6) Get rivered by a 9 and a 7
7) Kiss $145 good bye

End of rant

I will now go a give myself that lobotomy that I've always wanted.

Comments

  • Play longer and wait for your buddy, Variance, to come through for you? Also, buy those dudes a beer to encourage them to stay longer?
  • moose wrote: »
    Play longer and wait for your buddy, Variance, to come through for you? Also, buy those dudes a beer to encourage them to stay longer?

    Ya I know.
    Just got to me last nite that's all.
  • I've always found my winning sessions take a lot longer than my losing ones.

    For example last night 2/5 it took me almost 8 hours to end +55
  • zunni74 wrote: »
    I've always found my winning sessions take a lot longer than my losing ones.

    For example last night 2/5 it took me almost 8 hours to end +55

    In general I find the opposite in Brantford.
    My losing sessions are generally my longer ones (I play too long) and the vast majority of my winning sessions are under 3hrs.

    Atleast that was my only losing session since Feb (I go 3-4 times / month)
  • I think part of my issue is the amount I buy-in for. Since I do $60 (though I did $80 last night) I tend to lose it in a few hands much more quickly where if I win a hand 'early' and start ahead, I'll be more inclined to play more. I also got my original post wrong, it was 6 hours not 8 (10:45 - 4:45).

    Leads to another question, is $60 ever enough?
  • zunni74 wrote: »
    Leads to another question, is $60 ever enough?
    I always sit with at least 20BB (big bets). 30 preferably. So at 2/5 at donkford I'd sit with at least 100. I usually sit with two bills just cuz it's more fun to play with the extra chips.

    /g2
  • I always sit with atleast 30BB.
  • zunni74 wrote: »
    Leads to another question, is $60 ever enough?

    Not even close. The least I'd sit with is $100, but $150 (30BB) is better. You want to get the max value out of a premium hand.

    When you sit with such a small amount, you're telling the whole table that you're a fish who is scared to lose money.

    DON'T BE SCURRRRED!
  • JohnnieH wrote: »
    When you sit with such a small amount, you're telling the whole table that you're a fish who is scared to lose money.

    DON'T BE SCURRRRED!

    Those are the first players I look for.
    They are usually either scared money or bad players.
  • Hobbes wrote: »
    Those are the first players I look for.
    They are usually either scared money or bad players.

    Hmmm, interesting feedback..

    Went back and looked at my notes, I've can never recall a situation where I felt the size of my stack negatively impacted my game.

    I also did note that I felt that the people who sat with more chips tended to be a lot looser in their hand selection and therefore made better targets for me when I had a hand. Although last night I had the tightest guy ever at my table, sat for 1 1/2 hours, played 3 hands, bought in for $140, left with $143 :)

    The exception is the 5/10 guy waiting for a spot. Easy enough to spot and avoid. But I often see regulars buying in for $60 or $80 and walking out with $150 or more, myself included. Which is fine with me, because I'm at the casino about 3 times a week now, small wins for me add up nicely. (Gotta love living within walking distance)

    So please, come sit with me, think I'm a shmoe who doesn't know hand order or is dead money, and engage me in a big pot because you think you've got the best of me, I accept everyone's money equally ;)
  • Hobbes wrote: »
    Those are the first players I look for.
    They are usually either scared money or bad players.

    Well of course. Without dead money, this game would REALLY suck.
  • Hobbes wrote: »
    Atleast that was my only losing session since Feb (I go 3-4 times / month)

    Oh. In that case you had it coming.

    I feel your pain though.
  • morty wrote: »
    Oh. In that case you had it coming.

    I feel your pain though.

    Ya bit if an attitude adjustment was probably a good thing.
  • The most you can lose in one hand of limit is 12 (4 bets preflop / flop = 4 BB, and 4 bets turn / river = 8 BB) big blinds (capped every street = (at 2/5) 8,8,20,20 or $56.

    The greatest sin in Limit is to get a monster hand with a customer and NOT being able to get all that $ in. IF you're buying in for $60 and IF you hit that monster, you better not have played one hand after going through your first round of blinds.

    Give yourself a cushion. $100 at least

    Mark
  • DrTyore wrote: »
    The most you can lose in one hand of limit is 12 (4 bets preflop / flop = 4 BB, and 4 bets turn / river = 8 BB) big blinds (capped every street = (at 2/5) 8,8,20,20 or $56.

    Not if its heads up at a fresh street, then its uncapped. (Is Brantford heads up at new card or anytime heads up?)
  • Two things

    A: No, I don't think Brantford allows that (isn't there a arule about never being able to allow a bet of more than $100, so with an uncapped HU, that wouldn't be guaranteed)

    B: It's Brantford limit.. you're NEVER getting HU

    Mark
  • DrTyore wrote: »
    Two things

    A: No, I don't think Brantford allows that (isn't there a arule about never being able to allow a bet of more than $100, so with an uncapped HU, that wouldn't be guaranteed)

    B: It's Brantford limit.. you're NEVER getting HU

    Mark

    A. 25/50 game a 4 bet is already 200...point invalid.

    B. Good point
  • DrTyore wrote: »
    The most you can lose in one hand of limit is 12 (4 bets preflop / flop = 4 BB, and 4 bets turn / river = 8 BB) big blinds (capped every street = (at 2/5) 8,8,20,20 or $56.

    The greatest sin in Limit is to get a monster hand with a customer and NOT being able to get all that $ in. IF you're buying in for $60 and IF you hit that monster, you better not have played one hand after going through your first round of blinds.

    Give yourself a cushion. $100 at least

    Mark

    You are also assuming that the person(s) you are playing agains are re-raising you every time they can. What the usual situation is the following:

    Pre-flop, raise to $4 which is called down
    Flop, Raise to $4, maybe capped to $8

    (The above action can be reversed, pre-flop to 8, raise on flop which is called down)
    Turn, Raise to $10, which is usually called. I've only seen $15 hit very rarely about 4-5 hands of the hundreds I've seen
    River, same scenerio. I've seen one hand get upped huge by a new college player who I guess thought he could bluff someone off with a pair of 9's vs. trip aces (no flush/straight draws on board). The rest of the time where reraising occurs is when there is a split.

    So while your statement above may be correct from a 'utopian' point of view, the more realistic total is $12 by the flop and $10 each for turn/river.

    So $32..

    Losing one of these does not leave alot of room for further play at that level buying in for $60, but winning even one small pot gives enough money to play that hand again.

    As I say, I've never had a situation, (and to be frank, I'm sure I miss bets now and then) where I can recall wishing I had additional funds to put into a pot.
  • Zunni

    I am quite aware of how the logistics of limit poker works, and yes, that your opponents were in fact required to be re-raising you. My point is however that should you find yourself in this (albeit rare) ideal situation, you would very much like to maximize your potential winnings.

    At 2/5 BCC game, that max is $56. Buying in for $60 and playing more than two hands hinders maximum potential profit. There's your answer. Adjust accordingly, or don't ask questions you don't want answers to.

    Thank you, goodnight Cleveland

    Mark
  • Heads up at Brantford has no cap. Max SINGLE bet at Brantford is $100, therefore max table limit is 50/100 and also that is why nl is not permitted at Brantford.
  • DrTyore wrote: »

    At 2/5 BCC game, that max is $56. Buying in for $60 and playing more than two hands hinders maximum potential profit.
    Mark

    Just wait till you get someone betting the 2nd nuts into your stone cold nuts and you look down to find only 2BB sitting in front of you.

    And they WILL bet/raise/raise the 2nd nuts till the cows come home there.
  • DrTyore wrote: »
    Zunni

    I am quite aware of how the logistics of limit poker works, and yes, that your opponents were in fact required to be re-raising you. My point is however that should you find yourself in this (albeit rare) ideal situation, you would very much like to maximize your potential winnings.

    At 2/5 BCC game, that max is $56. Buying in for $60 and playing more than two hands hinders maximum potential profit. There's your answer. Adjust accordingly, or don't ask questions you don't want answers to.

    Thank you, goodnight Cleveland

    Mark

    Fair enough, however I'd argue that you could run into this exact situation if you bought in for $100 and find yourself down $40 at the point this occurs.

    Are you constantly topping up to bring yourself back to that nice cushion?

    I set this limit for myself so I don't bang up my bankroll too badly.

    As for asking the question if I don't want the answer, I'm questioning what other people are doing based on my experience, there's nothing wrong with that.

    We are all here to help each other (at least I thought) and so if you can share a tip of yours along with a reason you do it, I'd love to hear it. However, if I have followup questions, or concerns about your logic (again based on my experience), it's prudent for me to ask about clarification on those as well.

    At this point let's agree to disagree on this one aspect and move on :)

    Mark
  • zunni74 wrote: »
    Fair enough, however I'd argue that you could run into this exact situation if you bought in for $100 and find yourself down $40 at the point this occurs.

    Are you constantly topping up to bring yourself back to that nice cushion?
    Maybe not constantly, but topping up if you're short is not a bad idea.
    zunni74 wrote: »
    I set this limit for myself so I don't bang up my bankroll too badly.
    Another way to accomplish this same thing is to buyin for $100. Then if you drop to $40 or below get up and leave. (or do whatever you do when your $60 buyin disappears)

    /g2
  • Brantford 2/5.

    I have QQ

    Flop come Q83
    2 hearts, (I have the Q of hearts)

    I get in a raising war with a Donkey.
    I have $400 in front of me.

    $280 goes in $2 at a time.... until he is all in..
  • And did he hit his flush?
  • And did he hit his flush?

    Of course he did..It's BCC 2/5 :D

    The real question is did Reef fill up at the same time as the flush hit.
    I did that and man was it fun.
  • g2 wrote: »
    I always sit with at least 20BB (big bets). 30 preferably. So at 2/5 at donkford I'd sit with at least 100. I usually sit with two bills just cuz it's more fun to play with the extra chips.

    /g2

    I always sit with 20BB and I never leave for the casino without at least another 2-3 buyins in my pocket, depending on how long I expect my session will be.

    I know it is different for you, Zunni because if you get stacked you can just go home, and maybe that is a good way to limit yourself. But in a table stakes game, you can't afford to leave yourself shortstacked.

    Last time I played 5/10 I watched a guy buyin for $50 at a time at least 10 times. It was great. If he beat you, it was only for $50 and if you could trap him for a few bets preflop or on the flop, he would call off his last few chips anyways.
  • Hobbes wrote: »
    Of course he did..It's BCC 2/5 :D

    The real question is did Reef fill up at the same time as the flush hit.
    I did that and man was it fun.

    after he was all in I showed top set and he showed...

    Ah7h... and hit his flush on the turn...
    I get no help and shake his hand...

    But that's not the point.

    The point is that you want to be able to take advantage of donks and get it in with the best hand.
  • after he was all in I showed top set and he showed...

    Ah7h... and hit his flush on the turn...
    I get no help and shake his hand...

    But that's not the point.

    The point is that you want to be able to take advantage of donks and get it in with the best hand.

    And the nice thing about that is they think that's good poker (although it does hurt sometimes)
  • moose wrote: »
    I know it is different for you, Zunni because if you get stacked you can just go home, and maybe that is a good way to limit yourself. But in a table stakes game, you can't afford to leave yourself shortstacked.

    That's a great point, last week I put my name up 2x and left both times because the wait was too long. You couldn't do that coming in from out of town.

    Maybe I'll start opening my house up as a shelter for wayward poker players :)
Sign In or Register to comment.