Friday, December 31, 2010

ISF's hu strategy

source: http://poker-strategy.flopturnriver.com/Heads-Up-Cash-Game-Strategies.php


1. The most important thing in HU is focus. If you have any sort of tilt tendencies you really need to get those under control, or you'll be spewing off loads of cash. Adjusting is a premium. You need to get your opponents tendencies down... and the way you get that is focus. I really don't like putting emotions and mind state before skill (The reason is that I feel like it becomes more of an excuse than a fix), but the fact that I do should make you realize how important it is. 

2. Adjusting. If you don't know how to adjust than don't play HU, because adjusting is what separates mediocre players from good ones. -Things to look for and examples of how to adjust: The most basic things you need to look for when you're playing HU are your opponents three-betting frequency, how often he is calling three-bets, and how much he is opening from the BU. A lot of HU players call 75% of your three-bets, which is a gigantic leak. The only adjustment you need to make for that is just to only three-bet good hands. If someone isn't calling a lot of your three-bets, what you need to do is:
-three-bet more frequently
-polarize your three-betting range. Polarize means that your range consists of very weak hands and very strong hands, and not much in between. So three-bet hands such as low suited-connectors(sc's), low pocket-pairs (pp's), and of course our big hands.
- flat call your mediocre hands to a raise. Hands such as KJ, KT, QJ, AT, 88, 77 play great against his raising range but really poorly in a three-bet pot with someone who is playing tight.

There are many other things you need to look for. Does someone always raise when he has top pair or better and doesn't raise when he doesn't? Does he raise draws? Does he bluff? Is he tilting? Is he giving off bet sizing tells? There are many more but you can figure them out for yourselves. 

3. Early on tight is right. In fact, you can be a complete nit and make a lot of money. A lot of people will play against tight players and just start tilting because they can't make any money off of them quickly. Playing tight also helps you get a feel for the player before you have the chance to make a mistake because you don't have a read. 

4. Heads-Up Displays (HUDs) are pretty worthless HU, they are probably more of a distraction than an aid. 

5. Everyone thinks you're bluffing and just because someone bluffed once doesn't mean they are bluffing now. Always put people on ranges, on every street, no exception. Just because you're facing a maniac and have middle pair or top pair doesn't mean you have to stack off. Just because you're facing a tight player doesn't mean you have to bluff every street to make money off of him. 

6. People never fold a pair of Aces 

7. Just because you have top pair, top kicker (tptk) or a weak two pair it doesn't mean you can't fold. 

8. If you're having trouble against an opponent, even if he is worse than you, leave. It's not worth staying. You're likely to tilt and make some bad calls. There's no sense in staying when you're getting pwned, there are plenty of games out there to play. 

9. On the flop when you have hands with sd value when you are the PFR, like bottom pair, A high, and sometimes K high, it's often better to check and see a turn. logic is that the only thing a bet does is stop them from drawing 3 to 6 outs, which isnt nearly strong enough to warrant a bet. Hands like top pair, weak kicker (tpwk) where you're playing a decent player is also a check some of the time on boards like K33. Reasoning again is we're only betting to stop someone from drawing to possibly 3 outs, and the rest of his range you can only get one to two streets of value with anyways. 

10. Versus less than 30bb stacks, preflop has to change a lot. This isn't proven but has shown success with me. Raise strong hands with high cards in them, but limp medium cards and some weaker hands. Reasoning is 20bb deep we dont need to build a pot so raising weak holding hurts us more than helps. position is also less relevant. 

11. Mix up your game. Don't always raise your draws in spots where you raise draws, don't always reraise your big hands, don't always lead out tp or better in limped pots, etc. 

12. When facing a super lagtard, don't start "playing back" at him. Instead of trying to out aggress him, use counter-play. Start value betting lighter and extending your calling range. Just because someone is a maniac doesn't mean you have to play every pot with him.... if you do you're playing in his game. We call them maniac because their strategy does not work. Just stay in your game and when you think you have the best hand call and when you think he's going to call with worse bet. 

13. When facing nitty players, end your bluffs on one street. Most of the time nits will never fold when they call the flop barring no scare cards. 

14. Versus a lot of players its often correct to open 60% of your hands from the BU. If a player defends his blinds heavily the number obviously is going to go down, a lot. 

15. If you're looking to widen your flop raising range because of a nitty opponent, make sure its not complete air. Hands like Jd9d on a Td7c4s board is a great raising candidate. If villain calls we can hit our gut shot, turn a diamond draw or hit an overcard to possibly win. 

16. If someone is calling a lot of your three-bets but then folding his air on the flop, three-bet a shitload. 

17. It's really hard to play against players who are tight preflop. Because of this I recommend you as well play tight preflop. 

18. Your preflop button play is directly dependent to how much your opponent is defending his blinds. If he's not calling/three-betting very much you raise a ton. If he's calling and three-betting a lot you don't raise a lot. Note however, that whether he's frequently three-betting or frequently calling also is a huge factor. For example, if he's calling a lot we may feel fine about raising 86s, but if he's three-betting a lot we may not. 

19. K, Q, and J high flops are great to float. Note many opponents aren't playing hands like Q7-Q2, but play hands like 87 very easily (Note also that most opponents play any ace no matter what). 

20. Beating huge nits is tough. I recommend you don't sit in a game with one, but if you are determined this is what you have to do. Pretty much its all about early street aggression. Raise 100% of hands from the BU is one thing. 2nd is, if opponent is calling less than 25% of your three-bets, you should three-bet very frequently, but not every time so they adjust. Three-bet your Ax's, as it plays well against his calling range, as well as low connectors and sc's. Really, it's all about making sure your finger doesn't stay on the trigger, because they win when you make a really big bluff against them and they call you with the two pair that they played like they really wanted to fold it. 

21. Practice good game selection. If a table isn't good leave, it's that simple. If there aren't any good tables don't play, it's just not worth your time or frustration. This is easy for me since I'm a student and have so much free time, for those who don't I suggest you find a time where the games are normally good and make a habit of playing at those times (Hint: night time in the U.S. is the worst). 

22. Play up to three different opponents MAXIMUM. You're winrate should go down a ton if you do more than that, and that's coming from a guy who thinks 12 tabling 6 max is boring. 

23. Mostly everyone you play will float OOP. Most people don't fold a high to a continuation bet (cbet). Look for times when an overcard comes on the river and opponent comes out firing (obviously it does not make any sense unless opponent is really thin value-betting, or hit the overcard, or has better than one pair). 

24. In general, bets that were typed out are value bets. Bets that aren't are more likely draws or bluffs. Even if this isn't the case, most bad HU players vary the types of numbers they use for value bets and bluffs (I.E. 60 is a bluff but 57 is a value bet) 

25. If your best reason for making a thin call is "they can't have it every time," ..... fold. 

26. Don't ever fold without making an attempt to guess your opponents hand range. 

27. If you get your opponent to play his range passively, you win. 

28. On the same note its better to balance your ranges using aggressive play rather than passive play... 

Click here to continue reading the full thread, ISF's HU Cash Thoughts. 

December cash-out



Images above show performance for December stake period. Cashouts were made early this morning. In summary, backer got a 21.04% ROI for the month of December.

Thursday, December 30, 2010

2010 computer poker comptetition

Source: http://www.computerpokercompetition.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=64:participants-2010&catid=35:participants&Itemid=62&limitstart=1

Participants: 2010 - Heads-up Limit Texas Hold'em
Friday, 19 March 2010 19:39
Last Updated on Thursday, 29 July 2010 18:24
Written by Administrator
Article Index
Participants: 2010
Heads-up Limit Texas Hold'em
Heads-up No-limit Texas Hold'em
3-player Limit Texas Hold'em
All Pages
Page 2 of 4
Heads-up Limit Texas Hold'em
Arnold2

Team Leader: Victor Saase
Team Members: Victor Saase
Affiliation: Independent
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Technique: Monte Carlo Regret Minimization with Imperfect Recall
ASVP

Team Leader: Nan-chen Chen
Team Members: Christine Pei-jinn Chai, Nan-chen Chen, Chun-yen Ho, I-yen Su
Affiliation: National Taiwan University
Location: Taipei, Taiwan
Technique: The only idea we use is sampling. We use sampling to estimate the probability of winning. If it is pretty high, we will raise. If it is pretty low, we will fold. Others we will call.
GGValuta

Team Leader: Mihai Ciucu
Team Members: Mihai Ciucu, Stefan Popescu, Leoveanu Mihaita, Diana Dulgheru
Affiliation: University of Bucharest
Location: Bucharest, Romania
GS6

Team Leader: Sam Ganzfried
Team Members: Sam Ganzfried, Andrew Gilpin, Tuomas Sandholm
Affiliation: Carnegie Mellon University
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Hyperborean

Team Leader: Michael Bowling
Team Members: Nolan Bard, Michael Bowling, Neil Burch, Josh Davidson, Richard Gibson, John Hawkin, Rob Holte, Michael Johanson, Boyan Marinov, Dustin Morrill, Jonathan Schaeffer, Nathan Sturtevant, Duane Szafron, Martha White
Affiliation: University of Alberta
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Technique: All of our two player entries are Nash equilibrium strategies within abstract games, generated using CFR - counterfactual regret minimisation (Zinkevich et al., NIPS 2007). For our limit bankroll entry we did some ad-hoc post-processing of the strategies in an attempt to eliminate defensive play.
Related Papers:
Martin Zinkevich, Michael Johanson, Michael Bowling, Carmelo Piccione. Regret Minimization in Games with Incomplete Information. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 20 (NIPS), 2007.
Michael Johanson. Robust Strategies and Counter-Strategies: Building a Champion Level Computer Poker Player. M.Sc. Thesis, 2007.
Jester

Team Leader: François Pays
Team Members: François Pays
Affiliation: Independent
Location: Paris, France
Technique: The equilibrium is the solution of a scaled-down minimax problem.
sequence form problem formulation with k-means cards abstraction
cards bucketing: preflop:169, flop:400, turn:50, river:25
dedicated minimax (convex-concave) interior-point solver
newton system solved by PCG-like Krylov-subspace iterative method
solved in 5 days on Cuda / Nvidia Fermi GPU
LittleRock

Team Leader: Rod Byrnes
Team Members: Rod Byrnes
Affiliation: Independent
Location: Lismore, New South Whales, Australia
Technique: Little Rock is based on the regret minimization technique but with some important differences. It has been designed to be able to be used for games with any number of players, and as such the perfect recall of player actions that is used in the published technique is not suitable, as the number of states for games with more than 3 players becomes too large to compute. Instead Little Rock uses two abstractions. The first is a bucket abstraction, whereby each hand is placed into one of 31 buckets based on its potential (similar to the EHS squared metric). The second is a game state abstraction that takes into account number of players, player position, various actions that have taken place, as well as information about the pot size, bet/call ratio etc. By using these two abstractions much larger games are able to be solved, with the drawback that the agent may not be as effective against algorithms specifically tailored to games with fewer players (ie. 2 and 3 player games). Tests with Poker Academy show that Little Rock is able to convincingly beat Sparbot heads-up, and Pokibot in all game sizes from 3 to 9 players.
longhorn

Team Leader: Alan Lockett
Team Members: Alan Lockett, Risto Miikkulainen
Affiliation: University of Texas at Austin
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
PLICAS

Team Leader: Christian Friedrich
Team Members: Christian Friedrich, Dr. Michael Schwind
Affiliation: Technical University Kaiserslautern
Location: Kaiserslautern, Germany
Technique: PLICAS (latin for "you fold") is a Texas Hold'em Fixed Limit Heads-up Bot. It uses besides a classical rule-based decision process additional units which use case-based reasoning, pseudo-optimal play for specific situations and dynamic (adaptive) preflop hand selection as well as postflop agression control. The adaptive playing style is realized on basis of a detailed opponent model.
Related Papers: Friedrich, Schwind. PLICAS - A Texas Hold'em Poker Bot. Not yet published.
PULPO

Team Leader: Marv Andersen
Team Members: Marv Andersen
Affiliation: Independent
Location: London, UK
Technique: This bot is a neural net trained to play like a mixture of psuedo-equilibrium strategies
Rockhopper

Team Leader: David Lin
Team Members: David Lin
Affiliation: Independent
Location: New York, New York, USA
Sartre

Team Leader: Jonathan Rubin
Team Members: Jonathan Rubin, Ian Watson
Affiliation: University of Auckland
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Technique: Sartre uses a case-based approach to play Texas Hold'em. Hand history data from the previous years top agents are encoded into cases. When it is time for Sartre to make a betting decision a case with the current game state information is created. The case-base is then searched for similar cases. The solution to past similar cases are then re-used for the current situation.
Related Papers:
Jonathan Rubin & Ian Watson. (2010). Similarity-Based Retrieval and Solution Re-use Policies in the Game of Texas Hold'em. In International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR 2010). To Appear.
Jonathan Rubin & Ian Watson. (2009). A Memory-Based Approach to Two-Player Texas Hold'em. In Proceedings of AI 2009: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, 22nd Australasian Joint Conference, pages 465-474, 2009.
Slumbot

Team Leader: Eric Jackson
Team Members: Eric Jackson
Affiliation: Independent
Location: Menlo Park, California, USA
Technique: Slumbot employs the fictitious play algorithm to find a near-equilibrium solution for (an abstraction of) heads-up limit Texas Hold 'Em. In the abstraction Slumbot uses, the game tree has roughly 3x10^13 nodes. Bins have been manually specified (e.g., two pair, aces and eights, on a monotone unconnected board) rather than automatically derived from some metric (e.g., hand strength squared).

Heads-up No-limit Texas Hold'em
c4tw

Team Leader: Thorsten Spieker
Team Members: Thorsten Spieker
Affiliation: Universitat Bamberg
Location: Bamberg, Germany
Technique: Strategy is based on the creation of an action sequence tree. Action sizes have been selected with expert knowledge. Nodes of the tree contain information about occurences of their state showdown nodes contain information about previously showndown hands after that particular action sequence. Decisions are based on calculating the EV of different action possibilities by simulating current holding versus the observed hands in the showdown nodes. Total Bankroll strategy was trained with a database of observed real-money hands. Instant Run-off strategy is a freshly created tree which updates during the game.
Hyperborean

Team Leader: Michael Bowling
Team Members: Nolan Bard, Michael Bowling, Neil Burch, Josh Davidson, Richard Gibson, John Hawkin, Rob Holte, Michael Johanson, Boyan Marinov, Dustin Morrill, Jonathan Schaeffer, Nathan Sturtevant, Duane Szafron, Martha White
Affiliation: University of Alberta
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Technique: All of our two player entries are Nash equilibrium strategies within abstract games, generated using CFR - counterfactual regret minimisation (Zinkevich et al., NIPS 2007). For our limit bankroll entry we did some ad-hoc post-processing of the strategies in an attempt to eliminate defensive play.
Related Papers:
David Schnizlein. State Translation in No-Limit Poker. M. Sc. Thesis, 2009.
Martin Zinkevich, Michael Johanson, Michael Bowling, Carmelo Piccione. Regret Minimization in Games with Incomplete Information. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 20 (NIPS), 2007.
Michael Johanson. Robust Strategies and Counter-Strategies: Building a Champion Level Computer Poker Player. M.Sc. Thesis, 2007.
PokerBotSLO

Team Leader: Bojan Butolen
Team Members: Bojan Butolen, Mitja Cof
Affiliation: University of Maribor & University of Ljubljana
Location: Maribor, Slovenia
Technique: In general the agent plays by a simplified decision tree. It uses the information received from the server to determine which phase of the game it is (PRE-FLOP, FLOP, TURN, RIVER). The decision for our agent’s next move is based on an evaluation function from the combination in our hand. Based on the evaluation we check our opponent’s last move and try to decide accordingly to some predefined limits for our own move. Additionally we observe our opponents playing style by making in game statistics of how many times the opponent viewed the flop, raised pre-flop, called pre-flop, etc. We use those statistics to view if the opponent plays more loose or tight, so we can try to steal blinds.
Related Papers: Jonathan Schaeffer, Darse Billings, Lourdes Peña, Duane Szafron. Learning to Play Strong Poker.
SartreNL

Team Leader: Jonathan Rubin
Team Members: Jonathan Rubin, Ian Watson
Affiliation: University of Auckland
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Technique: SartreNL uses a case-based approach to play Texas Hold'em. Hand history data from the previous years top agents are encoded into cases. When it is time for Sartre to make a betting decision a case with the current game state information is created. The case-base is then searched for similar cases. The solution to past similar cases are then re-used for the current situation.
Related Papers:
Jonathan Rubin & Ian Watson. (2010). Similarity-Based Retrieval and Solution Re-use Policies in the Game of Texas Hold'em. In International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR 2010). To Appear.
Jonathan Rubin & Ian Watson. (2009). A Memory-Based Approach to Two-Player Texas Hold'em. In Proceedings of AI 2009: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, 22nd Australasian Joint Conference, pages 465-474, 2009.
Tartanian4

Team Leader: Sam Ganzfried
Team Members: Sam Ganzfried, Andrew Gilpin, Tuomas Sandholm
Affiliation: Carnegie Mellon University
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

Participants: 2010 - 3-player Limit Texas Hold'em
Friday, 19 March 2010 19:39
Last Updated on Thursday, 29 July 2010 18:24
Written by Administrator
Article Index
Participants: 2010
Heads-up Limit Texas Hold'em
Heads-up No-limit Texas Hold'em
3-player Limit Texas Hold'em
All Pages
Page 4 of 4
3-player Limit Texas Hold'em
Arnold3

Team Leader: Victor Saase
Team Members: Victor Saase
Affiliation: Independent
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Technique: Monte Carlo Regret Minimization with Imperfect Recall
Bender

Team Leaders: Johannes Fürnkranz, Frederik Janssen, Sang-Hyeun Park, Eneldo Loza Mencía, Jan-Nikolas Sulzmann, Lorenz Weizsäcker
Team Members: Johannes Fürnkranz, Frederik Janssen, Sang-Hyeun Park, Eneldo Loza Mencía, Jan-Nikolas Sulzmann, Lorenz Weizsäcker, Christian Brinker, Jan Bücher, Johannes Dorn, André Hoffmann, Alexander Juling, Benjamin Kahl, Tobias Krönke, Patrick Metzler, Mateusz Parzonka, Lavong Soysavanh, Tobias Wieschnowsky, Erkan Yüksel, Michael Zohner, Ruimin Zou
Affiliation: Technical University Darmstadt
Location: Darmstadt, Germany
Technique: Simulation-based Approach with Online Decision Tree Opponent Modelling
dcu3pl

Team Leader: Neill Sweeney
Team Members: Neill Sweeney, Dr. David Sinclair
Affiliation: Dublin City University
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Hyperborean

Team Leader: Michael Bowling
Team Members: Nolan Bard, Michael Bowling, Neil Burch, Josh Davidson, Richard Gibson, John Hawkin, Rob Holte, Michael Johanson, Boyan Marinov, Dustin Morrill, Jonathan Schaeffer, Nathan Sturtevant, Duane Szafron, Martha White
Affiliation: University of Alberta
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Technique: The three player games use CFR within abstract games to generate stratagies (Abou Risk, 2009). Heads up experts are added for common lines of play with only two players. These experts are also generated using CFR, within a game with more card knowledge than the base three player game. In the bankroll entry, the experts use an alternate payout structure to encourage more aggressive play.
Related Papers:
Nicholas Abou Risk. Using Counterfactual Regret Minimization to Create a Competitive Multiplayer Poker Agent. M. Sc. Thesis, 2009.
Martin Zinkevich, Michael Johanson, Michael Bowling, Carmelo Piccione. Regret Minimization in Games with Incomplete Information. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 20 (NIPS), 2007.
Michael Johanson. Robust Strategies and Counter-Strategies: Building a Champion Level Computer Poker Player. M.Sc. Thesis, 2007.
LittleRock

Team Leader: Rod Byrnes
Team Members: Rod Byrnes
Affiliation: Independent
Location: Lismore, New South Whales, Australia
Technique: Little Rock is based on the regret minimization technique but with some important differences. It has been designed to be able to be used for games with any number of players, and as such the perfect recall of player actions that is used in the published technique is not suitable, as the number of states for games with more than 3 players becomes too large to compute. Instead Little Rock uses two abstractions. The first is a bucket abstraction, whereby each hand is placed into one of 31 buckets based on its potential (similar to the EHS squared metric). The second is a game state abstraction that takes into account number of players, player position, various actions that have taken place, as well as information about the pot size, bet/call ratio etc. By using these two abstractions much larger games are able to be solved, with the drawback that the agent may not be as effective against algorithms specifically tailored to games with fewer players (ie. 2 and 3 player games). Tests with Poker Academy show that Little Rock is able to convincingly beat Sparbot heads-up, and Pokibot in all game sizes from 3 to 9 players.

;p

;p

The Hand Police

Posted: 29 Dec 2010 12:04 AM PST

We all know the player type. Gasping for air in some Phil Hellmuthesque deranged rant about what a fool  you are to ever have played such a hand and what a fish you are, these player types can provide one of the best examples of how not to behave at the poker table out there – both in terms of actual verbal behaviour, as well as in how not to play.

The first, and most obvious reason why this sort of behaviour is not only extremely annoying to those around those doing it – but also extremely bad for business in general – is the simple fact that weak players like to play weak hands. Berating someone for playing badly in a game where you pray for people playing badly is about as stupid a move as is possible in life. It is akin to a bookmaker telling all it’s regular  customers they are idiots and only inviting insider traders into their establishment – hardly a good move by any stretch of the imagination.

If you see what you think is a ‘bad’ play at the poker table, either keep your mouth shut and attack it at every available opportunity, or try and understand it in the terms of the game if the person in question seems to be a winning player. Lot’s of what goes in a poker game is extremely complex, and moves which appear very bad on the surface can actually be just a standard part of a winning player’s need to balance and mix up their game, or simply the required strategy in certain situations.

As an example, when I first started playing poker in a small live sit and go, the big winner in the game seemed to always have the worst hand in all ins but won the game all the time – simply because he understood correct shoving ranges and stack sizes late on. On the surface what he was doing seemed very weak (shoving regularly with junk), but in reality, what he was doing was very strong (applying huge pressure late, winning many big pots uncontested, and often having the chips to survive a few more all ins than those around him which adds up very quickly in a turbo sit and go).

Always be wary of anyone in poker saying something was definitively good or bad in terms of hand selection. Hand police themselves are usually relatively weak players, simply because they believe there is a ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ way to play poker in terms of the cards. The simple truth is that poker is a game of situations, ranges, and people – not exact hands – and any comment about moves with certain hands nearly always come from dull, predictable, tight players, who just don’t think about the game at a very high level.

If you set up high standards for the table you look very stupid if you suddenly get caught doing something unorthodox. No one likes to feel hypocritical ever in life, but to do so in an environment where it will be so quickly picked up on and observed by others nearly always leaves these players in a prison of their own creation. They can’t make the moves required to win at poker against good players, simply because they have set standards for those around them that they now have to live (and usually die) by.

If you are not getting caught regularly doing something with a weak hand in poker you are generally playing very badly unless at a table of complete fish, and in a game as relative as poker, there is very rarely a truly ‘correct’ thing to do. Hand police might make themselves out to be some kind of grand authority on the game, but in reality they are usually some of the weakest players out there, who not only make fish feel uncomfortable and want to leave, but also play meekly and badly due to the odd standards they set the world around them and have to then abide by – do not be intimidated or tempted to imitate them.

opportunities



"Let me ask you something... If someone prays for patience, you think god gives them patience? Or does he give them the opportunity to be patient? If he prayed for courage, does god gives them courage? Or does he give them opportunities to be courageous? If some one prayed for the family to be closer, you think god zaps them with warm fuzzy feelings? Or does he give them opportunities to love each other?"

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

how to earn $7 per day grinding

I got this email from a friend today:

...By the way Jim, conservatively, what stats should I have for me to earn USD7 per day initially grinding at the microstakes playing 4 hours per day?

My reply:

...net $7 per day is almost two buy-ins (max buy in with pokerstars at 2NL is $5)= 350 big blinds.

It depends on how you play. What is your winrate at the moment (xbb/100)? Assume the following:
- you choose to play full ring cash games at 2NL (i haven't played tourneys for a long time).
- your winrate is 1bb/100, which is common for tight aggressives.
- that you are playing 100 hands per hour x 4 hours is 400 hands per day.
- to net $7 per day, your winrate needs to be 350bb/400 hands per day = 0.875bb/100

Based on these assumptions, I think it is possible to earn $7per day net playing tag or lag. TAG meaning your vpip/pfr is 15/10-ish minimum. This means you are raising from all pocket pairs down to broadway (KQJT) suited, depending on position.

If you play 5NL or 10NL, $7 per day is easily attainable based on the assumptions mentioned above.

Better than looking at vpip/pfr to guarantee that $7 per day, make it a point that your W$SF is above 35 and your W$SD is over 50 but WTSD is below 35. These stats will show that:
- you are playing aggressive enough and winning small pots without going to showdown;
- that you are able to see flops at your price;
- and that you are going to showdown with only BIG hands and winning BIG pots at the same time.

Small hand, small pot. Big hand, big pot.

$7 per day, in a month's time is $210. Isn't that more than minimum wage by philippine standards?

This is why I think starting a staking business in manila may well be a very profitable business. You train people to play certain hands exclusively preflop. They get three of a kind or higher on the flop, then they bet/raise such that they be all in by the river. Anything less, go for cheap showdown. With that strategy, any player can make 2bb/100. You can teach this even to high school dropouts in a week of training. After training, you closely monitor each player for about two weeks to make sure they play within the specified method.

You start them off at 2NL pay them training salary (which is less than minimum wage) for the next six months. Whoever is in the black at the end of 30 days moves up a stake. Those who don't gets cut. After six months, you give them a choice between raising their salary to minimum wage, or 60/40 profit sharing. In one year, you'd have a stable of 2bb/100 players playing midstakes.

(i forgot to mention the VIP bonuses and rakeback you'd be earning along the way.)

The downside to this is that you will need bigger capital outlay for office space and computers. Compare this to finding horses on 2p2--you just give them the stake, they take care of their own pc. If (our friends at swifttrade) were into poker instead of trading US stocks back then, they'd probably be rich(er) by now. They had the office space, the equipment, and more importantly, the capital to make it work.

(hmmm, I think I should post this on my blog. The majority of visits on my blog come from the philippines.)

Thanks for bringing this up.

- jim

;p

HAPPY NEW YEAR!


*chart for the month of december.

ft + tableninjaft crashing

I just restarted my pc. I was opening up tables on full tilt poker, and suddenly the game platform froze--no response, then that dreaded white screen.

I don't know if it is the ft game platform itself that has problems, or the combination of ft, hem and tableninjaft. I think it is the latter. I haven't taken the time to isolate the issue. I need to open the ft platform first, then open several tables at once and see if I get the same problem. Then I need to close the ft platform, open tableninjaft plus ft platform and again open several tables. If the platform crashes, then it is that combination. I also need to do that with hem--open ft plus hem, open up several tables and see what happens. Then I need to close everything again, then this time, open all three and see how it goes.

That is going to take at about half an hour.

I might find the problem, but what concerns me is that I'd have to ask software support for assitance and that is going to take another three days. In the meantime, I am on semi-tilt, playing anxious waiting for the issue to be resolved. There's going to be a back and forth with tech support, sending files and getting feedback. If they can't find anything wrong with their product, they might say there is something wrong with my pc...

I am not going to go through all that. I'll always choose the path of least resistance--play in pokerstars.

In all twelve months that I have been playing with pokerstars (with hem and tableninja simultaneously), I only had a crash once or twice. That is what you call reliable. There was one time when pokerstars made changes on their game platform and tableninja did not quite work well. Within 24-hours, the issue was resolved entirely.

(*I did not get that kind of support from Notecaddy.)

I might choose to go through the trouble of isolating the issue with ft/tableninjaft/hem today. Or I might not. Not now at least. Maybe later. The combination still works when I use the manual table opening option within the ft platform, but it makes table selection a bit complicated.

I'd rather start playing instead.

PS
So why bother playing at full tilt poker? Because it is FUN!

Winnings chart filtered to show only this month

It seems like the natives are gone (probably moved to pokerstars). Most of the players I find on my tables, I seldom have much history with them. Only a handful have more than 100 hands on their HUD and these tend to be nits.

I just played a session on ft just now. It lasted less than half an hour and I had four showdowns where villain had two pair at best. I had to stop as one of the tables froze when I closed that using a tableninjaFT hotkey (and I thought they had that fixed).

I am taking a break now, make breakfast for the kids. In the meantime, I am firing up my gear to play on pokerstars. 

BRB.

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Free Coaching - terms and conditions

This free coaching offer will focus on full ring NLHE cash games only. To avail of this offer, simply open a new account with full tilt poker by using this link. For more information, click here.

These terms and conditions constitute a legally binding agreement (“Agreement”) between you, the end user, and Jaime Albert Syyap (the "Company", "we", "us" or "our" as appropriate). Those who use our Services (defined below) are referred to as "you." The Company provides the Services on and/or from the website at http://jimspoker.blogspot.com (the "Website").

1. Services

The Company provides poker-related educational material, blogs, videos, coaching sessions and other tools for people interested in playing poker (the "Services"). It should be noted that the Site is not a gambling site. We do not provide services to assist you if you have a gambling problem. The Services are provided subject to this Agreement, as it may be amended from time to time by us, and any guidelines, rules or operating policies that we may establish and post (the "Agreement") here or by otherwise providing notice to you. We may discontinue or revise any or all aspects of the Services in our sole discretion at any time.

a. The Services are available only to persons who complete the Registration process on our Website. Registered users are not permitted to share account privileges or username/password combinations with any other person. Violators are subject to account suspension or account termination, with or without notice, and forfeiture of any amounts paid to us for any services. Any unauthorized use of your username/password combinations shall be your sole responsibility and any liability there from shall be yours. You have the absolute obligation to notify the Company in writing in case you discover the unlawful or unauthorized use of your username or password.

b. You are responsible for maintaining the security of your account, passwords, files, and for all uses of your account and of the Services in your name. You are obliged to keep your user information and password secret and confidential. The Company reserves the right to refuse registration of, suspend, or cancel accounts upon (i)non-payment by you, (ii) your breach of this Agreement, or (iii) the request of any law enforcement or regulatory agency, or pursuant to any order issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. You hereby acknowledge that the Company may, from time to time, verify any of the information you provide to us, whether on the Registration page or otherwise in connection with your use of the Services.

2. Limited License

All Services provided via our Website, and all content included on our Website (such as text, videos, documents, graphics and software) is the property of the Company and/or its licensors and suppliers and is protected by domestic and international copyright and trademark laws. All Services and content on our Website is for your private and non-commercial use only. Any sale or transfer to others, or reproduction for the purpose of commercial distribution, is strictly prohibited. You agree not to remove, obscure, or deface any proprietary notices or labels from the Services or any Website content, or modify, translate, or create derivative works based on the Services or any Website content. Ownership of the copyrighted materials shall remain exclusively the property of the Company, and you are granted no rights other than those explicitly set forth herein. Aside from a revocable and temporary license to use the Services and download Website content as provided in this Agreement, nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as granting or conferring any proprietary rights or interests to you.

3. Indemnification, Representations and Warranties

You hereby unconditionally represent, covenant, and warrant that: (a) the information on your Registration is your true any payment accounts used to purchase services from the Company are controlled by you, through which you deposit or receive monies; (b) your use of the Services is lawful and in full compliance with this Agreement; (c) your use of the Services does not violate or infringe upon the rights of anyone else; (d) you will not use the Services to perform any commercial solicitation, encourage conduct that could expose the Company to criminal or civil liability, or prevent others from enjoying the Services; (e) you will not upload or post to the Website any information or materials that is protected by copyright, trademark, or other proprietary rights without the written permission of the owner of that copyright, trademark, or other proprietary right; (f) by submitting any material to the Company or on any public area of the Website, you automatically grant or warrant that the owner of such material has expressly granted the Company the royalty-free, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, display, translate and distribute such material (in whole or in part) and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or hereafter developed; (g) you will not share your password with anyone; (h) you will not attempt to modify, reverse-engineer, decompile, or otherwise disassemble or discover the source code, object code, or underlying structure, ideas, or algorithms of any software used by the Company to protect the Company’s proprietary interests in the Services or any related materials.

You hereby indemnify and hold harmless the Company and its officers, employees, contractors, agents, and advisors against any and all damages, losses, liabilities, settlements, and expenses (including without limitation, costs and reasonable attorneys' fees) in connection with any claim or action that arises from (i) your use or misuse of the Services, (ii) your violation of any law or regulation, including without limitation any laws regarding copyright, trademark, and other proprietary rights, invasion of privacy, slander and defamation, and gaming, (iii) any and all sums which you claim are due from the Company and that exceed the limitation of liability stated below in Section 5 of this Agreement, or (iv) your breach of any other representation, warranty or covenant made by you under this Agreement.

4. Warranty Disclaimer

The services are being provided to you on an “as is” and “as available” basis without warranty of any kind, either express, implied or otherwise, as to the quality, capabilities, performance, desired results or the suitability of the services for your purposes. To the extent permitted by law, the Company disclaims all warranties, express, implied or otherwise, including, but not limited to, implied warranties, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement. The entire risk arising out of the use of any Services remains with you.

Use of the services and any reliance thereon by you is done by you at your sole risk. The Company is not responsible for any losses incurred by you.

We do not warrant that the services you receive from us will be uninterrupted or without errors. We also make no warranty regarding the usefulness or benefits of the services for your particular needs, circumstances and abilities.

5. Limitation of Liabilities and Remedies

Independent of, and severable from, and to be enforced independent of any other enforceable or unenforceable provision of this Agreement, the Company and its employees, advisors, contractors and agents shall not be liable to you, or any other person claiming rights derived from or through you, for incidental, consequential, special, punitive, or exemplary damages of any kind, regardless of whether the Company was advised, had other reason to know, or in fact knew of the possibility thereof. In no event shall our aggregate liability to you, including to any person or persons whose claim or claims are based on or derived from a right or rights claimed by you, with respect to any and all claims at any and all times arising from or related to the subject matter of this agreement, in contract, strict liability, tort, or otherwise, exceed the aggregate amounts paid to us by you, if any, for use of the Services. The sole and exclusive remedy for any failure or nonperformance of the services shall be for the Company to use commercially reasonable efforts to adjust or repair the services.

6. Security Audit

To maintain the security and integrity of our Services, the Company reserves the right to conduct an audit ("Security Audit") at any time to ensure that you are not in breach of this Agreement or any applicable laws. You hereby authorize us and/or our agents to make any inquiries of you and take any lawful measures to validate the information you provide to us or should provide to us in accordance with this Agreement. In addition, to facilitate these Security Audits, you agree to provide such information or documentation as the Company may request from time to time to ensure you are in full compliance with this Agreement.

7. Termination

The Company may immediately suspend or terminate your ability to use our Services for any reason, including without limitation: (i) failure to comply with this Agreement at all times; (ii) failure to cooperate with the Company, or failure to respond to any Company request for information within 10 days, pursuant to a Security Audit (iii) any attempt to defraud the Company or any other user of the Services, or (v) at the request of your parent/legal guardian if you are a deemed a minor in the state in which you reside.

Upon termination for any reason by the Company, Section 5 of this Agreement relating to "Limitation of Liabilities and Remedies" shall survive and continue in full force and effect until fulfilled.

8. General Provisions

a. Any opinions, advice, statements, services, offers, or other information or content expressed or made available by third parties are those of the respective author(s) or distributor(s) and not of the Company. The Company neither endorses nor is responsible for the accuracy or reliability of any opinion, advice or statement made on the Website by anyone other than authorized Company employees or contractors while acting in their official capacities.

b. If any provision of the Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable or invalid, that provision will be limited so that the balance of this Agreement will otherwise continue in full force and effect. Additionally, any provision(s) held wholly or partly invalid or unenforceable shall be deemed amended, and the court is authorized to reform the provision(s) to the minimum extent necessary to render them valid and enforceable in conformity with the intent of the parties as shown herein.

c. The Company and you agree that the Agreement is the complete and exclusive statement of the mutual understanding between you and us and supersedes and cancels all previous written and oral agreements, communications, and other understandings relating to the subject matter of the Agreement. The Company may amend this Agreement at any time by publishing the modified Agreement on the relevant Website page of http://jmspoker.blogspot.com. Any such modification will take effect immediately upon posting to the Site. If any modification is unacceptable to you, your only recourse is to terminate your free coaching sessions. Your continued use of the Services following amendments to this Agreement will be deemed binding acceptance of the modification. It is your sole responsibility to review this Agreement and amendments hereto each time you access the Site.

d. We reserve the right to transfer or assign this Agreement, in whole or in part, to any person or entity without notice and you will be deemed to consent to such assignment. You may not assign or transfer any of your rights or obligations under this Agreement.

e. This Agreement shall be governed in all respects by the laws of New Zealand without regard to its conflict of laws provisions, and you and the Company agree that the sole venue for any and all disputes arising from or related to this Agreement shall be the appropriate state or federal court located in New Zealand. The Company and you hereby submit to the personal jurisdiction of New Zealand and irrevocably waive any objection based upon jurisdiction, venue, and the convenience of the forum. In any action or proceeding to enforce this Agreement, the prevailing party will be entitled to recover its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.

Publication Date: December 28, 2010

When you avail of our free coaching service, you hereby declare that you have read and agree to these terms and conditions.