Opportunity missed, opportunity gained

Rarity for me yesterday, I got to play two sessions, and one of them was pretty long, by my standards.  I play so many less hands than most of you guys (assuming I know who "you" are) that all my streaks/patterns/whatever are LOL sample size anyway.  But I was just shy of 900 hands across the two sessions.  And just about everything was going well in terms of finding the right seats, getting good situations to play, etc.  The only thing that didn't connect was villains' cards.  Which is pretty much the case for all sessions this month (again, LOL sample size).  I've yet to book a win, and in fact I'm losing over 21 PTBB/100 over that small sample.

You saw one of the hands last post, but there haven't been any other big pots where I didn't get most of the money in ahead or with 8-out-plus draws postflop.  The only other 200bb pot where the money went in with me behind I actually went runner-runner to win (flopped TP > turned trips > river top boat to beat his flopped bottom set -- like when does that ever happen to us?).

Just tons of medium size pots where villains seem to have better hands than I do, mixed in with a few suckouts.  Really, there's not a lot you can do when you get involved with looser players, waiting to make a hand and value bet them, except you never make a hand.  Make some c-bets on good boards, even some good barrel spots, but you have to be careful not to bluff those guys where they are likely to have a piece.  Good for aggression, not so good for bottom line.

In days past, several losing sessions would have a bigger ripple effect on my future sessions than I hope it is having now.  I feel like I am making basically solid plays (we'll see, shipped a few hands for confirmation off to my coach).  So, I'm treating this as an opportunity to work on my emotional game, and to keep making the plays that I believe are right, even when they're not working out.  In that way, there's a silver lining, as long as my bankroll continues to be able to withstand some time off the run-good train.

Not as bad as I thought

Looked over the last few months of hands, and it looks like I don't get as married to my flopped TP hands as I thought.  Most of the time I ended up calling down, I had improved by the river, or either the turn or river bet was pretty small.  Interestingly, those times I improved and called down, I got show some pretty redic bluffs, but not sure whether those were from otherwise (by stats) solid players.

So, here's the hand that really bugged me and made me feel like a calling station because I knew when he fired that 3rd barrel he most likely had AK.  My question to you all is what factors would lead you to make a call here, short of actually seeing him triple barrel bluff as the preflop 3-bettor in the past?  If you'd use stats, what's the stat threshold for you between calling and folding (or raising earlier in the hand)?  If it's an observed read, what sort of read/note would you be looking for?

Full Tilt Poker $2/$4 No Limit Hold'em - 6 players - http://www.thehandconverter.com/hands/355120
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter

MP: $492.20
CO: $933.25
Hero (BTN): $400.00
SB: $453.00
BB: $80.00
UTG: $110.00

Pre Flop: ($6.00) Hero is BTN with Qd Ad
3 folds, Hero raises to $10, SB raises to $34, 1 fold, Hero calls $24

Flop: ($72.00) Ac 8h 8d (2 players)
SB bets $44, Hero calls $44

Turn: ($160.00) 6s (2 players)
SB bets $112, Hero calls $112

River: ($384.00) 4h (2 players)
SB bets $263 all in, Hero calls $210 all in

Too Call Happy

Played a short session and was not too happy with it.  Biggest hand was calling down AQ on an ace high flop.  I opened on the button, somewhat nitty TAG (5% 3-bet, 7% facing a steal) 3-bets, and I defend.  The thing is when he fires that 3rd barrel, I really need to fold.  He's not wild enough for me to stack off bluff catching, and he's probably not value betting thin enough to be value cutting himself there.

Need to run a filter where I either call 3 streets or call AI on any street with top pair against reasonable players.  I bet it won't be good.  I'll also have to look at how often I fold in those spots, because I think we probably forget a lot of the folds we make when facing heat...seems like a standard play, and also those pots don't stick in your mind because the overall pot size is smaller.

More on Exploiting Regulars

OK, I still have not finished going through the exam questions.  Partly, I am really taking my time and writing some fairly detailed answers before checking Tri's.  Partly because I've continued to stay quite busy with work and family, and poker across the board has had to take a bit of a backseat.

However, I wanted to get a review up because if I understand correctly, the price of the book is going to double in the next few days when pre-order is done.  Bottom line, if you play 200NL or higher, I would recommend you get the book.

The first reason I would draw the line there is simply what the book costs in relation to a BI and also the alternative you would get if you were to purchase coaching.  But that's not the main reason. 

If you are playing 100NL or lower, you should just avoid good regs, which I think you can do pretty easily if you either datamine or play in the games regularly yourself.  There are not enough really good regs to warrant staying at a table with them without at least a couple of other soft spots.  And if you are in such a spot, you should avoid confrontations with the good reg and focus on the better spots.  Even when you play well against a good reg, you're going to be better off going against the other spots at the table.

Beyond that, even a good, thinking reg will probably not play or adjust in a way that will make the book exactly applicable.  In fact, I think it's borderline at 1/2, where even most of the better regs still don't value bet wide enough or make tough folds.  But it does get closer at 1/2, and even closer at 2/4.  There's probably a reason why all the examples are from a 3/6 game :).  That said, beginning at 1/2, I think there are times when you will have 2 or 3 regs on a table with one, maybe two, soft spots.  And one of those regs are bound to be decent.  Also, the games start to feature a little more aggression (some misplaced, but still aggression).  The context of the book starts to hit home there, some of the time.

There are a couple spots in the book where I think you could just follow a straightforward outline and make a unique play or two, but for the most part,  you shouldn't get this book expecting a quick read and magic results.  It will take some work to get the most out of it, and the most valuable parts of the book for me (and there were several) covered the sorts of things to evaluate before deciding on a given play.

I don't agree 100% with everything Tri says, but there's nothing that I wildly disagree with.  And even though it's a short book, there were multiple things that I hadn't considered in the light that Tri presented them before.  I did provide him several suggestions, some of which were addressed in an updated draft he sent, some of which were not.  I am about to provide him a few more.  I don't feel it's fair to comment on them because this is not a published draft, but if anyone would like me to comment on them after the book is in general publication, let me know (assuming I can get an update from Tri to see whether my feedback was addressed).  Feedback was more about flow of the book, formatting of the exam, and some extra bits I thought he could pretty easily add to round out some discussion -- it was not over anything I considered bad, though.

Exploiting Regulars, so far

I'm going through a preview copy of an upcoming e-book called Exploiting Regulars by Tri Nguyen,  I reviewed his PLO book in the past, which I thought would be an awesome starting point to complement some PLO videos if/when I start getting into PLO.  But I couldn't be sure, not having played PLO.

Going through this NL workbook so far, though, is different because I can relate to a lot of what Tri covers.  I haven't even finished the meat of the book yet, which is a series of workbook problems, but I'm quite enjoying it.  Some of the concepts seem different from videos I've watched and posts I've read. 

But what's happening is that the book, with its focus on play against regs, is illustrating specific applications of some concepts. Regs in general have certain tendencies, which while more profitable than the tendencies of various fish in the population, can nevertheless be exploited.  The book is doing a great job illustrating that I don't do a good enough job adjusting to regs.

When I think about adjusting to regs, at a very high level, I would say that it boils down to value betting a little less thin and bluffing a little bit more.  Sounds obvious, right?  Maybe.  But the "why" of it, and the associated problems, help drive that home in some specific ways.  Ways that I know will increase my bottom line when I can get them applied correctly.

There are some things I'm not sure that I agree with, or would like to see more detail behind Tri's thought process.  I'll see if he'll respond to my questions after I finish everything.  After I get his thoughts, I'll write a more detailed and actual review, rather than this sort of non-review.  But I'm sure my impression of the book will be quite favorable.  It's already made me sit back and think pretty deeply about some standard spots.

I haven't read Let There Be Range, which is Tri's most well-known book, but assuming it's as good as the pre-release of Exploiting Regulars, I'm missing out on good stuff.  I just can't justify to myself that high of a price tag, with the volume I get in.  But based on Exploiting Regulars, I may reverse that decision.  If you've read it, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts, especially if you've also read Exploiting Regulars.