mctrahan

It's all about win-rate baby. Track your hours/hands played and how much you've won/lost vs. that. If you can clear more than you make at your day job per hour over about 2,000 hours live or 50,000 hands online (about 800 table hours) then you can consider quitting your job. Otherwise you're just holding dead money for better players. Also wise to have at least 6-8 months of bills saved up outside of your bankroll if you're considering full-time playing.I think bankroll should (at least) match or exceed the "emergency bill fund" and your stakes should definitely be appropriate to your bank

I guess I'm Mr. UberTight here but I've got a tough time finding a way to call 55 with a 1-hole limper, a raise from mid, and a caller to boot. I know online plays looser than live but as far as I'm concerned that's only more reason to tighten up and wait to get some traps set. On that extremely dry board I agree it's impossible to get away from bottom set, but should you have been there in the first place? Like ElToasto said, what were you hoping for with that call?I also find it curious that you provided your reads on every other player in the pot EXCEPT the one player you were heads-up ag

That's even his motto for this WSOP. He's trying to rub it off on Gavin Smith but I'm not sure how much GS is buying it.

Without a good read, that's a slippery slope to try and induce a bet when all you can beat is a bluff. I didn't get to see the showdown and you did, but from where I see it a bluff is all you can beat there.

This is just such a funky hand I can't stop thinking about it. I like the raise preflop. The action from the big blind is what intrigues me. Calls preflop, check-calls flop, checks turn and bets river. No matter how I slice it, it just reeks of trap or a floating bluff. Unless he's absolutely awful, no way to credit him for K10 or 810. A9 also possibility if he was floating high(er) cards (a justifiable call I think preflop and on the flop given the pot odds and he wasn't giving you credit for a Q) and just happened to get there on river. I think 99 is right out for the simple fact that

I actually would play double this, just because I like to play for the session and not just for the hand and reload. I sit down with typically 100 blinds in a LHE game, and know that I should step away if I drop to 40 blinds or less. I leave the extra room just in case I hit a big hand on that last "Ok, if I have crap here I'm done" hand. Nothing sucks worse than having the nuts and losing bets because you're so short you're all-in. Also if you multitable I suggest adjusting accordingly. 600-1000 blinds is good for 1 table (and I know many will disagree with me on this next point) but it'

Sounds like a wicked upswing. Think about it this way. If you're breakeven against him, but he's insanely up (which he is) - he's getting money, just not YOUR money. He's just holding the other players money for you until you "feel it" so to speak. I like a sample of at least 10k hands/200 table hours before I figure out if I am (or anybody else is) winning/losing a particular game. I say keep tracking him down and grinding till you get some good snaps.

This is spot on. A rule I like for my live NL play in cash games, they play about 2-3 times as big as online. No joke, depending on the table, an open-raise in a $1/2NL game can be to about $10-$15. Same goes for the money you bring. $200 is standard for an online buyin at $1/2NL, but you'll probably be short-stacked in a live game. In my experience most people will be sitting with about $500-$600. I've never been to FW so I don't know their max buy-in limits (if any) but I wouldn't bring any less than the max buy-in for the game you're playing (maybe even 2 buy-ins if you get sucked out

Classic. Very well done. I'm not a huge fan of hit and runs or trash talking either, but there are always exceptions to every rule.

Hrm - that call on the flop would set an alarm off for me. Not too many draws on that board - 45 is probably folded, more like a draw to wheel like A5 suited if any draw at all. The way the hand played out I see QJ being a very strong possibility. Callable hand preflop against a potential blind-steal, check-call flop with a mediocre kicker, check turn hoping to set up check-raise, and bet river to get a medium hand to call. I'm not sure a QJ can check-raise that flop, because an agressive player can just play back representing KQ or AQ or heck, even 3's, or even easily actually have one of

Agreed. From just a cursory glance without knowing the player that smells like a nut flush or a funky J9 in there somewhere who checked turn and pounced on your turn-check knowing the board was scary. I know it seems a J9 might raise that flop, but without a redraw I can agree with that call on the flop with the (at the time) nuts. But you're right, either way I think top 2 is beat there.

Actually, longer blind structures favor the more skilled player. It affords them the time to be more patient and wait for good hands, as well as make crucial laydowns without dumping %30-%50 of their stack beforehand, or worse yet, calling with the worst of it because you'd be effectively "out" if you folded. Strategy for short-blind/turbo events tend to favor the players who are getting the better cards (increased luck factor=decreased skill factor) who play them aggressively. Always remember to consider your stack in relation to the blinds, not just how many chips are in front of you. I