HU25: Found a leak

Conventional wisdom says that top pair is usually the nuts in heads-up games. That kind of thinking isn't always constructive.

Here's a hand that helped me realize when I should consider laying down top pair or simply folding preflop:


Full Tilt Poker $2/$4 No Limit Hold'em - 2 players
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter

BB: $425.50
Hero (BTN/SB): $400.00

Pre Flop: ($6.00) Hero is BTN/SB with Q 9

Hero raises to $12, BB raises to $42, Hero calls $30

Flop: ($84.00) 7 2 Q (2 players)

BB bets $48, Hero calls $48

Turn: ($180.00) 3 (2 players)

BB bets $110, Hero raises to $310 all in, BB calls $200

River: ($800.00) T (2 players - 1 is all in)

Final Pot: $800.00
BB shows A Q (a pair of Queens)
Hero shows Q 9 (a pair of Queens)
BB wins $799.50
(Rake: $0.50)

My opponent in this hand was 3-betting me frequently (about 18 percent), so I thought I could justify a call in position with Q9o. When I hit top pair on the flop, I was willing to put it all in on most turn cards.

Using stoxev, I later learned that this isn't the best line against many opponents. Here are my conclusions:

_ Q9o is a pretty awful hand to call a 3-bet with, even in position heads-up. My simulation shows that Q9o doesn't become profitable in this hand example unless I'm against an aggressive opponent who's 3-betting around 30 percent of the time or more.

_ If I were to see a flop with Q9o against a more typical opponent (someone 3-betting around 18 percent of the time), the least -EV approach is to call two streets and fold the river. While there are times where this line is appropriate, I generally avoid the call-call-fold approach because it's too easy to get bluffed off the best hand.

_ Calling the flop and shoving the turn makes more money than simply raising the flop and getting it in, but not by much.

_ If my Q9 were suited or I had QJo or better, calling preflop and shoving the turn starts to show a profit.

_ Despite the two clubs on this board, this is still a pretty dry flop. Q9o with top pair performs better when there are a few more draws out there.

HU24: Goal Complete

I won my 10 buy-ins at $2/4 NL heads-up! It's pretty incredible when the suckouts don't hit for my opponents.

It took me eight days to achieve the goal, and at one point I was down seven buy-ins. But I came back and rocked some HU fish.

The only downside of this week crushing $2/4 HU is that I played many other game types as well, which resulted in losses at $3/6 HU and $2/4 PLO. Man, do I ever suck at PLO, but I'm sure I'll improve (eventually).

I credit my accomplishment at $2/4 in part to pr1nnyraiding S2, Ep. 5. In that episode, Krantz discusses a flow chart that is posted in the video comments. The flow chart is used as an aid to determine what your opponents' attributes are, and then to think of counterstrategies.

I took the flow chart a step further and started writing down my opponents tendencies and my adjustments as I play. That exercise has really forced me to think harder about how I should be dodging and weaving against various opponent types, which is so important in HU play.

I used to complain that in heads-up play, I always seemed to claw for a buy-in or two but then lose four or five buy-ins within a few minutes. Now I feel like I'm the one with the big wins and small losses.

HU23: Overview

Postflop play is hard: No limit hold'em simply doesn't involve as much postflop play as most other forms of poker. Cash game reraises often take down the pot preflop, and tournaments often turn into preflop pushfests.

Heads-up play is different because players are forced to see more flops, turns and rivers. You have to develop a balanced strategy. Determining strong continuation bet percentages, check-raise frequencies, aggression levels per street and bluffing patterns are important.

That means deciding when to check behind on paired flops, when to check-raise a weak flopped pair and how to adjust bet sizing to get maximum value and induce mistakes.

Adjustments: Each opponent is different. Playing a standard game isn't going to make much money. Coming from full ring and 6-max hold'em games, it was difficult for me to get used to making such drastic changes in my game.

Now, I'll rarely 3-bet against some players and blast others with reraises and preflop shoves. I'll donkbet against some and let others do the betting for me.

It's tough to constantly think: If my opponent is showing this attribute, how should I respond? What level of thinking is he on? Do I need to value bet thinly or bluff more often? Players who correctly re-evaluate their situations will be able to exploit their opponents more.

The Big Picture: When three bad beats hit within minutes, it's easy to lose perspective and go on tilt. Nobody wants to go on tilt, but it happens. When emotions cloud judgment, players allow short-term results from the past to influence their present and future actions. Tilt is a failure to see beyond the variance into the distant horizon of countless hands.

Miniquest: I'm confident that my heads-up game has improved to the point where I can beat most of the 2/4 regulars, as well as the fish. Now I want to take a week or two to try to win 10 buy-ins _ $4,000 _ at that limit. I'm already up two buy-ins since I embarked on this goal, so hopefully the remaining eight won't be too far behind. In this small way, I hope to prove to myself that I can dominate this limit.

HU22: Winnah!

I wasn't sure whether I had crossed the boundary from the red to the black in career heads-up play, so I ran the numbers.

I was happy to find that I'm a winning heads-up player, which beats break-even any day:

$10/20	($5,303.75)
$5/10	$19,594.14
$3/6	($1,180.85)
$2/4	($11,314.50)
$1/2	($423.20)
Total	$1,371.84

My winnings at $5/10 surprised me, but they make sense. Although my first real downswing after I seriously tried to learn heads-up was at $5/10, I dropped down to $2/4 pretty quickly. In addition, I run very hot when 6-handed $5/10 tables get down to heads-up.

Many of my $2/4 failings came from before I made a concerted effort to improve my heads-up game. I vaguely remember tilting off what was left of my Full Tilt roll more than a year ago at $2/4. Fortunately, my Full Tilt account is healthy again.

In retrospect, I wish I had been smarter from the start.

I should have tried to beat heads-up at lower limits before trying to play $2/4 and up. At the time, I was too proud to play lower than my regular $5/10 level, which was stupid.

I also should have realized how much I had to learn sooner. I could have studied first, rather than getting pwned first.

But I learn the hard way, which often is the only effective way.

HU21: At every opportunity

A marked improvement in my heads-up game came when I recently decided to open raise every single button at the beginning of a match.

Most players don't know how to respond. They aren't comfortable calling or 3-betting much more often than they do normally.

Attempting to steal every blind from the button is an aggressive move that automatically puts many villains on the defensive. It's a direct application of the advice that you should run over your opponent at every opportunity until you're given reason not to.

Sometimes, I know my villain and don't open every button. Sometimes, I'll get 3-bet a lot and have to scale back. Sometimes, the flow of the match dictates that T4o and 95o are just too crappy to attempt to play.

But there are many times when opponents will play too tight and hand over their blinds until they have a strongish hand. Then when they raise, it's easy to fold and resume stealing next hand.

I've been picking up a lot of HU tips, and they're truly making a difference in my game:

_ Watching videos on a regular basis is the best way to improve. I've been watching several DeucesCracked series and dedicating a lot of time to study. In order of my opinion of these series, here are the videos I'm currently watching: DogIsHeads UP, Parallels, Hand Readers, Movin' on Up: HU NL.

_ Two-barrel bluffing works pretty well in 3-bet pots.

_ AJs is a terrible 5-bet shoving hand.

_ Against frequent 3-bettors, floating and bluffraising the flop are fantastic options.

_ When there's a draw-heavy board on the turn, check-calling is not a good option most of the time. I should usually check-raise or fold.

_ No one ever believes the double check-raise. Nor should they, because it's usually a bluff (at least when I've tried to pull it off).

HU20: Sucking (and resucking) it up

In this heads-up hand against an aggressive player who was 3-betting 18 percent of his hands, I made a pretty awful raise on the flop with overcards and a gutshot draw:

Full Tilt Poker, $2/$4 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 2 Players
LeggoPoker.com - Hand History Converter

Hero (SB): $412

BB: $879.50

Pre-Flop: J Q dealt to Hero (SB)
Hero raises to $12, BB raises to $41, Hero calls $29

Flop: ($82) 7 T 8 (2 Players)
BB bets $68, Hero raises to $180, BB raises to $838.50 and is All-In, Hero calls $191 and is All-In

Upon reflection, my play is simply awful.

I'm not sure, but I think my call of his preflop reraise is OK because there are plenty of hands that I'll dominate against an opponent's wide range, and I could hit hard.

This flop is not one that I hit hard.

I'm not favored against hardly any hands that can call, and I'm not getting any better hands to fold. AA-77 is going to get it in. Overcards with flush draws are going to get it in. Many combinations of a 9 and an overcard are going to get it in. Any pair plus a draw is going to get it in. My equity against any of these hand types isn't great.

I discussed this hand with a friend who suggested that even calling this flop bet is questionable because there are few cards on the turn that I'll be happy with. What do I do if I make top pair? Can I make a move (probably not) if an Ace or a King falls, giving me an open-ended straight draw? What if I pick up a weak spade flush draw?

However, I don't think I'm good enough to fold this flop. In the future, I'm more likely to call the flop and think hard about what to do on the turn.

Turn: ($824) 9 (2 Players - 1 is All-In)

I suckout!

River: ($824) 7 (2 Players - 1 is All-In)

And villain resucks.

Results: $824 Pot ($0.50 Rake)
Hero showed J Q (a straight, Queen high) and LOST (-$412 NET)
BB showed 9 9 (a full house, Nines full of Sevens) and WON $823.50 (+$411.50 NET)

HU19: Ranges

Heads-up coaches differ on how to assess an opponent's hand: Most recommend putting your opposition on a range of hands, but a few suggest a more nebulous approach that's based more on feel.

A previous post created some debate on what "hand reading" means if you're not narrowing an opponent's hand range.

A recent video clearly falls on the side of developing a read by starting with a wide range of hands and deducing an opponent's likely holding based on that range. The video is DogIsHeads UP, Episode 1.

"Range-based thinking is superior to hand-to-hand thinking," Dogishead says. "A player who thinks hand-to-hand cannot achieve the overall resilience that a range-thinking player can."

This contrasts with MasterLJ's approach.

"Heads-up, you can really throw hand ranges out the window and play by feel and match conditions," he says.

MasterLJ backs up his claim with hand examples against loose opponents who float the flop with such a broad variety of hands that it's difficult to put them on any range. In these hands, MasterLJ keeps firing away on the turn and river because his opponent could have anything from air to a gutshot to a flush draw to the nuts. Most of the time, he gets a fold on the turn.

It seems obvious to me that playing against a range of hands is the best strategy when you can do so. Only when you can't eliminate many hands between the preflop round and turn should you fall back on less precise methods.

It's hard though.

In heads-up, where it's essential to consider playing most hands, there are many times when attempts at thinking about a range seem like a waste of time. I often feel more at ease playing the player rather than playing the hands. I'd certainly like to be a master hand reader, but sometimes it feels like a frustrating and impossible task.

The solution may be to use all tools at your disposal as best you can: hand ranges, match flow, flop textures, past history, instinct, aggression and deceptive plays.

"Heads-Up No-Limit Hold 'em"

While "Heads-Up No-Limit Hold 'em" by Collin Moshman lays a solid foundation for heads-up play, it feels incomplete. I learned a few new concepts, but I wish some of the chapters had lasted more than a page or two.

One chapter discusses the "Hit-to-Win Style," in which you plan to commit more chips into the pot only if you connect with the flop.

"You should usually avoid such a passive style when facing a single opponent. ... Most flops miss most hands, and those times when you 'hit' a second-best hand can significantly offset your gains when you do connect well," Moshman writes.

He nails a key point of heads-up play, but he doesn't explain the next logical step: If you can't play hit-to-win, what kinds of flops and opponents should you be bluffing? With what frequency? How do you best disguise your play when you do hit?

In another section of the book, Moshman addresses what kind of turn cards are good to fire a second barrel on. If you're bluffing, he recommends giving up more frequently when a rag falls, and continuing to bluff when an overcard hits. If you actually connected with the flop, he suggests the opposite strategy: continue betting for value when a rag turns, but tend to check behind a turn when a dangerous overcard appears. This is a quality section of the book, but it's too limited and general. I would have preferred more hand examples.

This theme runs throughout the course of the book. Other too-short sections talk about exploiting vs. optimal play, adjusting to paired flops, floating and table selection.

Meanwhile, identifying and adjusting to your opponents is ignored for the most part.

The book also falls short in that it's mostly focused on heads-up sit-and-gos rather than cash games. I wish its emphasis on sngs had been more clearly advertised.

However, I liked the hand examples, most of which were taken from Heads-Up Championships of the past featuring big-name players. Also, the advice is generally sound, which is more than I can say about many poker strategy books.

The main difficulty of "Heads-Up No-Limit Hold 'em" is that it's written like the Boy Scout Handbook for heads-up play. It speaks in helpful generalities, but it won't ensure your survival when you're stranded in the wilderness.

For that, you need coaching videos, analysis, discussion and lots of experience.

HU18: Hand Reading

Because the number of playable hands can be insanely wide in heads-up play, MasterLJ recommends narrowing down an opponent's holdings based on "hand reading" rather than the traditional "hand ranges."

He describes this method in "Heads Up: Zero to Sixty in 15,5650 Seconds, Part 3 of 6."

Instead of starting with an assumption of what your opponent could have, MasterLJ suggests using deductive reasoning to determine your opponent's hand type. You ask yourself, "would my opponent play a draw like that? Would he play top pair like that? Would he bluff this kind of flop?"

It's difficult to evaluate hands HU based mostly on hand ranges, which is what most full ring and six-max players are used to. Thinking about other ways to deduce my opponents' holdings will help my game, although it'll take a lot of practice.

HU17: War of Preflop Aggression

Scribbling down a few notes based on a few heads-up matches:

_ It's suicidal to try to 3-bet a minraiser too much. The only thing it accomplishes is building a pot out of position, which isn't profitable. Against a frequent 3-bettor, minraising from the button is a perfectly viable strategy, which Krantz uses at times in DeucesCracked videos. Calling those minraises should be the default play.

_ I love it when heads-up matches turn into battles of escalating preflop aggression. To counter 3-bets you can 4-bet, and to counter 4-bets you can 5-bet all-in preflop. Because the 5-bet is the last bet to go in, the 4-bettor has to be careful to properly balance his range to avoid folding too much once the pot has already grown large.

There's also a neat downward trickling effect, where a loose 5-bettor will start to see more 4-bets for value than as bluffs and a tight 5-bettor will see more 4-bets as bluffs. If someone is 4-betting too much, some opponents may be less likely to 3-bet unless they intend to call or reraise all-in in response. These adjustments go up and down the ladder, and there are many matches where it's not too hard to find a 3-bet, 4-bet or 5-bet range that your opponent isn't properly responding to.

_ I tried an experiment where I never cold-called out of position, choosing always to either fold or 3-bet. It worked pretty well in this limited trial, although I'm not sure how well it would do as a broad strategy because I'm putting more money in out of position with some marginal hands. Playing this way avoids the annoying dilemma of 3-betting strong hands and weak hands but cold-calling with a well-defined range of hands like K9o and QTo that will check-fold when they miss the flop. I wouldn't recommend 3-betting so much against passive opponents or calling stations.

HU16: Understanding Swings

Without a doubt, the swings in heads-up poker are bigger. You play more and more hands as there are fewer and fewer players, which increases hand ranges and volatility.

Realizing the swings are more dramatic, I tried to embrace them by pushing hands too hard and fast, bluffing too much, having a tough time making laydowns and expecting my time to come just around the corner.

Even heads-up, you can go hours or days without making big hands. Just because heads-up poker has larger swings, that doesn't mean those swings will happen this hand, next hand or the hand after that. Cards have no memory, and they don't care how long it's been since something went your way.

It's easy for me to think that I should overplay any random open-ended straight draw or flush draw on the flop because those draws can be powerful hands, especially HU where your opponent is less likely to have a hand himself.

But I still have to play poker, regardless of perceptions of a hand's inherent strength. I have to read hands, interpret bet sizes, weigh pot odds and play well. Thoughtlessly shoving it in is never a good play.

Video watched: Spaceman in a Cowboy Hat, Ep. 5

Building Blocks

I've picked up some strategic gems from a couple of recent shows. I'll put them down here in hopes that they stick.

Cash Plays: Limit Hold'em with Death Donkey

1) Death Donkey mentions that when the pot is larger, the purpose of your value bets is more to protect the pot. When the pot is smaller, the purpose of your value bets is more to get paid by a worse hand.

2) In limit hold'em, Death Donkey discusses his style of never 4-betting/capping when out of position against an in-position 3-bettor. The reason is that he'll extract that extra small bet on the flop anyway when his opponent continuation bets, and his check-raise on the flop represents a wider range than a 4-bet preflop would.

In position, Death Donkey goes ahead and 4-bets his premium hands preflop.

He says something like, "If you could choose to only play large pots in position and smaller pots out of position, you'd make a lot of money."

Spaceman in a Cowboy Hat: Episode 4

1) The theme of this heads-up NL powerpoint video is that you should try to see how much you can get away with as you adjust to your opponents.

If your opponent will fold as much out of the BB to a minraise as he does to a 3X raise, you risk less to make the same amount with the minraise. If your opponent doesn't distinguish between a 5X and 3X raise preflop, it makes sense to raise bigger with premium hands for value and smaller with lesser hands. Of course, many opponents will catch on if you do this all the time, so you have to pick your spots.

2) The purpose of making larger than 3X 3bets preflop is to reduce your opponent's implied odds. You can raise bigger -- to 10 or 11 BB preflop -- against someone who calls 3bets too frequently, while raising smaller -- like 3X/9BB preflop -- against someone who folds to 3bets too much.

---

On an unrelated note, I have to mention the shenanigans in PokerStars Triple Draw games.

PokerStars has changed the rules of the game without previously informing the players.

Read the 2+2 thread, Ed Miller's take on it and Random Shuffle's reaction.

HU15: Done

Screw heads-up poker.

I'm going back to my regular 6-max and full ring 5/10 NL games after failing to get close to becoming a winning heads-up player.

I certainly don't like admitting that I'm a HU fish, but it's the truth. It's a big relief returning to the games I know and feeling like I have a positive expectation in any game I sit in.

So what went wrong with my heads-up efforts? Why couldn't I break through?

As far as I can tell, my biggest problems were that I had a hard time evaluating hand strengths against wide ranges, and that I didn't have a good sense of the pacing of the game. That led me to time my bluffs poorly and call too lightly.

Now that I've decided to return to my regular games, I'm pretty happy. I'm letting myself listen to music again as I play, and I'm fine playing four tables, compared to the two I limited myself to HU.

In all, my heads-up challenge cost me about $11,000, according to my records. That's not nearly so bad as I perceived it to be, but it still leaves me with some work to do. At my high point, I was up about $4,000, and it's been all downhill since then.

I hope I don't sound too negative about this experience because I learned a lot about the game and I took a chance in a format that had great profit potential. I won't swear off heads-up entirely, but I don't intend to play HU much now.

A few footnotes:

_ Heads-up play does have incredible profit potential for those who are good at it. My opponents owned me and repeatedly got me to put my money in bad. My only problem is that I wasn't good at it.

_ These HU efforts strengthened my overall game. I steal much more, my 6-max and full ring VPIP has increased several points, I'm more confident playing out of position and I'm better postflop.

_ I have a lot of respect for players who are able to master HU, or any form of poker for that matter. It's not easy, and even a concentrated effort won't necessarily pay off.

HU14: No Worries

Video watched: Spaceman in a Cowboy Hat ep. 2

I always have to laugh at myself when I complain about losing one day, and then I feel like a balla the next. It's irrational and results oriented to think that way -- especially when the only thing that's changed is a couple of lucky hands -- but even so, I feel like things are starting to click.

A few broad ideas that are making sense to me:

_ Because I'm playing so many more small and mid-sized pots heads-up, it's important that I win more of those hands rather than go for big all-ins all the time. This is true in full ring and 6-max as well, but it's especially true heads-up. The swings are greater HU, but they seem more incremental, rather than winning or losing one big hand per 100 (or whatever).

_ When I started to make good money in full ring and 6-max games, I realized just how important position was and I became supertight out of position. After thousands and thousands of hands, folding out of position was routine. But heads-up, playing so nitty out of position doesn't fly. I'm coming to appreciate that I can't simply refuse to play out of position, and there are many spots where I can aggro my way into gaining the initiative. Instead of fearing being out of position, I can embrace it when the situation is right.

_ It's more important to play my range against my opponent's range, rather than worry about pot control. Previously, I was routinely checking behind dry flops for pot control, with the logic that I could extract value on later streets when I had the best hand and perhaps hit on the turn when I didn't. Now I realize that if my Ax hand on a 722 flop crushes my opponent's range, many times I'm going to want to bet.

HUJ13: Losing

This effort to get good at heads-up poker is starting to discourage me a bit. I feel like I'm improving daily, but the results aren't there.

It's been more than two months since I've been playing heads-up almost exclusively, and I have little to show for it. I'm not down too much overall, but the lack of wins makes the grind difficult.

This quest to improve at heads-up was predicated on a few ideas: heads-up poker can be very profitable if I get good at it, I needed to get better at postflop play, I wanted a new challenge and I didn't want to grow content playing 5/10 full ring and 6 max all the time.

I still believe those thoughts are valid, but there's a real possibility that I'll never master heads-up poker to the extent that I'll make more money at it than I was in my previous games.

However, as long as I'm continuing to figure the game out and my bankroll is intact, I'm not going to give up. I'll need more evidence before I can determine that I'm not going to make it as a heads-up player.

For now, I still believe I can beat these games the same way learned to beat sngs, limit hold'em up to 15/30 and no limit hold'em up to 5/10. Those games will be waiting for me if I decide my heads-up quest is futile.

Everyone reaches their level of incompetence at some point, but I don't think I'm there yet, and I have room to grow.

HUJ12: Out of position, out of power

Video watched: Spaceman in a Cowbow Hat, ep. 1

I've noticed that I've been calling too much out of position postflop. In general, I want to be raising or folding when I don't have the button. That will somewhat help neutralize the positional advantage of the button, especially if I do a good job of balancing my bluffs and value bets.

Calling out of position defines my hand too clearly and puts me in a sticky spot as the hand develops.

This next hand is one where I misplayed it and got lucky on the river:

Full Tilt Poker, $2/$4 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 2 Players
LeggoPoker.com - Hand History Converter

SB: $400

Hero (BB): $505.50

Pre-Flop: 9 8 dealt to Hero (BB)
SB raises to $12, Hero raises to $40, SB calls $28

Flop: ($80) 7 4 6 (2 Players)
Hero bets $55, SB raises to $146, Hero calls $91

Turn: ($372) K (2 Players)
Hero bets $319.50 and is All-In, SB calls $214 and is All-In

River: ($800) 5 (2 Players - 1 is All-In)


Results: $800 Pot ($0.50 Rake)
SB showed 6 7 (two pair, Sevens and Sixes) and LOST (-$400 NET)
Hero showed 9 8 (a straight, Nine high) and WON $799.50 (+$399.50 NET)

I ran this hand by my coach, and he suggested reraising the flop if I thought I had any fold equity, or simply folding my eight outs. Makes sense to me, although I'll have to work on folding my eight- or nine-out draws on the flop when appropriate.

HUJ11: Working on adaptation

One of the skills I'm focusing on is how to better adapt to my opponents. Every heads-up player is different, and it's entirely possible that a fishy player's style could beat a solid player if the solid player fails to adjust.

There are so many variables, and the challenge is to read hands, predict your opponents' next moves, develop counterstrategies and expose leaks. Inducing mistakes and recognizing them ain't easy, but it's damn profitable.

Here's an unrelated hand where I'm glad I didn't raise the turn when I turned the straight and had the nut flush redraw:

Full Tilt Poker, $2/$4 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 2 Players
LeggoPoker.com - Hand History Converter


BB: $813

Hero (SB): $460

Pre-Flop: A T dealt to Hero (SB)
Hero raises to $12, BB calls $8

Flop: ($24) Q 3 J (2 Players)

BB checks, Hero bets $16, BB calls $16

Turn: ($56) K (2 Players)
BB bets $46, Hero calls $46

River: ($148) 8 (2 Players)
BB bets $125, Hero calls $125

Results: $398 Pot ($0.50 Rake)
BB showed 7 T (a flush, Queen high) and WON $397.50 (+$198.50 NET)
Hero mucked A T (a straight, Ace high) and LOST (-$199 NET)

The donkbet on the turn set off alarm bells, but it also seemed suspicious because most flushes or flush draws would check-raise the flop. Maybe I could have found a fold on the river, but I like my play.

The most important point of this hand is that there was no value in raising the turn. Most worse hands would fold, and all better hands would call.

Video watched: pr1nnyraiding ep. 8

I finally finished this series. It was a strong introduction to a general strategy against various player types. Its downside was that it didn't go far into deeper concepts, but I know other series will.

My plan for now is to keep watching videos and improving, mostly at the 2/4 level. It's kind of hard to find weak players at limits 5/10 and above, so I know I need to be better prepared before I take on many of the solid regulars.

I also intend to start taking a closer look at hand histories, which is something I haven't been doing as much since playing heads-up because so many decisions are circumstantial. But that's no excuse not to review and analyze my play.

HUJ10: Getting coached

I got a poker coach, and it was completely worth it.

Thanks to DeucesCracked for setting me up with cowpig, whose grasp of the heads-up game humbled me. With a coach sweating me as I played, I felt like I could take on anyone.

I wanted to sit at a couple of $5/10 tables for my coaching session, but the action was a bit slow and I couldn't find any good games. But after a few minutes, I settled in for two $2/4 tables against an aggressive player who 3-bet and fired two bullets way too much.

I wish I could retain all the lessons I picked up, but it will take time and practice for these details to sink in.

I'll recount a few of them in hopes that they stick:

On a dry A5x flop, I check-raised with a set of 5s and went for a second check-raise on the turn or river. Unfortunately, my opponent didn't bite with his A3o. I missed a little value, but perhaps the value is made up for in those times when I can check-raise and get paid off.

There were also many times when I was told I needed to slowplay more. Previously, there were many hands that I would slowplay on the flop but show my true intentions on the turn. The problem with this strategy is that it makes my strong hand pretty transparent and misses out on value from hands that might bet into me or call a bet on the river.

Too often, I sacrifice value because I feel like I need to protect my hand, but that doesn't make sense when I'm up against a fairly narrow range that can hit on the river. I shouldn't fear the flush draw so much, and I should be more nimble in my re-evaluation of my hand strength on successive streets.

A final point is that exploitative strategies can have far more value than so-called optimal strategies. By that I mean that if you find a clear pattern in your opponent's game, it makes so much more sense to take advantage of it than trying to otherwise balance your range. For example, against a player who folds to 4-bets too frequently, I should 4-bet with weaker hands while cold-calling with premium hands.

Too often, I miss value because I've trained myself to make my bluffs and value bets look alike all the time.

I picked up many other tips too, and I feel like my profitability has instantly jumped a few BB/100. As my coach said, this kind of instruction will rapidly boost my learning curve, making it so I gain knowledge in a couple of hours that would otherwise take me thousands of hands and lots of thought to acquire.

HUJ9: One-table wonder

I usually single-table heads-up games so that I can get a feel for the flow of the match and look closely for exploitable situations. Heads-up requires more attention that six-max or full ring games, and I lose more value than I gain from multitabling.

One common-sense trick that I've started using is opening up my opponents' other tables as I play them on a single table.

On the other tables, I can see how my opponent is doing. If he has a tough decision on his other table, I can bluff more easily because he's less likely to play back. If he recently suffered a bad beat on another table, he may be more likely to be tilting.

This kind of information results in easy money. Give it a try because it can pay off immediately.

HUJ8: Postflop play

A lot of the money in hold'em cash games is made postflop, which is how it should be. Everything can change with the turn of a card or two, and later streets are also when the big bets go in. It's also appropriate that it's not easy to play postflop.

I remember before I played in my lone WSOP event, a $1,500 six-max tourney last year, my plan was to see some flops and "outplay my opponents postflop."

In retrospect, it's pretty funny that I uttered that phrase because I was probably a below-average player postflop. Instead, I tried to play preflop pots and in position to give myself an edge. But that edge didn't mean I knew how to handle relative hand strengths on various flop textures.

I'm getting a better idea of postflop play. That's one area where this heads-up challenge is vastly improving my game.

I'm working on recognizing the difference between top pair and second pair, between inducing a bluff and betting for value, between continuation betting on a paired flop and checking behind, between pot control and fastplays. Each hand is circumstantial, but I'm getting a better handle on how I should be thinking.

For example, on a dry flop, it's less likely that either you or your opponent hit a piece of it. At the same time, it's more likely that a player who hit a piece of the flop is going to see a showdown. So it becomes easier to bluff against a non-thinking opponent who will fold to pressure, and it becomes more difficult to bluff opponents who know the strength of Ace-high on a 722 flop.

Then I have to ask myself: if I have A6 on a 722 flop, do I want to continuation bet because my hand figures to be best and I'm happy to take it down? Or do I check behind and either bet or call the turn? What would I do with K6 in that situation? What would I do with 77? The idea that I should bet-bet-bet has gotten me in big trouble in the past.

Video: pr1nnyraiding ep. 7

As a more typical "sweat" type video, I felt more entertained by it but less educated than by previous episodes of the series. There were certainly a few nuggets that I want to remember:

_ Against an opponent who 3-bets frequently, his general cold-calling range can be something like 78-QT and low pockets.

_ Unconnected, unsuited hands with 9s in them _ K9, Q9 and J9 _ don't fare too well when cold-calling out of position. Just folding is usually better.