Four questions to ask yourself if you are running bad at poker (Daniel Negreanu)

[Debi]

Daniel Negreanu posted this on Twitter and it is too good not to share:

Four questions to ask yourself if you are running bad at poker:

1. When I'm all in am I getting it consistently with the worst hand?

If you are often finding yourself getting it all in with A9 against AK, that could mean you are playing too reckless preflop. There will be natural stretches where you are playing the spots well and just running unlucky, but its worth looking at maybe you are getting it in too light.

2. Am I consistently going broke paying people off on the river?

If so, this could mean you are being a bit too much of a hero. If you aren't catching your opponents bluffing rivers very often, it could also mean they have you correctly pegged you as a POW (Pay Off Wizard) and have adjusted their bluffing frequencies against you because you are calling too often.

3. Am I just bluffing it off too much?

This could mean several things, but its likely you are picking bad spots to bluff because you aren't properly assessing your opponents calling range. Just because a solver says your bluff was good... doesn't make it true. Pay attention. If you notice an opponent isn't capable of making big laydowns, then its foolish to depend on him making the "right fold." It's never their mistake when they call your bluff and win. That's on you.

4. Do I consistently find myself short stacked near the bubble? If you consistently find yourself with a short stack near the bubble?

It it is highly likely a result of you playing too conservative. Not playing enough hands, being too passive, and overall just not bluffing enough spots. A fear of going broke is an impossible obstacle to overcome if you want to be a winning tournament player. The real money is awarded to the top three. A life of min cashing spells doom for your bankroll.

 

[Marshmalo1994]

Yes, to all of the above. 😅
Thanks for sharing this!

 

[Emily Trott]

Those are excellent pieces of advice.

#1 - Not me because going allin pre-flop I usually have the best hand, or get my KK busted by AA.
#2 - Not very often. The way I play I'll usually be out already when the river card comes. Or my opponents will already have folded before the river.
#3 - I'm about 50-50 when it comes to bluffing.
#4 - Definitely me! In fact I may be the queen of being short stacked near the bubble.

 

[gon4iypes]

Amazingly good advice, and very thought provoking. Thanks for sharing it Debi

 

[markdias]

Wow, that's very good, I analyzed it here, I lose a lot of all ins but something around 50% of the big hands, I usually have less chips, I get a lot of folds too, I don't usually bluff a lot, only when I have a lot of chips, I usually getting to the bubble with few chips is very constant...

 

[fundiver199]

Excellent post by DNEG. Some additional thoughts:

1) But its also true, that if you always get it in good, you are not getting it in enough. There are plenty of spots, especially in online turbo SnGs or MTTs, where its completely correct to get it in with A9. Sometimes you will then run into AK or another premium hand, but this does not mean, you did anything wrong. Especially not when you were the player jamming rather than calling.

2) Bluff catching is an art, and its a fine line between making a hero call and a bad call. If in dought its never a bad thing to have a default of folding. In plenty of situations people are not bluffing as often, as we think, and there is an ICM penalty for calling in tournaments.

3) Just as important as frequenzy is thinking about, if you are telling a good story? If you have no or very few good hands, that would take a certain line for value, then good opponents will figure out, that your range is mostly bluffs, and they will snap you off.

4) Absolutely true. The amount of posts in this forum, where people advocate for making huge folds on the bubble, are amazing. Not being overly afraid to bubble is for sure a way to gain an edge on the field.

 

[P86]

Interesting bit I don't think it cover it all specially the last question doesn't have a direct correlation to running bad because you can run bad while having s good stack you grinded with small hands but at a point in a MTT you will face a 50/50 call...

 

[Debi]

Excellent post by DNEG. Some additional thoughts:

1) But its also true, that if you always get it in good, you are not getting it in enough. There are plenty of spots, especially in online turbo SnGs or MTTs, where its completely correct to get it in with A9. Sometimes you will then run into AK or another premium hand, but this does not mean, you did anything wrong. Especially not when you were the player jamming rather than calling.

2) Bluff catching is an art, and its a fine line between making a hero call and a bad call. If in dought its never a bad thing to have a default of folding. In plenty of situations people are not bluffing as often, as we think, and there is an ICM penalty for calling in tournaments.

3) Just as important as frequenzy is thinking about, if you are telling a good story? If you have no or very few good hands, that would take a certain line for value, then good opponents will figure out, that your range is mostly bluffs, and they will snap you off.

4) Absolutely true. The amount of posts in this forum, where people advocate for making huge folds on the bubble, are amazing. Not being overly afraid to bubble is for sure a way to gain an edge on the field.

On #4 - it is a fine balance. I have busted plenty of times near the bubble - but almost always with big hands. How tight you play on the bubble should be determined by what the min cash is and what your bankroll is.

 

[Canaldo Kao]

I'm a big fan of Negreanu, I'm going to read what he posted there two or three times and absorb something. Thanks for sharing!

 

[pancho_1954]

#2 and #4 have definitely happened to me a lot and I think it's something I've been thinking about for a while now, especially how to improve these aspects, sometimes I think it's a bit difficult for me to adapt to the changes in my game , every day is a constant learning, thanks for sharing, this helps a little more to be thoughtful

 

[georgi krastev]

3. Am I just bluffing it off too much?

This can become a chronic problem…

 

[fundiver199]

On #4 - it is a fine balance. I have busted plenty of times near the bubble - but almost always with big hands. How tight you play on the bubble should be determined by what the min cash is and what your bankroll is.

Bubble play should for sure be determined by the tournament structure. At one end we have satellite tournaments, where the only goal is to cash. So not busting on the bubble is literally everything. At the other end we have something like the now historic 180 man SnGs on pokerstars, where 27 places got paid. But a min-cash was only slightly more than the buyin, and most of the money was in the top 3. So in that format it was hardly even worth to make any adjustments on the bubble.

In a standard online MTT, something like 30% of the price pool is distributed on the bubble, meaning that after the bubble chips are worth 30% less. This lead to some risk aversion, but it still dont justify folding QQ preflop, if you only have 10 blinds. An online 6-man or 9-man SnG has much more risk aversion on the bubble, because 60-70% of the price pool is distributed there. This mean, that as the mid-stack you sometimes need to fold AK, if the chipleader moves all-in preflop. Which would never be the case in a normal MTT.

As for bankroll we should ideally always be bankrolled for the games, we play. But of course this is pretty far from reality. For live tournament players in particular its really difficult to play enough to ever reach "the long term". And if they are some kind of recreational player, its very unpractical and probably also unnessesary to have a bankroll. So its totally understandeble, that people might sometimes want to give up some long term EV and focus on "the bird in the hand rather than the 10 on the roof". And the same can be said for an online player, who satellited into an event way above their bankroll.

But on the other side maybe the motivation for playing the satellite or entering the live event was a dream of winning big life changing money. And in that case why should that dream be forgotten, just because a min-cash is in sight? I recently heard a PokerStars commentator say, that "ICM was invented to keep poor people poor". And this is certainly something to keep in mind, if you play tournaments, where the money for the top players could actually be life changing for you.

 

[Debi]

Bubble play should for sure be determined by the tournament structure. At one end we have satellite tournaments, where the only goal is to cash. So not busting on the bubble is literally everything. At the other end we have something like the now historic 180 man SnGs on PokerStars, where 27 places got paid. But a min-cash was only slightly more than the buyin, and most of the money was in the top 3. So in that format it was hardly even worth to make any adjustments on the bubble.

In a standard online MTT, something like 30% of the price pool is distributed on the bubble, meaning that after the bubble chips are worth 30% less. This lead to some risk aversion, but it still dont justify folding QQ preflop, if you only have 10 blinds. An online 6-man or 9-man SnG has much more risk aversion on the bubble, because 60-70% of the price pool is distributed there. This mean, that as the mid-stack you sometimes need to fold AK, if the chipleader moves all-in preflop. Which would never be the case in a normal MTT.

As for bankroll we should ideally always be bankrolled for the games, we play. But of course this is pretty far from reality. For live tournament players in particular its really difficult to play enough to ever reach "the long term". And if they are some kind of recreational player, its very unpractical and probably also unnessesary to have a bankroll. So its totally understandeble, that people might sometimes want to give up some long term EV and focus on "the bird in the hand rather than the 10 on the roof". And the same can be said for an online player, who satellited into an event way above their bankroll.

But on the other side maybe the motivation for playing the satellite or entering the live event was a dream of winning big life changing money. And in that case why should that dream be forgotten, just because a min-cash is in sight? I recently heard a PokerStars commentator say, that "ICM was invented to keep poor people poor". And this is certainly something to keep in mind, if you play tournaments, where the money for the top players could actually be life changing for you.

Life changing but very unrealistic. If you are playing in a tournament with 1000+ players only 1 person is getting that top prize. Of course every bubble situation is dependent on the individual's situation.

When you are only playing a few tournaments and the min cash is a significant portion of your bankroll for those tournaments - there is nothing wrong with tightening your range with a short stack when close to the bubble - if you know you can make to min cash. You then have the opportunity to build that stack up after the bubble.

I am not disagreeing with Daniel and only slightly disagreeing with you. It shouldn't be happening on a regular basis but there are situations where it is the right thing to do.

I only play live so that is what I am referring to - I don't even remember enoough about online tournament structures to comment about that.

At the wsop this year I had this happen to my twice. The first time was in a $500 tournament with over 4300 players in it. I was not super short, but short. I felt confident I could make it to the bubble by tightening up my range and I did. I went on to finish 41st for $5400.

The 2nd time I was short on the bubble - and not totally confident I could make it to the bubble for an $1800 min cash - but reasonably confident. I tightened up but was never going to fold a premium hand. I got QQ and went all in - got called by KK and busted.

I feel I played correctly in both situations. QQ was the bottom of my very tight range in this situation - I would likely have folded JJ and definitely anything lower.

But if the min cash had been small my range would have expanded.

 

[ADRI7HO]

Life changing but very unrealistic. If you are playing in a tournament with 1000+ players only 1 person is getting that top prize. Of course every bubble situation is dependent on the individual's situation.

When you are only playing a few tournaments and the min cash is a significant portion of your bankroll for those tournaments - there is nothing wrong with tightening your range with a short stack when close to the bubble - if you know you can make to min cash. You then have the opportunity to build that stack up after the bubble.

I am not disagreeing with Daniel and only slightly disagreeing with you. It shouldn't be happening on a regular basis but there are situations where it is the right thing to do.

I only play live so that is what I am referring to - I don't even remember enoough about online tournament structures to comment about that.

At the WSOP this year I had this happen to my twice. The first time was in a $500 tournament with over 4300 players in it. I was not super short, but short. I felt confident I could make it to the bubble by tightening up my range and I did. I went on to finish 41st for $5400.

The 2nd time I was short on the bubble - and not totally confident I could make it to the bubble for an $1800 min cash - but reasonably confident. I tightened up but was never going to fold a premium hand. I got QQ and went all in - got called by KK and busted.

I feel I played correctly in both situations. QQ was the bottom of my very tight range in this situation - I would likely have folded JJ and definitely anything lower.

But if the min cash had been small my range would have expanded.

I like to read Daniel Negreanu's thoughts, but the QQ pair in the bubble has been my downfall many times.
I've been out with him at least a dozen times pre ITM and nowadays on the bubble I just max flop him and if the flop is not right I'll fold.

 

[0546474]

All four points are good and correct advice!!! I think that as an addition to these points, you can see the statistics on the site sharkscope.com !!! If you know how to use this site correctly, then looking at the statistics you can learn a lot about the style of the opponent's play or about the leaks in your game !!!

 

[ebazynski]

Yes, #4 can be frustrating and is an area I'm looking to improve on. Changing gears to become more aggressive near the bubble is the challenge for me.

 

[bullkk]

These are good thoughts, we must take into account.

 

[Dmitriy_rus7]

It was interesting to read🙂

 

[fundiver199]

I am not disagreeing with Daniel and only slightly disagreeing with you. It shouldn't be happening on a regular basis but there are situations where it is the right thing to do.

And if we are honest, then almost everyone has done it. I have also done it sometimes, if it had been a bad session, and it was an MTT near the upper end of my buyin span. The thoughts being something like "let me at least cut my losses for this session by locking up a min-cash here". The important is, that we only give up on marginal spots and not the massively profitable ones. And tightening up does not always mean folding. It can also mean calling preflop with a hand, we would normally 3-bet, and generally trying to keep the pot small rather than go after thin value.

 

[Poker Orifice]

And if we are honest, then almost everyone has done it. I have also done it sometimes, if it had been a bad session, and it was an MTT near the upper end of my buyin span. The thoughts being something like "let me at least cut my losses for this session by locking up a min-cash here".

&/or
5 hours into this MTT... Let me at least cash in this eff'n thing now. (perhaps after having been in good situation but maybe losing a couple of large pots, etc. etc.).
Definitely huge leak for many posters on here... 'Bubble play'... not picking up on 'good spots', not understanding ICM and how, why, when and to whom to apply pressure. Waiting to cash and then hoping to build a stack isn't optimal imo.

 

[anicool]

That is great. Thank you

 

[BOXING71]

Debi, thank you so much for sharing with us. Enjoyed reading the comments.

 

[Navin Sarabjeet]

Great advice here!
Thanks for posting it here Debi.

 

[carloscfg23]

Thanks for the recommendations, it is good to evaluate the plays that are not strong to verify the risk and, if possible, have knowledge of the other player

 

[Vallet]

These are the questions that everyone should think about in case of unsuccessful actions. If opponents manage to do controversial things, many try to do the same. But nothing comes out. For example, when the worst hands consistently beat our premium hands. You start to doubt and expand the range.