<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Thinking Poker &#187; polarized range</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thinkingpoker.net/tag/polarized-range/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thinkingpoker.net</link>
	<description>Poker strategy blog, poker book reviews, trip reports and more!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:07:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Book Review: Easy Game by Andrew Seidman</title>
		<link>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/02/book-review-easy-game-by-andrew-seidman/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/02/book-review-easy-game-by-andrew-seidman/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:07:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>foucault</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Poker Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3-bet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4-bet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[5-bet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6-max]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew seidman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[balugawhale]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bet sizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bluff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[continuation bet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deep stacks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[double barrel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[easy game]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[float]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand reading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[loose aggressive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NLHE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[no-limit hold 'em]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poker Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polarized range]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[semi-bluff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[short-handed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thin value bet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[triple barrel]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=8320</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just published a review of one of the best and most advanced poker books I&#8217;ve encountered, the 3rd Edition of Andrew &#8220;BalugaWhale&#8221; Seidman&#8217;s Easy Game. It&#8217;s probably too advanced for your average recreational player, but if you want to be a serious competitor at no-limit hold &#8216;em it&#8217;s a marvelous read. Here&#8217;s a bit [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.thinkingpoker.net/poker-book-reviews/book-review-easy-game-by-andrew-seidman/easy-game-460/" rel="attachment wp-att-8318"><img class="alignright size-medium wp-image-8318" title="easy-game-460" src="http://www.thinkingpoker.net/images//easy-game-460-199x300.png" alt="" width="199" height="300" /></a>I just published a<a href="http://www.thinkingpoker.net/poker-book-reviews/book-review-easy-game-by-andrew-seidman/"> review</a> of one of the best and most advanced poker books I&#8217;ve encountered, the 3rd Edition of <a href="http://www.balugawhale.com/">Andrew &#8220;BalugaWhale&#8221; Seidman&#8217;s <em>Easy Game</em></a>. It&#8217;s probably too advanced for your average recreational player, but if you want to be a serious competitor at no-limit hold &#8216;em it&#8217;s a marvelous read. Here&#8217;s a bit of what I had to say about it:</p>
<blockquote><p>Seidman not only updates his advice for contemporary game conditions but also corrects a few of his own earlier mistakes and re-explains some material in light of his current thinking about the game. The result is substantial value added to what was already an exceptionally good no-limit hold &#8216;em cash game book, one of the few offering really high-level insights to experienced players.</p></blockquote>
<p>You can read the full review at <a href="http://www.thinkingpoker.net/poker-book-reviews/book-review-easy-game-by-andrew-seidman/">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/poker-book-reviews/book-review-easy-game-by-andrew-seidman/</a>.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/02/book-review-easy-game-by-andrew-seidman/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PCA Trip Report, Part 1</title>
		<link>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/02/pca-trip-report-part-1/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/02/pca-trip-report-part-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:16:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>foucault</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Trip Report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3-bet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bet sizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bjoern schneider]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bluff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[continuation bet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deep stacks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[double barrel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[float]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[full ring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand reading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[loose aggressive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NLHE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[no-limit hold 'em]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PCA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poker Stars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poker Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pokerstars caribbean adventure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polarized range]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[semi-bluff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thin value bet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tournament]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=8302</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The wait is over! I&#8217;m flattered by everyone who&#8217;s been asking about this. Part 1 of my PCA Trip Report is now appearing in 2+2 Magazine. Part 2 will be in next month&#8217;s magazine. Here&#8217;s a snippet from one of the more interesting hands I played: Saskatchewan limped UTG again, Belgium limped behind, and I [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The wait is over! I&#8217;m flattered by everyone who&#8217;s been asking about this. <a href="http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/issue86/andrew-brokos-pca-trip-report-part1.php">Part 1 of my PCA Trip Report</a> is now appearing in 2+2 Magazine. Part 2 will be in next month&#8217;s magazine. Here&#8217;s a snippet from one of the more interesting hands I played:</p>
<blockquote><p>Saskatchewan limped UTG again, Belgium limped behind, and I raised to 1,000 with A4o in the CO. This raise really blurs the line between “value” and “making a move”, since I do expect to win often with a continuation bet but I also think A4 is ahead of both of their ranges. Essentially I&#8217;ve got position and the best hand, so even though it might be tricky to play post-flop, I don&#8217;t see how raising can be bad. Saskatchewan joked about how “you internet guys don&#8217;t allow limping” and called, and Belgium called as well. They both checked a K83 rainbow, I bet 1,600, Saskatchewan folded, and Belgium quickly raised to 5,100. I was sure he was making a move, so I considered my options.</p></blockquote>
<p>This trip report focuses almost exclusively on the poker. If you want to read about the rest of the trip, check out <a href="http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/01/hello-goodbye-team-online/">Hello, Goodbye, Team Online</a>.</p>
<p>As always, please let me know what you think!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/02/pca-trip-report-part-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s Your Play? PCA Edition Results</title>
		<link>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/01/whats-your-play-pca-edition-results/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/01/whats-your-play-pca-edition-results/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:18:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>foucault</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Poker Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bet sizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bluff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deep stacks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[full ring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand reading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NLHE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[no-limit hold 'em]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PCA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pokerstars caribbean adventure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polarized range]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thin value bet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tournament]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=8291</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This week&#8217;s WYP is a little different, in that I don&#8217;t have a strong opinion about what&#8217;s best. I was actually hoping some of you smart people could help me out there, in particular with regard to how V2&#8242;s question and timing on the turn influences his range. My own, possibly results-oriented thinking was that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignleft" title="What's Your Play Results" src="http://www.thinkingpoker.net/images/general/whats-your-play-results.jpg" alt="" />This week&#8217;s WYP is a little different, in that I don&#8217;t have a strong opinion about what&#8217;s best. I was actually hoping some of you smart people could help me out there, in particular with regard to how V2&#8242;s question and timing on the turn influences his range. My own, possibly results-oriented thinking was that it might weight him towards weaker draws. With a flush draw or open-ended draw, I think he might call without really thinking about it. If he&#8217;s asking, that could weight him towards gutshots or something like an 8 that has a chance of being good (in his eyes &#8211; no one&#8217;s saying he&#8217;s a great hand reader) plus some outs to improve. I also thought Gareth&#8217;s suggestion was interesting that V2&#8242;s indecision may have been &#8220;between calling/raising with a hand like 86s&#8221;.</p>
<p>I say I may be results oriented because I bet 3000, V1 sighed and folded, and V2 called with Jh 8h.</p>
<p><strong>Value Betting</strong></p>
<p>As many of you identified, Hero is very likely to have the best hand on the river. The question, however is not only how but whether he can get value from it. Especially in multi-way pots, where people tend to be more tight and passive, it can be difficult to get value from medium-strength hands.</p>
<p>I agree with Gareth that &#8220;we should assume we have the nuts versus V1&#8243;. We can&#8217;t, however, assume that he calls with worse when we bet again into two people on a card that improves some of the hands his JJ or whatever was beating on the turn.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t agree that we have the nuts versus V2. His range looks more to me like busted draws or trips, meaning he either has us beat or can&#8217;t call a bet. In Bond2King&#8217;s words, &#8220;V2′s range is mostly missed draws or maybe an 8 or a 6, but he’s not calling with a 6 anyway.&#8221;</p>
<p>The key consideration behind betting, then, is whether the times V1 calls with worse outweigh the times V2 holds better. I&#8217;m still not sure of the answer. I&#8217;m also not sure whether Hero can call a river bet, and if so whether doing so is more profitable than value betting.</p>
<p><strong>Scenario A: Villain 1 bets 3000, Villain 2 folds</strong></p>
<p>Although V1 is very unlikely to hold a better hand than ours, I also think he&#8217;s very unlikely to bluff or value bet worse. Even with KQ, which would be oddly played to this point, I don&#8217;t see what he can expect to be called by. Passive live players suck at thin value betting anyway. Gareth suggests the possibility of a frustration bet, but he didn&#8217;t seem frustrated and in any event with something like 99 he may still be thinking he&#8217;s got a chance of winning if it checks down. Passive live players like seeing showdowns. I&#8217;d be inclined to fold.</p>
<p><strong>Scenario B: Villain 1 checks, Villain 2 bets 3000</strong></p>
<p>I feel better about calling here, but it&#8217;s not a lock. The scared money read makes me wonder whether he&#8217;d bluff into two people when so many draws obviously missed. He might, though, and I think there&#8217;s a good chance a live read could help me decide. Probably I&#8217;d call.</p>
<p><strong>Scenario C: Villain 1 bets 3000, Villain 2 calls</strong></p>
<p>I&#8217;d fold without thinking too hard about it.</p>
<p>In fact I like cbeak&#8217;s comment that, &#8220;another aspect of checking that I think is good is that it is lower risk insofar as we can see how things play out before deciding (avoiding, for example, hero bets, v1 calls, v2 raises, hero?).&#8221; When a decision is close, especially in live poker, I tend to err towards letting my opponents act, as they often give away information via physical tells or bet sizing. In other words, if it&#8217;s close anyway, I like to to create opportunities to collect more information that might help me make a profitable decision. So I kind of wish I&#8217;d checked here planning to see what happens and decide.</p>
<p>Thanks for all the comments, and sorry that I don&#8217;t have a more definitive answer for you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/01/whats-your-play-pca-edition-results/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Seminar Announcement: Hand Reading</title>
		<link>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/01/seminar-announcement-hand-reading/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/01/seminar-announcement-hand-reading/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:06:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>foucault</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Poker Coaching]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand reading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NLHE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[no-limit hold 'em]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poker Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polarized range]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tournament]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=8287</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ll be leading a small-group seminar on Hand Reading on Wednesday, February 8th at 2PM Eastern (19:00 GMT). The cost is $150/person, which includes a preparatory curriculum introducing a basic hand-reading technique, the two-hour seminar featuring opportunities to practice this method and receive individualized feedback, advanced strategy advice on counteracting opponents who hand-read well, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ll be leading a small-group seminar on <strong>Hand Reading</strong> on <strong>Wednesday, February 8th</strong> at <strong>2PM Eastern</strong> (19:00 GMT). The cost is $150/person, which includes a preparatory curriculum introducing a basic hand-reading technique, the two-hour seminar featuring opportunities to practice this method and receive individualized feedback, advanced strategy advice on counteracting opponents who hand-read well, and a follow-up curriculum to help you practice and expand your skills.</p>
<p>Thinking Poker Tournament Seminars are pre-scheduled, small-group discussions focused on the most common mistakes and skills gaps that I see in my NLHE tournament students. Each two-hour seminar costs $150 per person and is capped at five participants, to enable individualized attention and opportunities for everyone to ask questions and participate in discussions. The content is prepared and the discussion facilitated by me- it’s like an interactive poker video!</p>
<p>Hand reading is what separates mediocre and great post-flop play. It&#8217;s what enables you to extract an extra bet when you&#8217;re ahead, save a (usually large) bet when you&#8217;re beat, and pick off bluffs with weak hands that lesser players would fold without thinking twice. It&#8217;s the way great players accumulate chips in the early stages of a tournament when they aren&#8217;t getting slapped in the face with the deck.</p>
<p>To register, please e-mail andrew (at) thinkingpoker (dot) net with subject line “Hand Reading Seminar”. If you have questions, please post them here, as others may be wondering the same things. Also please leave a comment if there’s a topic you’re interested in or a time that would be better for you- there’s plenty of flexibility to accommodate everyone, I just need to know what you want to see!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/01/seminar-announcement-hand-reading/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s Your Play? PCA Edition</title>
		<link>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/01/whats-your-play-pca-edition/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/01/whats-your-play-pca-edition/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:34:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>foucault</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Poker Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bluff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deep stacks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand reading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[multiway pot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NLHE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[no-limit hold 'em]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PCA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pokerstars caribbean adventure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polarized range]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thin value bet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tournament]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[what's your play]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=8271</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is really the second WYP from the PCA, but the first was technically a &#8220;What&#8217;s Your Plan?&#8221;, and I couldn&#8217;t think of a catchier name for this one. It takes during Level 2 of the tournament, with blinds of 75/150 and effective stacks of well over 20K (I forget how much exactly but it [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignleft" title="What's Your Play?" src="http://www.thinkingpoker.net/images/general/whats-your-play-160.jpg" alt="" width="160" height="205" />This is really the second WYP from the PCA, but <a href="http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/01/whats-your-plan-flopped-pair-draw/">the first was technically a &#8220;What&#8217;s Your Plan</a>?&#8221;, and I couldn&#8217;t think of a catchier name for this one. It takes during Level 2 of the tournament, with blinds of 75/150 and effective stacks of well over 20K (I forget how much exactly but it wasn&#8217;t relevant for the hand).</p>
<p>Hero: It&#8217;s me. Late 20&#8242;s, wearing a PokerStars Team Online patch and sunglasses, not saying much but friendly when I do happen my mouth. I&#8217;ve been quiet so far and recently showed down KK in a 3-bet pot.</p>
<p>Villain 1: Middle-aged Canadian, recreational player, on the loose-passive side. He limps more than he raises in early position.</p>
<p>Villain 2: Young Spanish kid, maybe 22 at the oldest. This is likely one of the biggest events he&#8217;s played, as he&#8217;s giving off a bit of a &#8220;scared money&#8221;-vibe.</p>
<p>Villain 1 opens to 450 in early position, Villain 2 calls in the CO, and Hero calls with As Qs in the SB. The flop came Qd 8c 2h and checks all the way around. Hero bets 900 on a 6c turn, Villain 1 quickly calls, and Villain 2 asks how much, thinks for 15-20 seconds, and calls.</p>
<p>The river is the 8d, making the final board Qd 8c 2h 6c 8d. There&#8217;s 4200 in the pot. Do you bet or check? If you bet, how much? If you check, how do you respond to each of the following?</p>
<p>a) Villain 1 bets 3000, Villain 2 folds.</p>
<p>b) Villain 1 bets 3000, Villain 2 colds.</p>
<p>c) Villain 1 checks, Villain 2 bets 3000.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll post results and my thoughts on Friday, as usual.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thinkingpoker.net/2012/01/whats-your-play-pca-edition/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>28</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

