yep, never fold, ever, that way your non showdown losses will significantly decrease. Sure you may loose alot more cash but your red line should dissapear or go positive if others fold to youI hope that helpPoker Genius Jackal
Its pretty standard mate, not a great deal you can do, except try and get opponents to fold for big pots and not go to showdown!I think you need lots of agression post flop basically and as you know at the low limits donks aren't folding very much, so no point bluffing off stacks.As long as your overall moneys won is +ve then thats all you can do IMO.
That redline is pretty damn awful. 25 buyins in under 40k hands (again) is not standard at all. Glad you realise it needs addressing because it sure does. Mine was a loser but prob around the $1k mark iirc, but DB gone so can't give you comparison. IMO this isn't bluffing vs donks, it can't be that much. This is more like double barelling a lot vs regs and giving up river. Which then turns into triple barelling when the board runs out bad for you and getting bluff raised. Probably some consistently bad picks on flop textures vs competent villains. We'll talk about it more in Feb.This reply is way longer than I planned, I'll get this witty retort in at the end though...You're gay
Ben and bluffing? Burnley milk must never have played with him live. Ben and Nuts is more like it ;-)
Just had brainwave.Limp/call preflop. Check down or check/call every street. Shove every river. Watch that redline go boom!Looking forward to next post, "Can anyone help me with my gay blueline, and my rent"
ps when we gonna get a home game going, am gagging to bust you for once ben, you cant keep hitting quads or royal flushes vs me?
Red Line is no issue whatsoever in my opinion.I won over 30K at NLHE and have a negative red line, your lines are not mutually exclusive and bottom line all that matters.
http://www.pokerlistings.com/strategy/the-redline-articleA word to the wise'If you're a winning poker player, it's best not to obsess over having a positive redline.If your style is working for you, continue with it. Chances are messing with what works is going to make you less money - not more.'
That redline is not bad at all Brenos. It's not the best by no means, but it is fairly standard for a LAG player. They are going to get into a lot of post flop situations, this is the nature of 6-max.Obv full ring is different, but AFAIK Holmes plays 6-max exclusively.
Joking aside, fundamentally I think there is nothing wrong with a -ive red line. Most of the winningest players I know have -ive lines. Just that this example is a particularly bad one. Holmes would be stupid to not try and at least improve a -7bb/100 non SD trend. I'm not implying that he must have a +ive red line, just to strive to improve on it. Not pursuing those extra bbs/100 is bad practice!
Cheers fellas - I've had some decent feedback because of this post so glad I stuck up my graph, even if I did get the odd predictable gay jibe :-)I'm in agreement with Brenos last comment on this one, as although a negative red line is nothing to be ashamed of (everyone I know has one), mine is particularly gruesome due to the linear downward motion. Post flop is still by far my biggest weakness, and think this is the proof. More concentration on opponents tendencies needed me thinks, hopefully will let me outplay people a bit rather than robotic cbet / check / fold line, or DB, check, fold.
Not much more I can add to the advice than above -but I wish you luck with removing that red line!