[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
thanks man, im glad you enjoyed it, above and beyond questionable strategy choices on my part.

there were choices i made that i fully admit were -EV from a math/percentage perspective but made sense to me at the time because i felt i had suitable reads on specific players to guage my situation accurately post flop, or because i felt there was suitable benefits to table image/meta game, but im certainly willing to entertain criticism on those plays in case i missed something obvious.

there were other times where i felt i played strong hands too passively in position, which is certainly a valid cause for cringing and i will take any and all suggestions to improve my play on those hands to heart.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the #1 error I saw without breaking down into specific hands was your overly liberal use of implied odds vs bad opponents because you felt you could outplay them. For example there is nothing wrong with calling with 89o in the BB vs an UTG raiser if her range is the best 15-18% of hands if you play well post flop even if her equity edge is 67% - this is due to pot size, size of a bet to call, closing the action and HU play. But calling with 89o in any other position because of your implied odds is a losing proposition. There were some post flop examples as well, I am just pointing this one thing out because even with your suitable read its -EV from the getgo. Remember 89o has no showdown value, your looking to hit the flop hard or you just lost 2 bets vs her range.