2+2 Censorship Rererevisited
Abdul Jalib
Kevin J wrote:
> I agree that it's wise to take into account various philosophies and
> ideas when contemplating poker strategy. I can only speak for myself,
> but there is good reason why I lean towards Sklansky, Malmuth, Zee and
> Feeney. Simply put, I am convinced that these guys can and do, beat
> the games they write about.
I, Abdul, responded as follows:
> Suppose there was a simple proposition P, something that could be
> decisively determined quickly to arbitrary confidence by simply
> looking. Something objective like "the light is on," not a subjective
> proposition like "a tight image is best." Suppose the discussion goes
> like this:
>
> Abdul Jalib: "P!"
> Mason Malmuth: "P used to be true, but as of two weeks ago, not P!"
> Abdul Jalib: "I just saw it in the last couple of days... P!"
> Mason Malmuth: "Not P!
> Abdul Jalib: "I rechecked and as of an hour ago, P still holds!"
> Mason Malmuth: "I'm absolutely sure, not P! [Various insults hurled here.]"
> Jim Brier: "I agree, not P!"
>
> To P or not to P, that is the question. Which would you choose?
Mason deleted my response and wrote:
> In an effort to keep our forums vibrant we deleted a post from Abdul
> Jalib which was insulting in nature and violated our posting
> guidelines.
I was referring to the following discussion from the June 2000 archive
of www.twoplustwo.com's General Poker forum at
http://www.twoplustwo.com/digests/genpokarch_jun00_main.html
(This is a very long...)
MPN wrote:
> I play in a Casino Cardroom in the Northeast. About a month ago I
> was one of the starting players in a 15-30 HE game. The dealer
> spread the cards to draw for the button. A guy to my right anounced
> that he would draw first and he would pick the Ace of spades. Sure
> enough the did! The dealer called the floorperson over. In the
> meantime he spread the other deck. The same guy demanded that he pick
> first and again the picked the Ace of Spades. I almost fell off my
> chair! He then anounced to the whole table that sometimes the picture
> cards are twisted usually K's and Q's and sometimes the Ace of s is
> twisted. He plays there two or three times a week. He said he
> complains to management all the time and they say that there is
> nothing they can do about it.
Abdul Jalib wrote:
> These twisted cards are almost certainly due to a manufacturing flaw,
> because a huge number of cards at Bellagio suffer from the same
> problem. It is kind of annoying having to quickly grab each of your
> cards, lest someone know what you have. Recently, I had to stop myself
> from quipping to one player, "The cards on the board are all bent. So
> are both his hole cards. Your cards are flat. So why are you still
> calling?" The bent cards turned out to "only" be KK, which was much
> weaker than bent cards would have been on average. KK was good in the
> showdown, though.
Mason Malmuth wrote:
> The Bellagio, like most card rooms, was using the brown and green Kem
> decks. A couple of months ago they went to the blue and red Kem
> decks. This refers to the color of their backs. (Since Abdul plays
> almost no poker, he probably wasn't aware of this.) The different
> color Kem decks don't seem to have the manufacturing flaws, and all
> the cards now seem straight. Other card rooms should look at this as
> well.
Abdul Jalib wrote:
> Virtually nothing you believe about me or poker is correct, Mason.
> ... I saw the change in deck color at Bellagio, and I saw that the
> problem of twisted decks is worse than ever now. (Can someone please
> back me up on this?)
MPN wrote:
> The twisted kem cards at Turning Stone Casino (upstate NY) are the
> Blue/Red cards.
Abdul Jalib wrote:
> And my twisted KK story was on a red or blue deck. QQQ on the board,
> all twisted. True story, and it happened about a week ago.
M wrote:
> You are talking about a different cardroom, but at the casino I was
> talking about, over the years some of the cards have been warped as a
> defective issue too--identifiably so, specifically higher
> denominations.
youtal...@yahoo.com wrote:
> I play at the Venetian once a week, and last time I was there I
> noticed that the only cards that would lay flat on the table were the
> baby cards. The higher a cards rank, the more warped it was.
Abdul Jalib wrote:
> As I've said, the problem is still there and seems worse than ever. I
> asked a Bellagio player the question, "Do you think that the problem
> of warped face cards is gone now that they have switched to red/blue
> decks?" He replied, "No, they're worse than ever now." I didn't need
> to ask, of course. It's obvious to anyone with eyes or a sense of
> touch.
Mason Malmuth wrote:
> This is one of the many differences between us. I don't have to ask
> anyone since I do go there and play myself. When the decks were
> changed, the problem ended.
[Note: I asked the Bellagio player while I was playing poker at
Bellagio. -Abdul]
Abdul Jalib wrote:
> I said I saw the twisted cards on the red/blue decks while playing at
> Bellagio. So did the guy in Turning Stone. That should be enough for
> you, but it wasn't, so I got a friend of mine at Bellagio to confirm
> that it is visible to someone other than me. Now you still are not
> going to admit you are wrong, and you are being rude about it to
> boot.
> ...
> You said that "Abdul plays almost no poker," but I play tons of
> poker - almost 8 hours a day for the past two months and I do have a
> witness for much of that if need be, and I strongly suspect I've
> played more hands of hold'em in my career than you (but not stud,
> draw, etc.) Sklansky sometimes objects to my saying you lie, but that
> one sure is a lie.
>
> Virtually nothing you believe about me or poker is correct.
>
> Okay, here is the challenge. If Bellagio management will permit, I
> will examine 10 setups. If Bellagio management will not permit, then
> you will play while I watch from nearby (but not behind), and I will
> loudly proclaim when you have a king or queen, and a witness behind
> you will keep track. If I can pick out a statistically significant
> number of kings and queens in say 10 attempts, then you will admit
> that you are wrong about virtually everything, and that you are so
> blind you could not possibly see cheating if it were right under your
> nose.
Mason Malmuth wrote:
> It is well known that Kem has had problems with their card quality for
> years. During the past several months the cards in use at both
> Bellagio and The Mirage contained many face cards that were
> warped. The Bellagio switched to red/blue backs and the problem in my
> opinion went away. (I use to be in games where virtually everyone
> complained, and those complaints stopped after the switch.) However,
> due to other committments I have played very little the past two
> weeks, and if the imperfectation is something that occurs with use it
> is possible that the cards are going bad again. If that's the case,
> perhaps Abdul should make an appointment with their cardroom
> management and point the problem out to them.
Joe D wrote:
> I play at Turning Stone in Upstate NY. We have the same problem,
> warped or twisted Kings and Queens and sometimes the Ace of
> Spades. Warped-meaning that there is a defect in the cards.
Jim Brier wrote:
> Between the Bellagio and the Mirage I play about 40 hours a week. From
> time to time a player will notice a mark on the back of one of the
> cards that is hardly noticeable and the deck is promptly replaced. The
> "bent and twisted" phenonmenon is more unusual and I have only
> encountered it about 3 or 4 times since I moved to Vegas in April. One
> of the other players usually notices it when it happens and again the
> deck is replaced. Because my vision even with glasses is far from
> perfect, I do not notice these things as well as some of the other
> players. However, in my opinion these kinds of problems crop up from
> time to time in all cardrooms and the Bellagio and the Mirage are no
> better or worse than most the other cardrooms in this regard. I think
> this subject is getting a lot more attention than it deserves.
Abdul Jalib wrote:
> I expect Jim will be changing his tune, after I transfer to his
> table. It's kind of foolish to doubt me, when you've got the Turning
> Stone guys saying the same thing. I've had a second pro confirm what I
> can see easily.
>
> I'm sure Bellagio management is aware of it, because it must be
> obvious to most of the skilled players and most of the dealers who
> also sometimes play, and management should be looking for it after
> previously having problems.
Jim Brier wrote:
> This evening at the Bellagio I was playing $15-$30 and sitting in Seat
> #3 (my favorite end seat). I must confess that before you came over
> and pointed it out to me, I had never noticed it. For the benefit of
> everyone else on this forum, I started looking at the cards that came
> on the board and I could see them from an angle. Here is what I
> observed. In one red deck the Ace of Spades was noticeably warped and
> did not lay flat on the table. The Queen of Diamonds also had a
> pronounced warp. The King of Clubs also had a noticeable warp. With
> other decks, I did notice that facecards do not always lie flat on the
> table compared to other cards. There were a few decks where all the
> cards layed flat and I did not notice any warps. But there were other
> decks where some of the facecards were only warped to a very small
> extent but noticeable to anyone looking for them. I don't know if this
> makes a big difference or not and when I go to other card rooms I will
> start looking for it just to see how wide spread this phenomnenon is.
Abdul Jalib wrote:
> Tonight, I asked two floormen/dealers at Bellagio if they had noticed
> warped cards on the red/blue decks, and they said, "Oh yeah, tons of
> 'em. Facecards mostly." ... So see, I know, the guys at Turning
> Stone know, the pros at Bellagio know, the dealers/floormen at
> Bellagio know, and even Jim now knows, so only Mason is now not in
> the know.
Mason Malmuth wrote:
> I just spoke to Donna Harris, Cardroom Manager at The Mirage, and she
> told me that they had received a bad suply of cards and that Kem
> acknowledged and replaced them all. Now this doesn't mean that they
> are now perfect, but at The Mirage they are well aware of the problem
> and are monitoring it closely.
>
> I hope to talk to the Bellagio cardroom management later today or
> tomorrow. I will keep everyone informed.
ex-newbie wrote:
> Why do we need Mason to inform us about Bellagio? We've already been
> informed by Abdul.
Note who threw the first tomato in that thread. Now back to the present.
If you would like to comment on the 2+2 Forum about Mason's censorship
of my post up at the top here, go to
http://www.twoplustwo.com/cgi-bin/genpok.pl?read=20283
and there is a response form at the bottom of that web page.
urgetokillrising
wrote:
>In a current thread on the General Theory board of 2+2,
what "general theory board"? is it another news group? if so what's
the full name or if it's a web site, do you have a link?
thanks very much
urge
Barbara Yoon
>> I, Abdul, responded as follows:
>> Suppose there was a simple proposition P, something that
>> could be decisively determined quickly to arbitrary confidence
>> by simply looking. Something objective like "the light is on,"
>> not a subjective proposition like "a tight image is best."
>> Suppose the discussion goes like this:
>> Abdul Jalib: "P!"
>> Mason Malmuth: "P used to be true, but as of two weeks ago, not P!"
>> Abdul Jalib: "I just saw it in the last couple of days... P!"
>> Mason Malmuth: "Not P!
>> Abdul Jalib: "I rechecked and as of an hour ago, P still holds!"
>> Mason Malmuth: "I'm absolutely sure, not P!
>> [Various insults hurled here.]"
>> Jim Brier: "I agree, not P!"
>> To P or not to P, that is the question. Which would you choose?
>> Mason deleted my response and wrote:
Mason Malmuth:
> In an effort to keep our forums vibrant we deleted a post
> from Abdul Jalib which was insulting in nature and violated
> our posting guidelines.
So, what's not "vibrant" there?! Abdul is nothing, if not "vibrant"...
However, on one's own little website, one can delete as one pleases...
Doug
--
Doug
---------
"Meet me on the riverbank, cause I LOVE reelin' in fishies!"
urgetokillrising <tenone...@SPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:i78cctk0kltfsre57...@4ax.com...
RazzO
http://www.twoplustwo.com/cgi-bin/genpok.pl
razzo
urgetokillrising wrote:
--
_____________________________________________
POKERWORLD.COM
http://www.pokerworld.com
ADVERTISE IN FLASH in 2001
http://www.pokerworld.com/flashinfo1.html
Graham Ribchester
put into to helping a lot of players improve their game, but in this case
Malmouth isn't worth it. You should keep your posts to somewhere where they
are appreciated (here). I for one have no problems with anything you have
done and I am sure many others agree with me. Thank you for bringing to the
attention of everyone the warped decks and have a good one...
Rib
Abdul Jalib wrote in message <3ac5eba0....@news.pangeatech.com>...
Dsklansky
>You should keep your posts to somewhere where they
>are appreciated (here).
Unlike a couple of people I know, Abdul is smart enough not to bite off his
nose to spite his face.
Gary Carson
Gary Carson
get some kind of income from 2+2) ever bother to post anything on
2+2.
Gary Carson
On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 14:51:11 GMT, Abd...@PosEV.com (Abdul Jalib)
wrote:
>
>Mason deleted my response and wrote:
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
Terrence Chan
Like Mason?
--
Terrence Chan
http://www.sfu.ca/~tchand/
"It profiteth the wise, to be deemed a fool."
-Oceanus, Aeschylus' _Prometheus Bound_
Badger
dskl...@aol.com (Dsklansky) wrote:
> >Unlike a couple of people I know, Abdul is smart enough not to bite off
his
> >nose to spite his face.
>
> When did we meet, David?
He wasn't talking about you, Garry. He was talking about himself and Ray
Zee.
--
Steve Badger
http://www.playwinningpoker.com
Dsklansky
>get some kind of income from 2+2) ever bother to post anything on
>2+2.
>
>Gary Carson
Yet there have been hundeds of thousands of posts there. In spite of that, you
may in fact be right. The only thing you seem to miss is that the "income" is
in the form of increased winnings.
William Reich
>>You should keep your posts to somewhere where they
>>are appreciated (here).
>
>nose to spite his face.
So why censor his posts? I agree that you have the RIGHT to snip anything
you
want from your site. However, that doesn't make it right to do so. I read
and
post both here and at 2+2 and one of the things I look for in EITHER venue
is
a post by Abdul. He probably isn't always right, who is, but he is not a
troll
or even CLOSE to being a troll. There is no need to censor well-meant
opinion
from a knowdledgable source. Especially an entertaining source. It is
"biting
off your nose to spite your face."
--
Will
Doug
reputation of 2+2.
--
Doug
---------
"Meet me on the riverbank, cause I LOVE reelin' in fishies!"
William Reich <Will...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:3ACA...@MailAndNews.com...
PegSmithNow
>"Editing" posts from well respected poker players will do wonders for the
>reputation of 2+2.
>
I'm sure it cuts down on the traffic at their site. As soon as I read here on
RGP that 2+2 routinely deletes posts, I stopped going there. Yes, it's their
right to delete anything they want to. It's my right to decide they're full of
shit.
Peg
Jan Suchanek
did see someone mentioning that personal attacks and abuse/name-calling are
standard practice over there. If that's true, why was Abdul's post deleted
and the others allowed to stay?
PegSmithNow <pegsm...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010401034122...@ng-fs1.aol.com...
Gary Carson
<jan...@attglobal.n-e-t> wrote:
>I've never gone to the site because of what I've read about it here, but I
>did see someone mentioning that personal attacks and abuse/name-calling are
>standard practice over there. If that's true, why was Abdul's post deleted
>and the others allowed to stay?
It will all clear up when Mason gets back on his medication.
>
>PegSmithNow <pegsm...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20010401034122...@ng-fs1.aol.com...
>> >From: "Doug" rile...@home.com
>>
>> >"Editing" posts from well respected poker players will do wonders for the
>> >reputation of 2+2.
>> >
>>
>> I'm sure it cuts down on the traffic at their site. As soon as I read here
>on
>> RGP that 2+2 routinely deletes posts, I stopped going there. Yes, it's
>their
>> right to delete anything they want to. It's my right to decide they're
>full of
>> shit.
>>
>> Peg
>
>
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
VPOKERL
>did see someone mentioning that personal attacks and abuse/name-calling are
>standard practice over there. If that's true, why was Abdul's post deleted
>and the others allowed to stay?
Because it's not true.
vince
VPOKERL
>> number of kings and queens in say 10 attempts, then you will admit
>> that you are wrong about virtually everything, and that you are so
>> blind you could not possibly see cheating if it were right under your
>> nose.
Abdul,
I agree with you that if your post was deleted for what the reason you give
that Mason was wrong to do that. But I find the above statement very
misleading. To me you are implying that these distorted and warped cards are a
result of someone cheating. From reading your post it appears to me that Mason
has acknowledged that there is or has been a manufacturing problem with some of
these casino cards. Where is the cheating?
Vince
Daniel Contreras
what I can and ignore the rest.
Jaque Mate
As much as admire David and Mason for their contribution to poker, I must respectfull disagree with the deletion Abdul's post. It is like deleting Dave's posts because he makes the rest of the world feel inferior because we didn't get 1800 in the SAT. It is true than a level of civility must be maintained in this forum, but there have been a lot worst. If you can't possible read all messages then you should not target Abdul's. I think he deserves some breathing room because his contributions more than outweight his misschiefs in the heat of the battle when disagreeing with you guys. I think it is impossible to stop all sarcasam in his writings when commenting about something he diagrees with you. I would like to see Abdul, M Glover, Carson, David, Mason and Badger spend their time discussing poker and not playing a pissing contest. Suggestion: Any time you comment on each others messages, start the sentence with IMO (in my humble opinion), then say why you disagree/agree with the message.
Peace on this forum for the benefit of everyone..
Great job guys when you keep it to POKER and no personal attacks
PeaceMaker
MEEHAN1952
>From: le_bl...@hotmail.com ("Jaque Mate")
>Date: 4/1/01 1:19 PM Central Daylight Time
........
>
>Peace on this forum for the benefit of everyone..=20
>
Good post. *Thanx*. Why can't we all just get along? (Rodney King) <smile>
As an aside, I rarely get the opportunity to play with Mason, cuz he's just too
gutless to play *BIG* enuf, but the one time I did, he bought in for a thousand
in a 10-20 limit hold-em game, and - son-of-a-bitch, I couldn't believe my
*eyes* - he went broke blinding off one thousand without *EVER* playing *one*
hand. Apparently, he never picked up aces in *position*, where he dimly
grasped how to play them ....
Now, let's do the math .... fifteen bucks per round, blew a thousand on blinds,
and never played *ONE* hand .....
I wannabe like Mason .....
Delete *THIS*.
Minneapolus Jim the gutless
Peace on this forum - and sell *more* books <gasp>
>Subject: For MASON and the REST
>From: le_bl...@hotmail.com ("Jaque Mate")
>Date: 4/1/01 1:19 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: <OE40fbNwEmkol...@hotmail.com>
>
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
>------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C0BAAF.18C9DEE0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Reposted from 2+2
>
>Le_blanc99
>As much as admire David and Mason for their contribution to poker, I =
>must respectfull disagree with the deletion Abdul's post. It is like =
>deleting Dave's posts because he makes the rest of the world feel =
>inferior because we didn't get 1800 in the SAT. It is true than a level =
>of civility must be maintained in this forum, but there have been a lot =
>worst. If you can't possible read all messages then you should not =
>target Abdul's. I think he deserves some breathing room because his =
>contributions more than outweight his misschiefs in the heat of the =
>battle when disagreeing with you guys. I think it is impossible to stop =
>all sarcasam in his writings when commenting about something he diagrees =
>with you. I would like to see Abdul, M Glover, Carson, David, Mason and =
>Badger spend their time discussing poker and not playing a pissing =
>contest. Suggestion: Any time you comment on each others messages, start =
>the sentence with IMO (in my humble opinion), then say why you =
>disagree/agree with the message.=20
>
>Peace on this forum for the benefit of everyone..=20
>
>Great job guys when you keep it to POKER and no personal attacks=20
>
>PeaceMaker=20
>
William Reich
>>I
>>did see someone mentioning that personal attacks and abuse/name-calling are
>>standard practice over there. If that's true, why was Abdul's post deleted
>>and the others allowed to stay?
>
>
>vince
I agree that personal attacks and abuse/name calling are not standard
practice
at 2+2 as far as my 'sperience there goes. However, I don't think it is fair
or good policy to censor a guy who writes about interesting hands in an
interesting manner. And I HAVE read Mason saying in several places that
"Abdul
doesn't play much poker." That would seem to be an untenable postion to take
unless the speaker had EVERY available poker venue under constant
surveillance
or had someone following Abdul around. As the subject of the debate is poker
knowledge and this attack on Abdul's poker knowledge is insupportable, I
WOULD
call it a personal attack, even if subtle. Still doesn't make it standard
practice and, from what I have seen, Mason is often civil. I don't consider
"often civil" lavish praise but it is about the best that can be said about
ME
for instance.
--
Will
CodeSavvy
>he bought in for a thousand
>in a 10-20 limit hold-em game, and - son-of-a-bitch, I couldn't believe my
>*eyes* - he went broke blinding off one thousand without *EVER* playing *one*
>hand. Apparently, he never picked up aces in *position*, where he dimly
>grasped how to play them ....
>
>Now, let's do the math .... fifteen bucks per round, blew a thousand on blinds,
>and never played *ONE* hand .....
>
Ok let's do the math because it will show how full of shit you are. I estimate
that blinding off $1000 in a 10 handed live $10-20 game without playing a hand
would take about 20 hours of play. I estimate about 667 hands would be dealt to
a player in that time period. The chances of not having AA,KK,QQ or AK in that
time period is less than 1 in 20 million.
So what you're saying is that you played with Mason for 20 hours straight,
watched him blind off $1000 without playing a hand, and claim that he only plays
AA. Would you care to take this bullshit claim of yours back or do we just
attribute this to some lying rant from somebody who doesn't care for Mason. You
sir have no credibility as evidenced by this statement of yours.
Gary Carson
wrote:
>snipped .. derogatory comments
>>he bought in for a thousand
>>in a 10-20 limit hold-em game, and - son-of-a-bitch, I couldn't believe my
>>*eyes* - he went broke blinding off one thousand without *EVER* playing *one*
>>hand. Apparently, he never picked up aces in *position*, where he dimly
>>grasped how to play them ....
>>
>>Now, let's do the math .... fifteen bucks per round, blew a thousand on blinds,
>>and never played *ONE* hand .....
>>
>
>Ok let's do the math because it will show how full of shit you are. I estimate
>that blinding off $1000 in a 10 handed live $10-20 game without playing a hand
>would take about 20 hours of play. I estimate about 667 hands would be dealt to
>a player in that time period. The chances of not having AA,KK,QQ or AK in that
>time period is less than 1 in 20 million.
>
>So what you're saying is that you played with Mason for 20 hours straight,
>watched him blind off $1000 without playing a hand, and claim that he only plays
>AA.
I thnk he said only in position.
Do you really think a world class expert like Malmuth would play AA
from early position? Maybe as an advertising play, but Mason is on
record as being opposed to advertising.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
Badger
> Mason is on record as being opposed to advertising.
You obviously haven't seen the banner ads for "Modern Bride" (no joke) on
his site.
Gary Carson
<PlayWinningPoker(NOSPAM)@earthlink.net> wrote:
>"Gary Carson" <garyc...@mindspring.com> wrote...
>> Mason is on record as being opposed to advertising.
>
>You obviously haven't seen the banner ads for "Modern Bride" (no joke) on
>his site.
Oh Gawd. I'm getting a vision of Mason in a wedding gown.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
SYeates485
get a sense of humor
Abdul Jalib
That's what it sounds like I'm saying, but I'm not. I maintained from
the start that I believed it was a manufacturing/design flaw. I was
referring back to one of my previous disagreements with Mason. Mason
said he believed he had never been cheated, including in the handheld
games in the old days in Gardena. If Mason is not observant enough to
see blatantly warped cards, albeit caused by manfacturing/design flaws,
then how could he possibly see real cheating of any form?
Abdul Jalib
Mason Malmuth
Mason Malmuth
Abdul Jalib wrote:
> On 01 Apr 2001 17:20:33 GMT, vpo...@aol.com (VPOKERL) wrote:
>
> >>If I can pick out a statistically significant
> >>> number of kings and queens in say 10 attempts, then you will admit
> >>> that you are wrong about virtually everything, and that you are so
> >>> blind you could not possibly see cheating if it were right under your
> >>> nose.
> >
> >Abdul,
> >
> >I agree with you that if your post was deleted for what the reason you give
> >that Mason was wrong to do that. But I find the above statement very
> >misleading. To me you are implying that these distorted and warped cards are a
> >result of someone cheating. From reading your post it appears to me that Mason
> >has acknowledged that there is or has been a manufacturing problem with some of
> >these casino cards. Where is the cheating?
>
> That's what it sounds like I'm saying, but I'm not. I maintained from
> the start that I believed it was a manufacturing/design flaw. I was
> referring back to one of my previous disagreements with Mason. Mason
> said he believed he had never been cheated, including in the handheld
> games in the old days in Gardena.
This is just totally untrue. I even told you about a couple of cheating incidents
that I was aware of in the old hand held games in Gardena. If you remember, one of
them is actully quite funny. It was the incident where a player had an old time hold
out device under his shirt sleeve that malfuntioned and quickly spit out about a
dozen cards.
I also clarified that the not being cheated statement was targeted at the idea of
organized collusion. I made it very clear on these forums that incidents like a
player trying to short the pot a chip or two was not what I was referring to. In
addition, I have stated on many occasions that angle shooting, particularly at limit
hold 'em, has gotten worse during the past few years.
> If Mason is not observant enough to
> see blatantly warped cards, albeit caused by manfacturing/design flaws,
> then how could he possibly see real cheating of any form?
>
As for the blantantly warped cards there was never any disagreement that these
existed (and still do). What I stated was that The Bellagio had switched from the
green/brown decks to the red/blue decks and that the red/blue decks were suppose to
be free of the warps. They were at first, and I believe that they are better than
the green/brown decks but in time many of these cards, particularly some of the face
cards did begin to wrap as well.
>
> Abdul Jalib
CodeSavvy
to damage people are funny. You're the one that needs to get a sense of humor.
In article <20010402233335...@ng-cs1.aol.com>, syeat...@aol.com
says...
CodeSavvy
says...
>
>"Gary Carson" <garyc...@mindspring.com> wrote...
>> Mason is on record as being opposed to advertising.
>
>You obviously haven't seen the banner ads for "Modern Bride" (no joke) on
>his site.
>--
And you have your nose so high in the air that you would turn down ads from
"Modern Bride" on your site as well. Should I take this as a statement that you
will be selective about the adds you get on your site even as the number of
people who visit it grows a lot? If so what will be your criteria? BTW he
explained why these ads appear.
>Steve Badger
>http://www.playwinningpoker.com
>
>
Mason Malmuth
time. But I do play very tight, and when I bet I always have it.
As for Modern Bride, the pretty girl in the picture does look a little like
Charmaine.
Mason
Bill
"Mason Malmuth" <masonm...@twoplustwo.com> wrote in message
news:3AC95CBC...@twoplustwo.com...
> My comments are below.
>
> Mason Malmuth
>
> Abdul Jalib wrote:
>
Ironic - don't you think!!!!
MM has to use RGP to continue a conversation with Abdul. I guess he
couldn't find a way around the censorship problem at 2+2?
Bill
Gary Carson
wrote:
Get your prozac scrip refilled -- lighten up.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
Gary Carson
wrote:
>Obviously you've got a very sick sense of humor if you think outright lies meant
>to damage people are funny. You're the one that needs to get a sense of humor.
To those of us who havn't gone off their meds, it was obviously a
joke. Start with the buyin part. Mason Malmuth doesn't buy into a
10/20 game for $1,000.
How do I know that? I've got some kind of idea of the kind of poker
player Mason is.
Meehan assumed we all knew that. It was a clear and obvious joke. At
Mason's expense, yes. But, it did no damage to Mason and if you'd
take your meds then lay down for a nap you'd realize that.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
Gary Carson
Badger
>>> Mason is on record as being opposed to advertising.
> >
> >You obviously haven't seen the banner ads for "Modern Bride" (no joke) on
> >his site.
> And you have your nose so high in the air that you would turn down ads
from
> "Modern Bride" on your site as well. Should I take this as a statement
that you
> will be selective about the adds you get on your site even as the number
of
> people who visit it grows a lot? If so what will be your criteria? BTW
he
> explained why these ads appear.
Tom, you and your ilk just continue to amaze me. Where does this shit come
from? I made a joke at Carson's expense. And you come back with this.
Amazing. By the way, Meehan was JOKING.
Jesus because you and maybe a few others have no sense of humor doesn't mean
other people don't. So save your nastiness for 2+2 where it fits right in.
And if Modern bride wants to meet my rate, they can contact me.
RazzO
>out device under his shirt sleeve that malfuntioned and quickly spit out about a
>dozen cards.
LOL.
I would have loved to see the look on his face.
razzo
Mason Malmuth wrote:
--
_____________________________________________
POKERWORLD.COM
http://www.pokerworld.com
ADVERTISE IN FLASH in 2001
http://www.pokerworld.com/flashinfo1.html
My Pic ->> http://www.razzo.com/razz994.gif
VPOKERL
After reading your response and then Mason's response to you I have concluded,
in my own warped little mind, that this is a classic "peeing" contest. At
first I believed that the discussion was about "warped cards" and maybe even
cheating. I was wrong. I think it's a shame too because I and a lot others
can really benefit from poker discussions with you two. It's wading through
the nastiness that's a problem.
Hey, I'll be in Vegas mid month. Hope to see you and say hello.
vince
VPOKERL
>time
I've heard that even when you are in a 10-20 game you don't play. I've seen
you play $30-60. Seems to me that you play the same way there. You don't,
play that is. And to think I learned Holdem poker from you. Sheesh! How
about loosening up once in a while. Try playing A,Ko on the button. And
Charmaine is much better looking.
Vince
VPOKERL
Not to interfere Gary, but not all of us know when you are joking. I don't say
that in in a mean way. It's just a fact, especially when you talk about Mason.
I believe that MEEHAN1952 knows that.
vince
Gary Carson
I wasn't talking about my post.
I was talking about the post Meehan had made.
Everybody knows I'm a bitter, paranoid jerk with no sense of humor.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
Abdul Jalib
This is getting old. Although Mason made this statement to me in person,
Mason also printed that statement in Poker Digest, and others have quoted
his words exactly here before when he previously lied about it.
Here are other things that Mason Malmuth was emphatic about at the
time he said them, but later denied ever saying:
* Women should make no strategy adjustments whatsoever on the basis of
their gender difference and how men react to women.
* You should call with Q5 in the big blind versus a tight raiser and
tight cold caller with several loose limpers in the pot.
In all of these cases, Mason first denied every saying them and when
that failed he resorted to censorship in order to cover up his own
past stupid statements.
I've said some stupid things in my time too, but I own up to it.
>I also clarified that the not being cheated statement was targeted at the idea of
>organized collusion.
There was no such clarification or implication in the Poker Digest article
nor in the conversation with me. At the time, you clearly meant cheating
when you said cheating.
>As for the blantantly warped cards there was never any disagreement that these
>existed (and still do). What I stated was that The Bellagio had switched from the
>green/brown decks to the red/blue decks and that the red/blue decks were suppose to
>be free of the warps. They were at first, and I believe that they are better than
>the green/brown decks but in time many of these cards, particularly some of the face
>cards did begin to wrap as well.
And in an earlier warped card thread that preceeded the one I quoted, I had
stated that the warps seemed to be occur with use, since warps were much
more common in the lower stakes games than in the top section. I'd have
to go to the archives to check, but I don't think Mason was aware of the
warps before the information was posted in the earlier thread on warps.
The point of my post was that the original poster was basically saying
he was going to blindly follow Mason Malmuth, and I was suggesting that
one should always be open to other opinions.
Abdul Jalib
RazzO
razzo
Gary Carson wrote:
--
Doug
there is no censorship of posts here.
--
Doug
---------
"Meet me on the riverbank, cause I LOVE reelin' in fishies!"
Abdul Jalib <Abd...@PosEV.com> wrote in message
news:3ac9ed5b....@news.pangeatech.com...
Randy Hudson
Abdul Jalib <Abd...@PosEV.com> wrote:
> Here are other things that Mason Malmuth was emphatic about at the
> time he said them, but later denied ever saying:
>
> * Women should make no strategy adjustments whatsoever on the basis of
> their gender difference and how men react to women.
If you're referrring to the bookstore seminar at the beginning of Barge 97,
I thought he was saying something less wrong but more insulting. It seemed
to me that rather than directly answer the question, he said she should just
learn to play solid poker first before worrying about adjustments. The
implication was that she didn't know how to play.
--
Randy Hudson <i...@netcom.com>
Nate7out
the one in cukoos nest?
she looked like a bit older and less curvy version of my senior year english
prof in college that i wanted to @#%$ really bad...
one day i did get a money shot as she awkwardly got up from a student desk in a
short/tight skirt
~~sigh~~
Dsklansky
>If you're referrring to the bookstore seminar at the beginning of Barge 97,
>I thought he was saying something less wrong but more insulting. It seemed
>to me that rather than directly answer the question, he said she should just
>learn to play solid poker first before worrying about adjustments. The
>implication was that she didn't know how to play.
>
>--
>Randy Hudson <i...@netcom.com>
>
not being insulting. He was just trying to emphasize that these type of
extranneous concepts are only icing on the cake yet are often unfortunately
used as excuses to not delve into the more difficult aspects of the game. Not
knowing the questioner was the illustrious Tonda, it is understandable he would
assume that might be happening in this case.
PegSmithNow
>...he [Malmuth] said she should just
>>learn to play solid poker first before worrying about adjustments. The
>>implication was that she didn't know how to play.
>From: dskl...@aol.com
>Not
>knowing the questioner was the illustrious Tonda, it is understandable he
>would
>assume that might be happening in this case.
So, if Malmuth doesn't know the woman personally, he assumes she's not a good
poker player? Is that what you're saying, David, or have I misunderstood you?
Peg
Tom Weideman
pegsm...@aol.com wrote on 4/3/01 8:45 PM:
> So, if Malmuth doesn't know the woman personally, he assumes she's not a good
> poker player? Is that what you're saying, David, or have I misunderstood you?
This is certainly an assumption I make. Of course, I make it about men too.
Tom Weideman
Gary Carson
>>>Randy Hudson
>
>>...he [Malmuth] said she should just
>>>learn to play solid poker first before worrying about adjustments. The
>>>implication was that she didn't know how to play.
>>
>>Not
>>knowing the questioner was the illustrious Tonda, it is understandable he
>>would
>>assume that might be happening in this case.
>
>So, if Malmuth doesn't know the woman personally, he assumes she's not a good
>poker player? Is that what you're saying, David, or have I misunderstood you?
>
You understood him Peg.
But, of course, that's not insulting. If she wanted to be taken
seriously she should have submitted proof of her SAT scores in
advance.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
Mason Malmuth
PegSmithNow wrote:
> So, if Malmuth doesn't know the woman personally, he assumes she's not a good
> poker player? Is that what you're saying, David, or have I misunderstood you?
>
> Peg
I've written that I always assume an unknown opponent plays poorly until they
prove otherwise.
MM
Dsklansky
>poker player? Is that what you're saying, David, or have I misunderstood you?
>
>Peg
If I or Mason are asked about matters that are side issues that will help only
otherwise good players, we assume that the person asking may very well be
looking for a shortcut. However most women are not good poker players. Neither
are most men.
Gary Carson
Codesavvy
says...
>
>>It was a clear and obvious joke.
>
>
>>It was a clear and obvious joke.
>
Gary Carson missed his calling. He should have been a Democratic Party spin
doctor because Clinton could have used him. Anyway a lie is a lie but to be
fair let's examine the content of MEEHAN1952's posted lie for it's "humorous"
content.
MEEHAN1952 wrote:
>>As an aside, I rarely get the opportunity to play with Mason, cuz he's just too
>>gutless to play *BIG* enuf,<<
A clear slam on Mason, does anybody see anything in this phrase that is
humorous? The only way one would find this humorous is if they had a clear
dislike of Mason.
>>but the one time I did, he bought in for a thousand in a 10-20 limit hold-em
>>game, and - son-of-a-bitch, I couldn't believe my *eyes* - he went broke
>>blinding off one thousand without *EVER* playing *one* hand.<<
Clearly another slam on Mason. See previous comments.
>>Apparently, he never picked up aces in *position*, where he dimly grasped how to
>>play them .... <<
Ah the punch line. A total exaggeration based on previous lies told by
MEEHAN1952. A classless and tasteless display of raw contempt for someone I
doubt MEEHAN1952 knows at all.
It's curious that MEEHAN1952 hasn't defended his lies in this thread. I can
only surmise that he hasn't done so since he knows that they are indefensible
and he has been exposed. He needs to consult with Gary as to how to "spin" it.
I understand that MEEHAN1952 is a lawyer. I have no idea as to what his
capabilities are as a lawyer or what kind of person he is. Why should that stop
anyone from making a statement about him? I wonder if he thinks the following
statement is a "joke:"
As an aside, I rarely get the opportunity to witness MEEHAN1952 practice law,
cuz he's just too gutless to take on any case that is the least bit complicated,
but the one time I did see him represent someone in small claims court, and -
son-of-a-bitch, I couldn't believe my *eyes* - the other party ran rings around
him in front of the judge. Apparently, he never went to law school because he
bought his degree or he cheated his way through law school and can't handle
opposing counsel that has had no legal training.
Pretty funny huh?
Badger
news:9aer9...@drn.newsguy.com...
> fair let's examine the content of MEEHAN1952's posted lie for it's
"humorous"
> content.
>
> MEEHAN1952 wrote:
> >>As an aside, I rarely get the opportunity to play with Mason, cuz he's
just too
> >>gutless to play *BIG* enuf,<<
>
> A clear slam on Mason, does anybody see anything in this phrase that is
> humorous? The only way one would find this humorous is if they had a
clear
> dislike of Mason.
Wow.... perhaps you could start with "cuz" and then "enuf." Get a clue.
> As an aside, I rarely get the opportunity to witness MEEHAN1952 practice
law,
> cuz he's just too gutless to take on any case that is the least bit
complicated,
> but the one time I did see him represent someone in small claims court,
and -
> son-of-a-bitch, I couldn't believe my *eyes* - the other party ran rings
around
> him in front of the judge. Apparently, he never went to law school because
he
> bought his degree or he cheated his way through law school and can't
handle
> opposing counsel that has had no legal training.
>
> Pretty funny huh?
Nobody said meehan was funny, only that he was joking. And yes, anybody but
a toady could see that what you wrote above was not true. man oh man.
CodeSavvy
also not stoop to name calling.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definition of Joke:
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin jocus; perhaps akin to Old High German gehan to say, Sanskrit
yAcati he asks
Date: 1670
something said or done to provoke laughter; especially : a brief oral narrative
with a climactic humorous twist b (1) : the humorous or ridiculous element in
something (2) : an instance of jesting : KIDDING <can't take a joke> c :
PRACTICAL JOKE d : LAUGHINGSTOCK
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
So MEEHAN1952 was telling a joke not meant to be funny. hmmm.... seems like we
have another spin doctor in our midst.
You wrote:
>And yes, anybody but a toady could see that what you wrote above was not true.
>man oh man.<
Have you ever heard the expression turn about is fair play? What I wrote was
exactly the same form as the "joke" by MEEHAN1952 and most likely had as much
truthful content as what MEEHAN1952 wrote. You and Carson with your spin tactics
puhleeze!!!!!!!!!!
In article <9zMy6.1439$Kr1.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, "Badger"
says...
Kevin J
I never disagreed with you on this. In fact, I agreed with all you had to
say on thinking for yourself. I was just pointing out why I believed there
are distinctly different camps concerning poker strategy.
As for my own statement concerning myself... C'mon! Wouldn't you say there's
a slight difference between "lean towards" and "blindly follow"? It's this
type of "context distorting" and "liberty taking" with other people's
statements, that probably starts 9 out of 10 of these feuds in the first
place.
Abdul Jalib wrote in message <3ac9ed5b....@news.pangeatech.com>...
Badger
> So MEEHAN1952 was telling a joke not meant to be funny. hmmm.... seems
like we
> have another spin doctor in our midst.
Huh? Now what? Why do you insist on this stuff. He told a joke. He
thought it was funny. At best it was barely funny, in my humor opinion.
Why are you belaboring your obvious misinterpretation of this. Even Mason
read it as a ludicrous overstatement.
> You wrote:
> >And yes, anybody but a toady could see that what you wrote above was not
true.
> >man oh man.<
>
> Have you ever heard the expression turn about is fair play? What I wrote
was
> exactly the same form as the "joke" by MEEHAN1952 and most likely had as
much
> truthful content as what MEEHAN1952 wrote. You and Carson with your spin
tactics
> puhleeze!!!!!!!!!!
Tom, you are just being obtuse. I just agreed that what you wrote was as
truthful and as funny (to me) as what Meehan wrote. Not GET A CLUE... I
obviously knew what you wrote wasn't true about Meehan. Everyone else on
Earth similarly new what Meehan wrote wasn't true about Mason. Cmon.
Jacob Johannsen
>
> >It was the incident where a player had an old time hold
> >out device under his shirt sleeve that malfuntioned and quickly spit out about a
> >dozen cards.
>
> LOL.
> I would have loved to see the look on his face.
>
> razzo
>
I would have just said "It's my deal, isn't it?"
--
/Jacob Johannsen aka CNN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you flip a coin a million times, you're either crazy or a grad
student.
--Yoss, rec.gambling.poker
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
CodeSavvy
thread you get involved in. I don't know what the percentage is but I would
estimate that it's much higher than 50%. This speaks volumes about your
mindset. Go ahead you have my permission to have the last word in this one as
well.
MEEHAN1952
>From: Mason Malmuth masonm...@twoplustwo.com
>Date: 4/3/2001 12:27 AM Central Daylight Time
>
.....
>But I do play very tight, and when I bet I always have it.
>
<Hee-hee> That *is* funny <smile>.
*** POSTED & E-MAILED TO Mr. MALMUTH ****
I apologize to Mr. Malmuth for any possible misunderstanding or offense. _* I
*_ thot that my (paraphrased) statement
>> >>So what you're saying is that you played with Mason for 20 hours
>straight,
>> >>watched him blind off $1000 without playing a hand, and claim that he
>only
>> >>plays
>> >>AA.
was a self-evident joke. Without personally cranking the numbers, I'll accept
>> >>that
>> >>time period is less than 1 in 20 million.
that as ballpark enuf that it was intended as self-evident exaggeration that no
reasonable person could *possibly* interpret as intended to be taken seriously.
I'm very sorry that even *one* person could *possibly* have failed to realize
that my apparent historical recitation was intended as a joke. While I'm at it,
I apologize to *other* readers of rgp of some of my *other* jokes which they
find unfunny. Personally, I'd rather hear a good-faith but failed (as unfunny)
*attempt* at a joke than none at all - but that's just my personal preference.
As I've posted on rgp b/4, if I *ever* lose my sense of humor, someone please
just shoot me <sigh>.
And I give Mr. Malmuth great credit for some real *class*, and a sense of
humor, for *his* post. Was it the Bible, or Charles Schultz/Charlie Brown?: a
kind word hath turned away wrath. Apparently Mr. Malmuth accurately assumed it
was a joke.
So, mea maxima culpa. IGHN.
Minneapolis Jim the gutless Nit
Who did, in fact, successfully blind off an entire seven-figure bankroll in
Tunica, in *less* than two-and-a-half days, without *ever* playing one hand
<gasp>.
Now, let's do the math .....
and as a PS, I'll add that I personally would have preferred the caption of the
previous modified title to be: "Meehan1952 sometimes (or even *often* <sigh> )
tells bad jokes" .... "lying" ??? *forgeddaboudit* ...
entire previous post verbatim (sorry if imperfect netiquette, still learning
...) :
>Subject: Re: MEEHAN1952 is Certainly Lying (Re: For MASON and the REST)
>From: Mason Malmuth masonm...@twoplustwo.com
>Date: 4/3/2001 12:27 AM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: <3AC95F45...@twoplustwo.com>
>
>Just to set the record straight, I haven't played $10-$20 hold 'em in quite
>some
>time. But I do play very tight, and when I bet I always have it.
>
>As for Modern Bride, the pretty girl in the picture does look a little like
>Charmaine.
>
>Mason
>
>CodeSavvy wrote:
>
>> Obviously you've got a very sick sense of humor if you think outright lies
>meant
>> to damage people are funny. You're the one that needs to get a sense of
>humor.
>>
>> In article <20010402233335...@ng-cs1.aol.com>,
>syeat...@aol.com
>> says...
>> >
>> >
>> >get a sense of humor
>> >
>> >>snipped .. derogatory comments
>> >>>he bought in for a thousand
>> >>>in a 10-20 limit hold-em game, and - son-of-a-bitch, I couldn't believe
>my
>> >>>*eyes* - he went broke blinding off one thousand without *EVER* playing
>> >>*one*
>> >>>hand. Apparently, he never picked up aces in *position*, where he dimly
>> >>>grasped how to play them ....
>> >>>
>> >>>Now, let's do the math .... fifteen bucks per round, blew a thousand on
>> >>blinds,
>> >>>and never played *ONE* hand .....
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>Ok let's do the math because it will show how full of shit you are. I
>> >>estimate
>> >>that blinding off $1000 in a 10 handed live $10-20 game without playing
>a
>> >>hand
>> >>would take about 20 hours of play. I estimate about 667 hands would be
>dealt
>> >>to
>> >>a player in that time period. The chances of not having AA,KK,QQ or AK
>in
>> >>that
>> >>time period is less than 1 in 20 million.
>> >>
>> >>So what you're saying is that you played with Mason for 20 hours
>straight,
>> >>watched him blind off $1000 without playing a hand, and claim that he
>only
>> >>plays
>> >>AA. Would you care to take this bullshit claim of yours back or do we
>just
>> >>attribute this to some lying rant from somebody who doesn't care for
>Mason.
>> >>You
>> >>sir have no credibility as evidenced by this statement of yours.
>> >>
>
MEEHAN1952
>Would you care to take this bullshit claim of yours back
Hee-hee. Now that I think about it, this is *REALLY* funny. I, personally,
read rgp for the humor .... <smile>
Minneapolis Jim the humorless
>Subject: Apologies to Mason [was MEEHAN1952 is Certainly Lying (Re: For MASON
>and the REST)
>From: meeha...@aol.com (MEEHAN1952)
>Date: 4/6/2001 1:23 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20010406142356...@ng-fa1.aol.com>
JW Steve
wrote:
<snip>
>Pretty funny huh?
You are a buffoon. Give it a rest. It was a fricking joke. And no, I
don't have anything against Mason, I don't have any ties to Meehan or
Gary Carson. You pointed out yourself that the situation was so
exaggerated that it couldn't possibly be true which is typically
indicative of an attempted joke. If someone had a malevolent motive
they would be better served to use a more believable story.
jw steve
CodeSavvy
Mason and I shouldn’t have misinterpreted your “joke” as a slam on him. I also
know that if Mason would have made a similar exaggeration that every reader of
this newsgroup would have understood that Mason was making a joke and wouldn’t
have criticized him in the least.
In article <20010406142356...@ng-fa1.aol.com>, meeha...@aol.com
says...
Gary Carson
wrote:
>I know that in the past you have never written anything derogatory regarding
>Mason and I shouldn’t have misinterpreted your “joke” as a slam on him. I also
>know that if Mason would have made a similar exaggeration that every reader of
>this newsgroup would have understood that Mason was making a joke and wouldn’t
>have criticized him in the least.
Mason is a banel, joyless prick. He doesn't make jokes.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
CodeSavvy
Oh I see you’ve taken Badger’s course on how to communicate effectively and
discuss topics rationally.
>>Give it a rest. It was a fricking joke.<<
So is what I wrote. What’s your occupation I could write something that was
just as “funny” as this and Mr. Meehan's joke.
>>And no, I don't have anything against Mason, I don't have any ties to Meehan or
>>Gary Carson.<<
Is this the anti Mason Malmuth triumvirate? It’s funny I didn’t mention Badger
or Carson when I originally responded to this thread. They sure took up the
“its only a joke” stance in a hurry. At least Meehan admitted that it may not
be funny (it isn’t) and was a big enough person to address my criticism. I may
be wrong and I will surely be corrected ASAP if I am, but Mr. Meehan has slammed
Mason Malmuth in the past.
>>You pointed out yourself that the situation was so exaggerated that it couldn't
>>possibly be true which is typically indicative of an attempted joke.<<
Did you read his post about doing the math? I did.
>>If someone had a malevolent motive they would be better served to use a more
>>believable story. <<
I know Carson and Badger have such motives. I’m sure I have perceived Mr.
Meehan incorrectly as a person who takes gratuitous shots at Mason from time to
time and for that I perception I do apologize to Mr. Meehan.
Gary Carson
wrote:
>>>You are a buffoon<<
>
>Is this the anti Mason Malmuth triumvirate? It’s funny I didn’t mention Badger
>or Carson when I originally responded to this thread. They sure took up the
>“its only a joke” stance in a hurry. At least Meehan admitted that it may not
>be funny (it isn’t) and was a big enough person to address my criticism. I may
>be wrong and I will surely be corrected ASAP if I am, but Mr. Meehan has slammed
>Mason Malmuth in the past.
I didn't claim it was funny. Badger didn't claim it was funny.
It was a joke, however.
Read that definition of joke you posted. It says a joke is something
that's intended to be funny. Being funny isn't a requirement. A bad
joke is still a joke. Mason Malumth, for example, isn't funny -- he's
a bad joke.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
Badger
> Oh I see you’ve taken Badger’s course on how to communicate effectively
and
> discuss topics rationally.
I told you it was a joke. Everyone recognizes this except you whose nasty
bile is up too high to see that. Now you go accusing a few people of some
weird motives when all we did was tell you it was a joke and that you should
chill out. You should do that now.
> Is this the anti Mason Malmuth triumvirate? It’s funny I didn’t mention
Badger
> or Carson when I originally responded to this thread. They sure took up
the
> “its only a joke” stance in a hurry.
What is brown and sounds like a bell?
Dung.
That's a joke. It's not that funny, but it's a joke. We pointed out to you
the post was a joke right away because it was plainly evident to anybody but
a mean-spirited misanthrope who thinks everyone is as nasty and humorless as
he is.
This forum is supposed to be about poker and about fun. Please takel your
nastiness where it fits in.
Gary Carson
<PlayWinningPoker(NOSPAM)@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>This forum is supposed to be about poker and about fun. Please takel your
>nastiness where it fits in.
That's one of the things I don't like about rgp. It's just not an
inclusive group. Where on the interent can banel, joyless pricks have
discussions about poker?
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
David Monaghan
wrote:
>On Wed, 04 Apr 2001 21:42:29 GMT, "Badger" <PlayWinningPoker(NOSPAM)@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>Nobody said meehan was funny, only that he was joking.
>So MEEHAN1952 was telling a joke not meant to be funny. hmmm.... seems like we
>have another spin doctor in our midst.
Read it again. Badger didn't say MEEHAN wasn't intending to be funny.
And don't deliberately misquote next time.
DaveM
Jacob Johannsen
Lee Munzer
"MEEHAN1952" ...
> Who did, in fact, successfully blind off an entire seven-figure bankroll
in Tunica, in *less* than two-and-a-half days, without *ever* playing one
hand <gasp>.
> Now, let's do the math .....
I was shocked and horrified to read this. Even for a man of your means (and
assuming you were playing in high stakes side action) that's a considerable
bankroll to lose without giving yourself a chance to win a hand ... I'll
assume you were moved off your big blind hands eventually, thus could not
even win a showdown from that position.
Recently, I have begun working with some of the top pros. I study their
game for two to three days at $500 an hour. Then we discuss what I have
observed for one hour to two hours at $1,000 per. Then, they play again for
two days ... I watch. If they haven't improved their win rate, I refund 10%
and assign my apprentice (Badger) to work with them ... he specializes in
lost causes.
Only 'cuz I enjoy your humor, I will provide some free assistance. It is
apparent you have developed good discipline. That's an excellent start. We
may want to work on decision diversification.
Lee
VPOKERL
Vince
Jeff Wilder
| I've written that I always assume an unknown opponent
| plays poorly until they prove otherwise.
About three weeks ago, I was playing 20-40 in the Mirage. It's a new game,
8-handed. Mr. Malmuth raises UTG and gets two callers, including the BB.
The flop is TTx, one heart. Mr. Malmuth bets, it's raised, the BB drops,
Mr. Malmuth calls. The turn is a heart. Mr. Malmuth bets and is called.
The river is a heart. Mr. Malmuth bets and is called. He shows down ...
75s in hearts.
I waited about five seconds, then drawled, "Have you promoted that to Group
2?" Two minutes later, Mr. Malmuth eased his way out of the game.
Apropos of nothing (arguably), but I've been waiting to share.
Jeff
RazzO
So Mason is branded a Group 1 & 2 player? God, it's lucky he ever gets any
action.
Maybe its not the first time he has done this...hmmmmmmmm...? Maybe Mason
wasn't expecting to get a table change so fast?
Mike Laing has a thing going where he takes his seat and posts...no matter what
the hand is, or position, he always raises when the action comes around to
him. He told me he does this so the players will think he came to gamble, heh.
Not that this can be analogized to fit any patterns Mason has.
I'm curious to know what he said when you asked that.
razzo
Jeff Wilder wrote:
--
_____________________________________________
POKERWORLD.COM
http://www.pokerworld.com
ADVERTISE IN FLASH in 2001
http://www.pokerworld.com/flashinfo1.html
My Pic ->> http://www.razzo.com/razz994.gif
VPOKERL
think you are a better Holdem player than Mason Malmuth? I'll bet that Mason
would not leave a game because you were in it. I will also bet that he will
not stop playing 20-40 or 30-60 because of criticism of his play. I get the
impression that you feel he is an easy mark. If so why not keep it to yourself
and take advantage of him. I guess that would be smart.
Vince
Gary Carson
VPOKERL
Well that would be one.
vince
Jeff Wilder
[ Of Mason Malmuth open-raising 75s UTG and backing into a winning flush. ]
| What's your point? Do you think you could have played
| the hand better?
Only pre-flop, flop, and turn. Mr. Malmuth did great on the river!
| Do you think you are a better Holdem player than Mason
| Malmuth?
Actually, yes, I do. Mr. Malmuth is the Bobby Knight of hold'em. He was
great once (I guess), but psychological problems and a seeming inability to
adapt to a changed game have left him behind. Granted, this is based on
(almost) nothing except his own written words.
| I'll bet that Mason would not leave a game because you
| were in it.
Perhaps not. Could be he was just late for his appointment to have your
face surgically removed from his ass.
| I will also bet that he will not stop playing 20-40 or 30-60
| because of criticism of his play.
What about 10-20 or 80-160? What if I'd instead said, "There's a good boy!
Here's a treat! Sit, boy, sit!" Is that how Mr. Malmuth trained you to be
such a good little puppy?
| I get the impression that you feel he is an easy mark. If so
| why not keep it to yourself and take advantage of him. I guess
| that would be smart.
Easy? Not at all. I'm in the 98th or 99th percentile of 20-40 and lower
players out there, but that doesn't mean I want to play people who might
rank "only" 85th. Not when it's relatively easy to find a table of 60th
percentile players and worse.
To answer your initial question, frankly my point was simply to embarrass
him and watch his reaction. I have a mean streak that way when it comes to
pompous windbag has-beens. The fact that he left the table so soon
thereafter (after donating a stack or two, despite the RR flush win) was
just a bonus.
Jeff
Mason Malmuth
Jeff Wilder wrote:
> To answer your initial question, frankly my point was simply to embarrass
> him and watch his reaction. I have a mean streak that way when it comes to
> pompous windbag has-beens. The fact that he left the table so soon
> thereafter (after donating a stack or two, despite the RR flush win) was
> just a bonus.
>
> Jeff
To set the record straight, this play is in our book HOLD 'EM POKER FOR
ADVANCED PLAYERS. If you would have read some of our material you would have
an understanding as to why it is correct to occasionally make a play like this.
But it
should only be done occasionally.
As for leaving your game, I didn't go very far since my name was called for the
stud
game at the table right next to that one. Occasionally I get into a stud mood,
and I played there for the next few hours.
Next time you get in a game with me, please introduce yourself. I'm sure the
conversation will be extremely pleasant and very interesting.
Gary Carson
<masonm...@twoplustwo.com> wrote:
>
>
>Jeff Wilder wrote:
>
>To set the record straight, this play is in our book HOLD 'EM POKER FOR
>ADVANCED PLAYERS. If you would have read some of our material you would have
>an understanding as to why it is correct to occasionally make a play like this.
>But it
>should only be done occasionally.
I agree with raising whenever you're going to backdoor a flush. But,
you're wrong that it should be done occasionally. You should do it
every time that you're going to backdoor a flush without exception.
The small deception you might get by slowplaying when the flush is
coming just isn't worth it.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
VPOKERL
>coming just isn't worth it.
>
Is this in your book Gary? If so it may be worth reading after all.
Vince
lvdlrs
MEEHAN1952 wrote:
> Minneapolis Jim the gutless Nit
> Who did, in fact, successfully blind off an entire seven-figure bankroll in
> Tunica, in *less* than two-and-a-half days, without *ever* playing one hand
> <gasp>.
> Now, let's do the math .....
Not true Jim. I saw you play at least one hand.
Gary (...) Philips