Re: Who is the donkey
XaQ Morphy
> 19 left and it pays a paltry 8.64 for 10th through 18th.
>
> This happens to me a lot. In this case, hindsight tells me I might should
> have bet less and seen the turn before pushing.
I'm going to be nice to you, well, nicer than I would be to some random
idiot that would post this. Put some thought into it. You bet 137x the
pot there with top pair weak kicker. What did you expect to call you that
you could beat?
> This is also the thing won't let me reconcile my feelings on about the
> deal. Sure, I win my share of these when there is not as much at stake,
> but when it gets down to the nut cutting, I seem to lose way more than my
> share.
It's really hard not to unleash on you here. But I'll refrain. For now,
that is.
> PokerStars Game #17411120790: Tournament #88244456, $4.00+$0.40 Hold'em No
> Limit - Level IX (200/400) - 2008/05/13 - 20:07:55 (ET)
> Table '88244456 7' 9-max Seat #2 is the button
> Seat 1: zd fairlane (9603 in chips)
> Seat 2: posh55 (37751 in chips)
> Seat 3: ser.luca88 (14560 in chips)
> Seat 5: WillGamble2 (8220 in chips)
> Seat 6: DionRown (23513 in chips)
> Seat 9: 2muchgoods (4565 in chips)
> zd fairlane: posts the ante 50
> posh55: posts the ante 50
> ser.luca88: posts the ante 50
> WillGamble2: posts the ante 50
> DionRown: posts the ante 50
> 2muchgoods: posts the ante 50
> ser.luca88: posts small blind 200
> WillGamble2: posts big blind 400
> *** HOLE CARDS ***
> Dealt to WillGamble2 [Tc Kd]
> DionRown: folds
> 2muchgoods: folds
> zd fairlane: calls 400
> posh55: calls 400
> ser.luca88: calls 200
> WillGamble2: checks
> *** FLOP *** [8s Ks 5d]
> ser.luca88: checks
> WillGamble2: bets 7770 and is all-in
> zd fairlane: folds
> posh55: folds
> ser.luca88: calls 7770
> *** TURN *** [8s Ks 5d] [Js]
> *** RIVER *** [8s Ks 5d Js] [Ac]
> *** SHOW DOWN ***
> ser.luca88: shows [6s As] (a flush, Ace high)
> WillGamble2: shows [Tc Kd] (a pair of Kings)
If you expect a flush draw to fold in a $4 tournament, you are out of your
mind. You question the deal? How far ahead did you think you were?
I've said it in the past that people who question the fairness of the deal
in online poker generally don't understand the game. So far everyone has
proven that here: Spazzo, igotskillz, all those morons like Jachomo,
Foxtrot, rgposter and the like...and I guess I have to add you to the
list? I'd really rather not. Please just tell me that this is a case of
drunkenness or something...
---
Morphy
xaqm...@donkeymanifesto.com
http://www.donkeymanifesto.com
-----
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
Will_gamble
This happens to me a lot. In this case, hindsight tells me I might should
have bet less and seen the turn before pushing.
This is also the thing won't let me reconcile my feelings on about the
deal. Sure, I win my share of these when there is not as much at stake,
but when it gets down to the nut cutting, I seem to lose way more than my
share.
PokerStars Game #17411120790: Tournament #88244456, $4.00+$0.40 Hold'em No
ser.luca88 collected 17440 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 17440 | Rake 0
Board [8s Ks 5d Js Ac]
Seat 1: zd fairlane folded on the Flop
Seat 2: posh55 (button) folded on the Flop
Seat 3: ser.luca88 (small blind) showed [6s As] and won (17440) with a
flush, Ace high
Seat 5: WillGamble2 (big blind) showed [Tc Kd] and lost with a pair of
Kings
Seat 6: DionRown folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: 2muchgoods folded before Flop (didn't bet)
-------
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
Will_gamble
I don't seem to be able to know when to push an edge or wait.
If I had known it would make somebody angry, I wouldn't have posted it.
“Being Irish he had an abiding sense of tragedy which sustained him
through temporary periods of joy.” W. B. Yeats
--------
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
K9way
4thst. Good card comes , then go all-in .
BAD PLAY HERE!!
On May 13 2008 7:44 PM, Will_gamble wrote:
_____________________________________________________________________
Will_gamble
> On May 13 2008 7:44 PM, Will_gamble wrote:
>
> > 19 left and it pays a paltry 8.64 for 10th through 18th.
> >
> > This happens to me a lot. In this case, hindsight tells me I might should
> > have bet less and seen the turn before pushing.
>
> I'm going to be nice to you, well, nicer than I would be to some random
> idiot that would post this. Put some thought into it. You bet 137x the
> pot there with top pair weak kicker. What did you expect to call you that
> you could beat?
>
I didn't expect a call based on the action preflop. I called myself
chasing away any draws.
Actually, there is about 2100 in the pot Pre Flop.
Blinds will soon be 300/600 and I am in that dreaded range where us nits
seem to end up, close to ITM, but below average stack size. If the guy
calls and doesn't make a flush, then who is the donkey?
> > This is also the thing won't let me reconcile my feelings on about the
> > deal. Sure, I win my share of these when there is not as much at stake,
> > but when it gets down to the nut cutting, I seem to lose way more than my
> > share.
>
> It's really hard not to unleash on you here. But I'll refrain. For now,
> that is.
>
I don't know too many players that don't question the deal after a string
of long shot beats and opponents waking up with the nuts every time you
are short stacked and get a pocket pair, AK, or some other move in hand.
For what it is worth, it is a $4 tournament that pays $216 for first and
8.46 for 10th through 18th. You have played your way to the bubble and
are waiting for an edge to double up. At least that seems to be the
prevailing strategy. Well, at least it has been mine to date and I am
asking here is it wrong.
I think most half way decent players, given the situation.... would lay a
flush draw down with a bet that would cripple them. I can tell you that
I laid down several and as it turned out it was a good move because they
didn't make. However, they don't fail three out four times against me.
It is incredible IMHO.
> I've said it in the past that people who question the fairness of the deal
> in online poker generally don't understand the game. So far everyone has
> proven that here: Spazzo, igotskillz, all those morons like Jachomo,
> Foxtrot, rgposter and the like...and I guess I have to add you to the
> list? I'd really rather not. Please just tell me that this is a case of
> drunkenness or something...
>
I think I don't understand the game if luck is where the rubber meets the
road in poker. I feel like a cat waiting to pounce on an unsuspecting
prey and when the kill presents itself I get the miracle runner runner
loss. I can tell you and show you with tracker data that luck beats me
way more than the math says it should.
So, when you say that I may not understand the game, you may be right.
Maybe I lack the understanding that I will lose to suckouts way more than
I expect. If I didn't, I would be winning a lot of money me thinks.
> ---
> Morphy
> xaqm...@donkeymanifesto.com
> http://www.donkeymanifesto.com
Be nice Morphy, life is short.
Cheers
________________________________________________________________________
John_Brian_K
> in online poker generally don't understand the game. So far everyone has
> proven that here: Spazzo, igotskillz, all those morons like Jachomo,
> Foxtrot, rgposter and the like...and I guess I have to add you to the
> list? I'd really rather not. Please just tell me that this is a case of
> drunkenness or something...
Hey numb nuts I don't play online. I guess I could say more, but I think
that is all I need to say to contradict your reading comprehension.
One last thing; save yourself the time in back tracking and trying to
disprove my point. I don't call depositing 50.00 to play penny tables ONE
TIME 'playing online'
Now that Jason is gone who is your new roadie?
> Morphy
> xaqm...@donkeymanifesto.com
> http://www.donkeymanifesto.com
BOOM byae
John
______________________________________________________________________
Ian Stuart
> On May 13 2008 8:02 PM, XaQ Morphy wrote:
>
> > On May 13 2008 7:44 PM, Will_gamble wrote:
> >
> > > 19 left and it pays a paltry 8.64 for 10th through 18th.
> > >
> > > This happens to me a lot. In this case, hindsight tells me I might
should
> > > have bet less and seen the turn before pushing.
> >
> > I'm going to be nice to you, well, nicer than I would be to some random
> > idiot that would post this. Put some thought into it. You bet 137x the
> > pot there with top pair weak kicker. What did you expect to call you that
> > you could beat?
> >
>
> I didn't expect a call based on the action preflop.
Why? Plenty of players will limp with KQ/KJ/55/88 all of which have you
dominated. Quite a few players will also limp with A5s which gives 14 outs
against your pair. With 3 players against you it's not inconceivable that
you might be fighting an uphill battle.
>I called myself
> chasing away any draws.
Whilst I understand that you probalby felt you were so short stacked as to
be pretty well committed, you could have considered a pot sized bet. This
would have deprived any draws of adequate call odds and would have given
you the chance to fire off a second and final bullet on the turn.
> Actually, there is about 2100 in the pot Pre Flop.
> Blinds will soon be 300/600 and I am in that dreaded range where us nits
> seem to end up, close to ITM, but below average stack size. If the guy
> calls and doesn't make a flush, then who is the donkey?
Sometimes neither player is fundamentally wrong. If he had you down for
just a pair then he also had 3 aces to add to his 9 flush outs. Obviously
14 outs twice is still a gamble on his part but it's not an insane one.
>
>
> > > This is also the thing won't let me reconcile my feelings on about the
> > > deal. Sure, I win my share of these when there is not as much at stake,
> > > but when it gets down to the nut cutting, I seem to lose way more than my
> > > share.
> >
> > It's really hard not to unleash on you here. But I'll refrain. For now,
> > that is.
> >
>
> I don't know too many players that don't question the deal after a string
> of long shot beats and opponents waking up with the nuts every time you
> are short stacked and get a pocket pair, AK, or some other move in hand.
The beat wasn't that much of a longshot. Personally, I think a large part
of the problem here is purely emotional and an inevitable side-effect of
playing like a nit. I say this as a fellow nit but one who finds it a lot
easier to deal with the bust outs. It can be very frustrating for a tight
player to sit waiting and watching and waiting and......then getting
busted by some gambler who gets a little lucky. If you believe nittish
play is the best approach then try and get over the frustration.
Alternatively you could experiment with a looser approach to the game -
I'm guessing you don't play $4 tourney's for the money so what's the harm
in experimenting a bit?
I thought the ideal strategy near the bubble was to try and steal a lot,
given that the majority of players go all weak/tight at this stage. This
usually happens a good few places before the actual bubble and sometimes
ironically relaxes right on the bubble as people start to get fed up.
Again, as one of your nitty peers, I also find it hard to try and steal
with absolute garbage but many people do it successfully. The key I think
is to pick the right situations against the right players and always leave
yourself a bit of room to manoeuvre.
> Well, at least it has been mine to date and I am
> asking here is it wrong.
If it feels wrong often it is. You're playing at stakes that must be
considered purely recreational both for yourself and the majority of your
opponents. If you're not enjoying the experience then it's not good
recreation. Either learn not to let the beats get you down or add some
game to your play and see if that makes it more fun for you. You might not
win any more than you do now but you might just get more of a buzz out of
it.
>
> I think most half way decent players, given the situation.... would lay a
> flush draw down with a bet that would cripple them.
Most players at those stakes either aren't decent or are temporarly
choosing not to be. They're there to play, not to sit and watch and
wait.........
>I can tell you that
> I laid down several and as it turned out it was a good move because they
> didn't make. However, they don't fail three out four times against me.
> It is incredible IMHO.
It's more likely just selective memory. We tend to remember the killer
beats more than the hands we win, especially when we've just spent 3 hours
waiting and watching........
>
>
> > I've said it in the past that people who question the fairness of the deal
> > in online poker generally don't understand the game. So far everyone has
> > proven that here: Spazzo, igotskillz, all those morons like Jachomo,
> > Foxtrot, rgposter and the like...and I guess I have to add you to the
> > list? I'd really rather not. Please just tell me that this is a case of
> > drunkenness or something...
> >
>
> I think I don't understand the game if luck is where the rubber meets the
> road in poker. I feel like a cat waiting to pounce on an unsuspecting
> prey and when the kill presents itself I get the miracle runner runner
> loss. I can tell you and show you with tracker data that luck beats me
> way more than the math says it should.
The beat you posted in this thread was hardly a miracle and I bet the
majority of the ones that bust you out aren't either. Why don't you post
the stats that you reckon prove you get the shitty end of lady luck's
stick? I'm not calling you out but I'd be genuinely interested to see what
stats you're focusing on and how they compare to mine and other RGPers.
>
> So, when you say that I may not understand the game, you may be right.
> Maybe I lack the understanding that I will lose to suckouts way more than
> I expect. If I didn't, I would be winning a lot of money me thinks.
Relax and enjoy the game, I say. You're never going to win anything that
can be considered "a lot of money" playing those sorts of stakes so why
focus on that as one of your primary motivators?
>
> > ---
> > Morphy
> > xaqm...@donkeymanifesto.com
> > http://www.donkeymanifesto.com
>
>
> Be nice Morphy, life is short.
>
> Cheers
________________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
Ian Stuart
> Sometimes neither player is fundamentally wrong. If he had you down for
> just a pair then he also had 3 aces to add to his 9 flush outs. Obviously
> 14 outs twice is still a gamble on his part but it's not an insane one.
9+3=12 9+3=12 9+3=12.........
It's my proofreading that sucks, not my arithmetic!
Will_gamble
thought to myself.
It does drive me a little nuts to feel that I have played so well for a
couple hours and then get busted by a draw.
>Whilst I understand that you probalby felt you were so short stacked as to
>be pretty well committed, you could have considered a pot sized bet. This
>would have deprived any draws of adequate call odds and would have given
>you the chance to fire off a second and final bullet on the turn.
I need to think about this. I am sure you are mathematically correct, but
the way I usually think about draws is to be able to draw at it cheaply.
A pot sized bet in this case would have been 2100, if the drawer has a
large stack, it doesn't serve as much of a deterrent to my way of
thinking. For some reason I think most low level players think in terms
of how big a bet they are calling in relationship to their stack vs the
actual pot odds.
If memory serves me correctly, I bet 7700 into a 2100 pot making it 9800
total. He has to call 7700, which looks like almost even money. If I bet
2100, the pot is 4200 and he gets 2 to 1.
Granted, I am a low level player and don't make actual pot odds
calculations every time I bet.
I hate to show my ignorance to the RGP ass rippers, but I can take comfort
in being a modest winner.
XaQ Morphy
> Hey numb nuts I don't play online. I guess I could say more, but I think
> that is all I need to say to contradict your reading comprehension.
>
> One last thing; save yourself the time in back tracking and trying to
> disprove my point. I don't call depositing 50.00 to play penny tables ONE
> TIME 'playing online'
Yet, you've stated here on RGP that you don't feel the online deal is
right. Do you need me to find the posts where you said that?
Try and keep up here sparks. It isn't very hard.
-----
chandler
<Snip>
You bet 137x the
> pot there with top pair weak kicker. What did you expect to call you that
> you could beat?
Well, closer to 4X, but I see the point.
<Snip more stuff including HH>
> If you expect a flush draw to fold in a $4 tournament, you are out of your
> mind.
<Yeah, I snip more> Is there a way to reconcile these two seemingly
contradictory statements?
> ---
> Morphy
> xaqm...@donkeymanifesto.com
> http://www.donkeymanifesto.com
Chandler
-------
John_Brian_K
> right. Do you need me to find the posts where you said that?
I have viewed more hands live than online and noticed more long shots
hitting online. In a nutshell that is what I have posted time in and time
out. Now fee free to go back and find a post where I say something like
'the online deal is completely fucked' and take it out of context if you
feel like making me blow smoke from my ears.
BTW I haven't played online in about 3 months so for all I know the long
shots are hitting with MUCH less frequency now than what I witnessed.
> Try and keep up here sparks. It isn't very hard.
Apparently it is.
BOOM byae
John
---
chandler
> 19 left and it pays a paltry 8.64 for 10th through 18th.
>
> This happens to me a lot. In this case, hindsight tells me I might should
> have bet less and seen the turn before pushing.
>
> This is also the thing won't let me reconcile my feelings on about the
> deal. Sure, I win my share of these when there is not as much at stake,
> but when it gets down to the nut cutting, I seem to lose way more than my
> share.
Well, if my calculator is correct you were about 53% to win after the
flop. Not exactly a bad beat. I've sucked out way worse many times.
It's my specialty.
Did you consider a steal here? It's the kind of hand I might try it with
against limpers if conditions seemed right.
> *** FLOP *** [8s Ks 5d]
> ser.luca88: checks
> WillGamble2: bets 7770 and is all-in
Umm OK. You're short and don't think you can get away from the hand.
Default to push. I've done the same stupid shit when I got confused.
Potting it might have gotten you the results you wanted which seemed to be
to take it down there. Mostly I try to bet the minimum to get the job
done except when I get stupid... which happens with some frequency.
> zd fairlane: folds
> posh55: folds
> ser.luca88: calls 7770
> *** TURN *** [8s Ks 5d] [Js]
> *** RIVER *** [8s Ks 5d Js] [Ac]
> *** SHOW DOWN ***
> ser.luca88: shows [6s As] (a flush, Ace high)
> WillGamble2: shows [Tc Kd] (a pair of Kings)
> ser.luca88 collected 17440 from pot
Bad luck. Time to whine about it on the rail and call your opponent
names. This is online poker and we must keep up the standards of the game.
> *** SUMMARY ***
> Total pot 17440 | Rake 0
> Board [8s Ks 5d Js Ac]
> Seat 1: zd fairlane folded on the Flop
> Seat 2: posh55 (button) folded on the Flop
> Seat 3: ser.luca88 (small blind) showed [6s As] and won (17440) with a
> flush, Ace high
> Seat 5: WillGamble2 (big blind) showed [Tc Kd] and lost with a pair of
> Kings
> Seat 6: DionRown folded before Flop (didn't bet)
> Seat 9: 2muchgoods folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Chandler
____________________________________________________________________
XaQ Morphy
> I didn't expect a call based on the action preflop. I called myself
> chasing away any draws.
> Actually, there is about 2100 in the pot Pre Flop.
> Blinds will soon be 300/600 and I am in that dreaded range where us nits
> seem to end up, close to ITM, but below average stack size. If the guy
> calls and doesn't make a flush, then who is the donkey?
Results of the hand shouldn't determine if a decision was good or bad.
You both made bad plays in the hand, regardless of how it ends up.
Take your hand there and think about what sort of hand is going to call a
7000 bet into a 2100 chip pot. Then of those hands consider what you can
beat. Now take the size of your bet and reduce it to 1500 or so, and see
what calls and what you can beat. Now look at your actual hole cards vs.
the board and what calls. You'll see that they don't much matter in spots
like this.
> I don't know too many players that don't question the deal after a string
> of long shot beats and opponents waking up with the nuts every time you
> are short stacked and get a pocket pair, AK, or some other move in hand.
It happens. It's happened to some pros for years on end. But, your
opponent wasn't a long shot in the hand. He had (if I can count
correctly) 12 outs on the flop. Besides, I'm not saying this to belittle
the buyin level, but it's a $4 tourney. There aren't many expert players
at that level. They see a flush draw and think they are ahead because
they have most of a flush.
> For what it is worth, it is a $4 tournament that pays $216 for first and
> 8.46 for 10th through 18th. You have played your way to the bubble and
> are waiting for an edge to double up. At least that seems to be the
> prevailing strategy. Well, at least it has been mine to date and I am
> asking here is it wrong.
>
> I think most half way decent players, given the situation.... would lay a
> flush draw down with a bet that would cripple them. I can tell you that
> I laid down several and as it turned out it was a good move because they
> didn't make. However, they don't fail three out four times against me.
> It is incredible IMHO.
Here's the problem. You aren't playing half way decent players. You are
playing players who put up the worldly sum of $4 to have some fun. I've
talked to many people who have problems differentiating between what they
would do and what their opponents would do. Some players would sell all
of their material possessions to make a call with a flush draw with 1 card
left on a double paired board. Just because you wouldn't make the call
doesn't mean they won't.
> I think I don't understand the game if luck is where the rubber meets the
> road in poker. I feel like a cat waiting to pounce on an unsuspecting
> prey and when the kill presents itself I get the miracle runner runner
> loss. I can tell you and show you with tracker data that luck beats me
> way more than the math says it should.
>
> So, when you say that I may not understand the game, you may be right.
> Maybe I lack the understanding that I will lose to suckouts way more than
> I expect. If I didn't, I would be winning a lot of money me thinks.
There's way more luck to poker than most people realize, especially in the
short term. If you get in as a 2:1 favorite (which I don't think you
were, with 12 outs you were more like 60/40), you're going to lose 1 out
of 3 times, that's just the way it is. That's not a long shot, yet you
are considered a fairly solid favorite there. It's just the way the game
works, because if you take those odds a bazillion times, you'll come out
way ahead, even if you may lose money in 100 situations or whatever a
short term number may be.
Add to that the fact that poker sucks, and yeah, it's not pleasant when
you go on a rough run like that.
> Be nice Morphy, life is short.
>
> Cheers
I'm trying!
________________________________________________________________________
Ian Stuart
>
> If memory serves me correctly, I bet 7700 into a 2100 pot making it 9800
> total. He has to call 7700, which looks like almost even money. If I bet
> 2100, the pot is 4200 and he gets 2 to 1.
On the board in question the most likely valid draws are either an
open-ended straight (8 outs) or a flush (9 outs). Very roughly, they are
both about 4:1 against completing on the turn so if he calls with one of
those draws the pot odds of 2:1 are offering him poor value and it would
be a mistake for him to call on the basis of pot odds alone. If both your
stacks are deep enough, AND he reckons you are likely to pay him off
should he hit, then implied odds may compensate for poor pot odds, but I
don't believe that is the case in this hand.
Again, I'm not saying your move was fundamentally wrong as you didn't have
a whole lot of chips left after a pot bet. However, with a pot sized bet
you are nonetheless letting him make a mistake by calling and you still
have just enough left over to offer him the opportunity to make another
mistake on the turn should he miss. There is, however, the fact that when
you pushed you did not know what the other two players thought of the
flop. If you habitually shove all-in from EP with top pair poor kicker
against multiple opponents you're going to get burned with reasonable
frequency.
For all the discussion about this specific hand I would like to reiterate
the point I was mainly trying to make which was more about how the beats
are getting to you emotionally. I've been there and done that, and still
do on the very odd occasion, but when you look at it with proper
perspective you should be able to see that you're beating yourself up over
nothing. From a financial standpoint, you lost a fraction of an hours
income and you got more than enough entertainment value to compensate for
that. From an intellectual ego POV, the fact that someone wins after
making what you consider to be a stupid play doesn't make him the better
man nor you a fool. We make the best decisions we can and the cards do the
rest.
____________________________________________________________________
XaQ Morphy
> <Yeah, I snip more> Is there a way to reconcile these two seemingly
> contradictory statements?
Summary:
Statement 1: 4x the pot bet with top pair weak kicker, question is what
calls that you can beat?
Statement 2: flush draw doesn't fold in a $4 tourney
They seem to contradict one another, but they really don't. If you can
put your opponent on a flush draw and know that he will call every time,
then obviously the correct move is to bet the entire stack. But we don't
put our opponents on one specific hand, we decide what range of hands they
would have based on an action and go from there.
These numbers are just made up, but let's say 99% of the time he gets
called there and is in bad (30/70 dog or worse) shape and 1% of the time
he gets called and is a 60/40 or better favorite. Make sense now?
________________________________________________________________________
XaQ Morphy
> I have viewed more hands live than online and noticed more long shots
> hitting online. In a nutshell that is what I have posted time in and time
> out. Now fee free to go back and find a post where I say something like
> 'the online deal is completely fucked' and take it out of context if you
> feel like making me blow smoke from my ears.
>
> BTW I haven't played online in about 3 months so for all I know the long
> shots are hitting with MUCH less frequency now than what I witnessed.
lol. Yup, that's exactly what I'm talking about. Word it however you
want it. You're still a moron.
_____________________________________________________________________
Will_gamble
I really need to be less spontaneous in these situations. I went through
a period where I was calling to many all-ins because it must be my turn to
win a race. Now I need to do some tuning on the betting side.
John_Brian_K
> want it. You're still a moron.
I am no moron, but you will always be a dick.
BOOM byae
John
---
Will_gamble
stupid... which <happens with some frequency
Ah ha! Just the type of trigger I was looking for. The question Brew
asked about Carson's piece of paper with a reminder on it made me think
about needing something. Like I said to Morphy, I have pretty much
succeeded in conquering my call to race demon, now this will be a nice
addition on the betting side.
“Being Irish he had an abiding sense of tragedy which sustained him
through temporary periods of joy.” W. B. Yeats
-----
XaQ Morphy
> Thanks for the feedback Morphy.
>
> I really need to be less spontaneous in these situations. I went through
> a period where I was calling to many all-ins because it must be my turn to
> win a race. Now I need to do some tuning on the betting side.
Here's a great article that a RGP lurker sent me a few years ago when I
did that first hour tourney series of posts. Ian should read this too, in
fact I might pull a Russ and start a new thread with it as well:
http://www.pocketfives.com/poker-articles/The-unlucky-middle
________________________________________________________________________
![Mark B [Diputsur]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjW1ukZesLHTvLryryGaLhoUTsW-4I5_N8bKNVoFKGU5T0OxggP6=s40-c)
Mark B [Diputsur]
"John_Brian_K" <John_Brian...@Yahoo.Com> wrote in message
news:ialrf5x...@recgroups.com...
>
> I have viewed more hands live than online and noticed more long shots
> hitting online.
There's a very logical explanation for that...
I don't recall the limits you play live, but I'm
pretty sure it's a little bigger than the .02/.04
game you stuck to on stars... who folds for
two cents?
phlash74
wrote:
> I may be a moron, but you will always be a dick.
>
> BOOM byae
> John
>
> ---
> : the next generation of web-newsreaders :http://www.recgroups.com
FYP
chandler
> On May 14 2008 12:48 PM, chandler wrote:
>
> > <Yeah, I snip more> Is there a way to reconcile these two seemingly
> > contradictory statements?
>
> Summary:
>
> Statement 1: 4x the pot bet with top pair weak kicker, question is what
> calls that you can beat?
>
> Statement 2: flush draw doesn't fold in a $4 tourney
>
> They seem to contradict one another, but they really don't. If you can
> put your opponent on a flush draw and know that he will call every time,
> then obviously the correct move is to bet the entire stack. But we don't
> put our opponents on one specific hand, we decide what range of hands they
> would have based on an action and go from there.
>
> These numbers are just made up, but let's say 99% of the time he gets
> called there and is in bad (30/70 dog or worse) shape and 1% of the time
> he gets called and is a 60/40 or better favorite. Make sense now?
>
> ---
> Morphy
> xaqm...@donkeymanifesto.com
> http://www.donkeymanifesto.com
Yeah, that "range" thing. I've heard of that. Having recently waded
through 4000 of the finest donkeys UB could muster to play for free (and
wasting 6 hours of my time in the process), I can say that range stuff is
an interesting business. Jamming with a 137xpot bet could get called by
all draws and some second and third pairs. Fun times.... So jamming the
K 10 after the flop isn't the move that maximizes EV for the hand. I can
see where he's coming from, though. You're short, you've limped a
multiway pot out of the BB and you have the misfortune of hitting just
enough of the flop to feel you have to play it. Jamming simplifies
everything. No more tough decisions and no chance someone can steel your
oop play at the pot here or at later streets if you slow down. Pretty
seductive when you're confused and desperate. I'm donk enough to get it
and donk enough to have done it at one time or another.
Chandler
XaQ Morphy
> see where he's coming from, though. You're short, you've limped a
> multiway pot out of the BB and you have the misfortune of hitting just
> enough of the flop to feel you have to play it. Jamming simplifies
Only problem is you aren't short. 8200 chips with blinds 200/400 isn't
short.
----
chandler
> <Mostly I try to bet the minimum to get the job done except when I get
> stupid... which <happens with some frequency
>
> Ah ha! Just the type of trigger I was looking for. The question Brew
> asked about Carson's piece of paper with a reminder on it made me think
> about needing something. Like I said to Morphy, I have pretty much
> succeeded in conquering my call to race demon, now this will be a nice
> addition on the betting side.
>
>
Well, don't credit me. I just read it somewhere.
Chandler
----
chandler
> On May 15 2008 6:28 AM, chandler wrote:
>
> > see where he's coming from, though. You're short, you've limped a
> > multiway pot out of the BB and you have the misfortune of hitting just
> > enough of the flop to feel you have to play it. Jamming simplifies
>
> Only problem is you aren't short. 8200 chips with blinds 200/400 isn't
> short.
>
> ---
> Morphy
> xaqm...@donkeymanifesto.com
> http://www.donkeymanifesto.com
He has 8200T and he's paying 900T every six hands with that cost going up
by 50% very shortly unless I'm getting something wrong. Yes, he can still
be patient and make a standard raise or call with 22xthe bb, but there is
some urgency. He can afford to check fold this hand, but that seems
pretty wimpy. He can afford to take a stab at the pot and decide what to
do if he's called or played back at. Probably what I would do, but I'd
really be hoping to just take the pot right there. If I were going to
push I would have been better off doing it preflop, IMO.
I'd really be kicking myself if I had to shut it down after committing
about a quarter of my stack at this time in the tournament and it's
avoiding this decision that makes the push seductive especially if you are
easily confused by post flop play. Didn't you pose a similar puzzler
recently? I seem to recall a K 7 BB limp with a K hitting the flop.
Chandler
XaQ Morphy
> He has 8200T and he's paying 900T every six hands with that cost going up
> by 50% very shortly unless I'm getting something wrong. Yes, he can still
> be patient and make a standard raise or call with 22xthe bb, but there is
> some urgency. He can afford to check fold this hand, but that seems
> pretty wimpy. He can afford to take a stab at the pot and decide what to
> do if he's called or played back at. Probably what I would do, but I'd
> really be hoping to just take the pot right there. If I were going to
> push I would have been better off doing it preflop, IMO.
Playing a 22BB stack like you're short is just going to cause problems.
Staying focused on the average stack in a tourney that you can't control
rather than table conditions on the table you're on that you can ccontrol
is asking for trouble.
> I'd really be kicking myself if I had to shut it down after committing
> about a quarter of my stack at this time in the tournament and it's
> avoiding this decision that makes the push seductive especially if you are
> easily confused by post flop play. Didn't you pose a similar puzzler
> recently? I seem to recall a K 7 BB limp with a K hitting the flop.
Yes, was just like this one, except stack was 1500 blinds 10/20. In other
words, completely different.
-----
XaQ Morphy
> > I may be a moron, but you will always be a dick.
> >
> > BOOM byae
> > John
> >
> FYP
Not quite fixed enough IMO!
-------
chandler
> Playing a 22BB stack like you're short is just going to cause problems.
> Staying focused on the average stack in a tourney that you can't control
> rather than table conditions on the table you're on that you can ccontrol
> is asking for trouble.
Yep, but pushing solves your problem if your problem is you don't want to
make any more decisions. It pays to be rational, but I've found it a rare
quality in gamblers.
>
> > I'd really be kicking myself if I had to shut it down after committing
> > about a quarter of my stack at this time in the tournament and it's
> > avoiding this decision that makes the push seductive especially if you are
> > easily confused by post flop play. Didn't you pose a similar puzzler
> > recently? I seem to recall a K 7 BB limp with a K hitting the flop.
>
> Yes, was just like this one, except stack was 1500 blinds 10/20. In other
> words, completely different.
Yes it was exactly different then.
Chandler
------
John_Brian_K
> I don't recall the limits you play live, but I'm
> pretty sure it's a little bigger than the .02/.04
> game you stuck to on stars... who folds for
> two cents?
True Dat Donkey!
BOOM byae
John
_____________________________________________________________________
phlash74
> On May 15 2008 4:18 PM, phlash74 wrote:
>
> > > I may be a moron, but you will always be a dick.
>
> > > BOOM byae
> > > John
>
> > FYP
>
> Not quite fixed enough IMO!
>
> ---
> Morphy
Maybe not, but I didn't want to get accused of kissing your ass like
Dippy and Raider Fan. I was just trying to phrase it in the classic
rejoinder style. As originally worded, his post made no sense
(shocking, I know).
Michael
U.S. American
John_Brian_K
> On May 14, 12:13 pm, "John_Brian_K" <John_Brian_Kent_1...@Yahoo.Com>
> wrote:
>
> > I may be a moron, but you will always be a dick.
> >
> > BOOM byae
> > John
> >
> I am a dick
FYP
BOOM byae
John
_______________________________________________________________________