Gambling question for popinjay (test your knowledge)

[risky biz]

I really need help with this. I have concluded that calculating my 'expected ROI', per BillB, is a higher math procedure just way over my head. Every day I question more and more if I can ever be anything other than a loser at video poker without knowing beforehand what my 'expected ROI' is. The real stunner for me recently was my sudden discovery at RGP that video poker was -EV.

Please tap any experience you have to give me an honest opinion about my best course of action from the two alternatives below:

1. Just STOP playing video poker or any other form of poker.

2. Play 10 million hands of 1c/2c online poker which should make me a world-class poker player and then take the big step and go enter a $1/$2 no-limit tournament at the Golden Nugget.

Reference material:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h6x9na7de7np2s1/AAA_-SSiibrT7wEkw5gbRpe2a?dl=0

[BillB]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 1:05:55 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:

> 1. Just STOP playing video poker or any other form of poker.
>
> 2. Play 10 million hands of 1c/2c online poker which should make me a world-class poker player and then take the big step and go enter a $1/$2 no-limit tournament at the Golden Nugget.
>
> Reference material:
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h6x9na7de7np2s1/AAA_-SSiibrT7wEkw5gbRpe2a?dl=0

What is a "$1-$2 no-limit tournament"? Are you sure you have even played poker before? lol

I've already given you my advice. Stop wasting your time playing an (addictive) negative expected ROI game, and put that saved time toward improving your life-limiting job skills and opportunities.

[popinjay]

I think he said "Popinjay", numbnuts. I'll have to address this in the morning. If I can get my blood pressure down I'm fixing to go out on a play. Over 4%, over $2000 coin-in per hour, and I'm fixing on playing two machines at once, that's why I'm going in now and hoping there is no crowd. The good thing is, if I get lucky and hit it, there should be a 3% play close by. The game is keno, progressive. It's only 63 degrees out right now, so nice.

[risky biz]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 1:38:28 AM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

I did say 'popinjay', numbnuts and, no, I don't play tournaments and never will unless I get senile which is highly unlikely. The men in my family live past their early 90s still lucid and the early ones were frontiersmen who didn't have a doctor within 500 miles.

With a $70 buy-in, like the 11:00AM tournament at the Golden Nugget where you say you mopped up the floor, $25/$50 start blinds with pretend chips is a lot safer than $1/$2 cash games. Smart move on your part. LOL.

I'm expecting you to post some of your 2BBs per hour wins any day or year now.

[risky biz]

Good luck.

[BillB]

You said, "take the big step and go enter a $1/$2 no-limit tournament at the Golden Nugget."

What is a "$1-$2 NL Tournament"? I've been playing poker for 50 years, and I've never heard of such a thing. Could you please explain it for us and tell us where you would find one? lolol

By the way, I didn't say anything about "mopping up the floor" at the Golden Nugget. You asked me what I played when I stayed at The D, and I told you I played poker at the Golden Nugget, as I always do when I am in Downtown Las Vegas.

Actually, if you go back and read my trip report for that trip, I believe I reported losses of $600 for that trip (including about $400 in blackjack losses by my wife).

Unfortunately, I don't really have any documentation of my poker winnings I can show you. None of it is taxable in Canada, so I don't need to keep meticulous records. This is the best I can offer you right now, a credit report I ordered from PokerStars way back in 2008. It shows a total profit of about $45,000 playing microstakes, plus I made about $11,000 in additional cash and prizes with Frequent Player Points. You can use this data to try to extrapolate how much I have won online to date. It's an enormous sum, considering I'm just playing very low limit poker online for fun while I work and make real money. The money I've made playing live is the really significant amount. I'd rather not say how much that is, but you wouldn't believe me anyways.

Credit status Report

Date/Time Type TransId Amount
PS CHEQUES #
4/15/2007 1:55:57 AM Red 77681035 -1,138.40 CAD ($-1,001.00)
5/7/2007 3:39:41 AM Red 80724830 -1,109.14 CAD ($-1,001.00)
6/21/2007 3:08:58 AM Red 87321599 -425.98 CAD ($-400.00)
7/1/2007 10:47:28 AM Red 88751508 -490.24 CAD ($-460.00)
7/9/2007 8:25:14 AM Red 89866967 -733.44 CAD ($-700.00)
7/22/2007 4:46:51 PM Red 91772370 -495.35 CAD ($-475.00)
8/9/2007 10:36:49 AM Red 94255577 -839.54 CAD ($-800.00)
1/11/2008 11:40:31 PM Red 121589149 -503.64 CAD ($-500.00)
1/18/2008 10:24:12 PM Red 123074874 -513.47 CAD ($-500.00)
1/29/2008 10:23:19 PM Red 125462510 -500.64 CAD ($-500.00)
VISA #4***********9765
3/1/2008 6:09:45 PM Dep 132695330 50.00 CAD ($51.09)
QI #
2/21/2008 5:18:45 PM Red 129467398 -398.22 CAD ($-400.00)
3/25/2008 12:16:23 PM Red 137549708 -2,479.97 CAD ($-2,500.00)
4/2/2008 6:18:50 PM Red 139388616 -1,063.06 CAD ($-1,045.00)
ECHECK #0***************1001
1/18/2007 11:48:40 AM Dep 66457501 30.00 CAD ($25.50)
1/25/2007 7:54:09 AM Red 67220408 -30.00 CAD ($-25.33)
1/25/2007 9:04:52 AM Red 67220409 -1,746.20 CAD ($-1,474.67)
3/14/2007 4:59:55 AM Red 73315831 -1,053.24 CAD ($-900.00)
CHEQUE #
12/21/2001 6:35:05 PM Red 501291 $-186.00
1/1/2002 6:00:04 PM Red 506784 $-186.00
NETELLER #4*******5097
9/25/2004 5:48:58 AM Dep 8581028 $499.00
10/5/2004 4:36:01 AM Red 8905795 $-499.00
9/13/2005 11:02:00 PM Dep 23458861 $150.00
10/12/2005 10:26:29 PM Red 25166005 $-150.00
11/6/2006 10:46:26 AM Dep 57531056 $339.00
12/14/2006 4:37:19 PM Red 61812215 $-339.00
NETELLER #4*******5097 (OverCredit)
10/5/2004 4:36:01 AM Red 8905796 $-601.00
10/22/2004 3:29:33 AM Red 9412813 $-400.00
12/7/2004 11:00:09 PM Red 10853065 $-1,499.00
12/20/2004 6:45:00 AM Red 11236329 $-1,100.00
2/26/2005 6:01:15 AM Red 13736137 $-1,200.00
3/8/2005 10:19:36 AM Red 14143518 $-500.00
3/23/2005 7:53:32 AM Red 14785863 $-400.00
5/3/2005 5:30:37 AM Red 16486516 $-450.00
5/10/2005 2:07:08 PM Red 16817120 $-500.00
5/16/2005 3:56:48 AM Red 17081442 $-500.00
5/24/2005 3:31:02 PM Red 17439611 $-300.00
6/24/2005 8:50:56 AM Red 18941964 $-550.00
7/29/2005 7:38:42 PM Red 20803703 $-1,247.84
10/12/2005 10:26:31 PM Red 25166006 $-133.49
11/17/2005 12:18:12 AM Red 27429088 $-254.60
11/27/2005 11:48:20 PM Red 28247810 $-500.00
12/21/2005 5:50:44 AM Red 29823967 $-600.00
1/8/2006 6:54:39 AM Red 31098182 $-318.00
1/15/2006 4:44:12 PM Red 31657351 $-500.00
1/21/2006 3:35:36 AM Red 32082508 $-500.00
1/26/2006 5:39:28 PM Red 32511865 $-500.00
2/13/2006 3:05:52 AM Red 34014353 $-500.00
2/26/2006 7:30:49 AM Red 35178824 $-500.00
3/28/2006 5:09:28 AM Red 37947662 $-800.00
5/1/2006 3:49:39 AM Red 40769732 $-400.00
6/19/2006 4:57:50 AM Red 44738136 $-1,500.00
7/10/2006 4:14:15 AM Red 46411809 $-1,364.00
7/28/2006 7:36:41 AM Red 47937228 $-908.00
9/18/2006 12:08:42 AM Red 52587644 $-1,300.00
10/1/2006 4:44:58 AM Red 53869770 $-900.00
10/14/2006 4:17:07 PM Red 55139355 $-200.00
12/14/2006 4:37:24 PM Red 61812220 $-2,461.00
NETELLER #wgbx...@yahoo.com (OverCredit)
6/4/2003 1:23:41 PM Red 1216112 $-221.00
7/19/2003 3:39:30 AM Red 1409233 $-552.00
8/21/2003 2:18:47 AM Red 1673559 $-750.00
8/28/2003 11:57:47 PM Red 1754320 $-361.00
12/20/2003 6:22:28 PM Red 3028156 $-620.00
12/27/2003 4:52:25 PM Red 3108964 $-800.00
1/7/2004 2:45:02 PM Red 3249081 $-300.00
1/17/2004 4:16:37 PM Red 3382996 $-275.00
2/20/2004 7:55:45 PM Red 3916325 $-400.00
2/28/2004 11:56:45 PM Red 4072335 $-200.00
3/14/2004 6:23:53 AM Red 4336148 $-300.00
3/22/2004 5:00:04 AM Red 4476444 $-400.00
3/28/2004 5:49:07 AM Red 4579864 $-327.00
4/13/2004 5:43:23 AM Red 4853071 $-200.00
5/2/2004 8:42:34 PM Red 5194057 $-700.00
5/22/2004 2:13:08 AM Red 5520380 $-750.00
6/28/2004 9:51:25 AM Red 6233699 $-800.00
7/23/2004 9:33:20 PM Red 6798138 $-1,000.00
9/11/2004 4:58:12 PM Red 8166320 $-50.00
9/18/2004 9:28:40 PM Red 8378242 $-392.00
Total Player Balance: $-45,762.34

[BillB]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 1:57:54 AM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 1:38:28 AM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 1:05:55 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> >
> > > 1. Just STOP playing video poker or any other form of poker.
> > >
> > > 2. Play 10 million hands of 1c/2c online poker which should make me a world-class poker player and then take the big step and go enter a $1/$2 no-limit tournament at the Golden Nugget.
> > >
> > > Reference material:
> > > https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h6x9na7de7np2s1/AAA_-SSiibrT7wEkw5gbRpe2a?dl=0
> >
> > What is a "$1-$2 no-limit tournament"? Are you sure you have even played poker before? lol
> >
> > I've already given you my advice. Stop wasting your time playing an (addictive) negative expected ROI game, and put that saved time toward improving your life-limiting job skills and opportunities.
>
>
>
> I think he said "Popinjay", numbnuts.

Oh, sorry. I didn't read the title carefully. I thought this was my thread (the one with 250 responses). It was just risky copying me. Monkey see, monkey do.

> I'll have to address this in the morning.

Make sure you address what a "$1-$2 NL tourney" is while you're at it. I've never heard of such a thing before. I think this may be another case of risky inadvertently displaying his near total ignorance of all things gambling.

[popinjay]

I'm home already. Got really lucky and hit both in under two hours.

[BillB]

Aren't you going to endlessly harass risky over his stupid "$1-$2 NL tourney" comment? You know you would if Clave said it, you big phony.

[popinjay]

I'll wait to hear from Risky. It doesn't sound like no big deal to me. You're just jealous. Of Risky AND me, since I won almost $5000 on Keno this morning. I'm pretty sure Risky is trying to imply that you are a small fish, like a guppy, playing beldin-stakes.

[risky biz]

Nice, easy score. I'm going to start looking around for keno progressives here.

There are a decent number of UX keno machines around here now that can be AP'd but it takes almost 10 minutes to scan one machine and I'm not willing to take that much time so I usually ignore them. When I first discovered them I did play a little and you can make huge hits, relative to the bet size. I think I hit one for almost $300 playing a 10c denom.

[risky biz]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 3:25:51 AM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

~ Make sure you address what a "$1-$2 NL tourney" is while you're at it. I've never heard of such a thing before. I think this may be another case of risky inadvertently displaying his near total ignorance of all things gambling.

I'm not the least bit embarrassed about my total, not 'near total'(sic), ignorance of typical structure levels of $70 buy-in tournament poker. Am I supposed to be?🤣 I couldn't care less about tournament poker.

An example of near-total ignorance of POKER would be not recognizing the obvious and glaring difference of a stud hand from a hold'em hand and then being unable to admit it because that would undermine your facade of poker competence.

Or then following that up with an asinine disquisition about eliciting a bluff from a stud table when you have 4-to-a-straight on your board and 3 hole cards.🤣 You'd have to be in a game at a mental health facility.

Phew!

[popinjay]

It's different in Vegas. Vegas is not a place to AP progressive Keno. California, maybe Oklahoma, Montana. Vegas could be, but it isn't. The casino brass just ain't that creative.

The machines I play are not standard machines, like IGT, these were made strictly for Indian Casinos.

Btw, breaking news, Hard Rock, opening new casino just north of Sacramento this fall, maybe October. You always want to check a grand opening, looking for mistakes.

[risky biz]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 3:03:03 AM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 2:24:13 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 1:38:28 AM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > > On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 1:05:55 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> > >
> > > > 1. Just STOP playing video poker or any other form of poker.
> > > >
> > > > 2. Play 10 million hands of 1c/2c online poker which should make me a world-class poker player and then take the big step and go enter a $1/$2 no-limit tournament at the Golden Nugget.
> > > >
> > > > Reference material:
> > > > https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h6x9na7de7np2s1/AAA_-SSiibrT7wEkw5gbRpe2a?dl=0
> > >
> > > What is a "$1-$2 no-limit tournament"? Are you sure you have even played poker before? lol
> > >
> > > I've already given you my advice. Stop wasting your time playing an (addictive) negative expected ROI game, and put that saved time toward improving your life-limiting job skills and opportunities.
> >
> > I did say 'popinjay', numbnuts and, no, I don't play tournaments and never will unless I get senile which is highly unlikely. The men in my family live past their early 90s still lucid and the early ones were frontiersmen who didn't have a doctor within 500 miles.
> >
> > With a $70 buy-in, like the 11:00AM tournament at the Golden Nugget where you say you mopped up the floor, $25/$50 start blinds with pretend chips is a lot safer than $1/$2 cash games. Smart move on your part. LOL.
> >
> > I'm expecting you to post some of your 2BBs per hour wins any day or year now.
>
> You said, "take the big step and go enter a $1/$2 no-limit tournament at the Golden Nugget."
>
> What is a "$1-$2 NL Tournament"? I've been playing poker for 50 years, and I've never heard of such a thing. Could you please explain it for us and tell us where you would find one? lolol
>

~ By the way, I didn't say anything about "mopping up the floor" at the Golden Nugget.

'I can consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker game in the country..'
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.gambling.poker/0qM8dH2Y10Q/zYi6-NqmBAAJ

You asked me what I played when I stayed at The D, and I told you I played poker at the Golden Nugget, as I always do when I am in Downtown Las Vegas.
>

~ Actually, if you go back and read my trip report for that trip, I believe I reported losses of $600 for that trip (including about $400 in blackjack losses by my wife).

'I can consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker game in the country..'
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.gambling.poker/0qM8dH2Y10Q/zYi6-NqmBAAJ

'consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker'?

At low-midlimit poker? Hmmm.

~ Unfortunately, I don't really have any documentation of my poker winnings I can show you. None of it is taxable in Canada, so I don't need to keep meticulous records.

Should I wonder how you calculate your elsewhere-described-as-crucial 'expected ROI' with no records of your play? Phew!

~This is the best I can offer you right now, a credit report I ordered from PokerStars way back in 2008. It shows a total profit of about $45,000 playing microstakes, plus I made about $11,000 in additional cash and prizes with Frequent Player Points. You can use this data to try to extrapolate how much I have won online to date. It's an enormous sum, considering I'm just playing very low limit poker online for fun while I work and make real money.

I thought you were collecting disability.

~The money I've made playing live is the really significant amount. I'd rather not say how much that is, but you wouldn't believe me anyways.

Really? Where do you play live poker?

BTW- I TOTALLY believe what you cut and pasted below.

[BillB]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 2:57:50 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:

> 'I can consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker game in the country..'
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.gambling.poker/0qM8dH2Y10Q/zYi6-NqmBAAJ
>
> 'consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker'?
>
> At low-midlimit poker? Hmmm.

What part of that confuses you?

> Should I wonder how you calculate your elsewhere-described-as-crucial 'expected ROI' with no records of your play? Phew!
>

I have 50 years experience. I know what I win and what I lose and how much I am ahead to a very close tolerance. I don't need to keep track of it to the penny. Those days are long gone.

> I thought you were collecting disability.

When did I say that? It takes a little more than total kidney failure to sideline someone with my strength and resilience.

> Really? Where do you play live poker?

Everywhere I go. I've been playing in private game in Vancouver since the late 80s.

>
> BTW- I TOTALLY believe what you cut and pasted below.

I detect some sarcasm? One sign of intelligence is the ability to discern fact and fiction with some degree of accuracy. You don't have a very good track record. You're right down there with firkin and vanek, unfortunately.

[risky biz]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 2:57:50 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
>
> > 'I can consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker game in the country..'
> > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.gambling.poker/0qM8dH2Y10Q/zYi6-NqmBAAJ
> >

~ ~ 'consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker'?
> >
> > At low-midlimit poker? Hmmm.
>
~ What part of that confuses you?

The rake and toke part.

> > Should I wonder how you calculate your elsewhere-described-as-crucial 'expected ROI' with no records of your play? Phew!
> >
>

~ I have 50 years experience. I know what I win and what I lose and how much I am ahead to a very close tolerance. I don't need to keep track of it to the penny. Those days are long gone.

In other words- your 'expected ROI' ranting was complete and total bullshit.

> > I thought you were collecting disability.
>
> When did I say that? It takes a little more than total kidney failure to sideline someone with my strength and resilience.
>
>
> > Really? Where do you play live poker?
>

~ Everywhere I go. I've been playing in private game in Vancouver since the late 80s.

How convenient to your narrative.

> > BTW- I TOTALLY believe what you cut and pasted below.
>

~ I detect some sarcasm? One sign of intelligence is the ability to discern fact and fiction with some degree of accuracy. You don't have a very good track record. You're right down there with firkin and vanek, unfortunately.

Then not being able to recognize the obvious and glaring difference of a stud hand from a hold'em hand doesn't count? And not being able to recognize that eliciting a bluff from a stud table when you have 4-to-a-straight on your board and 3 hole cards is a ridiculous assertion?🤣

[BillB]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 6:35:43 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 2:57:50 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> >
> > > 'I can consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker game in the country..'
> > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.gambling.poker/0qM8dH2Y10Q/zYi6-NqmBAAJ
> > >
> ~ ~ 'consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker'?
> > >
> > > At low-midlimit poker? Hmmm.
> >
> ~ What part of that confuses you?
>
> The rake and toke part.

I don't know what you mean by that. 2bb/hr represents net profit. It was never meant to be anything other than a rough (but conservative) average over time.

> In other words- your 'expected ROI' ranting was complete and total bullshit.

No, it was actually a very conservative lowball average.

> ~ Everywhere I go. I've been playing in private game in Vancouver since the late 80s.
>
> How convenient to your narrative.

How convenient to my narrative that I've been playing poker forever? lol I wouldn't be commenting on it if I didn't know what I was talking about.

> > > BTW- I TOTALLY believe what you cut and pasted below.
> >
> ~ I detect some sarcasm? One sign of intelligence is the ability to discern fact and fiction with some degree of accuracy. You don't have a very good track record. You're right down there with firkin and vanek, unfortunately.
>
> Then not being able to recognize the obvious and glaring difference of a stud hand from a hold'em hand doesn't count?

Not reading one post carefully has nothing to do with my knowledge of poker. If you honestly think I don't know the difference between seven card stud and holdem then you are FAR dumber than anyone ever imagined. And since you keep bringing up this completely stupid "point," that is apparently the case.

>And not being able to recognize that eliciting a bluff from a stud table when >you have 4-to-a-straight on your board and 3 hole cards is a ridiculous >assertion?🤣

Stop parading your ignorance around like a badge of honor. You have no fucking clue what you are talking about. If you bet a winning hand on the river and everyone folds, that is the worst possible outcome for you. You gain NOTHING, every single time. You have wasted yet another opportunity to pick up an extra bet. It's one of the biggest, most expensive mistakes chump players like you make (time and time and time again). Expert players are good at knowing when it is better to check and let someone with nothing take a stab at the pot with a bluff bet. You have to be able to read players and their hands with some degree of accuracy to make it work. In other words, don't try this at home. Leave techniques like this to people who know what they're doing. People like you and popinjay are much better off just playing ABC poker.

[risky biz]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 1:05:17 AM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 6:35:43 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > > On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 2:57:50 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> > >
> > > > 'I can consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker game in the country..'
> > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.gambling.poker/0qM8dH2Y10Q/zYi6-NqmBAAJ
> > > >
> > ~ ~ 'consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker'?
> > > >
> > > > At low-midlimit poker? Hmmm.
> > >
> > ~ What part of that confuses you?
> >
> > The rake and toke part.
>
> I don't know what you mean by that. 2bb/hr represents net profit. It was never meant to be anything other than a rough (but conservative) average over time.

BillB expects to NET (although he doesn't keep records to calculate his 'expected ROI' which he says elsewhere is so crucially important; NOW he says it would be too 'meticulous'), after rake and tokes, 2BB/hr 'in just about any low-midlimit poker'. Low limit poker is $1/$2. He clears enormous sums in his spare time playing poker.

> > In other words- your 'expected ROI' ranting was complete and total bullshit.
>

~ No, it was actually a very conservative lowball average.

'Enormous sum'.

> > ~ Everywhere I go. I've been playing in private game in Vancouver since the late 80s.
> >
> > How convenient to your narrative.
>

~ How convenient to my narrative that I've been playing poker forever? lol I wouldn't be commenting on it if I didn't know what I was talking about.

You don't know what you're talking about.

> > > > BTW- I TOTALLY believe what you cut and pasted below.
> > >
> > ~ I detect some sarcasm? One sign of intelligence is the ability to discern fact and fiction with some degree of accuracy. You don't have a very good track record. You're right down there with firkin and vanek, unfortunately.
> >
> > Then not being able to recognize the obvious and glaring difference of a stud hand from a hold'em hand doesn't count?
>
> Not reading one post carefully has nothing to do with my knowledge of poker. If you honestly think I don't know the difference between seven card stud and holdem then you are FAR dumber than anyone ever imagined. And since you keep bringing up this completely stupid "point," that is apparently the case.

You spent DAYS claiming that the meaning of popinjay's post was confusing when it was as clear as day to someone who's ever played poker. Even a poker donkey like me.

> >And not being able to recognize that eliciting a bluff from a stud table when >you have 4-to-a-straight on your board and 3 hole cards is a ridiculous >assertion?🤣
>

~ Stop parading your ignorance around like a badge of honor.

Check.

~You have no fucking clue what you are talking about. If you bet a winning hand on the river and everyone folds, that is the worst possible outcome for you. You gain NOTHING, every single time. You have wasted yet another opportunity to pick up an extra bet. It's one of the biggest, most expensive mistakes chump players like you make (time and time and time again). Expert players are good at knowing when it is better to check and let someone with nothing take a stab at the pot with a bluff bet.

You think a check is going to entice a bluff when you have a board with 4-to-a-straight and 3 hole cards? Why wouldn't everyone still in the hand not assume that a bet is EXACTLY what you are hoping for? Are you assuming the game is in a mental health facility? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

~You have to be able to read players and their hands with some degree of accuracy to make it work. In other words, don't try this at home. Leave techniques like this to people who know what they're doing. People like you and popinjay are much better off just playing ABC poker.

You read a few poker books sloppily.

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 1:05:17 AM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

> If you bet a winning hand on the river and everyone folds, that is the worst possible outcome for you. You gain NOTHING, every single time.

If you CHECK, and we all just show down, THAT is the worst possible outcome, Doyle.

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 1:05:17 AM UTC-7, BillB wrote:




>

> No, it was actually a very conservative lowball average.
>

So now BillB is an expert lowball player too.

[risky biz]

He solved 7-card stud and moved on.🤣

[BillB]

Wrong. That is exactly the same outcome as if I bet and everyone folds. If I bet in that situation, all I have done is eliminated the chance of making more money. You realize the object in poker is to maximize your winnings, right?

Next time you are watching poker, take notice of how often someone bets the river in early position and everyone folds.

[BillB]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 7:10:41 AM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:

No, I don't play lowball.

[BillB]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 6:26:46 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> BillB expects to NET (although he doesn't keep records to calculate his 'expected ROI' which he says elsewhere is so crucially important; NOW he says it would be too 'meticulous'), after rake and tokes, 2BB/hr 'in just about any low-midlimit poker'. Low limit poker is $1/$2. He clears enormous sums in his spare time playing poker.
>

The only time I would play that low is online, and I'd be playing a minimum of six tables simultaneously. I showed you the records I had. Did you do the extrapolation I suggested?

> You don't know what you're talking about.

lol

> You spent DAYS claiming that the meaning of popinjay's post was confusing when it was as clear as day to someone who's ever played poker. Even a poker donkey like me.
>

Stop lying. I said if you are going to relate a poker scenario you should start by saying what game you are talking about, especially if it's not holdem, which everyone automatically assumes from the outset.

> You think a check is going to entice a bluff when you have a board with 4-to-a-straight and 3 hole cards? Why wouldn't everyone still in the hand not assume that a bet is EXACTLY what you are hoping for? Are you assuming the game is in a mental health facility? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
>

You are parading your ignorance again. What is the most likely hand someone has with 4 to a straight showing? NOTHING. If you are afraid to bluff bet on the river just because someone has some straight or flush cards showing, then you are a DONKEY who is throwing tons of money away. One of the most important things to remember in poker is that most of the time your opponent has jack shit. It's being able to recognize those times that separate expert players like me from chumps like you.

> You read a few poker books sloppily.

When you go YEARS on end without a losing week, like I have, then you will be in a position to argue with me. Until then, the best course of action is to shut up and try to learn from your superiors. But you are too dumb to do that.

[popinjay]

No, moron, the nature of 7-stud is that people CALL on the end. Even facing a dangerous-looking board, they call on the end, because it is so correct to usually call at that point. You're stupid.

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 8:28:24 AM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> No, I don't play lowball.

Then why did you mention it?

[BillB]

So you're going to call a bet with a K high four card flush or a pair of threes? LOL No wonder you are stuck playing penny slots "for a living". lolol Absolutely fucking clueless, just like your nickel playing buddy.

I showed you my results. YEARS without a losing week. Let's see yours.

[popinjay]

Betting on, and calling on, 7th Street, is almost standard in all the high limit Stud games, where I have regularly played, and you haven't. Not beldin-stakes.

Should I start calling it "bill-stakes" instead of "beldin-stakes? Pretty much the same thing.

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 12:02:46 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>

> I showed you my results. YEARS without a losing week. Let's see yours.

That's because you can beat beldin-stakes. Big deal. You can't play high stakes 7-stud in Los Angeles without losing.

[BillB]

lol...so clueless. Stick to your nickel video machines.

In the meantime, take my advice. Watch how often someone bets in early position on the river (or 7th street) and everyone folds. Really pay attention, instead of talking out your ass. It happens ALL THE TIME. EVERY SINGLE ONE of those is a lost opportunity. And if you could beat high-limit poker (which I don't play, and only a minuscule percentage of players do) you wouldn't be wasting your time staring at a video machine like the rest of the lifetime losers. I have made hundreds of thousands of dollars net profit playing at the stakes I play. Have you?

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 2:24:45 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



> I have made hundreds of thousands of dollars net profit playing at the stakes I play. Have you?

No, I had to player higher.

[BillB]

You should tell these guys on the final table at the WSOP that nobody folds on 7th street. I just saw a guy lay down aces and kings to a measly 12k bet with his opponent showing bupkis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w17l4mC33ic

Note that he wouldn't have gotten off that easy playing me. He would have been out of the tourney.

lol...face it man, poker just isn't your game. It requires high-level logic that is beyond the abilities of nickel slot players.

[BillB]

Bill Chen on 7-stud strategy:

"The only time you want to bluff is on the river when you missed your draw."

Uhhh...why would you bluff on the river if your opponent is always going to call? Someone better inform poor Bill how they play in Los Angeles!! lolol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuUCuBymnm0

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 2:38:35 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>

> You should tell these guys on the final table at the WSOP that nobody folds on 7th street. I just saw a guy lay down aces and kings to a measly 12k bet with his opponent showing bupkis:
>

A bet "showing bupkis" is more dangerous than a hand that appears dangerous.

By the way, why did you have to say it was a 12K bet? It's a limit game, you only needed to say he bet. Simpleton.

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 3:03:29 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> Bill Chen on 7-stud strategy:
>
> "The only time you want to bluff is on the river when you missed your draw."
>
> Uhhh...why would you bluff on the river if your opponent is always going to call? Someone better inform poor Bill how they play in Los Angeles!! lolol
>

Go ahead, put words in my mouth. It doesn't bother me.

And lol at Bill Chen. I had to explain to him the difference between the annual deficit and the cumulative debt. The "genius", did not know.

[BillB]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 3:09:48 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 2:38:35 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> > You should tell these guys on the final table at the WSOP that nobody folds on 7th street. I just saw a guy lay down aces and kings to a measly 12k bet with his opponent showing bupkis:
> >
>
>
> A bet "showing bupkis" is more dangerous than a hand that appears dangerous.
>
> By the way, why did you have to say it was a 12K bet?

Because that's what the bet was.

> It's a limit game, you only needed to say he bet. Simpleton.

I'm indicating he was getting very good odds to call (because of an earlier raise), but folded anyway. Why? You said that never happens. Whoops!

Why would Bill Chen say the only time you bluff in 7-stud is on the river if your opponent is almost always going to call that bluff? Do you have a video poker player's explanation for that?

[BillB]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 3:13:19 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:

> Go ahead, put words in my mouth. It doesn't bother me.

I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'm pointing out your claims are wrong.

> And lol at Bill Chen. I had to explain to him the difference between the annual deficit and the cumulative debt. The "genius", did not know.

I see he came 7th in the 2016 WSOP 7-stud championship (to go with his two bracelets). What place did you come in?

[BillB]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 3:26:32 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

> > Go ahead, put words in my mouth. It doesn't bother me.
>
> I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'm pointing out your claims are wrong.
>
> > And lol at Bill Chen. I had to explain to him the difference between the annual deficit and the cumulative debt. The "genius", did not know.
>
> I see he came 7th in the 2016 WSOP 7-stud championship (to go with his two bracelets). What place did you come in?

Tom McEvoy gets it:

"Another reason to check your full house with a pair showing against four open suited cards is to induce a bluff. If your opponent has missed his flush, he may try to bet you off your hand. But if you bet and he has missed his flush, he cannot call." -- Championship 7-Stud

Seriously, Paul, this is all VERY basic stuff. I'm kind of shocked it goes so far over your head. Risky, I can understand...he's dumb as fuck -- but I thought you had actually played some poker in your day. Very disappointing and disillusioning.

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 3:23:55 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:


>
> Why would Bill Chen say the only time you bluff in 7-stud is on the river if your opponent is almost always going to call that bluff?

Because of what you just said. He is ALMOST always going to call that bluff. He's not ALWAYS going to call. Go fuck yourself.

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 3:23:55 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



> You said that never happens. Whoops!
>

Words in my mouth. But it doesn't bother me.

[BillB]

You said: "Betting on, and calling on, 7th Street, is almost standard in all the high limit Stud games"

You also said: "the nature of 7-stud is that people CALL on the end."

If that were true, you would have experts like Tom McEvoy and me talking about checking "sure thing" hands on the river, and you wouldn't have Bill Chen telling people that the river is the time to bluff in 7-stud. People fold on 7th street ALL THE TIME.

I said from the very start (and made it very clear) that you should check WHEN you put your opponent(s) on hands that you believe will fold to a bet. You had the audacity to argue with me! LOLOL Now you've been schooled, and you're understandably embarrassed. That's what you get for blindly trying to stick up for your internet husband.

[popinjay]

I have nothing to be embarrassed about. Everything I have said is correct. And it will be a cold day when you can "school" me on anything gambling related, poker or otherwise.

[BillB]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 8:17:37 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:

> I have nothing to be embarrassed about.

Dude, you claim to play video poker "for a living". That's kinda embarrassing, not to mention pathetic.

Further, you clearly did not understand the very basic concept of inducing a river bluff from your opponent by checking a favored hand a percentage of the time. I asked if you would check a winning hand to a busted hand to induce a bluff rather than a fold, and you mocked me (along with your husband). You have LOTS to be embarrassed about.

And the idea that you think a bunch of LA retards can beat me at poker is the funniest thing of all. I have played in LA. I have played in Las Vegas. I have played in Reno. I have play all over the United States and Canada. There is no live game there at reasonable stakes that I would not destroy over time. ZERO.

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 8:44:54 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:


> I have play all over the United States and Canada. There is no live game there at reasonable stakes that I would not destroy over time. ZERO.

What is reasonable stakes to you? Because I am sure a $1-$2 game in Los Angeles is just as easy to beat as a $1-$2 in Canada. But you will NOT "destroy" the mid-limit games, 15-30, 20-40, 30-60. In fact, you might GET destroyed.

[BillB]

Ya, I will, although it might take me a few months to get to 30-60, just to make sure I'm comfortable. I haven't played a lot of stud since I was in high school. I'd start with 15-30...I have never played in ANY 15-30 game where I didn't see people making big mistakes all over the place. Some people don't even know how to induce river bluffs, if you can believe it!

30-60 ain't no big deal...to me it's just 10 3-6 games. Not a huge difference to me. What's the worst that's going to happen...lose 3k? You're still living in the 1970s. There are guys I play with in Vancouver who lose more than that almost every time they play.

Given my choice of games, I'd avoid 7-stud altogether. O8 or PLO8 are my games.

>In fact, you might GET destroyed.

Not long term I won't. Not a chance. The only way I'm going to get destroyed long term is playing day in and out at a table completely full of stone cold professionals, and I am too good to select a game like that, and they don't even exist at the limits you are talking about. Even then, it's going to be the rake that destroys me, not the other players.

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 9:55:57 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> Not long term I won't. Not a chance. The only way I'm going to get destroyed long term is playing day in and out at a table completely full of stone cold professionals, and I am too good to select a game like that, and they don't even exist at the limits you are talking about. Even then, it's going to be the rake that destroys me, not the other players.

Omg, he finally said it. It's the rake. I can't beat the rake. Poor baby. WAAAAAAAAAAH! Blame it on the rake. Maybe you thought I meant 30-60 home games in Los Angeles with no rake. lol You suck.

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 9:55:57 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>

> Ya, I will, although it might take me a few months to get to 30-60, just to make sure I'm comfortable. I haven't played a lot of stud since I was in high school. I'd start with 15-30...I have never played in ANY 15-30 game where I didn't see people making big mistakes all over the place. Some people don't even know how to induce river bluffs, if you can believe it!
>
> 30-60 ain't no big deal...to me it's just 10 3-6 games. Not a huge difference to me. What's the worst that's going to happen...lose 3k? You're still living in the 1970s. There are guys I play with in Vancouver who lose more than that almost every time they play.
>

Who said anything about the money? Did I say anything about being able to afford any specific game? No, I did not, The caliber of the players, moron. "10 3-6 games", laughing my ass off. Get back to me when you actually live and play in Los Angeles. Until then, you don't know wtf you're talking about. So stfu.

[BillB]

You can't read. I clearly said there are no 30-60 games with players of the professional caliber I am talking about. 30-60 is chump change. It's like 10 3-6 games. Big deal. Players like you play 30-60 (those under the delusion they really have a clue and can beat those with millions of hands more experience and 50 extra IQ points) Like I said, you're living in your 1970s glory days. The world has moved on without you.

[BillB]

There is nothing special about Los Angeles except an unusual abundance of crap players.

[BillB]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 10:46:13 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

> There is nothing special about Los Angeles except an unusual abundance of crap players.

Here's a hand of 40-80 HE from the Bike that nicely illustrates my point (first one I happened to pull up on youtube). These are the absolute morons that Popinjay thinks are going to beat me in the long run. lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMq8zB3JSKc

There are 3-6 and 4-8 games in Canada with much better players than that. I'd hesitate to even call that poker. It's more of a modified form of bingo for mentally deficients.

[popinjay]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 10:45:59 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:


> The world has moved on without you.
>

This thread has moved on without you. Goodbye.

[risky biz]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 4:30:55 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 3:26:32 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
>
> > > Go ahead, put words in my mouth. It doesn't bother me.
> >
> > I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'm pointing out your claims are wrong.
> >
> > > And lol at Bill Chen. I had to explain to him the difference between the annual deficit and the cumulative debt. The "genius", did not know.
> >
> > I see he came 7th in the 2016 WSOP 7-stud championship (to go with his two bracelets). What place did you come in?
>
> Tom McEvoy gets it:
>

~ "Another reason to check your full house with a pair showing against four open suited cards is to induce a bluff. If your opponent has missed his flush, he may try to bet you off your hand. But if you bet and he has missed his flush, he cannot call." -- Championship 7-Stud

A pair showing is 100% different from the 4-to-a-straight showing in Paul's OP. The fact that you don't grasp something so rudimentary illustrates how 100% full of shit you are in your poker competency claims.

Paul already gave you a clue about how to play 4-to-a-straight and I'm sure he could go into more detail but why should he? You're just as phonily bombastic as you are poker clueless. Why should he teach you?

And I see you're STILL trying to say Paul should have more explicitly told you the hand in his OP wasn't a hold'em hand when the few sentences describing it included the term '7th street'? Do you STILL not understand that there's no '7th street' in hold'em? How many freaking times does someone have to tell you there isn't?

[risky biz]

'experts like Tom McEvoy and me🤡' LOL.

[risky biz]

What else can you do? He still thinks there's a 7th street in hold'em.

[popinjay]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 10:14:56 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:



>
> 'experts like Tom McEvoy and me🤡' LOL.

We'll call him Doyle from now on.

Did I ever tell you about Bill Chen, the "genius"? He used to play in the Draw games at Paradise. He would sit in the game, and there was no problem, UNTIL, he sat in a second game. He couldn't do it. The game would slow to a crawl. The big math wizard, would bring the action to a CRAWL, anytime he would take a second seat. The game became unbearable.

[BillB]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 10:12:46 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> A pair showing is 100% different from the 4-to-a-straight showing in Paul's OP.

No it isn't. You're moron.

The fact that you don't grasp something so rudimentary illustrates how 100% full of shit you are in your poker competency claims.
>



> Paul already gave you a clue about how to play 4-to-a-straight

I've played poker with Paul. He's pretty much what I'd call a fish, and he's already admitted he can't even beat 15-30 games in Los Angeles filled with complete morons. Neither could you.

[popinjay]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 12:02:45 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> I've played poker with Paul. He's pretty much what I'd call a fish, and he's already admitted he can't even beat 15-30 games in Los Angeles filled with complete morons. Neither could you.

Go ahead and lie, liar. It doesn't bother me.

[BillB]

I don't lie. Unlike you and your hubby, I don't have to.

[risky biz]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 12:02:45 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

> On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 10:12:46 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:

~ ~ A pair showing is 100% different from the 4-to-a-straight showing in Paul's OP.
>
~ No it isn't. You're moron.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Unbelievable.

[risky biz]

You must think the personal disparagement accompanying every one of your posts is convincing everyone that you have a clue what you're talking about.💤

[BillB]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 3:34:18 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 12:02:45 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 10:12:46 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> ~ ~ A pair showing is 100% different from the 4-to-a-straight showing in Paul's OP.
> >
> ~ No it isn't. You're moron.
>
> 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
>
> Unbelievable.

What is unbelievable is your refusal to learn from someone who knows 1000x more than you.

In both cases you are checking because you have put your opponent on a hand that he cannot call a bet with. YOU HAVE NOTHING TO GAIN BY BETTING. You have also judged your opponent to be aggressive enough to bet and try to steal the pot with a broken hand. If you really think that there are no players that will try to steal a pot just because you have four cards to a straight showing, that just tells me you have VERY little experience playing poker.

[risky biz]

WHAT.A.NUMBSKULL.

[BillB]

In other words, you have absolutely 1nothing. LoL You and your internet husband have been thoroughly exposed and humiliated in this thread. Go argue with Travel. He is more your speed.

[risky biz]

Does anyone other than you think either I or Paul has been 'thoroughly exposed and humiliated' in this thread?😄

[popinjay]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 5:21:57 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:



>
> Does anyone other than you think either I or Paul has been 'thoroughly exposed and humiliated' in this thread?😄

He said that he has played with me before, and that I admitted I could not beat 15-30 in Los Angeles. Lie, and another lie. 15-30 was my standard game as I grew older and learned more. Basically the late 80s thru 90s. He lives to jerk people around on this newsgroup. There was a time, I believe, when he was a serious contributor to this group. Not sure what happened to that.

[BillB]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 5:21:57 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:

> Does anyone other than you think either I or Paul has been 'thoroughly exposed and humiliated' in this thread?😄

I guess that would depend if they can read English and if they know the first thing about poker. When I make an irrefutable point and your only response is a brainless quip like "what a numbskull," I think everyone recognizes that for what it is...total defeat and humiliation.

We can take a poll if it will make you feel better. Anyone who DOESN'T think risky has been exposed and humiliated in this thread, please speak up now in his defense. Thank you!

[BillB]

I have played with you many times. Did you not play as "Kelly" on pokerstars? Your game is, quite frankly, a mess. Basic mistakes everywhere.

You strongly implied you can't beat the 15-30 in Los Angeles. For one thing, you said you didn't think I could beat it, and I'm sure you are at least smart enough to know I could mop the floor with you with half my brain tied behind my back. Also, you are wasting your time playing video poker, which is where people who can't play real poker go to die alone in shame.

[popinjay]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 6:51:37 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> I have played with you many times. Did you not play as "Kelly" on pokerstars? Your game is, quite frankly, a mess. Basic mistakes everywhere.
>
> You strongly implied you can't beat the 15-30 in Los Angeles. For one thing, you said you didn't think I could beat it, and I'm sure you are at least smart enough to know I could mop the floor with you with half my brain tied behind my back. Also, you are wasting your time playing video poker, which is where people who can't play real poker go to die alone in shame.

I played at many online sites under many, many different names. I concentrated on bonus whoring. I did not imply that I could not beat 15-30 in Los Angeles. You are a liar. When holdem came in, all the high draw games quickly disappeared. There was still lowball up to 30-60 for several years. I concentrated on that. I could see the writing on the wall and started working on my holdem game. I never have become a good holdem player. In the late 90s I left Los Angeles but continued to commute. I discovered online gambling in 2001. I also discovered video poker online, and did quite well, without having to interact with assholes like you. In 2006, you know what happened. We had to pass the port security act so terrorists could not play poker. It's too bad I didn't know video poker in the 90s, because it was quite lucrative in that decade and the casinos looked at it like just another slot machine. That has changed.

By the way, some of the juiciest games in Los Angeles for sometime was the medium to large stud games at Hollywood Park. Can you guess why?

[Clave]

On 9/15/2019 5:51 PM, BillB wrote:
> On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 6:42:09 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
>> On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 5:21:57 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Does anyone other than you think either I or Paul has been 'thoroughly exposed and humiliated' in this thread?😄
>>
>>
>> He said that he has played with me before, and that I admitted I could not beat 15-30 in Los Angeles. Lie, and another lie. 15-30 was my standard game as I grew older and learned more. Basically the late 80s thru 90s. He lives to jerk people around on this newsgroup. There was a time, I believe, when he was a serious contributor to this group. Not sure what happened to that.
>
> I have played with you many times. Did you not play as "Kelly" on pokerstars?

He won't answer that.

[BillB]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 7:33:02 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:

> I played at many online sites under many, many different names.

You said I lied about playing with you. Did you not play as "Kelly" on Pokerstars?

[popinjay]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 7:44:21 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:



>
> He won't answer that.
>

Eat shit and die, fuckface. He knows that name because I played in the RGP home games under that name and I bought a set of tires with that name. There's a dozen names he does not know. I answered his question and I will answer any more he might have. He will jerk me around, but it doesn't bother me. So fuck your mother.

[BillB]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 7:44:21 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:

> On 9/15/2019 5:51 PM, BillB wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 6:42:09 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> >> On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 5:21:57 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Does anyone other than you think either I or Paul has been 'thoroughly exposed and humiliated' in this thread?😄
> >>
> >>
> >> He said that he has played with me before, and that I admitted I could not beat 15-30 in Los Angeles. Lie, and another lie. 15-30 was my standard game as I grew older and learned more. Basically the late 80s thru 90s. He lives to jerk people around on this newsgroup. There was a time, I believe, when he was a serious contributor to this group. Not sure what happened to that.
> >
> > I have played with you many times. Did you not play as "Kelly" on pokerstars?
>
> He won't answer that.

I don't ask a question unless I already know the answer. He did.

As I said in the first place, I have played with him many times and his game is weak. It is what it is. If someone keeps lying about me, eventually I'm going to be forced to tell the truth about hm.

[BillB]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 7:50:29 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 7:44:21 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> > He won't answer that.
> >
>
>
>
> Eat shit and die, fuckface. He knows that name because I played in the RGP >home games under that name and I bought a set of tires with that name.

But I thought I was "lying"?? LOLOLOL Humiliated again.

Just give it up, bro. Take your husband out to dinner or something. Quit while you're behind. Go play some nickel slots.

[popinjay]

I said yes. I used that in the RGP home games. Razzo was still alive. Brewmaster played. You know all that, fuck Clave in his babboon-like red ass. I had MANY names, MANY accounts. You're still a liar, but I said it doesn't bother me.

[popinjay]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 7:54:18 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> But I thought I was "lying"?? LOLOLOL Humiliated again.
>

Yes. You are a liar.

You are also the RGPer who guessed what brand tires I bought.

[popinjay]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 7:51:30 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> As I said in the first place, I have played with him many times

Liar.

[BillB]

What fucking difference does it make how many accounts you had?? The point is that you were in fact "Kelly," I did in fact play with you many times, and you are in fact very weak player prone to many obvious mistakes. Just like I said in the first place! Apology accepted!

[popinjay]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 8:04:03 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:


> I did in fact play with you many times,

You're a liar.

[popinjay]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 8:04:03 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

> I did in fact play with you many times, and you are in fact very weak player prone to many obvious mistakes.

What did we play together many many times? What game? What limit? You don't have to answer exactly, just ball park. But if you come back with "I don't remember", then you are a liar. Here's your chance. I will know whether you are lying or not. I suspect you are lying, but I hold out the small possibility that you are telling the truth. Here's your chance.

[risky biz]

You didn't recognize a glaringly obvious stud hand when you saw it then spent DAYS, if not weeks, trying to claim that it wasn't glaringly obvious.

You think you can 'induce' a bluff from a table when you have 4-to-a-straight on your board in a 7-stud hand by checking.

Duh and duh.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[da pickle]

The other shoe hits the floor.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

[BillB]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 11:50:55 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:

> What did we play together many many times? What game? What limit? You don't >have to answer exactly, just ball park.

Are you dumb? You already answered this yourself. I played with you in several RGP Homegames. I also seem to recall playing triple draw with you and Razzo one night. I can't remember the limits, but it must have been low limit because I only play low limit online (for obvious reasons). I can't comment on your draw play, because I am not an expert in that game. I only comment on games in which I consider myself expert or above.

[BillB]

We've already been over all this. Stop making a fool of yourself.

[popinjay]

I don't think I played in "several" RGP home games. And I never played Triple Draw with Razzo. I never played anything with Razzo. Go ahead, ask him.

[BillB]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 1:02:44 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:

> I don't think I played in "several" RGP home games.

Ya, you did. Several. You don't seem to realize I can usually assess a player's ability with astonishing accuracy within 15 minutes.

>And I never played Triple Draw with Razzo. I never played anything with Razzo. >Go ahead, ask him.

I'm not 100% sure on this one. Maybe it was just Razzo. Like I said, my comments didn't relate to any draw poker anyway, because I don't feel qualified to pass judgment on that genre. I am eminently fair.

[popinjay]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 5:41:53 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 1:02:44 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
>
> > I don't think I played in "several" RGP home games.
>
> Ya, you did. Several.

Na, I dint. Maybe 3 or 4 times. Regardless, you didn't play in any of them with me. Fuck you, liar.

[BillB]

lol...you live in your own alternate reality. The funny thing is, I wouldn't even have to observe you playing to assess your ability. You believe way too much stupid shit to be a good poker player.

For example, you believe I'm "lying," even though you have read my posts for 20 years and know I have never once been caught in any sort of lie. Every time I have been challenged on anything (my education, my qualifications, my identity, my consistent poker winnings, etc.) I've proven what I was saying was 100% true. EVERY SINGLE TIME. And now you think I am suddenly lying over some small potatoes shit like this? LOLOL You are welcome at my table any time.

For the 100th time: I DON'T LIE. I don't need to.

[popinjay]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 6:29:38 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> lol...you live in your own alternate reality. The funny thing is, I wouldn't even have to observe you playing to assess your ability. You believe way too much stupid shit to be a good poker player.
>
> For example, you believe I'm "lying," even though you have read my posts for 20 years and know I have never once been caught in any sort of lie. Every time I have been challenged on anything (my education, my qualifications, my identity, my consistent poker winnings, etc.) I've proven what I was saying was 100% true. EVERY SINGLE TIME. And now you think I am suddenly lying over some small potatoes shit like this? LOLOL You are welcome at my table any time.
>
> For the 100th time: I DON'T LIE. I don't need to.

Your claim that you played with me in several RGP home games is a lie. You weren't even thinking of claiming you played with me in several RGP home games until I mentioned the home games. You were going to say you played with me in several ring games. When I mentioned the home games, it gave you an out just in case you couldn't prove you played me in regular ring games. Once I mentioned the home game you knew for sure that I had played in some. BUT, you didn't know it was 3 or 4 and not several. Now you have to lie your way out of that. You're just a fucking liar. And I don't THINK you would lie over small potatoes like this, I KNOW you would. There is nothing too small for you to lie about.

[BillB]

Like I said, you believe a lot of incredibly stupid shit with no evidence whatsoever. Not a good sign for anyone's poker abilities! I played with you in the RGP Homegames several times. Sorry if reality is too hard on your delicate sensibilities. I'm sure there is proof somewhere in the archives if you care to look.

[popinjay]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 7:16:01 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> Like I said, you believe a lot of incredibly stupid shit with no evidence whatsoever. Not a good sign for anyone's poker abilities! I played with you in the RGP Homegames several times. Sorry if reality is too hard on your delicate sensibilities. I'm sure there is proof somewhere in the archives if you care to look.

I have screen shots. What was your handle? Of course, I don't have many screen shots, not more than 3 or 4.

[popinjay]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 7:16:01 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:


>

> Like I said, you believe a lot of incredibly stupid shit with no evidence whatsoever.

Nobody knows how much stupid shit you believe in because they can't separate the times you are telling the truth from the times you are lying. We can only rely on a standard of preponderance.

[BillB]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 7:27:42 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:

> Nobody knows how much stupid shit you believe in because they can't separate the times you are telling the truth from the times you are lying. We can only rely on >a standard of preponderance.

Nobody has ever shown me to be lying about anything. Not once in 20 years here. You are welcome at my table anytime.

[popinjay]

I know as a fact you are lying. I played no more than 3 or 4 home games. Are you calling me a liar?

What was your handle, fuckface? Don't dodge.

[BillB]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 7:53:58 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:

> I know as a fact you are lying. I played no more than 3 or 4 home games. Are you calling me a liar?
>



> What was your handle, fuckface? Don't dodge.

No, my handle was not fuckface. If you don't know what my name was, how do you know if I played with you or not? How do you think I knew you played as "Kelly"? It's obvious to anyone with a brain that I saw you play.

[popinjay]

What was your handle, bitch? Never mind. I know you weren't in the 3 or 4 games I played, you're lying about it so keep your handle secret, I don't give a fuck what it was. Liar.

When I bought my tires and you won the guess-the-tires contest, why didn't you speak right up? Such a bullshitter. I'm about done with this.

If I'm ever on a jury in your criminal trial, you're going down, mutherfucker. I will never believe the butler did it. You did it, mutherfucker.

[risky biz]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 11:00:35 AM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

> On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 11:50:55 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
>
> > What did we play together many many times? What game? What limit? You don't >have to answer exactly, just ball park.
>

> Are you dumb? You already answered this yourself. I played with you in several RGP Homegames. I also seem to recall playing triple draw with you and Razzo one night. I can't remember the limits, but it must have been low limit because I only play low limit online (for obvious reasons). I can't comment on your draw play, because I am not an expert in that game. ~ I only comment on games in which I consider myself expert or above.

Then why are you shooting off your mouth about poker?

[risky biz]

He probably railed the games and is now claiming he played in them.

[risky biz]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 6:29:38 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 6:04:57 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> > On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 5:41:53 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > > On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 1:02:44 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't think I played in "several" RGP home games.
> > >
> > > Ya, you did. Several.
> >
> >
> > Na, I dint. Maybe 3 or 4 times. Regardless, you didn't play in any of them with me. Fuck you, liar.
>
> lol...you live in your own alternate reality. The funny thing is, I wouldn't even have to observe you playing to assess your ability. You believe way too much stupid shit to be a good poker player.
>

~ For example, you believe I'm "lying," even though you have read my posts for 20 years and know I have never once been caught in any sort of lie. Every time I have been challenged on anything (my education, my qualifications, my identity, my consistent poker winnings, etc.) I've proven what I was saying was 100% true. EVERY SINGLE TIME.

You've never proved any of those things any single time.

~ And now you think I am suddenly lying over some small potatoes shit like this? LOLOL You are welcome at my table any time.

[risky biz]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 10:58:01 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 7:53:58 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
>
> > I know as a fact you are lying. I played no more than 3 or 4 home games. Are you calling me a liar?
> >
>
>
>
> > What was your handle, fuckface? Don't dodge.
>

~ No, my handle was not fuckface. If you don't know what my name was, how do you know if I played with you or not? How do you think I knew you played as "Kelly"? It's obvious to anyone with a brain that I saw you play.

You knew he used 'Kelly' because it was discussed here. Everyone knew that.

All you have to do is reveal the handle you used to prove what you're saying is true. You're avoiding that like the plague.

I'm pretty sure Paul knows you didn't play in those few games (which you describe as 'many times') because he knew who everyone was who actually was playing.

[popinjay]

His biggest lie is that he's not a liar. BillB would have been the perfect Propaganda Minister for Hitler.