troutsmart

why is that stupid... I would have folded here if I were you... He made a play at a pot that was an obvious bluff, yet it wasn't. He was thinking on level 4 of the poker thought process... He knew what he had... the nut flush, minus SF.. He knew that you had a club, and hoped it was a high one... He then knew that if he bet a huge amount, that you would think he had nothing. And finally, he was thinking that you thought he thought you had nothing... if you get that... So, by betting a huge obvious bluff amount, he figured you would put him on nothing, as you thought he thought you didn't have

good lists... deadmoney found the gems in the quarry so to speaki try to like it , bit whenever i hear zepplin or the stones i think of stoners wearing tye dye shirts driving old beat up vans thinking of the good old days ....i know the historical importance of that music, but outside of a few bands,its mostly unlistenable..imo....very funny

Nobody here likes classic rock?

On the other hand, I think that it was a horrible raise with the nut flush (not counting sf) there, since there was a very good chance I didn't have any clubs and would be folding there. You made the right decision I think. With regard to this player, you'll more than make up for what you lost on the hand in future play if he played the flop nuts as he did. Honestly, that has to be one of the most poorly played flopped nut hands I've heard of. He was fortunate you had the king, everything else you fold, no problem.

Yeah, I think I'm the only one here who listens to Hip Hop and stuff huh? Ah well.Usher, Kanye West, JayZ, Eminem, etc. I'm a fan.

So your saying a guy bets $60 into a $13 pot?Tough place to be. That is a ridiculous bet that I can't imagine anybody making, with the exception of a delirious fish. You fold, you haven't lost much, but I'd call as long as $60 didn't mean not paying a bill or something.

outside of the clash im listening to the exact opposite of you lol...mostly stuff like the cure, depeche mode, the smiths, old u2, romeo void,joy division,dead kennedys,splt endz,the bansheses.....lol. I'm a big fan of the smiths and morrisey. His latest was one of my favorites last year. Joy Division was brilliant, and sad story. Sad someone so talented would commit suicide. I occasionally listen to cure and Depeche Mode. Robert Smith is one of the few good things to appear out of the 80's. Romeo void is definitely cool.

As an avid music fan, I often enjoy the fact that poker and music mix quite well. I think the music keeps me grounded overall in my play. Provides a calming effect of sorts. I've compiled a list of my top 40 rock songs of all-time. If you read the December 9, 2004 edition of Rolling Stone, I used it as a guide, as pulling my favorite songs from thin air proved impossible. 1 - (I Can't get no) Satisfaction -- Rolling Stones The stones difinitive song. I'm a huge Rolling Stones fan, and could put numerous of their songs as my favorites, but when I think about the Rolling Stones

$500 is good to deposit online and play at .10/.25 NL. Stunned? A good NL bankroll should have 1500 Big blinds in in it. Thus, for a 2/4 game, you'd want $6000 to overcome variance. I'd take the $500, deposit it online, and follow that bankroll rule. Move up in stakes as your bankroll allows. In relatively short time, you'll have your $6000 to play 2/4 if you're a solid player. If you're not solid, it will help progress you to that point.

Norman Haupt. He's a new comer to the game.. but with an impressive 2nd place finish in the Neg-O, he's hitting some confidence. I believe he may have some natural instinct. Don't be surprised if you see him. I've always maintained the creed to never underestimate a man named Norman. I'll be sure to stay clear of you in the future.layne flack. one of the best NL players today and he gets very little credit.good pick. They say the more he drinks, the better he gets. Anybody who can play like that definitely should be feared.I'll add Allen Cunningham to the list. Daniel once said that he tho

Phil hasn't faired so well in the highest cash games,due to a lack of control. You can check what Barry Greenstein's opinion is about Phil and cash games.http://www.barrygreenstein.com/phellmuth.htm

We see regular threads discussing who is the best player in poker, which in my modest opinion, is darn near impossible to determine. What I haven't seen much of are discussions regarding those players that perhaps fly under the radar and might be underrated. In any game one might play in, one player usually stands out from the pack, and then there is the player that doesn't have as much flash, but quietly accumulates a stack. My picks:I don't know if one can call John Juanda underated as I'm sure any player sitting on his table gives him tremendous respect. He is however, underappreciated

The internet guys are really busting through into the tourney scene... between the Grinder and Spirit Rock, they're proving that a solid internet game can transfer over into a tough tourney player. Now we need to see Eric123 make a few final tables.

I am mainly a limit guy like many, currently grinding away at the micros. However, if one is serious about making money, it is my opinion that they should learn to play pot limit omaha. A good pot limit player can clean up by getting maximum value out of hands.

Live game- Exactly $630 is the most I've lost on a single hand. Capped preflop, 3 SB on the flop, 4 BB on turn, 3 BB on the river. We could have saved an extra bet on each street if not for "the loose cannon" in the 2 seat. I had AK, flopped two pair, didn't fold when the T on 3rd street made a straight. Guess I just couldn't accept the fact that a player would call 3 bets cold in a 30/60 game with QJ and then lead out on the flop with a gutshot. Honestly though, I really thought I was dead to a set, but actually had the second best hand. Oh well. You live, they learn. Isn't that how

Daniel's journal was definitely a good read. With the amount of $ being played and time spent, this is a unique veiw into the world of high-stakes poker. The thought of Phil Ivey laughing uncontrollably leaves me doing the same.As for the posts regarding the big game, I'm glad somebody finally posted a link that gave some clarification. We were getting pretty far off track in the "rumor" category, which seems to happen frequently. Does anyone else here think that if the "Big Game" could ever be televised that ratings would go through the roof?? I doubt that the players would ever agree to

Your win rate in $ per session is very good. Over more sessions and hours, you'll see this rate actually decline. That might sound funny, but even if you are a top player, a 5 hour session in such a game might be 3BB/hr for $12/hr. That would be a $48-$60 session. You're doing fine if you're beating it for 1.5-2.5BB an hour.

Yes you are a hypocrite if that's the way you view it. I think this explains pretty well the difference between Mormonism and Christianity, it is less about a personal freedom found in the love of God.I didn't intend to bring up an arguement regarding Mormonism. I readily admit that I'm hypotcritical in regard to the conflict in me playing poker and my conviction that I should not. First off, I consider myself a Christian, being a believer in Christ. The difference in Mormonism and traditional Christianity is not about personal freedom, but rather in doctrine regarding revelation from God t

This is one of those topics I've usually avoided posting commentary on in the past, though I always am interested in the various opinions expressed by the poker community.I am a Christian who attends church on Sundays. My faith plays an enormous role in my life. That faith has shaped my life dramatically. I am human. I sin, and far more often than I should. It is for this reason that my faith in Christ is so vital to me.The religion to which I belong is well known for its conservative lifestyle. I am LDS or a Mormon as we are often called. We are taught to live lives free of addiction.

Those who have studied science or psychology have learned of the experiments in which Ivan Pavlov studied stimulus response. Since these experiments were conducted with the use of dogs, the research is often referred to as Pavlov's Dog. When a dog smelled meat it would salivate. It would not salivate to the sound of a bell, however. Yet, when the bell was rung as the dog smelled the meat, the dog soon became conditioned. In time, the dog would salivate simply at the ring of a bell.Why am I talking about such ridiculous things as Pavlov's Dog on a poker forum? I believe their is a connect

Luxor or excaliber for the softest games on the strip.

To overkill the point so we understand this. Triple draw is not played no limit. It wouldn't play well at all.

I don't believe I've discovered any secret plays in limit poker. If I had to say anything that I enjoy the most it would be getting a free card on the river by raising on the flop in position. If they bet the turn, I can fold, but usually they check to the raiser and I check behind, seeing the river for .5 BB less. They'll usaully bet out and I can now fold, check, or raise. Like I said, this is nothing apart from basic limit strategy. Just my favorite, that's all.

If Daniel wins the main event of the WSOP, I would expect poker to increase in popularity ten-fold. Just because of how outgoing he is.Probably no other player today could increase the postive image of poker like Daniel Negreanu. Moneymaker will forever be remembered as the man who gave poker a face, but Negreanu would give poker an image, one entirely different than ever before. A side note: if Daniel were to win, imagine how many hands we'd see him play. With that much exposure to that style of play, poker by the books would likely be forgotten, though it already partially is.

I personally look forward to 20 years from now when I'm the experienced poker player who watches kids being born this very day manhandle me after only picking up the game a few months previous. "The Moneymaker Effect" has only been positive for the game of poker in my modest opinion.