Zeatrix

The thing I noticed though when playing was the players tended to shut down completely when a straight or flush card hit making it hard to extract any value from them. Maybe I was unlucky, just looking for comments if indeed players tend to pay off possible straights flushes to a higher degree than I noticed, remember I'm mainly a limit player so don't have a lot of NL cash game experience.

Well mainly and that's the only place I've been trying it before but reading DNs blogs and some of his comments in the forum I deduced that he uses it in cash games too, like in his current challenge. Did I deduce wrongly?

Ok, I was hoping to get a discussion going, but never mind. Useless forums. I'll just go back to killing in limit instead...

I knew people was going to say that before hand but I wanted to hear what others have to say.Sure it's a small set of hands but I'm more concerned about the feeling of it than the actual results. This based on the way the average PS low limit player plays. My feeling is they rarely commit big parts of their stacks unless they have something which is kind of the idea behind small ball that they do, or did I misunderstand something...

I just got DNs Power Hold'em Strategy book and read the Small Ball chapter. Although I was familiar with most of the concepts I hadn't tried it in cash games.Let me just say that DN owes me $100 :)All the small pots I won didnt nearly cover the big pots that I lost, most money I lost trying to draw cheap to straights/flushes that never got there. Also, for example managed to loose a big pot with KK on a Q66 when I checked trying to induce a bluff (following the reasoning that either I'm beat or way ahead) only to loose to a guy that hit a set when he took a free card.My point is, I wasn't even

No, because anything that isn't status quo is BAD!

they've fullfilled? Must have been this morning when I went to the bathroom.

I don't have a lot of insight into how researchers get their money in the US, but I've seen a lot of comments about scientists doing it for the money.One thing I know, if you want to make money in this world, scientific research is NOT the way to go. At least not in Sweden. Here researchers are hired by universities and colleges and they get money from the government to educate students, so scientists work part time as teachers and the rest of their time researching. They don't get more money if they discover something. So I've always had a hard time swallowing the notion that scientists are o

So much doubt! :)I haven't read up on all the research being done on evolution but from what I understand they have some very good data that supports evolution.For example, I'm pulling this out of my head since I read about this some 5 years ago but, scientists found a special pair birds. The two bird species had not had contact with each other for a long time since they lived on each side of a vast ocean but they were related since they shared a lot of DNA. The DNA was so similar that they had to have come from the same "branch" of species. The interesting thing about the story was that the t

I just read the two first and kind of chuckled. What are these quotes (that are full of "...", meaning missing content) really saying?If we start with the second one. Dr Simpson is saying that she is no longer affiliated with an organization and therefore can be frank. Ok check. Then she says she is skeptical. Ok check.What does this tell us? She is not an active scientist and she is skeptical. Did you know that skepticism is a cornerstone of ALL science. All scientists are skeptical of everything unless they can prove it correct. If you take scientific methodology 101 that's the first thing y

He did not mention at all that they got care for very special conditions. Had I known that it would have made more sense. I agree that it isn't anything special for rare conditions. See, I can acknowledge when I'm wrong

So you have to travel out of state to get good care? That seems like a great system!And your comment about fantasyland was great. Get back to me when you get a grasp of how it really works...

Well, I just don't know what to say about this anymore. The IPCC (the organ set up by UN to research global warming) has been working on collecting scientific data and summarizing it since the nineties. WAAAY before any media hype. The media only caught on to it after Gore released and got a lot of attention for his film. Also, the "conference" you are referring to was organized by people and organizations that gains from no actions against man made global warming being taken. At that conference you got PAID to hold a presentation about why global warming was false. Not so hard to find people

I'm sure you have a very particular case in mind when you ask this so I'm not even going to bother answering. Don't you see the difference between the care you get if you have infinite amounts of money and if you have an average income. I'm sure the best treatment money can buy in the US is up at the very top. But that's not what we are talking about, we're talking about the overall system, not a particular clinic. Does every single person in the US go to the Mayo clinic? No.And your example is pretty lame. When Yassir Arafat became ill he was sent to a French hospital. He's not as rich as a s

Yes, look towards France. They have the best healthcare system in the world. Guess who runs it?

First line: Think you misunderstood me (or I expressed myself not so well). I meant the way he communicated the things he did.Second line: Of course, I understand. I wrote this from a foreigners perspective since I thought it might add something to the discussion. I make no claims that he was my president. But some of his actions does indeed affect us (foreigners). For example denying global warming.Third line: Nowadays terrorists kill more. But not at the start of the war. And don't pretend civilians aren't still killed by American troops.Also, the US is not the only country that did stem cel

For me as a foreigner Bush was a bad president. But not only for what he did, also HOW he did it.The things he did that I felt was bad was taking your economy (far from his fault entirely) and your budget (his fault) and really destroying it. Your national debt is ridiculous and your future generations will have to repay it, somehow.He also did a lot of bad things with science IMHO. Banning stem cell research on fetuses was just plain stupid. Making sure your auto industry didn't have to lower emissions was utterly stupid, and we can see some of the results now, few want to buy American cars h

You can't even be number one in that, Japan is!

Lol, are people STILL denying man made global warming. Tell THAT to the Aussies in Victoria...

From what I understand WHO ranked you at something like 30-40 in the world in their last ranking around the millennium.

Hey B, girlfriend just happens to be sick right now but we just moved to our first house so we could do worse, she's been waiting for this! :)I think we just disagree here overall though I have no general problem paying for slackers when it comes to health care. It's just one of a few things that I think everyone should be entitled to regardless of financial status or smarts. Of course I don't really like smokers destroying their own bodies but on the other hand two people I knew got lung cancer and both died. I'd wish that on nobody regardless of how dumb I think they were smoking their whol

Stories like these are EXACTLY why i soooo prefer government healthcare. I'd be so pissed if it happened to me. I so appreciate that my government would pay for my medical bills if I went to the US and got sick/in accident.My sister was born with a genetic chronic disease. About a year ago she was abroad enjoying a vacation and suddenly had to be rushed to a hospital because of her disease (which isn't common). The doctors there kept asking her how she was going to pay while she was fearing for her life. All it took was a couple of phone calls and it was sorted. She didn't have to pay anything

Well, so in essence I agree with you. I love free market and all that comes with it. But come on, you've had some time to work the kinks out, but still you have plenty of bad apples and it sure ain't cheap. From what I understand healthcare is very expensive in the US.

One thing that seem to be an "universal truth" to many skeptics of universal healthcare is the privately run companies are SO much more efficient and that private coverage is SO much cheaper. Well, I'm no expert, it might be true, but things are rarely that black and white.I'm a consultant and I've seen plenty of examples of companies that really aren't functioning well. Being privately owned is not a guarantee that it runs efficiently. Also, one things that doesn't seem to be mentioned is greed. Greed from privately owned hospitals and privately owned insurers. I watched Sicko and although I

No, I'm simply saying that I sure wouldn't be able to fork up 86 grand for a test on a whim. Would you? Would someone with a low income? I'm just saying that I'm glad that our government (our insurer per say) pays for it, if it's needed.