Jump to content

Royal_Tour

Members
  • Content Count

    14,296
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Royal_Tour

  • Rank
    Sherlock Holmes of butt sex
  • Birthday 07/11/1981

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://events.eventzilla.net/e/sigma-2018-casino-closing-party-2138950209

Profile Information

  • Location
    Ontario
  1. lol - You guys jumpin on their bandwagon are jokes.Matt wont tell you how he wouldnt play me in vegas. He just comes on here and posts out of his ass.anyways, The advice about buyin in short is totally irrelevent because its a fuking 2/5Nl game. If you're a beginner, play a lower game!!
  2. most places implement the 50% rule. which is from LHE. it means if someone bet 60 and the next raise is an all in. It has to be 50% the original bet or more to re-open the betting.So if the bet is 60, the all in would be 90. 30 is 50%.in the case of the OP. it was 55. then all in 85. thats 30 more. thats over 50% the original bet,
  3. 1 more thing..I thought it was funny how i compared acid's graph with my 10k run and I trumped his win rate by double lol.That alone should cause another argument with him.
  4. anyways, I came in the forums to confess, but now that my thread is locked, that kinda pisses me off. This thread will prob be my last. Not due to the communist ways, but because I wont have time. feb is going to be the start of a busy year.For those of you interested, about 95% of the time, any debates I have in here with Acid_Knight, or anyone are True. some of them are pointless debates, some raise good questions and generate good turnout. This last one, however, I'm sad to say. was a level of epic proportions. Let me explain how it came to be. (just an fyi, i'm going through lots of legal/biz stuff right now with investors so to come on here and just zone out felt great)anyways, So, i saw the OP, and I was so focused on commenting about his buyin of 200 in a 2/5 game that the rest of my post was strung together loosely. If you notice, I never touched on it again, I was more focused on telling the OP the negatives of buying in for 40bb's ... That is until stupidhead called me out on my post.Now, often times, I might look at it and think. "Ohh you knoow what, you're right. I mis-read the OP" But the post stupidhead made which said "this is worse than open folding" struck a nerve with me. and it became a personal reason for me to try and defend what i wrote. So i quickly looked over the OP and thought of ways i could debate and convince people that a check/raise was a good line.At first I thought, I'm sure I can come up with something that could make stupidhead question his line and give mine a reasonable nod. But then things escalated quickly as everyone came in and started posting.at this point i was too deep,no turning back.. and Then it became funny. So i went with it. ready to give in by about the 4th page or so, snamuh and a few others came in with posts that almost helped my argument,So I thought, hmm maybe I can Johnny Cochran the shit out of this thread. and so it began even more indepth. At one point I actually thought to myself, maybe this line is optimal?. I had to think that, it was the only way I could make a crack in their arguments.eventually i started to fizzle, realizing no one was cracking, I threw out one last ditch effort to get a rise out of people. I questioned math in poker. LOL.basically my strat thread version of asking them to try the glove on. I wanted to see who would bite, and of course everyone did.Thanks for the fun 3 days.good night
  5. who said I was forgetting any of those theories?If you go back several pages and read through my process, I came to my conclusion by various dynamics in the hand.I didnt just say, well, i think he's bluffin, so i'll test it.seriously. firstly, I would opt to fold pf. but if we got to this spot, and my thought was he could hold anything from QQ+ or AK, the obvious play is to flat and c/f the river (assuming again, he rarely bluffs) naismith said this, as did others, which I agree If we turned the hands face up and he held AK, and we held 10,10. I said the best line is the check/raise. snamuh said the same thing at one point.
  6. you've seen annette play without looking at her cards. I mean, thats tournament poker, but used as an example, it illustrates how the cards you hold are only but a small portion of the game you're playing.so if we dont even know our hand, how can we use math as the deciding factor?
  7. Its not because I think so, its due to my thought process. In this case, the fact that I make my conclusion by narrowing a persons range to such. ie: 1 or 2 type holdings.to be honest, I'd have to say I'm very successful at thinking through the thought process of villains playing live 2/5 NL. whther their donkeys or quality players. Its my game of choiceIf you told me this was a 1/2 game on tilt, the advice would be fold pf. but if we got into this situation, i'd prob lean towards flatting the turn
  8. it would be nice if the online superstars who all came back to fcp for the other thread would post in this one.shynepo can use reassurance on the advice
  9. I know exactly what you guys are saying.trust me. lol - you cant convince me on this hand. fundamentally, it comes across as odd, since when we assign a range of hands, that range is made up of a number of holdings and combo's. All of which help narrow our decision but inherently we're still making assumptions.But what i'm saying is in this particular case. I dont see it that way. I mean, you can continue to judge my 5 years of poker experience which has added up to 100's of thousands of hands leaving me in the blackor you just agree to disagree. all i'm saying is i'd play it my way.
  10. we should be cbetting because our image is TAG. TAG's cbet flops with overpairs. if this guy (hero) tells me he was a TAG, and he raised pf. then fired the flop. i'd assume he holds AQs+ 10,10+until he shows differently that he cbets air, its would be an easy fold for most villains who missed.
  11. My psychology in this hand brought me to a conclusion. The math in this hand was my expected ev in two situations, 1 - how much i win if i win 100% of the time on the turn.2 - how much i win if i call and go to a river.then 2 brings back the psychology aspect of villains bluffing tendency. the chance aspect is in the form of 13% when we decide (with our psychology) that villain holds one of the 32 combo's that make up AQ or AK.
  12. no no, Jesus, i said this like 500 times, I was only advocating a c/r IF he had more chips.in which case it would look something like.pot is 95ishvillain bet 50, a check raise to 140ish is sufficient.
  13. same can be said for 7,8s so you could be drawing dead.I personally dont like the idea of a 9 coming off and us being much more interested in the hand.I'd like to see a 4 and a 4 only. but that didnt happen, so i'm done with this hand.regardless, my line is to cbet this flop, and throw it in the muck when he calls or raises.
  14. Just to point this out, this isnt really valid if a 4 lands we have the nut straight. if a 9 lands we have the low end of a straight but villain would have needed a gut shot for the 9 to have made him a higher straight.if a Jack lands completing the higher end of a straight, It doesnt affect us since we have no straight. my advice, /\ This
×
×
  • Create New...