MrConceit

I think you're being foolish in your assessment. Saying he got beat because he slowplayed. Somebody limped in early, button limped, and you think it's a bad play to see a free flop with 88? It's not like it's an obligatory raise, though that is an option. He bet 50 into a 125 pot, that isn't slowplaying. That's an ok bet. And yeah, he does want to be called, or even better raised. Do you like flopping top set and having everybody fold to your pot bet immediately? A7d with his 1 overcard and BDF has no odds to call this bet, even if our hero had 83 offsuit. His bet was 2/5ths of the po

First off I basically agree with what einbert said, both about bankroll and about the hands, but I'll put in my .02 briefly also on the hands.The QTs I feel just call, but raising is alright here too (if it was QJs or KQs I'd be more likely to raise of course).ATo I feel is somewhat close between limping and folding, but folding is probably best. In a tighter more skilled table it's a definite fold.KTo in that position I'd say call. But you have to be careful because of kicker. A straight draw vs your 3-5 opponents might be nicer than a K pair.67s with 2 limpers on button... Call, but you'

Ugh. I love SSHE overall, and I feel the series of articles in CardPlayer (by Jim Brief) are so ANTI-SSHE that it's a bit much. It's totally fine to disagree with things in the book (or the book as a whole), but he's been doing the hand samples from the book for 5-6 straight weeks now and basically implies or out and out says they're wrong and giving bad advice.Now again, it's fine for him to say this as a whole, but why not give it as an aside or even dedicate one single article to this. Say he feels the book is advising you to be too aggressive, or implying your draws are stronger than th

I can see playing it like this. Basically, the entire way you played the hand is consistent, but I've kind of gotten away from being quite this aggressive in this senario (I mean postflop, preflop this is a total 3bet by me also). By that I mean the 2 overcard flop (the K being the much uglier card) combined with the fact that SB stayed through the whole thing. I can see raising on the flop to again take control and/or get rid of SB, it's still still an ugly situation. I truthfully might just release on the flop immediately. UTG+1 raised in early, you said he's no maniac, it's hardly that

Good post. And it would be pretty scary to me if I hadn't thought about this a lot before. Luck can play such a huge roll over what SEEMS a long term to us.Like say 1 month (online). That seems like such a long time in terms of playing cards day in and day out. But it really isn't. Some of my friends still don't believe you can run bad for like 3 weeks straight. I hope they can continue to believe that, but sadly it's unlikely.The other opposite problem some people have is they had 1 good session or good week, and now think they have a certain skill that might not be totally accurate. S

Cool post.I will say though -- most of these names are people Daniel calls good friends from what I have read/heard. In fact, reading them over, basically all of them are his friends barring MAYBE Carlos/Josh, and even that is only a maybe.

If you ever do decide it was because you couldn't easily see it, almost all poker sites offer 4 colour decks. I hate 4 color decks, because I'm weird or whatever. But tons and tons of people swear by them.To me having _blue_ as a color for a card is just too wrong.

Yeah it's as he said. The reason you're getting rake kickback is because racktracker (or any affiliate) is getting you to sign up at whatever X poker site, and X poker site is giving the affiliate - raketracker here - a cut of the rake forever generated by you. In this case raketracker is giving you back a cut of that cut. Though raketracker is giving back a large part of their cut. Though it depends on their throughput in what percent THEY the affiliate gets.Technically you can't do this at a site you already play at. But in reality if you use some slightly different info they might not n

In general doing what you're talking about is a lot easier in cash games imo. In tourneys (unless you're already at the very big stack compared to blinds point) you usually don't have enough chips to take the worst of it like you're describing. I am speaking mostly of online tournaments here btw, where you only get 1-1.5k chips usually and blinds go up pretty fast.Also, I tend to think the opposite of what you do in terms of small stacks vs large stacks. Unless they are very small. I want some potential good payout if I hit my draw, I want his stack to be deep. And I second the general co

100 isn't a ridiculously number in this example we're talking about. Better put it at 1,000 if you want to say you have a real chance of never busting. Another thing to remember in the commonly quoted 300BB estimate for bankroll. That assumes you don't skim off the top everytime you get to 350 back down to 300 (yeah I'm sure many of you know that, but does everybody who posts/reads here?). Losing 100 coin tosses in a row (or 50 in a row twice in relatively short sucession) is very improbable, but impossible? HAH. I wish it were impossible for me to lose 100 BB in a session too. Not that

Wow, I am impressed. I did believe they were worth a lot - but having something worth a lot in theory isn't always the same as finding somebody willing to pay what they are worth. Not that perhaps 4k is what they are worth, but at least it's going up in bids pretty well so far.Good luck!

Sorry, this hand has no instructional value, nor am I asking for critiques because it played itself. But it just happened a couple hours ago, and it was fun and a large pot. :)And I figured I show some low limiters that quite often 15/30 on party ends up feeling like .5/1 only with a lot more aggression on average.(btw it's not like I'm trying to say 15/30 is high stakes, it's all relative)By the by, I did half-believe by river I was either splitting with another AK or losing to 22, but because of all the people in the hand (obviously drawing, to flush draws or stupid gutshots or god knows w

Hah. People were mostly just naming their best sessions/days. Not that they consistently made X forever. But I know/think you were just joking around. And we are elite, just ask us! I think there are too. Although game moving faster and more hands only helps if you ARE a winning player. A small caveat I figured I'd add, hah.

That's awesome man. Total congrats on this.Though I do think it's odd you bothered to do a deal with such a huge chiplead and even if he got utterly lucky you still would have gotten 2k vs 3.1k. But hey, that deal part is utterly your perogative.Again, CONGRATS!

This is the abolute best! Thanks for posting this link. I was rolling on the floor.

How many tables you play at does matter obviously. You want a rough estimate of how much you'd make per table. It's obviously less important if you're ALWAYS going to be doing the same number of tables, 2 or 4 or whatever. I still prefer BB/100 overall, it's easier to keep track of.But I still keep track on an excel spreadsheet every table. And I can easily just sum the total amount of money won/lost in the end and sum my table hours. I usually look at 3 things, or 4. Total money won compared to how many table hours, and I glance at total real time I spent, and then perhaps how many hand

What did you graduat in? Probably not poker. Do you want to talk college and SAT or poker? Either one I feel comfortable talking about. Don't get so defensive...i'm not here to make you look stupid, it just happened. This is my favorite diss (and one that was needed to be given) I've read in a few days. Yay WRTO!

You forgot to say though whether it would be a limit or NL tourney.

Huh? How the cards are falling?? What does that mean? I'm hoping you aren't saying that seeing what cards have fallen previously gives you any clue as to how they will fall in the future, even the short-term future. Come to think of it, if you're going to be at my table, I hope that is what you're saying.Laugh, I imagine the "how the cards are falling" is just a saying. It sounded just like he said he took 5-6 hands to observe players and start getting reads. But if you were right and he determines his "luck ratio" for the night by how the cards are falling -- then sorry, you were right to m

I think you're unexperienced, I wouldn't say crazy or stupid yet. You want to call an early raised 2 cold with nobody else in the pot with 87 suited? Your best case senario will likely be the 60-40, but you have to understand something also. That odd is the cards are dealt to the river. Are you going to be calling bets with bottom or second pair if an A, K, or Q flops? Are you going to stay around for a backdoor flush or straight draw? Calling 2 cold before the river doesn't entitle you to see the river for free from this point on unless you only had 2 small bets at the table.It's just a

Once you get to a certain limit all hands that go to the river are max raked anyway. So do they have 2 programmed routines for lower limit tables to create "action pots" and a normal for the higher tables which will be max raked anyway? Or do they just use the same "action pot" subroutine for the high tables too just for fun? It's not like hitting a 3 buck rake is hard to do.

It is best to jam draws if people will come along for the ride. Even discounting any sorts of free card plays, even if you think BB will 3bet, as long as the callers come along for the ride you're easily making money by raising. Although if sb folds, BB raises, and both callers fold to 2 cold (yeah right! but I'm saying if), then you should only cap if you feel that will get your a free turn. And if you feel that then you for sure should. But if by 3betting BB will be betting out turn, then technically HU capping is bad as your 12 outer isn't QUITE a favorite over a made pair of aces. Bu

First to try to address your question... Were you talking about your most recent stab in SnGs or when you had been trying MTTs? In SnGs the "end" is either on the bubble or once you're ITM, and no, you shouldn't be tightening back up very much, it's 3-4 handed and you have to be aggressive overall. Obviously there will be situations where you don't follow this exactly, but in general you don't tighten up when it gets shorthanded, you do the reverse. Most of your decisions on how you're going to play is going to depend on your stack vs the other stacks at that point in SnGs. Along with obv

Freerolls are ok, especially ones that don't attract a lot of people.But what I think Empire has about the best of is Guaranteeds.They are so often an overlay situation (on Empire). Example, a 4k guarantee for a 20+2. They expect to get at least 200 people to break even on the 4k promise. But quite quite often on Empire they don't get as many as they want/expect for their guarantees. You can try this on any site, and they occasionally happen on UB, but not nearly as often as it occurs on Empire.It's free money of sorts, and quite often more than the freeroll is offering.100 people in this

Agreed. But the sites could easily make customers feel a whole lot better by providing statistics on everything, which none do as far as I know. They simply assure you that they are regulated, the card generators are random, and well... just trust us :roll: .For example, Party Poker is regulated by the Government of Gibraltar - seriously. Doesn't that make sense, my understanding is they operate from an indian reservation in Canada but are regulated by the Government of Gibraltar - strange.What kind of stats are you looking for? As I recall pokerroom.com offers tons of stats. And ther