theabyss

Nice job laying on the sarcasm nice and thin there.I never said the amount of money was lame. I never said the players were lame. In fact I even said that even though something about Durrr annoys me as a person I respect his skills.What is lame is a prop bet that takes months, if not years, to finish and is not actively pursued unless either person has nothing better to do and feels like chipping away at this massive goal of playing 50k hands. Think about how long ago it started and consider how far along it's come. To do it privately is one thing but to announce it to the whole poker world as

lol, yea. the hands are disgusting.But I love the Obama chain is tight

This cracked me up. I don't even know how I wound up reading a Durrr article because he sorta annoys me. No particular reason actually. I admire his skills.Anyway, this cracked me up.The pic where they prognosticate what he's gonna look like when that lame Durrr challenge finally ends (hypothetically, lol)http://www.pokerlistings.com/durrrr-challe...o-session-41956

I liked that article actually. Similar to my top 5 hated winners list except i put hellmuth and nguyen on there too cause i loathe those guys. Both too arrogant for their own good.This was also cool - 40 years of WSOP

OH MIE GAHDwow. So much hilariousness in that video. Wow.first, that hat. holy moly. seriously? Were the 80's really that far out of touch?But the celebration and the jumping on the table, with the fist pump shouting "alright! I did it" is like straight out of an 80's cheese movie.It makes me wonder if in 20 years people will look back on 2009 and think that we too are super lame...it cant be that bad. no way

yeah, agreed.I wonder what the true issue was. Are they simply trying to state their claim that wealthier players (often pros) are more likely to win bracelets because of rebuys? Well, that may be the case but so be it. These are tournaments like any other.Some people love these events and it's not really fairly to completely eliminate them.Hey, atleast the dealers will be happy now that they won't have to deal these often longer tournies.

I just read this. Wanted to post it here to see what everyone thinks. It's basically a debate of tournament structural integrity versus traditionShaniac takes on Negreanu in rebuy debate"While I think Daniel is passionate about poker and has helped the game tremendously over time, it's not a stretch to say that he is a bit out of touch with the mass of poker players. It's certainly quite clear that his priorities are different."That's fine, except he still comes off like he's 'telling it like it is' or doing 'what's best for poker' when his statements regarding rebuys are not really logical or

This is a joke, I realize....but still, whats going on here??Daniel Negreanu says he's never seen anyone as fundamentally sound, and that his mere presence at the table makes people crumble. Nolan Dalla says he's on such an unprecedented level, he could "change poker history."http://www.pokerlistings.com/blog/poker-hu...e-poker-history

Without talking about position in the technical sense of the word, I think that where people are at a live game has a large impact on how certain hands play out.Basically what i mean is that if you engage in conversation with players by virtue of them sitting closer to you (rather than across the table, ie. further away and less conducive to chitchat) it ultimately could impact the way you bet against that player should the situation arise.If you are having friendly convo with someone at a live game or tourny you may not be as aggressive against them later because of the intangible "friendly a

hey. just wondering where you guys are getting most of your updates from? I have been checking out lots of sources. I mostly just use the WSOP main website but i like getting different views. i found this one this morning. the review is pretty good but i found myself watching cause of the girl i think. not exactly a stunner but she has a good appeal. amy mcbride WSOP event 1 review vidtough loss for bloch on his birthday - losing yet another heads up at the final table.2nd place is the FIRST LOSER. lol, sorry

Royale flush...........................with CHEESE

i find that if i am a little bit high i can focus a lot better on the players - but this is when i play live. I dont find it advantageous at all when playing online.too much alcohol or weed is not beneficial (for me).For some reason tho, when i am drunk and playing blackjack i do much better. My cousin had a funny half-hearted invention idea. Similar to cars that force you to take a breathalizer before they will allow you to start the engine, he says he wants his computer to make him do that before logging on to stars/tilt.....hahahhaalso, same for cell phone and drunk dialing(PATENT PENDING l

hey, i certainly do value the points. I left this thread kinda early yesterday because i had to leave work and watch the playoffs. At that point i didnt get a lot of actual mathematical feedback refuting my opinion. Mostly what i got was mocking remarks. I dont mind people proving me wrong with facts and numbers. When i came back to the post this morning there were a lot more posts with well articulated explanations and I agreed with them for the most part and definitely appreciated them. I realize there are a lot of great players here. Thats why i read here and posted this.The thinking i am t

Thats a fair point. I tried to mention in that last post that you are making your final move based on the read you have on the CO as a player and what he is likely to do in response to your bet/call

Ok, well first of all, I never said anywhere explicitly that going all-in PF was wrong. I just dont think it is optimal.I dont mean to put focus on "flat calling" here. What I wish to focus on in this situation is the fact that you definately should want the 4th player in this pot - however possible.If you shove all in and he calls this is good. If you flat call and he shoves and you call this is good. If you min-raise and he calls this is good. If you shove and he folds this is not ideal.Say you do shove and the CO folds. [Odds calculated below with pokerstove: AA v xRandom hands involved in

I definitely agree that if he comes along, at one point all of your chips are going in. I never was disputing that. What i was disputing was the fact that if you go all in PF he might fold - and i think this is a mistake.You can go all in after the flop because you act first. Remember, I am saying that with this decision you have to be 100% content with the fact that you are going to shove (after you make sure you get the CO in there with you)

The main thing to me is this.If you bring along the cutoff, you can effectively increase your stack while still LOSING the main pot. To do this you have to beat one player and you hold AA. Instashoving does not guarantee this possibility.It is like hedging your bets

sorry - i quoted wrong___________________________________Good point. I can dig it.But are you saying you would not go all in if you were heads up against this same stack - assuming the sidepot business didnt exist in this little scenario

Good point. I can dig it.But are you saying you would not go all in if you were heads up against this same stack - assuming the sidepot business didnt exist in this little scenario

Okay, so clearly I am beyond retarded. But sir, tell me WHY. Explain it to me. Then I can perhaps take your expertise to heart. But back up your belittling comments please. I did not make fun of you. You can make fun of me but only if you prove it to me first.

EDIT---- lol, by the time I'm done ("trying to") defending the merits of this post "I" should have well over 25 posts....lol

Yes, i fully agree. However i think this situation is different because if you discourage the CO from joining the hand you have a 3way pot with no betting and the cards face up. If that is all you want then that is fine - but i think it is not optimal.I think what is optimal is to establish in your mind that that mainpot is now out of your control. Leave it be and consider the fact that you have the chance to play an isolated hand with a guy with a stack slightly bigger than yours and you hold AA plus you know that since the situation is a bit unusual, he is probably going to want to stick aro

I realize im new to the forum and i didnt start a thread to be confrontational. In fact, on the contrary, i came here to start an intelligent conversation with people who i thought would treat the topic with equal due diligence - as im sure you would expect too if you had an idea you wanted to share (in any place of discussion be it online or in person). Is it not a bit disappointing to get hasty sarcastic responses to something that you know holds some merit and u hoped to have more insighful banter about? I believe it is. I was hoping to get some solid responses - which i have from some p

ya mase, thats what i was thinking too....but i think thats a risk you gotta be willing to take.if you think about it tho, if you could play that one guy heads up with AA (and pretend that side pot didnt exist) wouldnt you want the chips all in preflop? If you say yes to that then you sorta gotta think the same way here imo

to break it down ........you want the 4th player (the cutoff) in the hand with you. if you dont agree with that then say so and we can discuss it further.if you do agree, here is how you do it:A) call. CO is priced in and responds by either calling himself, raising all in, or, if hes funny like some of you guys he folds (1/10000 chance he's that bad)B.) Raise all-in. He still probably calls but if you challenge him to lay it down and that is not to your advantage here.