BlueDev

So, I just had my second check in a row from Bodog bounce. This one was actually a replacement for the last one that bounced. A bit troubling. The answer I've gotten both times has been that they've changed payment servicers, as the government keeps cracking down on their dealings with banks. I suppose it's best to cash the checks immediately--I made the mistake of waiting a couple of weeks.Sure, it's only $300.00 (go microstakes!), but I sure would like my money.Anyone else had any problems with this? Apologies if it's already been discussed, but I didn't see a thread in my brief search.

I assumed he meant "slowplaying the boat." So 2 outs to the better boat.

Not even sooooooted. I think just about everyone playing at that level on Bodog is best friend material. Including me. Especially me.Who am I kidding...I just want more friends.

4c, actually.I did just call. They both had ace-rag and split. So, clearly it was a terrible call..... <sw>

I think I just misread mtdesmoines first post as advocating a push. My bad. Reading comprehension in the toilet. Blame the public school system.Thanks, everyone.

I appreciate the feedback, though it seems opinions are split on the proper move on the turn. While I do see the advantage of calling and reevaluating on the river, I'm curious to the rationale for pushing the turn. I agree that we're not going to get the BB to fold an ace, so what advantage does a push give us? Additionally, would we even want him to fold? Assuming we're currently beaten here by both villains (but with lots of outs to catch up), isn't it preferable to keep both involved?

Oops. He was tricky, that one. :)Fixed the history.

Copying from Bodog. Forgive me if I don't get the format/pot size/etc. quite right.Hero is new to table, so no real reads on either opponent. Hero has both covered:Hero (MP): $18.11Villain 1 (button): $5.78Villain 2 (BB): $9.40Preflop: Hero is MP with 10, J. 1 fold, Hero raises to $0.40, 1 fold, Button calls, 1 fold, BB callsFlop: ($1.25) 10, J, Q(3 players)BB bets $0.10, Hero raises to $0.60, Button raises to $1.10, BB calls, Hero callsTurn: ($4.55) K(3 players)BB bets $2.00, Hero calls, Button raises to $4.28 (all-in), BB calls, Hero ????Is this an insta-push? I'm assuming I'm up against

Being a bad person and being disrespectful are two totally different things. He may be a great guy--I've got no reason to think he isn't, and he didn't seem to be celebrating explicityly to rub other people's noses in it (as we've seen from countless other players). Acting like that may be just the way he acts. It may be totally natural. That, however, isn't an excuse for it. It simply shows an amazing lack of self control. Whether he intends to be disrespectful or not, that's the outcome.

Yikes. Glad everything's going to be okay. Here's wishing you a speedy recovery!Oh, and I think you should at least be the Featured Player of the Week on FCP for this.

Gotta side with Phil on this one as well. DN, as he frequently does, appears unable to critically examine an issue without clouding the discussion with his personal biases.Plus, you can't call someone a "buffoon," misspell it, then accuse them of not proofing their work, without looking like a complete tool.

It worked for me, but only on my 20,000th try.

Euphamism?

Sure it skipped it? My Tivo got it, but it looks like it started about 5-6 minutes late, so it seemed at first not to have recorded. Didn't miss much, anyway. It's not a particularly entertaining group this week.I don't mind the show in general, as I think some of the table talk from last week was interesting. They could get rid of the sporadic play-by-play/generally annoying comment announcer guy, though.

I'm just starting to play PLO8 myself, so I'm finding your reports very helpful. Thanks for the insight into the low limit game (which is where I'll be spending my time).

Your question has been answered/responded to/mocked!!!!!The answer won't change if you ask again/more times/repeatedly!!!!!Do you understand now????

If I remember it correctly, Sammy asked Barry to run it twice before the river, and Barry declined. When Sammy asked again after the flop, Barry declined again. My read was that it was very gracious of Sammy to offer it (as he had flopped the set) and also gracious of Barry to decline it (as he had already declined it while he had a big advantage, and he was now at a big disadvantage). Seemed like a couple of class moves from both of them, if it happened as I remember.

Interesting topic. My quick response is that you may be overestimating the number of people who actually apply themselves and learn how to play. Personally, I know a number of people who began playing during this poker boom, and continue to play, but do nothing to actually improve the level of their game. If my guess is right, the number of people entering the game with no knowledge will, for a while at least, continue to increase faster than the number of people getting better at the game. Also, take into account that it takes no time to begin playing (poorly), but a long time to play well. T

Of course it's because he's black. Sheesh. Everyone knows a black guy can't get an endorsement deal in this country. Just ask Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, or LeBron James. Poor guys have to live on the pittance they make playing their respective sports, and the rest of us have to sit through all those incessant Wally Szczerbiak commercials. Like Wally...if I could be like Wally....I wanna be I wanna be I wanna be

I can't claim that I know enough about game theory to say that there's anything wrong with the game. And, I certainly wouldn't claim that it isn't any fun until I've actually tried it.My biggest concern is this: It seems that that what you consider to be the big draw to California Hold'em is that it favors skilled players. Given that (and the fact that that's what you seem to be promoting about the game), wouldn't that lead to fewer unskilled players wanting to play the game, knowing they're at a disadvantage? And, if that's the case, as the unskilled players are the main source of income for

Hey, people scoffed when a wise man suggested that two pair beat three of a kind, but now... never mind.Meh. I suppose it's not fair to knock until we try it, but that's not what the internet is for. :wink:

Or...yes I can: http://www.tivo.com/2.1.2.2.aspThe model I have is a Pioneer. Best investment I've made in a year.Don't knock the Tivo. The Tivo is good.

What in the hell is discussion of actual poker play doing on the front page??? Confused the living crap outta me. :wink:

Letting a bit of personal bias in, perhaps? Recognizable=marketable. Popular has nothing to do with it. It's semantics, but that seems to be the basis of your post. Doyle Brunson and Phil Ivey certainly aren't particularly entertaining characters at the poker table--they don't "make for good television" like Matusow and Hellmuth, but they're recognizable--they're marketable. You certainly don't think that your face gets plastered on products solely because you're an "engaging character," do you? It's because you've had success. You can be the most entertaining guy in the world at the poker tab

why? it's not the wall that's posting.To be fair, the wall didn't take the bad beat. It sucked out with two broken bones on the river.