Jump to content

loose/semi-retarded 2/4 table


Recommended Posts

Oh yeah, and i called.The guy with the pocket kings was hilarious. He looked a bit confused by what happened when his kings didnt hold up. The hand right before it when i was in the BB, i had 6/2off and flopped two pair. He and I raised back and forth all the way to the river, and he ended up _calling_ me with (no joke) jack high. There was no apparent flush draw or straight draw for his hand either.
"He called me with Jack-hiiiiiiiiigh!"(Sorry, couldn't add any more content arguing that calling with 45s was correct.)
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

"Now if he hits a astraight or flush draw then he will win the entire pot from there anywhere from 28-36% of the time."You MIGHT get hit by a car when you go outside. Does this prevent you from going outside?
He will NOT win this pot 28-36% of the time if he flops a straight or flush draw. You are failing to consider someone else making a better straight, better flush, full house, etc. IF he was GUARANTEED to win with his straight or flush, then yes. But he's not. His hand is easily subject to domination. Of course you go outside even though you may get hit by a car.You go out when you have to. He doesn't have to here.If I look outside and see a fun homerun derby going on, yet a drunk crazy guy speeding up and down the street waving a gun out the window...I'm not going to go outside. Not with a 45s. I'll forego the possibility of partaking in a fun homerun derby, until another day.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Seriously...what kind of flop do you guys want to hit here? I'm being honest. Even if you hit an ideal flop, you may not hold up, and you may pay off bigtime in the expensive turn and river rounds.
He's looking for a KK6 flop. Hope this helps.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Seriously...what kind of flop do you guys want to hit here? I'm being honest. Even if you hit an ideal flop, you may not hold up, and you may pay off bigtime in the expensive turn and river rounds.
He's looking for a KK6 flop. Hope this helps.
Exactly. I make a similar call in a NO LIMIT game nonetheless (where I can buy the pot if need be) and it's wrong. Yet somehow, in limit, a similar play is right?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Context is overrated.45s is a correct call in limit play under these circumstances. 45s will win against random hands enough to justify calling based on the pot odds presented preflop.K6o is almost always an incorrect call in no limit play at a full table. The pot and implied odds are rarely there preflop.Open folding is universally donkish.Ripping online players that have made hundreds of thousands of dollars playing poker when you can't afford a $100 HU freezeout is comedy gold.Is there anything else I can clarify for you? If you are actually going to be open minded for a change, we might make some progress.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you miss you hand, are you going to pay someone off? NO. There are no negative implied odds associated with this hand. Only positive implied odds. If the turn and river come 9, then 10, you get out. You're not going to pay it off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If you miss you hand, are you going to pay someone off? NO. There are no negative implied odds associated with this hand. Only positive implied odds. If the turn and river come 9, then 10, you get out. You're not going to pay it off.
Flop comes 678 and gets pumped by all players. Turn comes X and gets pumped by all players.River comes T and gets pumped. Have fun.ORFlop comes AKQ all of your suit. You flop a flush. Pot gets pumped.Turn...J of another suit...pot gets pumped.River...another one of your suits, counterfeiting your hand. Too late. You've already pumped so much in here. Sure you can throw it away but you are underestimating how much it will cost you to get through the rivercard.Even a good flop here is highly adverse to holding up with this many opponents. There ARE reverse implied odds here. Realize that.This is an easy fold to 1.5 with a player yet to act.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Context is overrated.45s is a correct call in limit play under these circumstances. 45s will win against random hands enough to justify calling based on the pot odds presented preflop.You're not acknowledging reverse implied odds though. Don't do that.K6o is almost always an incorrect call in no limit play at a full table. The pot and implied odds are rarely there preflop.K6 was the SB to NO raise. It was tourney play. Different from ring game. Tourney play allows for more risk-taking. Plus, K6 off is SO MUCH easier to get away from in a multi-way NL hand than 45s is in a multi-way limit hand. It's not even debatable.Open folding is universally donkish.I never open-folded. I brought up the query as to the pro's and con's of doing so. Please don't slander me. Please?Ripping online players that have made hundreds of thousands of dollars playing poker when you can't afford a $100 HU freezeout is comedy gold.Of course I can afford a $100 HU freezeout. My bankroll can't. I'm not going to play out of my bankroll just to cater to some fuming E-thug. You have no proof that said online player has made hundreds of thousands of dollars. All speculation.Is there anything else I can clarify for you? If you are actually going to be open minded for a change, we might make some progress.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ripping online players that have made hundreds of thousands of dollars playing poker when you can't afford a $100 HU freezeout is comedy gold.Of course I can afford a $100 HU freezeout. My bankroll can't. I'm not going to play out of my bankroll just to cater to some fuming E-thug. You have no proof that said online player has made hundreds of thousands of dollars. All speculation.
Fine then, modify my statement above to say "your bankroll can't afford a $100 HU freezeout". It's still comedy gold.Since you don't bother to check facts, I'll do the legwork for you.Prahlad Friedman: http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/player.php?a=r&n=17913Aaron Bartley (GambleAB): http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/player.php?a=r&n=37389I'll correct myself again. Both players have earned over $100,000, not necessarily "hundreds of thousands of dollars".
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never said I made hundereds of thousands of $$$$ online, at least not yet :wink: . JFarrell,please explain the "reverse" implied odds here and how this hgad won't be able to win 5% of the time. Show me, don't just write some dumbass bullshit that you are prone to spout out. I'm goone tell you now, that more than 5% of the time your cards will be live on one of your two main draws. You asre just looking at the immeadite results, which is why you are never able to analyze a hand, its not about the results, but the play itself and if the play is +EV, which this PF call is

Link to post
Share on other sites

JFarrell, you are the only person who considers me an E-thug, now why is that. Do I actually care about you, no. are you an utter dumbass who thinks he knows what hwe's talking about, yes. You will never be able to do well at poker( and life in general) because You are very self absorbed. You can't acceppt an opinion that isn't yours and you can't see the logic in an opinion that doiffers from yours. I just guess that you are that much of a better player than me and is just hapy to stay at .5/1. I have also given my reason for why the HU needs to be at least $100 at .5/1

Link to post
Share on other sites
JFarrell, you are the only person who considers me an E-thug, now why is that. Do I actually care about you, no. are you an utter dumbass who thinks he knows what hwe's talking about, yes. You will never be able to do well at poker( and life in general) because You are very self absorbed. You can't acceppt an opinion that isn't yours and you can't see the logic in an opinion that doiffers from yours. I just guess that you are that much of a better player than me and is just hapy to stay at .5/1. I have also given my reason for why the HU needs to be at least $100 at .5/1
If it is any consolation, JFarrell20 won't respond to me any more either.Pardon me while I go jump off the Fremont Bridge into the Willamette River now. I'm crushed. (sw)
Link to post
Share on other sites
JFarrell, you are the only person who considers me an E-thug, now why is that. Do I actually care about you, no. are you an utter dumbass who thinks he knows what hwe's talking about, yes. You will never be able to do well at poker( and life in general) because You are very self absorbed. You can't acceppt an opinion that isn't yours and you can't see the logic in an opinion that doiffers from yours. I just guess that you are that much of a better player than me and is just hapy to stay at .5/1. I have also given my reason for why the HU needs to be at least $100 at .5/1
If it is any consolation, JFarrell20 won't respond to me any more either.Pardon me while I go jump off the Fremont Bridge into the Willamette River now. I'm crushed. (sw)
Did anyone think my "Jack high" quote from last year's WSOP was funny? Anyone? Anyone at all?JFarrell20--I've noticed one thing about you in past threads (and this one) is that you seem very stubborn in sticking to your beliefs. While there is nothing wrong with sticking to what you believe in, it should become worrisome when you do it consistently and in the face of tremendous contradictory evidence. What makes it worse is that some very experienced and successful players are telling you that you are wrong. Honestly, when I first read the hand history, I thought, "Wow, seems like a loose call from the SB...I prolly would have mucked." But, I keep an open mind and now realize how calling is the right play thanks to the detailed analysis provided in the thread. If you are reluctant to open your mind in consideration of the merits of other points of view, or are reluctant to see the errors in your view, then perhaps you shouldn't be posting here. There is nothing wrong with debate. Debate is what helps us all learn. But constant opposition when it's obvious to EVERYONE else that you are wrong is just foolish.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone think my "Jack high" quote from last year's WSOP was funny? Anyone? Anyone at all?I chuckled, but did not guffaw...JFarrell20--I've noticed one thing about you in past threads (and this one) is that you seem very stubborn in sticking to your beliefs. While there is nothing wrong with sticking to what you believe in, it should become worrisome when you do it consistently and in the face of tremendous contradictory evidence. What makes it worse is that some very experienced and successful players are telling you that you are wrong.

Honestly, when I first read the hand history, I thought, "Wow, seems like a loose call from the SB...I prolly would have mucked." But, I keep an open mind and now realize how calling is the right play thanks to the detailed analysis provided in the thread. If you are reluctant to open your mind in consideration of the merits of other points of view, or are reluctant to see the errors in your view, then perhaps you shouldn't be posting here. There is nothing wrong with debate. Debate is what helps us all learn. But constant opposition when it's obvious to EVERYONE else that you are wrong is just foolish.
I have lost sight of what the argument is about...is it the pre-flop call or the post-flop call? I am on the fence about the pre-flop call (just a personal preference based solely on the numerical value of the suited connectors), but post-flop when it gets capped after your bet and your looking at the dummy end of the straight, I personally do not think this is the right call. Therefore, not EVERYONE as you have indicated is disagreeing with JFarrell. Get your facts straight before you post claims such as this...lol :wink:
Link to post
Share on other sites
Did anyone think my "Jack high" quote from last year's WSOP was funny? Anyone? Anyone at all?JFarrell20--I've noticed one thing about you in past threads (and this one) is that you seem very stubborn in sticking to your beliefs. While there is nothing wrong with sticking to what you believe in, it should become worrisome when you do it consistently and in the face of tremendous contradictory evidence. What makes it worse is that some very experienced and successful players are telling you that you are wrong. Honestly, when I first read the hand history, I thought, "Wow, seems like a loose call from the SB...I prolly would have mucked." But, I keep an open mind and now realize how calling is the right play thanks to the detailed analysis provided in the thread. If you are reluctant to open your mind in consideration of the merits of other points of view, or are reluctant to see the errors in your view, then perhaps you shouldn't be posting here. There is nothing wrong with debate. Debate is what helps us all learn. But constant opposition when it's obvious to EVERYONE else that you are wrong is just foolish.
To your first statement...I got ripped apart for calling in the SB with K6 offsuit in a tournament with 4100 when the BB was 200. This was a multi-way pot that was not raised with a tight BB. My reasoning was that I had implied odds if I did hit a miracle flop. Especially since it was NL, and it was a tourney (where you have more lee-way in risk taking).NOW, I side the other way when it's a LIMIT hand, and am getting dragged through the mud. People are saying he has "implied odds". Maybe, but he can't protect his hand post-flop like I can in NL. Also his limit hand is MUCH MUCH harder to get away from than K6 off is in NL. His hand has reverse implied odds whereas K6off does not since I'm not going to pay off anything short of a miracle. That is my main beef herein. I still stand by my original thought that it's a very loose call of 1.5 cold with a player yet to act. This is an easy throwaway for .25 BB's.I don't care if it's "obvious" to everyone else. At one time, it was also obvious to everyone that the Earth was flat. That the Sun rotated around the Earth. Your reasoning here means very little. You also aren't taking into account all the people who agree with me but aren't going to post b/c:1) they hate me and don't want to be associated with agreeing with me.2) they have no reason to post b/c I'm saying everything they would.I still stick to it being a loose p-f call. If nobody agrees with me, that's fine.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Did anyone think my "Jack high" quote from last year's WSOP was funny? Anyone? Anyone at all?I chuckled, but did not guffaw...JFarrell20--I've noticed one thing about you in past threads (and this one) is that you seem very stubborn in sticking to your beliefs. While there is nothing wrong with sticking to what you believe in, it should become worrisome when you do it consistently and in the face of tremendous contradictory evidence. What makes it worse is that some very experienced and successful players are telling you that you are wrong.
Honestly, when I first read the hand history, I thought, "Wow, seems like a loose call from the SB...I prolly would have mucked." But, I keep an open mind and now realize how calling is the right play thanks to the detailed analysis provided in the thread. If you are reluctant to open your mind in consideration of the merits of other points of view, or are reluctant to see the errors in your view, then perhaps you shouldn't be posting here. There is nothing wrong with debate. Debate is what helps us all learn. But constant opposition when it's obvious to EVERYONE else that you are wrong is just foolish.
I have lost sight of what the argument is about...is it the pre-flop call or the post-flop call? I am on the fence about the pre-flop call (just a personal preference based solely on the numerical value of the suited connectors), but post-flop when it gets capped after your bet and your looking at the dummy end of the straight, I personally do not think this is the right call. Therefore, not EVERYONE as you have indicated is disagreeing with JFarrell. Get your facts straight before you post claims such as this...lol :wink: EVVVVERRRYYYONNNEEEE!!! You know what I mean. Right? I think so?Anyway, JACK HIGH!!
Link to post
Share on other sites
but post-flop when it gets capped after your bet and your looking at the dummy end of the straight' date=' I personally do not think this is the right call. Therefore, not EVERYONE as you have indicated is disagreeing with JFarrell. Get your facts straight before you post claims such as this...lol :wink: [/color']Thank you for proving "reverse implied odds". It's now become very difficult to get rid of your hand (even with one of the most optimal flops you could hope to land mind you!) and you may be paying off a boat or a better straight. I mean it's just silly how obvious it is that this should have been a p-f fold to 1.5 cold.
Link to post
Share on other sites
EVVVVERRRYYYONNNEEEE!!! You know what I mean. Right? I think so?Anyway, JACK HIGH!!
You're disrespecting the game.
Even Ellix Powers' head lice though he was disrespecting the game.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for proving "reverse implied odds". It's now become very difficult to get rid of your hand (even with one of the most optimal flops you could hope to land mind you!) and you may be paying off a boat or a better straight. I mean it's just silly how obvious it is that this should have been a p-f fold to 1.5 cold.what did I prove? that I'm a pussy that would have not called pre-flop, or that I'm a pussy that would have folded to the capping? I agree with you that I personally would have folded 98% of the time, regardless of what the math says or does nto say (I am terrible with math). I always catch a lot of flack when I agree with you, but I don't care. I'm a big boy, I can take it. Besides, whatever they hurl at me bounces right back and sticks to them...lol :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
I always catch a lot of flack when I agree with you, but I don't care.
2 questions: When have you agreed with me previously? (I'm not saying you haven't, I'd just like to know).and 2): Who gives you flack? They don't PM you do they? If so, that is childish and absurd.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I always catch a lot of flack when I agree with you, but I don't care.
2 questions: When have you agreed with me previously? (I'm not saying you haven't, I'd just like to know).and 2): Who gives you flack? They don't PM you do they? If so, that is childish and absurd.
no, they haven't PM me...yetI have agreed with you on numerous occasions when you have commented in one of KDawg's postings or argued with him about something. Not everytime mind you, but I have had KDawg tell me not to get involved when I argued that he was doing exactly what he was accusing you of doing...he hates me now...do I care...maybe...lol
Link to post
Share on other sites
I always catch a lot of flack when I agree with you, but I don't care.
2 questions: When have you agreed with me previously? (I'm not saying you haven't, I'd just like to know).and 2): Who gives you flack? They don't PM you do they? If so, that is childish and absurd.
no, they haven't PM me...yetI have agreed with you on numerous occasions when you have commented in one of KDawg's postings or argued with him about something. Not everytime mind you, but I have had KDawg tell me not to get involved when I argued that he was doing exactly what he was accusing you of doing...he hates me now...do I care...maybe...lol
Well, have faith in yourself. You seem to know who to listen to and who to discard. KDawg and I are going to have a pow-wow later this month, where he will publicly unveil me as the sub-ape-IQed-poker-idiot that I am.Don't worry, we'll post the hand history on here for all to dissect.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...