Dn Playing 100/200

[Tehtoe 3]

oh right, that's why we don't post here anymore.

oh come on.

[K_dense 3]

As a general statement you seem like a good guy and I typically find your posts very insightful, so this one surprised me. You are an individual. And you still post here (which as far as I am concerned is a good thing). But to post with the royal we (presumably referring to 4BB) makes you sound like an insecure child. A guy with 4 posts made a stupid comment. Ignore it. Heck, ignore this too. But if you are going to take your ball and go home, do it, don't tell everyone about how you are doing it (and that your friends joined you). In the last two years I have never once thought to myself, "man, I wish the 4BB guys posted here more". It might be because I suck at poker and don't want to learn, or it might be because I spend 5-10 a day on FCP strictly for entertainment. Most likely feel the same. I hope you stay and keep contributing, but can everyone just agree to drop the "group x doesn't post here anymore" rhetoric (especially where it is only the people who left that are coming back to say it).

I dont think this could of been said any better , and very politely.it does seem that at times there are " little quips " referring to how we dont post here anymore.not that you need kudos for this ... well said sirprob most intelligent thing posted in some time. / srry BG ... oh and lbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz , i still ovle you

[TrueAce13 18]

THANK GOD I DON'T POST HERE ANYMORE!

[Acekob 0]

DN should never have a set after just calling the flop although it is possible 5-10% of the time. His hand on turn is semi-bluffs/87/JJ+ making QJ a fairly standard call.

Thank you $6 HUSNG player for explaining to us exactly how DN should be playing in a NL20K game. Your in-depth analysis is much appreciated.l

Point: unless you are a reg on these stakes I doubt you should start pointing out wrong plays unless you know the dynamic and thought process behind. Besides that, DN has been 100% real saying he think he's a dog in these games wanting to improve.

I'm certain there are loads of plays/mistakes I've made that a 50NL reg would not have made. Have you considered, though, that there are some plays I've made in the game that were actually really good that a typical 50NL reg would NOT have made? I believe that anytime you step out of the box you either run the risk of doing something awfully stupid, but you also have the potential to make some really high end plays as well. I'm not Durr or Ivey and I know that, however, I am certain that I could find you some hands where if you didn't know who the player was you'd say "That's a mistake a 50NL reg would never ever make." When your goal is not to learn how to become a "grinder" and you are trying to become really, really, good at the game, you are simply going to make mistakes along the way that people will go, huh??? How bad was THAT! The key is to learn from those hands and I think I'm doing a very good job of that...

oh right, that's why we don't post here anymore.

lol.

[babylondonks 5]

Lol really Cowboy. You come in to this thread, post a hand that is fairly standard/explainable given game flow/dynamics and then somebody with 4 posts says something and you say "That's why we don't post here anymore"? And the justification that if Daniel hadn't "sucked out" on the river he wouldn't be able to talk about a winning session is just ridiculous. You could go back over anybody's session and say it would be a loser if they just lost one of their biggest hands, or a winner if they won a flip or whatever. I think that's horribly results oriented and just not a healthy way to think about your own, or anybody elses game. Otherwise after each little Heads Up session you're going to worry about things like your EV line too much and the same goes for any tournaments (if I won that stupid flip deep I would have gone on to final table and win almost always!). Because the fact is that he *did* spike his 8 outer and he *did* win 60k on the session.edit: I'm not sure if you remember the thread but at one stage I think it was Baxter who was offering MTT coaching on FCP and some idiot came in and said "oh but if you take away his two huge scores this no not baxter is a losing player!" As I recall most of us had a laugh at how silly that guy was because it's such a stupid way to look at poker, but really you're doing the same thing here.Cliffnotes: sick fcp hat in your avatar tho.

[Tehtoe 3]

You must not have slept very well, Max!

[fighter 4]

Lol really Cowboy. You come in to this thread, post a hand that is fairly standard/explainable given game flow/dynamics and then somebody with 4 posts says something and you say "That's why we don't post here anymore"? And the justification that if Daniel hadn't "sucked out" on the river he wouldn't be able to talk about a winning session is just ridiculous. You could go back over anybody's session and say it would be a loser if they just lost one of their biggest hands, or a winner if they won a flip or whatever. I think that's horribly results oriented and just not a healthy way to think about your own, or anybody elses game. Otherwise after each little Heads Up session you're going to worry about things like your EV line too much and the same goes for any tournaments (if I won that stupid flip deep I would have gone on to final table and win almost always!). Because the fact is that he *did* spike his 8 outer and he *did* win 60k on the session.edit: I'm not sure if you remember the thread but at one stage I think it was Baxter who was offering MTT coaching on FCP and some idiot came in and said "oh but if you take away his two huge scores this no not baxter is a losing player!" As I recall most of us had a laugh at how silly that guy was because it's such a stupid way to look at poker, but really you're doing the same thing here.Cliffnotes: sick fcp hat in your avatar tho.

Posts like this are the reason I come to FCP. Where else can you find Babylondonks dropping bombs of knowledge like loose change.

[babylondonks 5]

Definitely not in that blog you told me to make once

[Acekob 0]

Posts like this are the reason I come to FCP. Where else can you find Babylondonks dropping bombs of knowledge like loose change.

Ya, Babylondons effort in the SNG thread is also amazing!

[Gallo 1]

Posts like this are the reason I come to FCP. Where else can you find Babylondonks dropping bombs of knowledge like loose change.

Certainly not in SSNL. Only things he says are "Call." "Don't fold." "Nit."

[Acekob 0]

Certainly not in SSNL. Only things he says are "Call." "Don't fold." "Nit."

Obv bruh, why would he educate the fish?

[Naked_Cowboy 0]

I wasn't referring to any discernable group of people with "we" unless you are aware of who my closest poker friends are somehow. Tons of people from 4bb still post here, and even in this thread. It's realy silly though that I make a post that in any way could paint DN in a bad light and people either troll me (hi BG) or indicate that I shouldn't be able to comment on a hand or chain of events for whatever reason both because "everyone would have done the same thing" and "you can't possibly understand what's going on in that game" (those are kinda the opposite).I thought it was weird to post results and seemingly imply a causal relationship between his results and the games not filling up as fast. There are a ton of reasons the games don't fill up as fast as they used to. Yes, one of them is daniel getting better. I know two of the people who have played in the game with daniel, and that's totally a conversation we can have if you want to. Shortly after I posted that, his blog went up admitting that he's running way over EV in the game, which nullifies my point and is a very humble and cool thing to do. I'm happy to chalk it up to the inadequacy of 140 characters to convey everything we'd want and a misunderstanding on my part.Daniel has earned the ability to play in these games through amazing results throughout the years and the ensuing sponsorships that came from also being a great ambassador to the game. I'm not some random DN hater, I just thought the combination of his tweets and this hand was a little funny.

Point: unless you are a reg on these stakes I doubt you should start pointing out wrong plays unless you know the dynamic and thought process behind.

As to the hand itself, this is a wholly retarded statement. If anyone wants to go back and attempt to answer my question or genuinely thinks that what's going on in this hand is so many levels above my question that I can't even comprehend it, then let's have a conversation about that. Hell, i'd love to have DN address the hand becuase maybe it actually is and I could learn something. I do play HUNL and watch HU and shorthanded videos from stakes that I play all the way through stakes above this, so I'm not some random shouting "but but YOU SUCKED OUT!!". There are more than 1 ways to play this hand, and I think there are others with merit when you consider how deep the stacks are, the bet sizing throughout the hand, and the price a shove is going to lay fisheye on a call on that board.Bob, there were 2 clubs on the flop, daniel had, i believe, the Kc.

[Acekob 0]

lol what? You didn't post the hand togheter with any strat question, what was your intent again? And nevermind that, you can question DN's play all day long if thats what you want, as I quoted he says himself he makes big mistakes. But when you suddenly drop the bomb with the "thats why we don't post here anymore" comment, just because some 4 post guy give you a tiny bit of needle, what do you expect people to think? And lol @ saying that you were speaking on behalf of a certain few friends, it was obvious what people would read into that comment, and it was obvious what you meant.Kudos for the, "wholly retarded statement", comment, I'm sure none of your replies quallify for that.

[donk4life 34]

Oh yeah, well I've seen 3 of the guys that have played with Daniel in the game! I'd be totally glad to have a conversation about people I've seen in the poker world.

[Balloon guy 158]

Hi NCA lot of people don't know this, but Naked Cowboy once hunted down a man in the winter of northern Minnesota who posted something bad about DN's assistant's dog and made him post a retraction. A heartfelt one at that.So he has EARNED the right to make fun of DN's twittersThat sentence doesn't read like it was meant.Sounds kind of gayNot that DN is gay, or that there is anything wrong with him not being gay.If he's not I mean.

[babylondonks 5]

I wasn't referring to any discernable group of people with "we" unless you are aware of who my closest poker friends are somehow. Tons of people from 4bb still post here, and even in this thread. It's realy silly though that I make a post that in any way could paint DN in a bad light and people either troll me (hi BG) or indicate that I shouldn't be able to comment on a hand or chain of events for whatever reason both because "everyone would have done the same thing" and "you can't possibly understand what's going on in that game" (those are kinda the opposite).I thought it was weird to post results and seemingly imply a causal relationship between his results and the games not filling up as fast. There are a ton of reasons the games don't fill up as fast as they used to. Yes, one of them is daniel getting better. I know two of the people who have played in the game with daniel, and that's totally a conversation we can have if you want to. Shortly after I posted that, his blog went up admitting that he's running way over EV in the game, which nullifies my point and is a very humble and cool thing to do. I'm happy to chalk it up to the inadequacy of 140 characters to convey everything we'd want and a misunderstanding on my part.Daniel has earned the ability to play in these games through amazing results throughout the years and the ensuing sponsorships that came from also being a great ambassador to the game. I'm not some random DN hater, I just thought the combination of his tweets and this hand was a little funny. As to the hand itself, this is a wholly retarded statement. If anyone wants to go back and attempt to answer my question or genuinely thinks that what's going on in this hand is so many levels above my question that I can't even comprehend it, then let's have a conversation about that. Hell, i'd love to have DN address the hand becuase maybe it actually is and I could learn something. I do play HUNL and watch HU and shorthanded videos from stakes that I play all the way through stakes above this, so I'm not some random shouting "but but YOU SUCKED OUT!!". There are more than 1 ways to play this hand, and I think there are others with merit when you consider how deep the stacks are, the bet sizing throughout the hand, and the price a shove is going to lay fisheye on a call on that board.Bob, there were 2 clubs on the flop, daniel had, i believe, the Kc.

Let me just repost your original response:[ ] questionIf you really want my analysis I can put something together if you want but that certainly had absolutely nothing to do with your original post, and not really much to do with your subsequent posts either. They were mostly "if daniel hadn't won this pot he'd be a loser this session" and "this is exactly why we don't post here anymore". If it wasn't intended as a group anybody would recognise, why would you post it? I'd love to hear your strat behind it.

[Pivvy2001 0]

They were mostly "if daniel hadn't won this pot he'd be a loser this session" and "this is exactly why we don't post here anymore". If it wasn't intended as a group anybody would recognise, why would you post it? I'd love to hear your strat behind it.

This is directly on point. Your commentary on the hand was reasonable (whether people agree or not) and your opinion on DN's play and tweets was fair enough (and I respect you acknowledging his later posts). But you either posted we because you are stupid and don't realize that you are an I and not a we (this seems unlikely based on your other posts), or you did it to make a point (and there is only one group for which that point could be made with any coherency). Feel free to make an argument that you were referring generally to a group of your poker friends, but we both know how ludicrous that statement sounds.