Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 313
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Insecure much?I agree you aren't likely on my level, at least when it comes to deep analysis of hands. In the online world which you are neck-deep in, you make your living by making standard plays wit

Alright, I've caught up (this is a lie: I skimmed too much of the last 13 pages and not enough in-depth reading).I decided to make a full-fledged mathematical analysis of the hand. It's long and I ha

sometimes we must tear down so that we may rebuild.

Raising more as a c r for one would price out draws-instead of min raising and giving the correct odds for villain to call..and by your logic would increase fold equity-if this line increases our win % and showdown % then we should want to get more money in the middle.Stating you feel like 'the person with the best hand may bet a river' so what cards do you bet on the river? What do you do when the river pairs the board with a d? And your raised? Your taking the results and including them when in matters and leaving them out when it suits you..Bet sizing means a lot- for one if villain bets 6k on the turn we are now getting the right price with our hand-to me his 12k and an all in are essentially the same thing.Our line: villain is unlikely to be double barreling air/a worse ace or a draw we walk away down 6600 by folding the turn as played..if he's bluffing oh well-it was pretty suicidal on his part but we've done very little damage to our stack...on to the next hand.Your line: he over shoves and we are out 10600..I don't see us ever getting to show down without facing more bets and if we do I don't see us winning at showdown a whole lot. And if we do win at show down its a pretty big showing of us losing value in playing a hand this way..
If we had a strong hand as opposed to tha mediocre one, I would be looking to price out draws on the flop .As it stands, I don't think we have either the chip stack or hand to do that. People playing the sort of hand that would flop a big draw here aren't going to fold to a raise, even if the odds say they should. They got the flop they were looking for and are willing to see it through to the end."Stating you feel like 'the person with the best hand may bet a river' so what cards do you bet on the river? What do you do when the river pairs the board with a d? And your raised? Your taking the results and including them when in matters and leaving them out when it suits you.."If I have a flush I bet the river, otherwise I check and I expect to be checked back. If I'm not, then I fold, cause I'm likely beat. As for the scenario you described of rivering a paired diamond, this is yet another example of a situation you bring up that demonstrates the value of my play. In this case, I have absolutely no fear that the viallain has a boat, since I would have heard from him much earlier had the flopped a set/2 pair, or turned a set/two pair."Bet sizing means a lot- for one if villain bets 6k on the turn we are now getting the right price with our hand-to me his 12k and an all in are essentially the same thing."I think calling 6K with our chipstack would be borderline. The price is close, so its not an absurd play, but we are basically commiting these chips to the pot knowing that we are fairly substantial underdogs. When stacks are deep, you can do this all day long. If you're looking to play percentages in this situation, its probably better to shove at some point earlier in the hand (pre-flop to be precisely, IMO).BTW, you dind't answer the fundamental question ofo what the 6K bet size "means", since I was told that you get all the information you need from the betsize.As for your last comments, my opinion is that by c/c check, we almost never get to a showdown, which means we never get the chance to catch that river card. We are either beat and fold, or we are outplayed and fold. Its as simple as that. By c/r we may still be beat and lose, but it makes for fewer hands that will prevent us from seeing the river, and I think seeing that river is enormously important having the mediocre holdings we do.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh and to AK....again
Someone must have been stuck in his crate all day long. Don't worry, trueace, your master will let you out to play fetch soon enough. Who's a good boy?
Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are not trying to price out draws we should burn our computer and stop playing poker because this is pretty basic-if he's going to call a draw regardless of price we want him to make the mistake of paying more then he should. A 6k bet could be a scared bet/value bet/inducing a bluff bet/ if he bets 6k on the turn for whatever reason he makes the mistake of giving us the right price to draw. You say:1: you say he calls no matter our raise with draws2: he calls with better aces,3: he shoves sets, two pairs, combo draws, some regular draws4: he probably doesn't fold better aces but will check down the future streetsYou've assessed all of this but assume he'll double barrel putting half his stack in with air/semi bluff. So according to you he folds hands that we beat to a c r except draws which we give the right price for him to draw too but then we assume he won't put another chip in unless he hits?So we lose an extra 4k everytime he shoves and by pricing in draws we essentially lose another 4k everytime he calls.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't get how after numerous people say the best play is to c/c, you continuously argue a horrible point that c/r is the best play. That we should turn our top pair into a bluff and that the hand will play exactly how you want it. It is seriously just amazing. We gave numbers, reasons, and other points to disprove your play, but yet, you think it is the right play. Have fun being a losing player for the rest of your poker career until you learn to be more open about hands. And again, the flop isn't even the most interesting point of this hand; its the turnEdit: posting on my phone so I haven't spell checked or anything

Link to post
Share on other sites
Irish, there is no use arguing w this dude. He is content playing the hand poorly.
Agreed I just find it fascinating that someone would persistently defend a play ignoring both logic and math but I was probably just as stubborn before I really wanted to actually win at poker
Link to post
Share on other sites
If we are not trying to price out draws we should burn our computer and stop playing poker because this is pretty basic-if he's going to call a draw regardless of price we want him to make the mistake of paying more then he should.A 6k bet could be a scared bet/value bet/inducing a bluff bet/ if he bets 6k on the turn for whatever reason he makes the mistake of giving us the right price to draw. You say:1: you say he calls no matter our raise with draws2: he calls with better aces,3: he shoves sets, two pairs, combo draws, some regular draws4: he probably doesn't fold better aces but will check down the future streetsYou've assessed all of this but assume he'll double barrel putting half his stack in with air/semi bluff.So according to you he folds hands that we beat to a c r except draws which we give the right price for him to draw too but then we assume he won't put another chip in unless he hits?So we lose an extra 4k everytime he shoves and by pricing in draws we essentially lose another 4k everytime he calls.
Your questions typically highlight the difficulty in playing this hand, not so much whether the c/r on the flop is the best play. Of course, with draws out there, we would like drawing hands to fold. However, our hand is not strong enough, nor is our chip stack big enough, to try and protect our hand against draws. It simply isn't. If we're concerned about draws getting here, then IMO c/f is definietly the way to go since we're in some sort of coin flip situatoin at best. If we're either way behind or flipping at best, I'm not particularly interested in putting any more money into the pot in this hand at all.But having decided to continue with the hand past the flop, I believe the c/r gives us the best chance of getting to the river and seeing if we were good on the flop, and if we weren't it gives us the best chance of getting to the river and catching cards. The c/c wil simply not allow us to get to the river as cheaply and it makes our decision on the turn more difficult since we have less information to put our opponent on a hand.I don't assume the opponent will double barrel/bluff the turn. I leave it open as an option in the c/c scenario and pretty much a non option in the c/r scenario. I don't assume the opponent will bet AJ/AQ or semi bluff on the turn. I leave it open as an option in the c/c scenario and pretty much a non-option in the c/r scenario.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I just don't get how after numerous people say the best play is to c/c, you continuously argue a horrible point that c/r is the best play. That we should turn our top pair into a bluff and that the hand will play exactly how you want it. It is seriously just amazing. We gave numbers, reasons, and other points to disprove your play, but yet, you think it is the right play.Have fun being a losing player for the rest of your poker career until you learn to be more open about hands. And again, the flop isn't even the most interesting point of this hand; its the turnEdit: posting on my phone so I haven't spell checked or anything
I'm sorry you don't "get it". Here are a few hints to help you out. Poker is a game of incomplete information and even more so when discussing hands in a forum, since there's lots of information we are not privvy to. When discussing these hands, it's virtually impossible to determine a single correct plan of action, since there are plenty of variables we are not aware of. However, we can certainly lay out the logic of a particular course of action. Throughout the debate in this thread, the naysayers have kept rellying on the arguent which essentially states "My skill at poker will allow me to make the right decision on the turn without having to put in the extra 4K bet". This is a fine argument and it may be right. But it isn't an argument which holds any water in a theoretical discussion. I have put forth a course of action which makes it so we don't have to rely on skill or hand-reading or guessing in order to make the right play. We just have to rely on some assumptions of how our opponent might logically play certain hands. At no point has anyone bothered to contradict my assumptions in a meaningful way. All people have contradicted is the worthiness of paying an extra 4K, and again, the argument goes somehting like.. I am a good poker player.. I will make the right decision. Well, I happen to believe that good poker players make mistakes in situations just like this, when the pressure is on and they are pretty much in the dark. So I like to try to find a line of play that makes the decision easy.The other matter, of course, is that you and some of your pals seem to think not only that your chosen course of action is right, but that alternate courses are wrong or "horrible". This is pretty much idiotic and betrays a hubris which you have no reason to display. None of the plays we have discussed here are cut and dry. They all have aspects which are risky, or may be wrong in the final analysis based on what the opponent actually has. If you disagree with someone's viewpoint, then defend your own all you want. I have no problem with you or anyone sticking to your guns. But the minute you start acting like you or anyone else has all the answers is the minute I start discounting most of what you have to say since you clearly have a warped view of reality.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Your questions typically highlight the difficulty in playing this hand, not so much whether the c/r on the flop is the best play. Of course, with draws out there, we would like drawing hands to fold. However, our hand is not strong enough, nor is our chip stack big enough, to try and protect our hand against draws. It simply isn't. If we're concerned about draws getting here, then IMO c/f is definietly the way to go since we're in some sort of coin flip situatoin at best. If we're either way behind or flipping at best, I'm not particularly interested in putting any more money into the pot in this hand at all.But having decided to continue with the hand past the flop, I believe the c/r gives us the best chance of getting to the river and seeing if we were good on the flop, and if we weren't it gives us the best chance of getting to the river and catching cards. The c/c wil simply not allow us to get to the river as cheaply and it makes our decision on the turn more difficult since we have less information to put our opponent on a hand.I don't assume the opponent will double barrel/bluff the turn. I leave it open as an option in the c/c scenario and pretty much a non option in the c/r scenario. I don't assume the opponent will bet AJ/AQ or semi bluff on the turn. I leave it open as an option in the c/c scenario and pretty much a non-option in the c/r scenario.
Firstly the last thing we want is for drawing hands to fold!!! We just don't to bloat the pot oop while giving them odds to call with their draws. The amount of the turn bet/total stack villain puts in at the turn really slims down the likely hood that he's double barreling anything we're ahead of. Your whole line relies on villian flatting the c r then checking down the following two streets in position when you've shown weakness. I don't know a single person that would play the hand like that...I sure as hell wouldn't. The only way this line could possibly make sense is if villain has a draw and is passive/weak and even if that's the case we've absolutely made there call the most profitable for them by giving them the right odds. Any mid pair type hand k9, j9 etc that may bet flop folds to your raise the only thing that flats is a draw and we make it correct for him to call and then we check the turn..:we help make the villian play their hand properly by playing ours poorly.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad Irishguy could articulate everyone's thoughts so well. Sadly, it appears to be for a lost cause. I guess the poker worlds needs players who are obstinate towards learning, gives the rest of us better chances to make money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I only think your c/r is horrible, I never said I'm against b/f here. And c/r is horrible, well. For all the reasons everyone has stated sooooo many times in this thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
Firstly the last thing we want is for drawing hands to fold!!! We just don't to bloat the pot oop while giving them odds to call with their draws. The amount of the turn bet/total stack villain puts in at the turn really slims down the likely hood that he's double barreling anything we're ahead of.Your whole line relies on villian flatting the c r then checking down the following two streets in position when you've shown weakness. I don't know a single person that would play the hand like that...I sure as hell wouldn't. The only way this line could possibly make sense is if villain has a draw and is passive/weak and even if that's the case we've absolutely made there call the most profitable for them by giving them the right odds.Any mid pair type hand k9, j9 etc that may bet flop folds to your raise the only thing that flats is a draw and we make it correct for him to call and then we check the turn..:we help make the villian play their hand properly by playing ours poorly.
Instead of going in circles, how about this... please tell me what hand(s) you would bet the turn with if you were our opponent, and approx. how muich you would bet had we gone through the c/c scenario and had we gone through the c/r scenario (assuming you flatted the c/r). I think that would give us a good look into exactly how you would play the hand.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, I only think your c/r is horrible, I never said I'm against b/f here.And c/r is horrible, well. For all the reasons everyone has stated sooooo many times in this thread
I bet you lack the reading comprehension and communication skills to be able to summarize all of those reasons which have been stated sooooo many times in this thread.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Firstly the last thing we want is for drawing hands to fold!!! We just don't to bloat the pot oop while giving them odds to call with their draws. The amount of the turn bet/total stack villain puts in at the turn really slims down the likely hood that he's double barreling anything we're ahead of.Your whole line relies on villian flatting the c r then checking down the following two streets in position when you've shown weakness. I don't know a single person that would play the hand like that...I sure as hell wouldn't. The only way this line could possibly make sense is if villain has a draw and is passive/weak and even if that's the case we've absolutely made there call the most profitable for them by giving them the right odds.Any mid pair type hand k9, j9 etc that may bet flop folds to your raise the only thing that flats is a draw and we make it correct for him to call and then we check the turn..:we help make the villian play their hand properly by playing ours poorly.
i also forgot... your philosophy is that it is innapropriate to "bloat the pot" by 4K and give the opponent the "right" odds to call on the come, assumedly because we risk 4K.... but its ok to give the opponent infinite odds both on the flop and the turn by flatting/checking when we have already committed 6K to the pot. How does that make any sense?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Instead of going in circles, how about this... please tell me what hand(s) you would bet the turn with if you were our opponent, and approx. how muich you would bet had we gone through the c/c scenario and had we gone through the c/r scenario (assuming you flatted the c/r). I think that would give us a good look into exactly how you would play the hand.
As villain if hero checks flop I'm betting 100% of my range almost every single time-there are hands I may check behind dependent on hero. If called and checked to on turn I am only betting here with with two pair or better or maybe a better ace. This a flop that makes perfect sense for hero to hit and when he check calls I think his hand becomes fairly polarized-I'm only commiting my stack here with a made hand..checking behind with a draw. As villain in your line-I'm shoving over your c r with all two pair hands, sets, combo draws and some plain draws almost always-notice this includes hands your 70/30 ish against-and I'm folding all hands you beat..I may just flat the odd draw and big aces. When checked to on the turn I'm betting pretty much every hand I flatted the flop with almost always-if I think you'll pay me off with a weak ace I may check behind and value bet river
Link to post
Share on other sites
i also forgot... your philosophy is that it is innapropriate to "bloat the pot" by 4K and give the opponent the "right" odds to call on the come, assumedly because we risk 4K.... but its ok to give the opponent infinite odds both on the flop and the turn by flatting/checking when we have already committed 6K to the pot. How does that ma
Okay wow lol. By this logic if I know my opponent has an under pair and will three barrel I should bet every street instead of letting them bluff off there stack? Do you see how flawed this is?We want our opponent to bluff off on draws-we are confident enough in our ability to reasses the situation when draw cards get there..and if we know our opponent has a draw on the turn we snap call or shove and hope he calls. We've come to the conclusion based on the fact that he fired two bullets putting half his stack in that it's unlikely he has a draw...now if he checks behind on the turn and the flush hits we make our decision to call or fold.We want to extract value from hands we are ahead of-and limit our losses vs hands we are behind. Your entire thought process just flies in the face of math...
Link to post
Share on other sites
i also forgot... your philosophy is that it is innapropriate to "bloat the pot" by 4K and give the opponent the "right" odds to call on the come, assumedly because we risk 4K.... but its ok to give the opponent infinite odds both on the flop and the turn by flatting/checking when we have already committed 6K to the pot. How does that ma
Okay wow lol. By this logic if I know my opponent has an under pair and will three barrel I should bet every street instead of letting them bluff off there stack? Do you see how flawed this is?We want our opponent to bluff off on draws-we are confident enough in our ability to reasses the situation when draw cards get there..and if we know our opponent has a draw on the turn we snap call or shove and hope he calls. We've come to the conclusion based on the fact that he fired two bullets putting half his stack in that it's unlikely he has a draw...now if he checks behind on the turn and the flush hits we make our decision to call or fold.We want to extract value from hands we are ahead of-and limit our losses vs hands we are behind. Your entire thought process just flies in the face of math...
Link to post
Share on other sites
As villain if hero checks flop I'm betting 100% of my range almost every single time-there are hands I may check behind dependent on hero. If called and checked to on turn I am only betting here with with two pair or better or maybe a better ace. This a flop that makes perfect sense for hero to hit and when he check calls I think his hand becomes fairly polarized-I'm only commiting my stack here with a made hand..checking behind with a draw.As villain in your line-I'm shoving over your c r with all two pair hands, sets, combo draws and some plain draws almost always-notice this includes hands your 70/30 ish against-and I'm folding all hands you beat..I may just flat the odd draw and big aces.When checked to on the turn I'm betting pretty much every hand I flatted the flop with almost always-if I think you'll pay me off with a weak ace I may check behind and value bet river
As villain if hero checks flop I'm betting 100% of my range almost every single time-there are hands I may check behind dependent on hero. If called and checked to on turn I am only betting here with with two pair or better or maybe a better ace. This a flop that makes perfect sense for hero to hit and when he check calls I think his hand becomes fairly polarized-I'm only commiting my stack here with a made hand..checking behind with a draw.As villain in your line-I'm shoving over your c r with all two pair hands, sets, combo draws and some plain draws almost always-notice this includes hands your 70/30 ish against-and I'm folding all hands you beat..I may just flat the odd draw and big aces.When checked to on the turn I'm betting pretty much every hand I flatted the flop with almost always-if I think you'll pay me off with a weak ace I may check behind and value bet river
This is great insight... So when your opponent plays the hand as weakly as possible... check calling the flop and checking the turn (all after raising pre-flop, mind you), then you get cold feet, not wanting to commit any more chips to the pot unless you catch a made hand. However, when your opponent has shown at least some strength, not to mention appears to have commited himself to the pot, then you're "betting pretty much every hand I flatted the flop with". Ok, well here's the disconnect. I think that is ass-backwards. Now, I'm not going to call you a horrible player, or say that you are stupid like some others on this board. I will simply say I 100% disagree with the way you would play the opponent's role in this hand, or to put it another way, I would not play it that way. Now considering what some of the folks on this board think of my poker accumen, that might be a good thing for you.The main reason I think your play is flawed here is, if you think you're good enough to commit most of your remaining chips on the turn, all because the opponent decided to check a second time after they just check raised you, then why on earth would you do your opponent the favor of giving them a free card by flatting the flop? What, are the players you typically playing against not capable of check raising with strong hands? Or are the players you play against so bad that they typcally call off all their chips with mediocre holdings?I believe you also indicate here that you might check behind the turn and then value bet the river with things like AJ/AQ/AK. I think that's just plain crazy IMO, considering again, you would be basically betting most of your remaining chips. What on earth do you think your oponent would call most of his remaining chips with after they just checked three times to you.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You are fighting in a circle...I said in villains shoes in your scenario I almost always shove that flop...if I don't and hero checks the turn-I'm supposed to fear the old double check raise? And if I do and check back the turn your entire theory is based on the assumption that villain would again check behind on the river??? Your entire theory is contingent on villain having a flush draw and calling the flop then checking down in pos when we show weakness the next two streets...So aside from a busted flush draw what does villain call the flop with and not put another bet in when we check both streets that we beat at show down? The answer is nothing...so again we are we giving a flush draw the right odds? You say our c c c f line screams weakness...what range of hands do you think villain puts us on when we check call the flop? A draw? Maybe so he's pricing us out of draws on the turn-now is he doing with air or with a hand where he hopes we **** up and call with a draw getting a horrible price when he's already committed his stack to the hand or does he think we have exactly the kind of hand we do but yet he thinks he can blow us off of it-again the contention is its super unlikely villain is committing his hand on a bluff. Again we fold out every single hand we beat except flush draws that either shove on us causing us to fold when we've got a ton of equity vs them and we only get called by hands that beat us or flush draws that will get there 33% of the time and we give them a perfect price to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is clearly going in circles. When I was much newer I'd do the same thing take a stance that I thought was justified and fight like hell to get the world to see my point instead of taking a look around at the success of some of the players on here and and realizing that they were all thinking in a similar manner but eventually I clued into the likelyhood that instead of me being the one brilliant guy who saw something Nobody else did that maybe there was something to the fact that the more successful/respected players all seemed to be on the same page which was far away from the one I was on. They weren't always delicate or polite about it and sometimes that would just make me fight harder to prove my point..ultimately they were just encouraging me to shut up for a second and really think..not just to think about the hand but to think about the way I was thinking about the hand...and once the happened I realized what a huge value a place like this can be. Even what should look like a pretty standard hand like his can evolve into an in depth lesson given the right people. There could be tons of interesting discussions: why we should bet fold/bet call-if it goes b c what about the turn-if we c c and he bets 8k what do we do? Etc Instead you've chosen to advise a line that ranks on the brilliant scale along side the open fold and instead of sitting back and processing what everyone is saying-or poker stoving/grabbing a calculator and doing the math you just continued on thinking the way you think..and defending it without stopping for a second to think you may be wrong and all the rest of us may be right.It reminds me of the home game and rob once and awhile when the players defend calling raises with T5 'cus ya can't make a straight' without a ten or a five' and even when graciously shown the math the look at me like I've got to heads and then wonder why I always leave with their money. Part of me hopes you begin to think about the way your thinking about things...the other part of me thanks god there are people like you-who think about things the way you do because I sure love the money

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are fighting in a circle...I said in villains shoes in your scenario I almost always shove that flop...if I don't and hero checks the turn-I'm supposed to fear the old double check raise? And if I do and check back the turn your entire theory is based on the assumption that villain would again check behind on the river??? Your entire theory is contingent on villain having a flush draw and calling the flop then checking down in pos when we show weakness the next two streets...So aside from a busted flush draw what does villain call the flop with and not put another bet in when we check both streets that we beat at show down? The answer is nothing...so again we are we giving a flush draw the right odds?You say our c c c f line screams weakness...what range of hands do you think villain puts us on when we check call the flop? A draw? Maybe so he's pricing us out of draws on the turn-now is he doing with air or with a hand where he hopes we **** up and call with a draw getting a horrible price when he's already committed his stack to the hand or does he think we have exactly the kind of hand we do but yet he thinks he can blow us off of it-again the contention is its super unlikely villain is committing his hand on a bluff.Again we fold out every single hand we beat except flush draws that either shove on us causing us to fold when we've got a ton of equity vs them and we only get called by hands that beat us or flush draws that will get there 33% of the time and we give them a perfect price to.
I am fighting in a circle, because you guys seem to refuse to address issues I bring up in my posts. All you do is reply with another barrage of random thoughts, scenarios, claims (and in other cases, insults). I have to say this latest posts of yours is quite confusing. Rather than trying to dissect it, I will ask that you actually respond to the post I made.. #118. I'm trying to understand your train of thought and see if there is something of value to bel gleaned from it, or if its something I disagree with. From what you posted previously, I have to say your logic doesn't make a lot of sense. Feel free to respond to my actual post and tell me where I'm either misunderstanding what you wrote, or where you disagree with my conclusions.
Link to post
Share on other sites
This is clearly going in circles. When I was much newer I'd do the same thing take a stance that I thought was justified and fight like hell to get the world to see my point instead of taking a look around at the success of some of the players on here and and realizing that they were all thinking in a similar mannerbut eventually I clued into the likelyhood that instead of me being the one brilliant guy who saw something Nobody else did that maybe there was something to the fact that the more successful/respected players all seemed to be on the same page which was far away from the one I was on.They weren't always delicate or polite about it and sometimes that would just make me fight harder to prove my point..ultimately they were just encouraging me to shut up for a second and really think..not just to think about the hand but to think about the way I was thinking about the hand...and once the happened I realized what a huge value a place like this can be.Even what should look like a pretty standard hand like his can evolve into an in depth lesson given the right people. There could be tons of interesting discussions: why we should bet fold/bet call-if it goes b c what about the turn-if we c c and he bets 8k what do we do? EtcInstead you've chosen to advise a line that ranks on the brilliant scale along side the open fold and instead of sitting back and processing what everyone is saying-or poker stoving/grabbing a calculator and doing the math you just continued on thinking the way you think..and defending it without stopping for a second to think you may be wrong and all the rest of us may be right.It reminds me of the home game and rob once and awhile when the players defend calling raises with T5 'cus ya can't make a straight' without a ten or a five' and even when graciously shown the math the look at me like I've got to heads and then wonder why I always leave with their money.Part of me hopes you begin to think about the way your thinking about things...the other part of me thanks god there are people like you-who think about things the way you do because I sure love the money
Sensei,At the outset allow me to say that you are not a total ass. And considering some of the bottom-feeders that troll this board, please take that as a huge compliment. I also commend what appears to be a sincere effort on your part to discuss poker strategy in a reasoned and (usually) respectful way. And lastly, allow me to thank you for this post where you seem to honestly be trying to provide advice to a wayward soul in your eyes. I appreciate the effort.Having said all this allow me to explain to you why you are wrong.. not about the hand necessarily, that battle is left for another day or another post, but rather about your approach and why the reasons for this latest post of yours are misplaced.First you should be aware that this whole sideshow began not with me throwing down and telling people it’s my way or the highway. It began with my putting forth an alternative action. At no point did I claim that the strategies others put forth were horrible. At no point did I insist that those who supported those strategies didn’t know what they were doing. All I did was offer an alternative, and rather than just assuming that others should accept my word and ideas as gospel I actually provided my justification. This entire thread, at least my part of it, hinges on the supposition I put forth that a c/r on the flop will make it less likely that the opponent bets the turn, and will make for an easier decision on the turn, and the extra 4K I bet was worth it. These were my main goals with the action. Immediately others started to post about how my play was bad, didn’t make sense, etc, etc. These people threw out all sorts of justifications for their opinions and seemed to be frustrated that I did not see things the way they did, but at no point did anyone actually address the bases of the strategy, which I just mentioned. If you want to attack my play, what you need to do is attack these suppositions as either wrong or unimportant. And if someone succeeded in that, I would be perfectly willing to accept that it is a flawed strategy. Instead, I got a barrage of talk about turning top pair into a bluff, and giving the opponent odds to draw, or, my personal favorite… our play is best because we can rely on our skills to make the right decision on the turn and don’t need to waste 4K. All of this just served to distract the entire conversation away from the central suppositions I made. Now, if people make posts that I find interesting, even if they do not directly address these questions, I will often respond with my thoughts, so that clearly has made for a rather muddled thread.Now, the personal attacks, and insults, and utter troglodytic behavior doesn’t really bother me. But there is one thing that gets under my skin, and given your last post you are not immune. It’s the insistence that you and others are ”right” just because of who you are and because you agree. The thing is, I don’t have a clue who you are. I don’t have a clue if you are the best poker players in the world, or if you’re just a bunch of poker clowns who are doomed to go bust over and over again. But here’s the key.. it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter how good you are, or how much success you have had, or how much experience you have, or how many folks there are that agree with you. I assure you all of these things are either illusions or are fleeting. All that matters is whether you can make a logical argument for your position at a given moment. And I assure you the “listen to us because we know what we’re talking about” argument just doesn’t fly. Its patronizing, and its weak. The poker world is ever-evolving and is ever-grey. 10 years ago small ball strategies were looked at as heretical by lots of folks who thought a lot of themselves. Who knows what the landscape will be like in the future. In this kind of environment one should never be quick to dismiss an alternate viewpoint.Lastly I will leave you with this. There are two types of people in the world... those who are smarter than they think they are, and those who think they are smarter than they are. I'm not sure which group it’s better to be in. I'll leave it to you to decide for yourself.
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...