88 on a suited flop

[hotbacon 0]

no readsPokerStars 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) converterPreflop: Hero is MP1 with [8d], [8c]. 3 fold, MP3 calls, CO calls, Button calls, SB calls, BB calls.Flop: (12 SB) [Kc], [2c], [6c] (6 players)SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, Hero calls.Turn: (8 BB) [Kd] (2 players)Hero bets, Hero calls.River: (12 BB) [9c] (2 players)Hero checks, CO bets, Hero calls.i think the flop and turn are standard, though the turn might not have been. i should've bet/folded river, right?

[Mattnxtc 0]

im thinkin check fold the turn...he is showing u he either has the flush already or the king...time to cut ur losses and get outwith the turn being another king...ur probably drawing to at most 4 outs..if he doesnt have a king and has the flush...if he has the king ur drawin to 2 hopin he hasnt already filled up...if he already has a made flush ur more than likely drawing dead on the turn unless he has to real low suited cards...either way u arent A getting the right odds to call anything and B ur really not in a winning situation

[wrto4556 0]

no readsPokerStars 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) converterPreflop: Hero is MP1 with [8d], [8c].    3 fold, MP3 calls, CO calls, Button calls, SB calls, BB calls.Flop: (12 SB) [Kc], [2c], [6c] (6 players)SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, Hero calls.Turn: (8 BB) [Kd] (2 players)Hero bets, Hero calls.River: (12 BB) [9c] (2 players)Hero checks, CO bets, Hero calls.i think the flop and turn are standard, though the turn might not have been.  i should've bet/folded river, right?

i really like how you think.preflop, flop, and turn where good.

[PrtyPSux 0]

no readsPokerStars 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) converterPreflop: Hero is MP1 with [8d], [8c].    3 fold, MP3 calls, CO calls, Button calls, SB calls, BB calls.Flop: (12 SB) [Kc], [2c], [6c] (6 players)SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, Hero calls.Turn: (8 BB) [Kd] (2 players)Hero bets, Hero calls.River: (12 BB) [9c] (2 players)Hero checks, CO bets, Hero calls.i think the flop and turn are standard, though the turn might not have been.  i should've bet/folded river, right?

i really like how you think.preflop, flop, and turn where good.

why bet fold and not check call?

[wrto4556 0]

if you check, he bets all the hands that beats you and checks all the hands that you beat.lose, lose.this is textbook clarkmeister.

[screech 0]

im thinkin check fold the turn...he is showing u he either has the flush already or the king...time to cut ur losses and get out

If he has the king, he only has one card that has to be either a 9, 10, J, Q, or A of clubs. The ace is unlikely, since he would have probably 3-bet the flop with AK. Therefor, if we are behind the turn to trip kings, we have to count for the clubs as being partial outs. We have to sure outs, and probably can count 3-4 outs for the clubs. If our opponent bets the turn, we are getting 9:1 immediate odds and are better than that to make our hand.

[harvey 0]

In my opinion,Raising 8s from MP1 in a low limit game is a bad idea. What part of seeing a large pot with the least cost to hit a set, or taking the blinds, or going heads up with position does this play satisfy? Very expensive bad idea.Betting that flop is a bad idea. Checking/folding with a strong possibility of check-raising, depending on the action after you would be the play.Betting into the raiser on the turn is a bad idea. Sets have turned into full houses, Top pair have turned into trips, there are already 3 to a flush on the board. Since you've managed to make to the pot so large, checking and calling the rest of the way with your measily 8 high flush draw and full house draw might be okay. If you bet you will be raised with 90% of the hands that you were raised on the flop with including: a king, a made flush, a high flush draw, something turned full-house..etc. The only hands that would fold are hands that you beat (2 something 6, six something no clubs).You correctly checked/called the river. If you happend to do all of this with 72 offsuit for whatever reason, then maybe, MAYBE betting/folding would be okay. This hand has real calling value (now) and should be check/called in this pot. I'm all for being aggressive with better than middle pair, but with at least a LITTLE selectivity....

[cdddc75 0]

this is textbook clarkmeister.

note: I'm probably check/folding that flop, but I'm not usually raising 88 from MP1 at 1/2 either.

[wrto4556 0]

In my opinion,Raising 8s from MP1 in a low limit game is a bad idea. What part of seeing a large pot with the least cost to hit a set, or taking the blinds,  or going heads up with position does this play satisfy? Very expensive bad idea.Betting that flop is a bad idea. Checking/folding  with a strong possibility of check-raising, depending on the action after you would be the play.Betting into the raiser on the turn is a bad idea. Sets have turned into full houses, Top pair have turned into trips, there are already 3 to a flush on the board. Since you've managed to make to the pot so large, checking and calling the rest of the way with your measily 8 high flush draw and full house draw might be okay. If you bet you will be raised with 90% of the hands that you were raised on the flop with including: a king, a made flush, a high flush draw, something turned full-house..etc. The only hands that would fold are hands that you beat (2 something 6, six something no clubs).You correctly checked/called the river. If you happend to do all of this with 72 offsuit for whatever reason, then maybe, MAYBE betting/folding would be okay. This hand has real calling value (now)  and should be check/called in this pot.  I'm all for being aggressive with better than middle pair,  but with at least a LITTLE selectivity....

huh?

[HtotheNootch 0]

I'm much lower stakes than wrto. However, I do like the PF raise. I probably would play the flop and on differently, but I have a tendency to get weak/tight postflop. That said, there's just too much out there that beats me IMO.

[wrto4556 0]

preflop raise is really easy.flop bet is even easier.the turn is interesting and could go either check/call or bet/call.the river is a super easy bet/fold.

[harvey 0]

preflop raise is really easy.

Its really easy to DO, just very very hard to justify at a typical 1/2 table.....

flop bet is even easier

Well lets see... its not a stone cold bluff, you got better than middle pair and a small one-card flush draw. A semi-bluff? Hmm, I think we would like to have a chance at a very good hand if that were the case. Are we betting our pocket 8s into a field of 5 players for value on this flop? Well, that felt silly just typing it.I guess we are facing a field of 5 players at a Party Poker 1/2 game with 1 bet for the monsterous fold-equity for anyone holding a K, flush draw higher than 8 high, or a set. Actually, that doesn't sound like the best idea now that I thought that out. why are we betting this flop again?(sw)

the river is a super easy bet/fold

who is going to call? Trip kings. Maybe. Every single other rational hand is either raising or folding (with better-than and worse-than hands respectively), including trip kings occassionally on both counts (at least once in 16 times you'll get a raiser with trip kings or a folder), which is very bad for our hero's profits. It would be much better to induce trip kings to bet and just check down/check call a hand that could possibly win.

[Mr Monkey 0]

the river is a super easy bet/fold.

IMO its better to check/call. he has gone to the river at least see a showdown. if he bet/folds he pays the same but he doesnt see a showdown.

[wrto4556 0]

88 has an equity edge preflop. we would like to try and thin the field as much as possible because we actually have a chance to keep the pot short. We very likely have the best hand and will stay the best hand often. RAISE.On the flop it is very likely we have the best hand and don't want to give free cards to overs. You are weak/tight if you don't make this bet because we may have the best hand, and if not, we have outs. BET.The river, i know this might be a little tough for you, is what we call a clarkmeister. Ever heard of it? If you are out of position, heads up, on the river, and the 4th flush card hit, you should bet and fold to a raise no matter what two cards you have. It's a very interesting concept. If you check your opponent is only going to bet hands that have you stomped (bigger flushes and full houses), but he is going to check behind with all the hands that you had beat (trip kings and two pairs). Therefore, we should bet because trip kings and two pair call a bet but wont bet themselves. Opponent isn't raising without a hand that has us beat.BET.If you got any other questions i'd be happy to answer them.this hand goes:raise, bet, bet, bet.

[wrto4556 0]

It would be much better to induce trip kings to bet

this shit right here made me laugh.

[justblaze 0]

preflop raise is really easy.

Its really easy to DO, just very very hard to justify at a typical 1/2 table.....its very easy to justify. you have an equity edge on the range of hands your typical 1-2 opponent will call with. is this complicated?

flop bet is even easier

Well lets see... its not a stone cold bluff, you got better than middle pair and a small one-card flush draw. A semi-bluff? Hmm, I think we would like to have a chance at a very good hand if that were the case. Are we betting our pocket 8s into a field of 5 players for value on this flop? Well, that felt silly just typing it.I guess we are facing a field of 5 players at a Party Poker 1/2 game with 1 bet for the monsterous fold-equity for anyone holding a K, flush draw higher than 8 high, or a set. Actually, that doesn't sound like the best idea now that I thought that out. why are we betting this flop again?(sw)because the board is scary, theres only 1 overcard, we have draws, and we dont want to give free cards to anyone with a naked club. do you play poker?

the river is a super easy bet/fold

who is going to call? Trip kings. Maybe. Every single other rational hand is either raising or folding (with better-than and worse-than hands respectively), including trip kings occassionally on both counts (at least once in 16 times you'll get a raiser with trip kings or a folder), which is very bad for our hero's profits. It would be much better to induce trip kings to bet and just check down/check call a hand that could possibly win.i guess you dont play poker. trip kings doesnt bet the river, only a better flush than us. By bet/folding, we lose the same amount of bets either way, but will get villain to fold some hands which beat us. If he raises we lose anyway, so we arent losing extra bets.

[rog 0]

I dont disagree with the analysis. I dont understand all aspects of it though. First of all, how can you say the preflop raise is easy? Even SSHE says limp in with middle pairs (cold call 2 in a loose/passive game), and it's a fairly aggressive style compared to a lot of other low-stakes systems. Nowhere in there did I see raise with 88. Now, I'm not going to just quote Sklansky/Miller and insist you're wrong. I really just want you to explain to me why they're wrong. If we can clear up the preflop strategy, the rest might fall into place for me.

[gobears 0]

The river, i know this might be a little tough for you, is what we call a clarkmeister. Ever heard of it? If you are out of position, heads up, on the river, and the 4th flush card hit, you should bet and fold to a raise no matter what two cards you have. It's a very interesting concept. If you check your opponent is only going to bet hands that have you stomped (bigger flushes and full houses), but he is going to check behind with all the hands that you had beat (trip kings and two pairs). Therefore, we should bet because trip kings and two pair call a bet but wont bet themselves. Opponent isn't raising without a hand that has us beat.BET.If you got any other questions i'd be happy to answer them.this hand goes:raise, bet, bet, bet.

Have you ever raised back with any two cards under the assumption that the better is using a clarkmeister and would fold to your raise?

[harvey 0]

its very easy to justify. you have an equity edge on the range of hands your typical 1-2 opponent will call with. is this complicated?

88 has an equity edge preflop. we would like to try and thin the field as much as possible because we actually have a chance to keep the pot short. We very likely have the best hand and will stay the best hand often. RAISE.

Every source on low limit holdem that I know of would disagree with you. First you are trying to thin the field in a Party Poker 1/2 game with 6 players left to act. Second, you are trying to thin the field with POCKET 8s. The sole reason you play pocket 8s in MP in a low limit game is to have a very large field and a very large pot. Also, you could raise often in late position to try and steal or get a heads up flop. Its equity edge without a doubt not large enough to warrent a raise from this postion regardless. Low limit holdem, Small Stakes Holdem, Hutchison point system, all disagree with you. I don't know if your post count will compensate for that fact. (sw)

because the board is scary, theres only 1 overcard, we have draws, and we dont want to give free cards to anyone with a naked club. do you play poker?

On the flop it is very likely we have the best hand and don't want to give free cards to overs. You are weak/tight if you don't make this bet because we may have the best hand, and if not, we have outs. BET.

Everytime you make a bet, you should consider the pot odds you are giving another player. There are 12 small bets in this pot. 12. We don't want to give free cards to a naked club huh? The only naked clubs that might fold are lower than 8. Those are hands we want to call. The only naked clubs we want to fold are getting wonderful odds to call and will definately call and most likely raise....Over cards? Sorry once again you are giving odds. Its not weak tight not to bet here, its stupid because the bet doesn't protect your hand, like you seem to think it does..In a large pot in early position with this board, its much better to try for a check-raise (like I said in my first post) if the subsequent action favors it. With a large pot, you should consider more risky approaches.

i guess you dont play poker. trip kings doesnt bet the river, only a better flush than us. By bet/folding, we lose the same amount of bets either way, but will get villain to fold some hands which beat us. If he raises we lose anyway, so we arent losing extra bets.

Are you insane? There are 12 big bets in the pot and if you bet and get raised that make it 15. At a 1/2 party poker table you don't think that once in sixteen times you will get raised with a worse hand?? You are insane. The absolute worst thing you could ever do in this hand is fold on this river. I don't care who clark is, or what his theory is. What you want, is to show down the hand at the least cost. Perhaps you are misinterpreting the Clarkmeister(a term I haven't heard), because while it would be mathematically correct to bet/fold with any two cards that have no chance at winning or a great chance at winning on a four flush, your cards have a merely marginal chance at winning and betting here is mathematically incorrect. The mere fact that your average PP goofball would be inclined to bet trip kings on a four flush sometimes, tells me that you guys are playing at a higher limit than this.

[wrto4556 0]

I dont disagree with the analysis. I dont understand all aspects of it though. First of all, how can you say the preflop raise is easy? Even SSHE says limp in with middle pairs (cold call 2 in a loose/passive game), and it's a fairly aggressive style compared to a lot of other low-stakes systems. Nowhere in there did I see raise with 88. Now, I'm not going to just quote Sklansky/Miller and insist you're wrong. I really just want you to explain to me why they're wrong. If we can clear up the preflop strategy, the rest might fall into place for me.

Every source on low limit holdem that I know of would disagree with you. First you are trying to thin the field in a Party Poker 1/2 game with 6 players left to act. Second, you are trying to thin the field with POCKET 8s.

SSHE and all the books give guidelines. harvey obviously doesn't understand this.But, if you take a look at any 6-max "guideline" or any other similar thing, 77 is a raise from UTG. MP1 is UTG (full compared to 6-max).The reason we raise is because by limping, too often our hand will not get the callers it needs to "draw to a set". Because the pot has become shorthanded it is better to raise:1) To thin the field2) We have an equity edge3) initiative or fold equity66-88 do best against either a lot of opponents or few opponents. MP1 is the point where raising becomes better than limping.

The sole reason you play pocket 8s in MP in a low limit game is to have a very large field and a very large pot.

very large field? You're an idiot. The pot has become shorthanded...we are not going to get a large field. The only way limping could be better than raising is if every player left to act limps in behind you. It's not happening enough.

Low limit holdem, Small Stakes Holdem, Hutchison point system, all disagree with you. I don't know if your post count will compensate for that fact.

Books are guidelines. Also, noone said anything about post count. I just understand the game better than you. You're a robot that doesn't think.

Everytime you make a bet, you should consider the pot odds you are giving another player. There are 12 small bets in this pot. 12. We don't want to give free cards to a naked club huh? The only naked clubs that might fold are lower than 8. Those are hands we want to call. The only naked clubs we want to fold are getting wonderful odds to call and will definately call and most likely raise....Over cards? Sorry once again you are giving odds. Its not weak tight not to bet here, its stupid because the bet doesn't protect your hand, like you seem to think it does..

You're missing some very basic theory. Sure, people will be correct to call, but we have no way to protect our hand (which i never mentioned, btw) so we should bet for VALUE. Do you know what value is? Would you rather give a flush draw infinite odds or 12-1?

Are you insane? There are 12 big bets in the pot and if you bet and get raised that make it 15. At a 1/2 party poker table you don't think that once in sixteen times you will get raised with a worse hand??

No. I don't.

You are insane

No, you just don't understand poker very well.Btw, i started out at .5/1 at party and worked my way up. I know how the game plays.Harvey, you're leaving a ton of money at the table if you don't bet this flop. You leave money at the table if you fail to raise preflop. And you leave money at the table if you fail to bet this river.I know very successfull players that raise 88 UTG in full ring, small stakes party games. Examples include Ed ****ing Miller. But the conditions have to be right. You havn't gotten good enough to consider anything other than what the chart tells you. Take your goddamn training will off and try to learn the theory behind why Sklansky, Miller, and Mallmuth tell you to do the things you do.just to quote SSHE"We list hands that are playable in certain spots and recommend raising with some fo them. These recommendations are not rigid. View them like training wheels for preflop play: When you feel lost, look to these guidelines for a decent default play.

[rog 0]

But, if you take a look at any 6-max "guideline" or any other similar thing, 77 is a raise from UTG. MP1 is UTG (full compared to 6-max).

This isn't 6-max, or did I miss that part? If this is 6-max I agree.

just to quote SSHE"We list hands that are playable in certain spots and recommend raising with some fo them. These recommendations are not rigid. View them like training wheels for preflop play: When you feel lost, look to these guidelines for a decent default play.

And in the next paragraph..."Having said that , we have thought seriously about these recomendations, and we feel they represent the best default play for each hand in a typical situation. So deviate from these recomendations only when you can identify something specifically atypical about your game or situation."and..."You should not deviate from these recomendations by applying your own broad preflop concepts. You will usually be wrong."Again, I dont want to just quote the book like a robot, but I asked where they got it wrong and you haven't been able to respond to that. You may still have the right play here, but my point is SSHE doesn't think so. There is nothing atypical about your situation...it's pretty standard, and we have no read on the game or players left to call that would make us break from a trusted system unless our only purpose is to "mix it up".In any case, I dont believe the equity edge, and I think I'm in pretty good company in that.

[harvey 0]

I know very successfull players that raise 88 UTG in full ring, small stakes party games. Examples include Ed censored Miller. But the conditions have to be right. You havn't gotten good enough to consider anything other than what the chart tells you. Take your censored training will off and try to learn the theory behind why Sklansky, Miller, and Mallmuth tell you to do the things you do

. First, I am a mathematics researcher. I use low limit games to take large amounts of data to analyse the effects of the slightest changes in strategy, and am writing software exploiting this research. I have read most poker books on the market to compare and contrast with my research. So your impression of a kid on "training wheels" or a robot applying hand charts without thinking is a little skewed since the mathematics and theory behind poker is the only reason why I play poker to begin with.

But, if you take a look at any 6-max "guideline" or any other similar thing, 77 is a raise from UTG. MP1 is UTG (full compared to 6-max).

The reason that short handed games have different starting requirements is due to the cost of folding. You only get to see six hands for the same price that you would normally see 10, therefore you play more hands due to the value of each hand. Treating a 10 handed table like a six-handed table when three people fold in front of you, as fun as that sounds, has no basis in reality. Its a completly different dynamic.

very large field? You're an idiot. The pot has become shorthanded...we are not going to get a large field. The only way limping could be better than raising is if every player left to act limps in behind you. It's not happening enough.

I said the sole reason you play pocket 8s in MP in a low limit game is to have a very large field and a very large pot. That meant in ANY game, not just this hand. I never said you should limp with this hand with three folders in front of you. I only said raising was a bad idea. You should probably fold. Raising is to thin the field with 6 people left to act in a 1/2 game is absurd. Although calling, is much less absurd than raising because you only need 5 out of the 6 to limp. I mean jesus, 5 of the 6 called the raise! I know thats being "results oriented" but that is typical for a 1/2 game.I know what you are trying to do by raising, but your analysis that MP1 is the point to do it is way off. CO is a good place to start considering a raise, perhaps one place earlier if its folded to you.

You're missing some very basic theory. Sure, people will be correct to call, but we have no way to protect our hand (which i never mentioned, btw) so we should bet for VALUE. Do you know what value is? Would you rather give a flush draw infinite odds or 12-1

There are two ways to protect your hand. One is going for a check-raise occasionally, as I've mentioned three times now, which may make overcards draw against the odds. The second occurs if you just called a flop bet with the intention of check-raising a blank turn.. Playing hands this way in large pots will vastly increase your earnings, and is some of the best advice in Small Stakes Holdem--forgoing a useless bet, for a better play to take down the pot.Betting for value implies that you are hoping for callers. You can see clearly without me explaining it to you that concept does not apply here. With your "thinning the field" having failed miserably, you have 5 opponents on the flop and your pot equity with all of the draws against you is low enough that you are definately not juicing the pot for value. You have a relatively low expectation to end up with the best hand by the river, and you are looking for ways to win this big pot immediately. Betting outright is not one of those ways.

No. I don't.

How often do you raise a person who habitually bets on a four flush regardless of hands? I do it quite often. A good rule of thumb from HOH is: You always figure your opponent is bluffing AT LEAST 10%. You can throw away a 16:1 pot just because you got raised and "are sure" that no one would do that with a worse hand. Not in a 1/2 game anyway. Thats why you check and call.

[justblaze 0]

I know very successfull players that raise 88 UTG in full ring, small stakes party games. Examples include Ed censored Miller. But the conditions have to be right. You havn't gotten good enough to consider anything other than what the chart tells you. Take your censored training will off and try to learn the theory behind why Sklansky, Miller, and Mallmuth tell you to do the things you do

. First, I am a mathematics researcher. I use low limit games to take large amounts of data to analyse the effects of the slightest changes in strategy, and am writing software exploiting this research. I have read most poker books on the market to compare and contrast with my research. So your impression of a kid on "training wheels" or a robot applying hand charts without thinking is a little skewed since the mathematics and theory behind poker is the only reason why I play poker to begin with. I suggest you do a little more game theory research.

But, if you take a look at any 6-max "guideline" or any other similar thing, 77 is a raise from UTG. MP1 is UTG (full compared to 6-max).

The reason that short handed games have different starting requirements is due to the cost of folding. You only get to see six hands for the same price that you would normally see 10, therefore you play more hands due to the value of each hand. Treating a 10 handed table like a six-handed table when three people fold in front of you, as fun as that sounds, has no basis in reality. Its a completly different dynamic. This is a terribly innacurate misconception. You dont 'pay' for your hands. If you are thinking of blinds as a 'cost' i think you'd better scrap your numbers research right now. The reason short games have different starting requirements is because the players left to act after you are always less numerous. It has nothing to do with how often you pay blinds.

very large field? You're an idiot. The pot has become shorthanded...we are not going to get a large field. The only way limping could be better than raising is if every player left to act limps in behind you. It's not happening enough.

I said the sole reason you play pocket 8s in MP in a low limit game is to have a very large field and a very large pot. That meant in ANY game, not just this hand. I never said you should limp with this hand with three folders in front of you. I only said raising was a bad idea. You should probably fold. Raising is to thin the field with 6 people left to act in a 1/2 game is absurd. Although calling, is much less absurd than raising because you only need 5 out of the 6 to limp. I mean jesus, 5 of the 6 called the raise! I know thats being "results oriented" but that is typical for a 1/2 game.I really cant believe you just posted those two statements. You have just lost all credibility as a mathematician and poker player. I know what you are trying to do by raising, but your analysis that MP1 is the point to do it is way off. CO is a good place to start considering a raise, perhaps one place earlier if its folded to you. If you're giving away money, you may as well just transfer it directly into my party account. justblaze112, please.

You're missing some very basic theory. Sure, people will be correct to call, but we have no way to protect our hand (which i never mentioned, btw) so we should bet for VALUE. Do you know what value is? Would you rather give a flush draw infinite odds or 12-1

There are two ways to protect your hand. One is going for a check-raise occasionally, as I've mentioned three times now, which may make overcards draw against the odds. The second occurs if you just called a flop bet with the intention of check-raising a blank turn.. Playing hands this way in large pots will vastly increase your earnings, and is some of the best advice in Small Stakes Holdem--forgoing a useless bet, for a better play to take down the pot.I dont know where to start. how are you going to thin the field with a check raise, when you will need a raise from LP and will have 2 players inbetween who, if calling 1, will most definitely call 2? This advice doesnt make any sense. You get many things from a flop bet, including information. If you get threebet on the turn check-raise, you've now pumped 4bb into this pot to find out you're no good. Betting for value implies that you are hoping for callers. You can see clearly without me explaining it to you that concept does not apply here. With your "thinning the field" having failed miserably, you have 5 opponents on the flop and your pot equity with all of the draws against you is low enough that you are definately not juicing the pot for value. You have a relatively low expectation to end up with the best hand by the river, and you are looking for ways to win this big pot immediately. Betting outright is not one of those ways. Show me your pot equity calculations.

No. I don't.

How often do you raise a person who habitually bets on a four flush regardless of hands? I do it quite often. A good rule of thumb from HOH is: You always figure your opponent is bluffing AT LEAST 10%. You can throw away a 16:1 pot just because you got raised and "are sure" that no one would do that with a worse hand. Not in a 1/2 game anyway. Thats why you check and call.oh, now i see whats going on. You're applying advice from a no limit tournament book to small stakes limit ring games. You have a lot of misconceptions about LL ring games. I suggest you put your program writing on hold until you can differentiate between NL tournaments and limit ring games.

[Rocketwadster 0]

It's like Clash of the Titans with these two spouting off against each other. The 8) lightning bolts are crashing all around us...

[justblaze 0]

It's like Clash of the Titans with these two spouting off against each other.  The  8) lightning bolts are crashing all around us...

nah, its like david and goliath, except david learned a lot of big words/theories and forgot to learn about context.